The two different parts of the Qur'an represent his idea; "The Meccan teachings are eternal, the Medinese teachings are for the historical context." This argument is constructed out of the words of other scholars. The piece uses a historical approach compiled through the writings of other scholars who have expertise in their specific religious teachings. The author understands that his ability to judge and use information of Judaism and Islam is limited for he is from the Christian tradition. However, he does not want his own limitations weaken the strength of his essential argument. Therefore, he borrows pieces of arguments from other scholars in order to prove his argument correct.

The arguments and statements used in...

For instance, the Old Testament is set up as a complete contradiction to the nonviolent themes within the New Testament. How then can the Judaic tradition be considered has having fundamentally nonviolent principles within its core texts if there is little regard for human life or undying love and excessive use of violence? A fundamental piece of Judaic tradition calls on defending the Jewish people using violence, which is seen through the exploration of both the "required" and "optional" wars within the tradition. If the religious texts of Judaism call for nonviolence, how does one explain these wars? Does it relate to the Jewish people as a nation state rather than a religious group?