Islam and revelation

Peter Leithart reviews French historian Alain Besancon's contention that Islam cannot be a revealed religion. Along the way, he notes

(1) that a hallmark of revelation is its progressiveness. And progression is not "the transmission of an eternal preexisting text." This is why we need to read our scripture from within its roots in the progression. God is a God of revelation within the creation, using and sanctifying created means to hold meaning. Only this affirms the goodness, the spirituality, of the creation. Mohammed, on the other hand, "does not play a role akin to that of Moses and Jesus. He does nothing but receive texts, which he repeats as if under dictation."

(2) that Islam is a mirror in which we we as Christians can see our own flaws and misconceptions. I have previously found much interest in reading about the leading thelogians underpinning the radical Islamic movements. They critique western, and specifically western Christian, culture, seeing in it a radical dualism which divides life into the inner spiritual and the outer wordly. (I will try and find the link.) While my own Reformed tradition has actually done much to hold against this tide that has swept much of the church, it is not exempt from the same criticism - hence my interest in the ways we interpret scripture. Besancon's analysis suggests some strikingly similar conclusions regarding the ways in which Islam may fall to the same criticisms of dualism as some its theologians make of us.

Lastly, I note with interest amusement that despite having gone to print with Against Christianty, Leithart speaks positively in terms of 'Christianity', and of what it does or does not teach. This illustrates the importance of reading rhetoric for the point intended - which Robbins, ever the literalist, utterly fails to do in his critique of Leithart.