Abstract
Qu’ranic awareness permeates religious discourse in Arabic and so it is no surprise that Christian apologists writing within this milieu, past and present, make reference to the Muslim scriptures in order to convey their message. Although a plethora of examples could be presented of how this is done inappropriately, that is in a manner violent to the text, J. Scott Bridger judiciously presents learned examples of those who attempted a positive reading of Qur’an in order to justify and clarify Christian doctrine for a Muslim audience. This is a timely work because there have been heated discussion in evangelical circles concerning the permissibility of such an approach because, as Sam Schlorff and others have argued, an appeal to the Qur’an apparently elevates its status to that of the Bible. But Bridger succeeds in presenting a strong case for its justification through biblical, historical, and theological arguments. He accomplishes this by establishing its normativity amongst orthodox, or diophysite church leaders as seen in highly reputable works such as On the Triune Nature of God (ca. 755 or 788), possibly the oldest Christian apology in Arabic, and in Theodore Abū Qurra’s (b. 755) Disputation with the Muslim Mutakallimūn in the Majlis of al-Ma’mūn. Bridger observed that the Qur’an’s ‘eliptical and allusive style’ allowed for Christians to argue for particular interpretations in ways not altogether different than Muslim counterparts. Contemporary exegetes, as considered in two works by Mazhar Mallouhi’s Al-Kalima School, namely A Sufi Reading of the Gospel of John and The True Meaning of the Gospels and Acts, proceed in dialogical awareness of these earlier works and similarly seek to identify locutions in the Qur’an that once resignified can be seen to support particularly contentious Christological positions such as the incarnation, atoning crucifixion, and resurrection. The alternative meaning differs of course to that brought forward in the classical exegetical tradition and the dissonance ultimately is intended to demonstrate that the nature of the Qur’an is primarily referential and mimetic: it is a message confirming what came before. Though not exhaustive, the text more than succeeds in supporting the value of a positive apologetic approach. The text is well researched, provides a valuable introduction to the relevant literature and surrounding issues, and sustains a respectful tone throughout.