At the end of this study, a fact that stands forth
very clearly is that the predominant opinion held in the
West on the Texts of the Holy Scriptures we possess today
is hardly very realistic. We have seen the conditions,
times and ways in which the elements constituting the Old
Testament, the Gospels and the Qur'an were collected and
written down: the circumstances attendant upon the birth
of the Scriptures for these three Revelations differed
widely in each case, a fact which had extremely important
consequences concerning the authenticity of the texts and
certain aspects of their contents.
The Old Testament represents a 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 centuries, been changed by man.
Some parts were added to what already existed, so that
today it is sometimes very difficult indeed 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 teachings
he wished to leave them on completion of his earthly
mission. Unfortunately, the authors of the Gospels were
not eyewitnesses of the data 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 today, and which constituted an intermediate
stage between the oral tradition and the definitive
texts.
This is the light in which the Judeo-Christian
Scriptures should be viewed today, and-to be
objective-one should abandon the classic concepts held by
experts in exegesis.
The inevitable result of the multiplicity of sources
is the existence of contradictions and oppositions: many
examples have been given of these. The authors of the
Gospels had (when talking 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-Christian 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 surprised when they realize this, so
great have been the continuous and far-reaching efforts
made until now by many official commentators 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 given in Matthew and Luke, which were
contradictory and scientifically unacceptable. 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 Muhammad by Archangel Gabriel, Believers
learned it by heart. It. was also written down during
Muhammad's life. The last recensions of the Qur'an were
effected under Caliph Uthman starting some twelve years
after the Prophet's death and finishing 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 time of the Revelation itself and had
subsequently recited it constantly. Since then, we know
that the text has been scrupulously preserved. It does
not give rise to any problems of authenticity.
The Qur'an follows on from the two Revelations that
preceded it and is not only free from contradictions in
its narrations, the sign of the various human
manipulations to be found in the Gospels, but provides a
quality all of its own for those who examine it
objectively and in the light of science i.e. its complete
agreement with modern scientific data. What is more,
statements are to be found in it (as has been shown) that
are connected with science: and yet it is unthinkable
that a man of Muhammad's time could have been the author
of them. Modern scientific knowledge therefore allows us
to understand certain verses of the Qur'an which, until
now, it has been impossible to interpret.
The comparison of several Biblical and Qur'anic
narrations of the same subject shows the existence of
fundamental differences between statements in the former,
which are scientifically unacceptable, 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 subject
of the history of the Exodus, where the two texts were
very much in agreement with archaeological findings, in
the dating of the time of Moses. Besides, there are major
differences between the Qur'an and the Bible on the other
subjects: they serve to disprove all that has been
maintained-without a scrap of evidence-concerning the
allegation that Muhammad 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 Muhammad
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 becomes so
obvious that any notion of a common origin is ruled out.
In view of the level of knowledge in Muhammad's day,
it is inconceivable 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 as the expression of a
Revelation, but also to award it a 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 as a challenge to explanation in
human terms.