gy, paid ministers, and church workers, the separation of church new information for the researcher. What they can give, however, and state should all be scrutinized closely from both the American is a broad perspective of the entire Protestant endeavor in Chinese and the Chinese perspectives. They all remain "live" questions, society from 1890 to 1950. The record, as presented by M. Searle which affect church life in both countries and could become the Bates, is vast, complex, and idiosyncratic. There are neither heroes basis for valuable and enlightening dialogue. nor villains. This writer personally feels that a day with these A final note about the manuscripts now housed at the Yale manuscripts would be time well spent. This collected body of in­ Divinity School Library: a number of people have asked whether formation confounds simplistic judgment, whether of praise or of the papers warrant a trip to New Haven by the researcher pursuing blame, and therefore should be useful to researchers looking for a a specialized subject. As .was noted in the beginning of this essay, balanced context in which to place their subject. the manuscripts are unlikely to yield a great many particulars or The Provhet Muhammad in Christian Theological Perspective David A. Kerr The real nature of the Prophet Muhammad (may God's mercy and blessing be upon him) is perhaps the central issue of Christian­ Muslim dialogue, for if Muhammad is a true prophet who delivered his message faithfully, what is there to prevent a sincere man to accept his call to Islam? his question, put by a European staff member of the revealed from the beginning of human history, and identified T Islamic Foundation in Leicester (U.K.) in an article in the characteristically (though not exclusively) with Abraham ('Ibrahim; widely circulated Muslim magazine Impact Internaiional.t does in­ Q. 6:162), the "pure in faith" ihani]; Q. 3:67), the "leader ('imam) of deed direct us to one of the most critical areas of Christian-Muslim humankind" (Q. 2:124). Both before and after Abraham, however, debate. It raises direct questions about our respective theological the Qur'an attests prophets to have been sent by God to human understandings of divine revelation and its human reception, and communities, and with particular frequency to the Children of Is­ as directly it raises issues regarding human responsiveness, both rael (banu 'isra 'fl). The Qur'an 42:13 gives special mention to Noah, individual and communal. So complex are these matters that few Moses, and Jesus along with Abraham, and assures Muhammad Christians, however desirous many may be of cordial relations that God had ordained for him the same religion (dfn) as He had with Muslims, have been able to reply affirmatively to the age-old for them. At the close of Muhammad's ministry, the Qur'an de­ Muslim question: "Since we [Muslims] accept Jesus as a genuine clared Muhammad to have succeeded, by divine favor, in bringing prophet and messenger of God, can you [Christians] not recipro­ to perfection the religion of God revealed to all his prophets, and cate by accepting the genuineness of Muhammad's prophethood?" the designation al-'islam was confirmed (Q. 5:3). The Qur'an there­ However, it remains deeply hurtful to Muslims that Christians so fore propounds a doctrine of unity and universality in divine reve­ easily reply in the negative, and that their reply is prompted more lation from the beginning of human history, completed in the rev­ characteristically by an uncritical acceptance of a long Christian elation of the Qur'an to Muhammad as "the Messenger of God to polemical tradition than by serious historical and theological re­ you all" (i.e., to the whole of humankind; Q. 7:158) and therefore flection. "the Seal of the Prophets" (Q. 33:40). The depth of Muslim injury can be measured by the fact that Within this perspective the Children of Israel have consider­ the question and the reply are as old as the Qur'an itself, taking us able importance in the Qur'an as recipients of divine favor (Q. back to the experience of Muhammad in Mecca and Medina. The 2:40; cf. 2:47) not as an "elect" people in a sense comparable to divine revelation that Muhammad believed had been vouchsafed Jewish or Christian thought, but as a historical case study of divine to him called for radical human obedience (= 'islam) to God (Q. revelation and human response-a case study full of instruction 6:163-66)* in the reordering of individual lives in congruity with for Muslims themselves. The Qur'an acknowledges the authentic­ the divine will (= muslim; fem. muslima; Q. 3:102), and the conse­ ity and truth of the revelations sent by God to the prophets of Is­ quent restructuring of human society ('umma) as the 'umma rnuslima: rael, particularly in the scriptural forms of the Torah (tawra), (Q. 3:104; cf. 3:110). This was not conceived in terms of the Psalms (zabur), and Gospel ('injfl), (Q. 3:3; 4:163). It criticizes Jews creation of a new religion, unlike all religions that had previously and Christians, however, for in the most part refusing to recognize existed in human history. On the contrary, Muhammad clearly Muhammad as a genuine prophet (Q. 2:104-5). Given the Quranic understood his task as being, under divine guidance, the restora­ view of the unity and universality of divine revelation, Jewish and tion of primordial monotheism, the religion of God (Q. 3: 18-19), Christian obstinacy regarding Muhammad cannot be attributed to their Scriptures as vouchsafed to their prophets. Indeed, the Qur'an understands the coming of Muhammad as "the Seal of the Proph­ David A. Kerr is Director of the Center for the Study of Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations at the Selly Oak Colleges, Birmingham, U.K. This essay was prepared for *All references to, and quotations from, the Qur'an are from M. M. Pick­ study and discussion at a "Trialogue II ofJewish, Christian, and Muslim theologians in thall, The Meaning of the Glorious Koran (New York: New American Library, Birmingham. n.d.). 112 International Bulletin of Missionary Research ets" to have been foretold in these Scriptures: for example, we read Once again it was John of Damascus who introduced the view of in Q. 61:6: "And when Jesus son of Mary said: a Children of Isra­ Islam, and by implication Muhammad, as the "forerunner of the el! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming [i.e., by the Antichrist," but he had not intended the term in an apocalyptic 'inji"l] that which was revealed before me in the Torah, and bring­ sense. In the Greek tradition it was a polemical description of any ing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me, whose name prominent political or religious figure-emperor or patriarch-who is the Praised One."2 This verse concludes with the complaint: was believed to lead others astray from the orthodox faith. For the "Yet when he [Muhammad] hath come unto them with clear Cordoban martyrs, however, the term was redolent of Daniel's vi­ proofs, they say: 'This is mere magic.' " Thus the Qur'an attributes sion of the fourth king who shall arise to inaugurate the millennial the refusal of most Jews and Christians to their own error, rather events preceding the second coming of Christ." This interpretation than to the judgment of their Scriptures, and this is the basis of the of Daniel, chapter 7 (especially vv . 24-27) became a standard fea­ Muslim allegation that both historical Judaism and historical ture of the Latin polemical tradition through the Crusades and in Christianity have deviated from the teachings of their original rev­ their aftermath, up to the polemical tracts of sixteenth-century elations and Scriptures." The result is portrayed in terms of Jewish Lutherans and Catholics, who likened one another to the Turks and Christian exclusivism, which, by distorting the true nature who had by that stage pressed the western frontier of Islam to the and history of divine revelation, seeks to reduce the latter to the Danube." proportions of confessional monopoly. Such exclusivism causes Even those medieval Christians who valued the philosophical Jews and Christians to deny salvation to anyone who is not a Jew richness of Islamic thought, for example, Thomas Aquinas (d. or a Christian (Q. 2:111; 5:18) and results in errors of belief, partic­ 1274), had little good to say of Muhammad."? With deference to ularly of Christians regarding the person of Jesus (Q. 5:17, 72-73, Muslim sensitivity I shall draw a veil over the absurdities and cru­ 116; 9:30), which blind them from appreciating the truth of Mu­ dities of the medieval Christian character assassination of Muham­ hammad's revelation (Q 5:19). For the Qur'an, and we can there­ mad in the polemical attempt to refute Islam. Suffice it to say that fore say for Muhammad, the issue was less one for polemics than the massive literature, exhaustively analyzed by Norman Daniel, for anguished appeal: "a People of Scripture! Why disbelieve ye in his Islam and the West: TheMaking cf an Image, 11 witnesses to an ab­ in the revelations of God when ye [yourselves] bear witness [to ject failure of Christian theology to deal creatively with a post-Je­ their truth]. a People of Scripture! Why confound ye truth with sus claimant to prophetic status as a recipient of divine revelation. falsehood, and knowingly conceal the truth" (Q. 3:70-71)7 This Theological enterprise gave way almost entirely to fabulous story­ appeal must be set within the invitation, a few verses earlier in the telling and slander.