1

The Quran and the Atheist: A Response to a Skeptic

To such as Allah rejects from His guidance, there can be no guide: He will leave them in
their trespasses, wandering in distraction.

- The Holy Quran, Surah Al-Araaf, 7:186

Polemics against Islam are not a new development. They have been around since
the beginning of the mission of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
Furthermore, as the centuries have rolled by, the polemics have evolved. For example,
one of the most common polemics against Muhammad (peace be upon him) has been
his marriage to Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), and yet, this polemic has only
become common in modern times. Before the turn of the 20th century, it was rare to see
non-Muslims attacking the character of Muhammad (peace be upon him) for such a
reason.1 In addition, the type of polemic against Islam varies depending on its origin.
Generally, atheist polemics are different from Christian ones, though they may overlap
in some cases. For example, an atheist may find offense with the Islamic belief in hell,
whereas a Christian would naturally not see anything offensive about such a belief.
With this in mind, we will examine the polemics of one modern-day skeptic against the
Holy Quran. In his book The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy, the late skeptic C.
Dennis McKinsey (d. 2009)2 briefly discussed his reasons for rejecting the Holy Quran,
offering a few examples of what he saw as evidence of the Qurans flawed nature.3
Through this discussion, it is hoped that the reader will see the flaws in McKinseys
methodology and weaknesses in his approach to the Quran.

The Arguments

Beyond the standard polemical arguments, McKinsey also makes rather silly and
childish arguments against the Quran, such as that it is boring and is a good antidote
for insomnia.4 Since these arguments expose McKinseys own ignorance of the Qurans
literary style (which scholars have expressed admiration for), we can ignore them for
now and will discuss them briefly later on. After all, whether a book is boring or not is
in the eye of the beholder, and laymen who dont truly appreciate or understand the
 2

Qurans status as a literary masterpiece will obviously not find much to be excited
about.5

To start, McKinsey makes what is unquestionably the most common polemic

against the Quran: that it propagates a message of intolerance, brutality, and barbarity
toward non-Muslims.6 First, he refers to Surah 5:51, which states:

O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors:
They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to
them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.7

McKinsey claims that this verse displays contempt for Jews and Christians and an
appalling ignorance of historical events.8 But what he doesnt realize is that this verse
is referring to specific circumstances. According to The Study Quran:

[t]he verses prohibition against alliances of protection with those outside the Muslim
community likely had to with the fluid and somewhat precarious social and political
situation of the fledgling Islamic community during the time of the Prophet.9

It also notes that:

it is important to note that Islamic Law, developed after the Islamic state had become
fully established, allowed agreements of mutual protection with non-Muslim states and
political entities.10

Finally, it notes that (emphasis in the original):

[t]he verse should not be interpreted as forbidding friendly relations with Jews and
Christians on a purely personal level, since such a reading would contradict v. 4, which
allowed for the most intimate of personal relationshipsmarriageto exist between
Muslim men and Jewish and Christian women, and 60:7-8, which states that Muslims
may behave justly and kindly to any who do not fight them on account of religion or
otherwise oppress them.11

Indeed, the Quran states very clearly in Surah Al-Mumtahana, 60:7-8:

Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive
you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those
who are just. Allah only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for (your) Faith,
and drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, from turning
to them (for friendship and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these
circumstances), that do wrong.
 3

For someone who claimed to have studied the Quran cover to cover,12 McKinsey
seemed to conveniently forget about these verses, or perhaps deliberately failed to
mention them.

Next, McKinsey appealed to Surah Al-Maeda, 5:33, which states:

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive
with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the
cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their
disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;

According to McKinsey:

[i]ntolerance of this magnitude exceeds that of the New Testament, because the latter
never goes so far as to advocate the execution of all those who oppose the key figures of
Christianity.13

But McKinsey seemed to completely miss the point! One would not normally associate
the act of waging war with simply opposing another party. That would be like saying
that Adolf Hitler was not waging war against Europe but rather he was simply
opposing Europe! McKinsey did not realize the extent of the opposition that
Muhammad (peace be upon him) and his followers were facing. Moreover, the verse
says that execution was only one of the options. The other option was to exile those who
opposed the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).14 So, unless McKinsey was a
pacifist, there is no reason why he would have found anything offensive in the above
verse.

Next, McKinsey referred to surah 9:36, 33:61 and 9:5, and claimed that:

[b]elievers in the Quran are urged to be no more open-minded than Old Testament
Hebrews.15

But as we have already seen, the command to fight was only against those who waged
war on the Muslims. McKinsey was rather disingenuous in his partial quotes of the
Quran. For example, the part of Surah Tawba, 9:36, which McKinsey complained is
offensive because it commands the Muslims to fight the pagans, is actually very clear
as to which pagans it is referring to (emphasis ours):

fight the Pagans all together as they fight you all together. But know that Allah
is with those who restrain themselves.16

Was McKinsey somehow unable to comprehend the meaning of this very clear
statement? Or was he deliberately misquoting the Quran to deceive his readers? Since
he was obviously a very intelligent person, we are forced to conclude that he was
deliberately lying.
 4

Next, McKinsey used the fear card by claiming that if strict believers in the
Quran attained positions of national importance in the United States, non-Muslims
would be facing a clear and present danger.17 It seems McKinsey was propagating
discriminatory policies and irrational fear of Muslims even before the tragic events of
9/11. In that regard, he was a pioneer in the Islamophobic industry. How ironic that,
when it came to potentially restricting the rights of Muslims in America, McKinsey was
in the same camp as Christian extremists!

Next, McKinsey referred to Surah Anb-Nahl, 16:118 and Surah As-Shuaraa,

26:55-58 (the latter only with ellipses) and claimed that they exhibit intolerance against
Jews which:

resembles the Christian treatment of Jews duringthe age of the Spanish

Inquisition.18

Given McKinseys habitually inept quoting of the Quran, we can be sure that he
completely misconstrued the meanings of the above verses as well. First, McKinsey
quoted Surah 16:118 only partially, and misinterpreted the part he did quote as
somehow promoting intolerance against Jews. But when the verse is read in context,
it becomes clear that it is simply referring to the laws of the Taurat (Torah) which
prohibited certain things for Jews that were not prohibited for Muslims:

To the Jews We prohibited such things as We have mentioned to thee before: We did
them no wrong, but they were used to doing wrong to themselves.

This is a reference to Surah Al-Anaam, 6:146,19 which mentions specific types of food
that the Jews were forbidden to eat:

For those who followed the Jewish Law, We forbade every (animal) with undivided
hoof, and We forbade them that fat of the ox and the sheep, except what adheres to their
backs or their entrails, or is mixed up with a bone: this in recompense for their willful
disobedience: for We are true (in Our ordinances).

Thus, this verse explains that such things were prohibited to the Jews due to their acts of
disobedience to Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He), but that they are not prohibited to
Muslims, as the Quran abrogated the laws of previous scriptures, such as the Taurat.
The verse says nothing about being intolerant to Jews.

As for 26:55-58, which McKinsey again somehow interpreted as promoting

intolerance, the verses were actually referring to the Egyptian Pharaohs attempts to
recapture the escaping Israelites and how Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He) thwarted
his attempts and defeated the Egyptians. In other words, the verses are referring to
Allahs favors to the Jews! Indeed, verse 29 states:
 5

Thus it was, but We made the Children of Israel inheritors of such things.

Hence, according to the Quran, it was not the Jews who were expelled from gardens,
springs, treasures and every kind of honorable position. Rather, it was the Egyptians
who were expelled for their tyranny and rejection of Allahs word!20

Next, McKinsey noted that [c]orporal punishment is promoted in the Quran

and quotes Surah Al-Maeda, 5:38 and Surah Al-Anfal, 8:12 to demonstrate this.21 While
the former obviously does uphold corporal punishment (i.e. cutting off the hand of a
thief), it is difficult to understand how McKinsey associated corporal punishment with
Surah Al-Anfaal, 8:12, which states:

Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give
firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye
above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."

As can be seen, this verse has nothing to do with the punishment of criminals, but is
rather referring to the Battle of Badr, when a small Muslim army defeated a larger pagan
army in the first clash between the followers of Muhammad (peace be upon him) and
their persecutors, and was aided in that victory by Gods angels.22 Obviously, McKinsey
didnt believe in angels, but that is irrelevant. The important point to note is that
McKinsey failed yet again to properly quote the Quran!23

Next, McKinsey claimed that tolerance, humaneness, and restraint are not the
Qurans strong points, and refers to Surah An-Nisa, 4:89 (and 4:91) to support his
claim.24 But as we have seen already, McKinseys honest portrayal of what the Quran
teaches was not his strong point! Based on his (mis)quote of Surah 4:89, he then
claimed that:

[i]f Muslims ever gained control of [America] and obeyed the Quran, one can
only shudder at what would occur.25

Clearly, McKinsey was good at misquoting the Quran to spread fear and hatred of
Muslims in America, because when we read Surah An-Nisa, 4:89, we see that it is not
referring to unbelievers, as McKinsey claimed, but rather to the hypocrites, who
pretended to have faith but were in fact in league with the pagan persecutors who had
driven the Muslims out of Mecca:

Why should ye be divided into two parties about the Hypocrites? Allah hath upset them
for their (evil) deeds. Would ye guide those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way?
For those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way, never shalt thou find the Way. They
but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as
they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From
 6

what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye
find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-26

McKinsey also failed to quote the next verse as well, which makes it clear that there was
no hardline stance even against the hypocrites and that peace was always preferred:

Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or
those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as
fighting their own people. If Allah had pleased, He could have given them power over
you, and they would have fought you: Therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you
not, and (instead) send you (Guarantees of) peace, then Allah Hath opened no way for
you (to war against them).27

Next, McKinsey quoted Surah AnNisa, 4:101 and claimed that:

Muslims must have some degree of paranoia if they really believe sura [sic] 4:101

This statement is certainly ironic given McKinseys warning of doom that unbelievers
would be in serious trouble if the big, bad Muslims ever took over America! Talk about
paranoia!

In any case, he actually quoted parts of 4:101 and 4:102, which indeed refer to the
danger posed to Muslims by unbelievers. But what McKinsey failed to understand was
that this was in reference to Muslims who were fighting for their lives during the
struggle against the Meccan pagans. Thus, the historical context shows that McKinsey
was full of hot air and failed to understand the real significance of these verses to
faithful Muslims. It was meant to convey to all Muslims that, in times of danger, when
one was fearful of ones life, or when one was traveling, the obligatory prayers could be
shortened.28 This was a practical measure aimed at avoiding placing any unnecessary
difficulties on the believers.

Next, McKinsey referred to Surah An-Noor, 24:2-4 and claimed that:

Quranic legal procedures are unjust and brutal.29

Curiously, however, he only directly quoted verse 2, which refers to flogging for men and
women who are guilty of fornication, and ended the quote with ellipses. For some
reason, McKinsey did not directly quote verse 4, which states:

And those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses
(to support their allegations), flog them with eighty stripes; and reject their evidence
ever after: for such men are wicked transgressors;

Why didnt McKinsey quote this verse? Could it be that even though he regarded
flogging as an unjust and brutal practice, he did not want his readers to know that the
 7

Quran commands flogging people who accuse chaste women of adultery without
providing any evidence? Instead, he only wanted them to know that flogging was
prescribed for fornicators. Given McKinseys history of only giving half-truths, it seems
likely that this was yet another deliberate attempt at deceiving his readers.

As for his opposition to the criminal punishments commanded by the Quran,

McKinsey offers no logical reason for why these procedures are unjust and brutal. It
was only his personal opinion which carries no logical weight. Just because something
appears to be unjust and brutal due to ones personal opinion, it does not mean that it
is. Many people in western countries are opposed to the death penalty, whereas many
others are for it. Amazingly, even giving life sentences for crimes such as murder is now
being opposed by some people in western countries!30 Who has the authority to declare
such practices as unjust? Clearly, McKinsey was appealing to subjective criteria in his
opposition to Quranic legal procedures.

Next, McKinsey launched a tirade against the Quranic attitude toward divorce,
referring to it as strange.31 He paraphrased Surah Al-Baqara, 2:229, stating that
two divorces are permissible, and Surah At-Talaaq, 65:1, stating that it:

lays down the absurd rule that when a prophet divorces a woman the latter is not to
be expelled from her house unless she is guilty of some lewdness.32

First, let us examine Surah Al-Baqarah, 2:229. The verse states:

A divorce is only permissible twice: after that, the parties should either hold Together
on equitable terms, or separate with kindness. It is not lawful for you, (Men), to take
back any of your gifts (from your wives), except when both parties fear that they would
be unable to keep the limits ordained by Allah. If ye (judges) do indeed fear that they
would be unable to keep the limits ordained by Allah, there is no blame on either of
them if she give something for her freedom. These are the limits ordained by Allah; so
do not transgress them if any do transgress the limits ordained by Allah, such persons
wrong (Themselves as well as others).

What the verse states is that a married couple can get divorced and then reestablish
their marriage afterwards if they choose to reconcile with each other. This can be done
no more than two times. What was so strange about this to McKinsey? The Quran
allows for a couple to reconcile, and in fact even encourages this. However, it puts a
limit on how many times this can be done. If a couple divorces, then reconciles, and
then divorces again, the Quran gives the man and woman two choices: either reconcile
permanently or separate permanently. As The Study Quran states:

A couple can reconcile after a declarative divorceonly twice. After the third divorce
declaration, the divorce is final.33
 8

In addition, readers will notice that McKinsey completely ignored the part of the
verse which commands Muslim men to let the divorced women keep their marriage
gifts. Did McKinsey also find this part to be strange?

Second, let us examine Surah At-Talaaq, 65:1, which states:

O Prophet! When ye do divorce women, divorce them at their prescribed periods, and
count (accurately), their prescribed periods: And fear Allah your Lord: and turn them
not out of their houses, nor shall they (themselves) leave, except in case they are guilty
of some open lewdness, those are limits set by Allah: and any who transgresses the
limits of Allah, does verily wrong his (own) soul: thou knowest not if perchance Allah
will bring about thereafter some new situation.

According to McKinsey, this verse states that if the Prophet divorced his wife, she could
not leave his house. But McKinsey completely misunderstood the verse. First of all, this
verse actually applies to all Muslims, even though it was originally addressed to the
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).34 Second, the verse lays down the rules for
how a man may divorce his wife. For example, the reference to prescribed periods
refers to the menstruation period, and the verse states that a man may not divorce his
wife while she is menstruating.35 Third, the prohibition of expelling a woman even after
the divorce is meant to give the couple a chance to reconcile. However, while they may
still live together during this period, they may not have sexual relations until they have
reconciled.36 Moreover, a man cannot expel his wife merely on the suspicion of marital
infidelity. Rather, he must bring evidence in the form of four eyewitnesses.37

Next, McKinsey attacked the Quran for permitting polygamy, referring to Surah
An-Nisa, 4:3, which states:

If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your
choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with
them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more
suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.

McKinsey referred to this as a disgusting practice, but again that was merely his own
opinion. What is important to note yet again is McKinseys deceit in only partially
quoting the above verse while ignoring the part which clearly states that Muslim men
may only have one wife if they fear that they cannot treat each wife equally, in the event
they do want to marry more than one. Thus, Islam permits polygamy but only if it is
done equitably and fairly. McKinseys claim that it is disgusting is certainly ironic
given the prevalence of loose sexual mores in western society. Did McKinsey believe
that having multiple sexual partners outside of marriage was also disgusting?
 9

Next, McKinsey accused the Quran of sexism and male chauvinism,38 referring
first to Surah Al-Baqarah, 2:228, which states:

And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is
equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in
Power, Wise.

In McKinseys view, the verse makes doubletalk, by claiming that men and women
have equal rights while simultaneously maintaining that men have an advantage over
them. But this is a simplistic reading and classical Islamic scholars did not interpret the
verse this way. For example, according to the view of Ibn Abbas, the verse:

is a reference to mens encouraging good relations and their generosity toward

women in wealth and virtuous behavior, which means that the one possessing the upper
hand must be biased against himself.39

Another view is that men have certain economic advantages and obligations as well
as their ability to fight in the way of God or advantages in strength and
intelligence.40 Indeed, one cannot reasonably argue that men and women are equal in
every way. For example, men are generally physically stronger than women. This would
not be a sexist statement because it is based on general fact.

Next, McKinsey referred to Surah An-Nisa 4:11 and 4:176, two verses which
outline inheritance laws in Islam, and then claimed that they are meant to keep women
in subjugation.41 Obviously, McKinsey was being a bit melodramatic and resorting to
exaggerations rather than rational arguments. It is difficult to see how the inheritance
laws in Islam somehow keep women in subjugation, when they clearly outline that
women have inheritance rights, a revolutionary idea in 7th-century Arabia and even
across the globe. In pre-Islamic Arabia, women and children were not entitled to
inheritance.42 Even in Europe, women were denied property inheritance up until the
end of the 16th-century!43 Indeed, both Jewish and Islamic laws provided inheritance
rights to women far earlier than the supposed enlightened Europeans even considered
the idea, as Professor Mary Radford of Georgia State University College observes:

[t]he laws of Judaism and Islam both established inheritance rights for women long
before these rights were established in most Western countries.44

As for the unequal distribution of inheritance among males and females, the reason for
this was explained by the 13th-century scholar Ibn Kathir, who stated:

There is a distinction because men need money to spend on their dependents,

commercial transactions, work and fulfilling their obligations. Consequently, men get
twice the portion of the inheritance that females get.45
 10

Thus, contrary to McKinseys melodramatic and exaggerated rant, the Islamic

inheritance laws were not meant to keep women in subjugation.

Another example of McKinseys exaggeration and proclivity for making false

statements is the following claim:

[c]learly the Quran puts no stock whatever in equality between the sexes. No wonder
women in Muslim-dominated countries are forced to go around in black sheets like
mobile prisoners with everything covered but their eyeballs.46

Unfortunately for McKinsey, the only thing that is clear is that his claims are bogus
and based on a desire to shock his readers rather than give them the full facts. His
reference to the niqab or face-veil is inaccurate given that the majority of Muslim
countries do NOT require women to wear it! It is actually most common in places like
Saudi Arabia and Yemen, whereas other forms of dress, such as the chador, are common
in other countries like Iran.47 So in actual fact, most Muslim women do not have to wear
the face-veil since most countries do not require it by law. Thus, those that do wear it do
so by choice.

Next, McKinsey continued his tirade on Islam and womens rights by appealing to
Surah An-Nisa, 4:34, which states:

As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them
(first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they
return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most
High, great (above you all).

As was the habit for McKinsey, he made the following false claim with regard to this
verse:

Talk about male supremacy! Men are in charge because Allah wills it and you can beat
women when you merely fear rebellion. It doesnt have to actually occur.48

Once again, McKinsey appealed to shock value rather than scholarly discourse to make a
false accusation against Islamic law. First, the verse does not state that men may beat
their wives if they have a mere suspicion of rebellion. Classical Islamic scholars have
explained that the verse is referring to women who have demonstrated these things
through their actions.49 For example, Ibn Kathir stated in his commentary that the
verse refers to:

the woman from whom you see ill conduct with her husband, such as when she acts
as if she is above her husband, disobeys him, ignores him, dislikes him, and so forth.
When these signs appear in a woman, her husband should advise her and remind her of
Allah's torment if she disobeys him.50
 11

Thus, as The Study Quran states:

it refers to demonstrated hostility, not merely the suspicion thereof.51

Furthermore, McKinsey failed to account for the context of the revelation of the verse.
It was in fact revealed on the occasion of a woman (or her family) who complained to the
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) that her husband had hit her. Before the
verse was revealed, the Prophet ordered retaliation as a means to punish the husband,
which indicates his own dislike for domestic violence. However, when the verse was
revealed, the order for retaliation was rescinded. On this occasion, the Prophet is
reported to have said:

I wanted one thing and God wanted another.52

Considering that domestic violence was a common occurrence in pre-Islamic Arabia, the
very fact that the woman initially complained to the Prophet shows that Muslim women
were given more rights than their non-Muslim counterparts. Why would she have
complained in the first place if Muhammad (peace be upon him) had not already taught
that beating ones wife was disliked? Indeed, it is very well known that he repeatedly
urged men to avoid hitting their wives, and that he also never struck any of his wives.

Finally, it has been the unanimous opinion of Islamic scholars that the phrase
beat them means to use a moderate and noninjurious form of physical force-without
violence.53 The opinion of the famous commentator and companion of the Prophet
Muhammad (peace be upon him), Ibn Abbas, was that the beating should be done
with a siwak, which was a small twig that was normally used for cleaning ones teeth.
It is hard to imagine how a siwak would have caused any pain or serious injury!
Moreover, classical scholars tended to discourage beating in favor of other means. As
Professor Jonathan A.C. Brown observes:

[i]t became received opinion among Sunni ulama from Iberia to Iran that, though
striking ones wife was permitted, other means of discipline and dispute were greatly
preferred, more effective and better for the piety of both spouses.54

Next, McKinsey claimed that like the Bible, the Quran supports slavery. To
make his case, he quoted Surah An-Nur, 24:32-33 and Surah An-Nisa, 4:92. However,
the irony of his appeal is that 24:33 and 4:92 actually command Muslims to free slaves!
Indeed, the freeing of a slave was a meritorious deed and was prescribed as penance for
a variety of sins, including the accidental killing of a Muslim (Surah An-Nisa 4:92).
Furthermore, all modern Islamic scholars have stated that since slavery has been
universally abolished, then there is no reason to revive it, since there is nothing in the
Quran that requires Muslims to enslave people as a means of fulfilling their religious
duties.55
 12

Next, McKinsey quoted Surah Al-Maeda, 5:18, which states:

(Both) the Jews and the Christians say: "We are sons of Allah, and his beloved." Say:
"Why then doth He punish you for your sins?

He then made the silly claim that this critique of Jews and Christians by Muslims is
hardly worthy of serious consideration given that agony, ignorance, superstition,
deprivation, regression, disease, and misery flourish in Muslim-dominated areas of the
world.56 Yet, if he had actually bothered to quote the entire verse, he would have
relegated his ludicrous assumption to the dustbin. Let us quote the entire verse and see
the context:

(Both) the Jews and the Christians say: "We are sons of Allah, and his beloved." Say:
"Why then doth He punish you for your sins? Nay, ye are but men,- of the men he hath
created: He forgiveth whom He pleaseth, and He punisheth whom He pleaseth: and to
Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between: and
unto Him is the final goal (of all)".

Thus, as can be seen, the Quran is critiquing the claim of some Jews and Christians that
they are favored by Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He) over others. It also states that
Allah forgives and punishes whomever He pleases. Moreover, this verse is among many
that criticize the idea that God has sons and daughters, even when it was meant as a
metaphor.57

Finally, the Quran and Ahadith state that being a Muslim does not mean that one
will never suffer in the life of this world. In fact, a believer can expect to suffer trials.
There are many Quranic verses that refer to the suffering of Muslims for their faith.58
Hence, if anyone is not worthy of serious consideration, it is McKinsey and his silly
polemics against the Holy Quran!

Next, McKinsey accused Muslims of being as superstitious as Christians59 and

appealed to Surah Maryam, 19:29-30, which mentions the miracle of the infant Jesus
(peace be upon him) talking in his cradle in defense of his mother. Of course, being an
atheist, McKinsey would not believe in miracles. Yet that is hardly a problem for
Muslims. Just because McKinsey regarded the belief in God, heaven, hell or miracles as
superstition does not actually make it so. If one believes in God, then why would one
also not believe in miracles? Miracles would certainly be easy for an All-Powerful and
Omnipotent being!

Next, McKinsey accused the Quran of being unscientific.60 First, he appealed to

Surah Al-Hijr, 15:16, which states:

It is We Who have set out the zodiacal signs in the heavens, and made them fair-
seeming to (all) beholders.
 13

To McKinsey, the reference to the zodiacal signs was unscientific. But his claim is
once again a reflection of his own ignorance of the Quran rather than some shortcoming
in the Quran itself. The Arabic word translated by Yusuf Ali as zodiacal signs is
burj, which has also been translated as constellations or stars.61 The same word
appears in two other places in the Quran: Surah Al-Furqaan, 25:61 and Surah Al-Buruj,
85:1. In the former, the constellations are simply described as the creation of Allah
(Glorified and Exalted be He), just like the sun and the moon:

Blessed is He Who made constellations in the skies, and placed therein a Lamp and a
Moon giving light.62

Also, the burj are simply part of Allahs creation, and have no significance other than
being used for navigation, as people in ancient times used to use the stars during travel
(emphasis ours):

It is He Who maketh the stars (as beacons) for you, that ye may guide yourselves,
with their help, through the dark spaces of land and sea: We detail Our signs for people
who know.63

Finally, the belief in horoscopes and astrology are completely forbidden in Islam.
The stars have no power over the lives of people, as only Allah (Glorified and Exalted be
He) has that power. Thus, believing in horoscopes and astrology would constitute the
sin of shirk, the greatest sin in Islamic theology.64 The following ahadith demonstrate
the prohibition of relying on the stars:

It is reported on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (may peace
and blessings be upon him) said: Don't you know what your Lord said? He observed: I
have never endowed My bondsmen with a favor, but a section amongst them disbelieved
it and said: Stars, it was due to the stars.65

Narrated Zaid bin Khalid Al-Juhani: The Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon
him) led us in the Fajr prayer at Hudaibiya after a rainy night. On completion of the
prayer, he faced the people and said, "Do you know what your Lord has said (revealed)?"
The people replied, "Allah and His Apostle know better." He said, "Allah has said, 'In
this morning some of my slaves remained as true believers and some became non-
believers; whoever said that the rain was due to the Blessings and the Mercy of Allah
had belief in Me and he disbelieves in the stars, and whoever said that it rained because
of a particular star had no belief in Me but believes in that star.'"66

Thus, the Quran does not say that the 12 signs of the Zodiac have any significance over
peoples lives. It merely refers to them as among the signs of Allah in nature.
 14

McKinseys second claim of a scientific inaccuracy is one of the most prominent

examples of his laughable ineptitude. He referred to Surah Al-Ankaboot, 29:41, which
states:

The parable of those who take protectors other than Allah is that of the spider, who
builds (to itself) a house; but truly the flimsiest of houses is the spider's house;- if they
but knew.

In McKinseys view, this verse is false because:

pound for pound the silk composition of a spiders home makes it anything but the
flimsiest of houses.67

Yet, this argument can be quickly refuted by demonstrating how easy it is to destroy a
spiders web, which is made of silk. Anyone who has found a spider web in their house
knows that it is very easy to destroy the web. Hence, the spiders home is very flimsy
after all!

Next, McKinsey referred Surah Maryam, 19:97 and others, which say that the
Quran is easy to understand and remember. McKinsey found this hard to believe and
credulously asked:

[h]ow can one statement be so utterly false?68

Yet, the better question would be how could McKinsey be so utterly inept? He didnt
seem to realize that he was reading an English translation of the Quran. The Qurans
original language is Arabic, not English! Thus, if the translation is hard to understand,
that would be the fault of the translator, would it not?69

As a matter of fact, those with knowledge of the Qurans historical background

know well that it is indeed easy to understand and remember.70 Furthermore, one of
the greatest miracles of the Quran is that millions of Muslim men, women and children
have memorized it in its entirety throughout the history of Islam.

Finally, the nave opinion of an obvious novice like McKinsey is easily outweighed
by the more knowledgeable views of scholars, both Muslim and non-Muslim. For
example, A.J. Arberry, whose English translation is one of the most widely used in
western countries, stated the following about the Holy Quran (emphasis ours):

I have been at pains to study the intricate and richly varied rhythms whichapart
from the message itself constitute the Koran's undeniable claim to rank amongst the
greatest literary masterpieces of mankind.71

Thus, real scholars of Islam didnt seem to share in the ignorant views of McKinsey. He
was clearly out of his league!
 15

Next, McKinsey claimed that:

Islam, like Christianity, degrades its supreme being, God, by alleging that he plays
favorites.72

To support this claim, he quoted Surah An-Nahl, 16:71, which states:

Allah has bestowed His gifts of sustenance more freely on some of you than on others:
those more favoured are not going to throw back their gifts to those whom their right
hands possess, so as to be equal in that respect. Will they then deny the favours of
Allah?

He then claimed that the meaning of this verse is that gifts are not earned but given
according to preference.73 Yet, this is another example of his rush to judgement rather
than serious scholarship. Elsewhere, the Quran explains that these gifts are meant as
a test, and do not express any notion of favoritism. Surah Al-Anaam, 6:157, states:

It is He Who hath made you (His) agents, inheritors of the earth: He hath raised you in
ranks, some above others: that He may try you in the gifts He hath given you: for thy
Lord is quick in punishment: yet He is indeed Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

Furthermore, in his last sermon, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) stated
that (emphasis ours):

[a]ll mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a
non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black
nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action.74

Therefore, in contrast to McKinseys asinine claim, a person earns Gods favor through
piety and good deeds.75

Before closing his diatribe against the Quran, McKinsey appealed to Surah Al-
Furqaan, 25:30, which states:

Then the Messenger will say: "O my Lord! Truly my people took this Qur'an for just
foolish nonsense."

He then again credulously asked:

[n]ow why on earth would somebody do that?76

But the better question would be how on earth was McKinsey so utterly incompetent?
First of all, the verse is referring to a complaint of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be
upon him) on the Day of Judgment. On that day, the detractors and mockers of the
Quran, both amongst the Prophets own people and those who would come in the future
(such as McKinsey), will realize much too late the error of their ways. Second of all,
 16

McKinsey didnt seem to realize exactly what type of people the verse is referring to.
These detractors of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), who found the Quran
to be foolish nonsense were backward and superstitious pagans who believed in or
practiced such things as:

1. Idol worship.77
2. The so-called daughters of Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He).78
3. Female infanticide.79
4. The power of the stars (astrology).80
5. Eclipses of the sun and moon happened because of someones death.81
6. Exploitation of orphans and the poor.82
7. Exploitation and mistreatment of women.83
8. Cruelty to animals.84
9. Tribal wars and vendettas.85

Certainly, this list is not complete and we could refer to some other beliefs and practices
of the pre-Islamic Arabs. But it should suffice as a refutation of McKinseys ignorant
and nave appeal to the opinions of the pagan Arabs with regard to the Quran. They
regarded the Quran as foolish nonsense precisely because it criticized their savage way
of life. Appealing to their misguided and foolish opinions didnt help McKinseys case!

Conclusion

In this article, we have analyzed the arguments of C. Dennis McKinsey against the
Holy Quran in his book The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy. As we have seen,
McKinsey frequently took verses out of context or completely misunderstood the
meaning in his rush to criticize the Quran. While his detailed analysis of the Bible is
praise-worthy (though not without mistakes), his analysis of the Quran reflected his lack
of knowledge and scholarship. In fact, the approach of McKinsey and those like him can
perhaps best be described in the words of Professor Carl W. Ernst:

[h]ostile readers of the Quran use a literary approach that is the equivalent of a blunt
instrument. They make no attempt to understand the text as a whole; instead, they take
individual verses out of context, give them the most extreme interpretation possible, and
implicitly claim that over 1 billion Muslims around the world robotically adhere to these
extremist views without exception.86

So, while McKinsey wanted to prove that the Quran was a fraud, he actually only
proved it with regard to himself!

And Allah (Glorified and Exalted be He) knows best!

 17

1Jonathan A. C. Brown, Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of

Interpreting the Prophets Legacy (London: OneWorld Publications, 2014), p. 144.

Brown notes:

I have found no instance of anyone criticizing the Prophets marriage due to Aishas
age or accusing him of pedophilia until the early twentieth century.
2http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/dispatch/obituary.aspx?n=claud-dennis-
mckinsey&pid=128922877

3C. Dennis McKinsey, The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy (New York: Prometheus
Books, 1995), p. 476.

While the vast majority of the book is dedicated to a thorough analysis of the Bible,
McKinsey only briefly looked at the Quran and the Book of Mormon. His analysis of the
Bible is admirable and his book presents a voluminous amount of evidence against the
inerrancy of the scriptures of Judaism and Christianity, but his analysis of the Quran
and the Book of Mormon lacked the same energy, and was more bluster than a scholarly
examination. For the purposes of this article, we will only examine McKinseys brief
arguments against the Quran and will ignore his discussion of the Book of Mormon.

4 Ibid.

Elsewhere, McKinsey refers to the Quran as a fraud (p. 477), and claims in his
conclusion that Islam and the Quran deserve no more respect than Christianity and
the Bible (p. 480).

5Additionally, it would be silly to say that a book could not be authentic scripture and of
a divine origin simply because one finds it boring. Also, as we will discuss later,
McKinsey did not seem to understand that he was reading a translation and not the
Quran in its original language!

6 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 477.

7McKinsey used Yusuf Alis translation, which is also the translation the articles on this
blog use as well.

8 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 477.

9The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary, ed. Seyyed Hossein Nasr
(New York: HarperOne, 2015), p. 303.

Obviously, McKinsey did not have access to The Study Quran, as it was published six
years after his death in 2009, and twenty years after The Encyclopedia of Biblical
Errancy was published. However, the commentary in The Study Quran encapsulates
 18

the views of both classical and modern commentators on the interpretation of the
Quran, so McKinsey had no excuse for his rather simplified analysis of the verse.

10 Ibid.

11 Ibid.

12 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 476.

13 Ibid., p. 478.

14 For example, this is precisely what happened with the Jewish tribes of Bani Nadir and
Bani Qaynuqah. For more on the Prophet Muhammads conflict with these Jewish
tribes, see Karen Armstrong, Muhammad: A Biography of the Prophet (New York:
Harper Collins Publishers, 1992), pp. 183-194.

15 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 478.

16McKinsey very deceitfully quoted 9:36 as simply fight the pagans and ignored the
rest of the verse!

17 Ibid.

18 Ibid. The irony is, of course, that the Spanish Inquisition also affected Muslims.

19 The Study Quran, op. cit., p. 689.

20 Ibid., p. 912.

On the topic of the Exodus, see our three-part series:

https://quranandbibleblog.wordpress.com/2014/11/09/the-exodus-from-egypt-part-i/
https://quranandbibleblog.wordpress.com/2014/11/29/the-exodus-from-egypt-part-ii/
https://quranandbibleblog.wordpress.com/2014/12/22/the-exodus-from-egypt-part-
iii/

21 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 478.

22 See the commentary on 8:9-12 in The Study Quran, op. cit., pp. 485-486.

23As for McKinseys obvious opposition to corporal punishment, we can dismiss it as

merely his personal opinion which does not require any response. Corporal punishment
has its supporters and opponents, even in modern times. People like McKinsey may
have been opposed to it, but that is hardly the problem of Muslims.

24 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 478.

 19

25 Ibid.

26 Surah An-Nisa, 4:88-89.

27 Surah An-Nisa, 4:90.

28 The Study Quran, op. cit., pp. 239-240.

29 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 478.

30http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/mandatory-life-sentences-are-
unjust-and-outdated-6272884.html
31 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 478.

32 Ibid.

33 The Study Quran, op. cit., p. 228.

34 Ibid., p. 1384.

35 Ibid.

36 Ibid.

37 Ibid.

38 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 479.

39 The Study Quran, op. cit., p. 99.

40 Ibid.

41 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 479.

42 The Study Quran, op. cit., p. 193.

43 http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1205&context=iclr
44 Ibid.

45

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=706&Itemid=
59
 20

46 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 479.

47https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/04/world/what-in-the-world/burqa-hijab-
abaya-chador.html?_r=0

48 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 479.

49 The Study Quran, op. cit., p. 207.

50

http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=672&Itemid=
59

51 The Study Quran, op. cit., p. 207.

52 Ibid., pp. 207-208.

53 Ibid., p. 208.

54 Brown, op. cit., p. 276.

55 See the following lecture by Dr. Yasir Qadhi: https://youtu.be/AEa-cM2lS_E

56 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 479.

57 The Study Quran, op. cit., p. 285.

58 See 2:214, 8:26, 21:35, and 29:2-3.

In addition, a well-known hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)

states:

Never a believer is stricken with discomfort, hardship or illness, grief or even with
mental worry that his sins are not expiated for him (Sahih Muslim, 32:6242).

59 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 479.

60 Ibid, p. 480.

We have previously discussed the topic of science in the Quran here:

https://quranandbibleblog.wordpress.com/2014/03/08/science-in-the-bible-and-the-
quran/

61 The Study Quran, op. cit., p. 644.

62 Notice that Yusuf Ali translated the same word here as constellations.
 21

63 Surah Al-Anaam, 6:97.

64

http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&I
d=85291

65 Sahih Muslim, 1:133.

66 Sahih Bukhari, 1:12:807.

67 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 480.

68 Ibid.

69Translations are the work of fallible people. Thus, they are not perfect and will
inevitably reflect the imperfections of the translator.

As the scholar Michael Sells explains:

[i]n any translation, there is a loss and an effort to compensate for that loss. Some
features in the original cannot be duplicated in the new language without artificiality.
Thus, for example, there is no possibility of duplicating the end-rhymes in many
Quranic passages in an English idiom in which rhyming is far more difficult and would
require forced and awkward syntax (Michael Sells, Approaching the Quran: The Early
Revelations (Oregon: White Cloud Press, 1999), pp. 26-27).

70 Surah Al-Qamar, 55:17.

71http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/book/islam-9780192835017/islam-
9780192835017-miscMatter-6

72 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 480.

73 Ibid.

74 http://www.introductiontoislam.org/prophetlastsermon.shtml

75It must still be borne in mind that ultimately, it is not our actions that determine our
salvation, but Allahs mercy and grace. For more, see the following:
https://bloggingtheology.net/2017/05/26/do-good-deeds-but-dont-rely-upon-them/

76 McKinsey, op. cit., p. 480.

77 Surah Ibrahim, 14:30.

 22

78 Surah An-Nahl, 16:57.

79 Surah An-Nahl, 16:58-59; Surah At-Takwir, 81:8.

80 See the discussion above about the zodiacal signs.

81 The Prophet refuted this silly superstition, as shown in the following hadith:

Narrated Abu Mas`ud: The Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon him) said, "The
sun and the moon do not eclipse because of the death of someone from the people but
they are two signs amongst the signs of Allah. When you see them, stand up and pray"
(Sahih Bukhari, 2:18:151).

82 Surah Al-Fajr, 89:17-18.

83 Women were generally unable to acquire inheritance in pre-Islamic Arabia

(http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_3_No_2_Special_Issue_January_2013/23.pd
f).

84 One common practice in pre-Islamic Arabia was cutting the flesh off an animal while
it was still alive (Armstrong, op. cit., p. 231). This practice was condemned by the
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him):

Narrated Ibn `Umar: The Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon him) cursed the
one who did Muthla to an animal (i e., cut its limbs or some other part of its body while
it is still alive) (Sahih Bukhari, 7:67:424).

85 According to Dr. Mohd Shukri Hanapi:

[w]ar between differing clans could exist even on trivial grounds. The al-Basus war
between the Bakr clan and Rabiah exhibited a trait of the Arab Jahilliyyah society that
took pleasure in fighting one another
(http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_3_No_2_Special_Issue_January_2013/23.pd
f).

86Carl W. Ernst, How to Read the Quran: A New Guide, with Select Translations
(USA: University of North Carolina Press, 2011), p. 2.