How Sacred Texts Are Interpreted to Justify Prejudice
This paper examines how two major sacred texts — the Bible and the Qur'an — are subject to radically divergent interpretations that can be used to justify violence or discrimination. Drawing on peer-reviewed scholarship and religious commentary, the paper explores how the Qur'anic concept of al-Wala wal-Bara has been used by radical Islamists to justify jihad against non-believers, and how Old Testament passages in Leviticus and Genesis have been cited to condemn homosexuality. Scholarly analysis reveals that in both cases, the texts are taken out of context or deliberately distorted to serve ideological agendas rather than reflect the original meaning of the scripture.
- Introduction: Sacred Texts and Divergent Interpretations: Bible and Qur'an subject to wildly different readings
- How the Qur'an Is Interpreted to Justify Jihad: Al-Wala wal-Bara doctrine used to justify violence
- How the Old Testament Is Used to Condemn Gay and Lesbian People: Leviticus passages cited out of context against homosexuality
- Conclusion: Manipulation of Sacred Texts: Sacred texts manipulated to serve ideological agendas
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper draws on peer-reviewed sources (the Middle East Quarterly and The Expository Times) alongside religious scholarship, lending academic credibility to its claims.
- It balances two distinct case studies — radical Islamic interpretation and anti-gay Biblical readings — showing that misuse of scripture is not unique to one religion or tradition.
- Counter-evidence is woven into each section, demonstrating that the problematic interpretations conflict with other passages in the same texts and with established scholarly readings.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper uses comparative textual analysis supported by secondary scholarly commentary. Rather than simply quoting scripture, it introduces expert interpreters (Bukay, Cassidy, Cragg) who contextualize each passage, then uses those contextualizations to rebut the extremist or prejudicial reading. This layered citation strategy models how to engage with primary sources responsibly in religious and humanities writing.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a brief framing introduction that establishes the core argument: sacred texts produce divergent interpretations. It then moves through two clearly demarcated body sections — one on Qur'anic interpretation and jihad, one on Old Testament passages and anti-gay prejudice — before closing with a short conclusion that synthesizes both case studies into a general claim about ideological manipulation of religious texts. The structure is lean and well-organized for its length.
Introduction: Sacred Texts and Divergent Interpretations
The Bible and the Qur'an are ancient religious texts that many — if not most — believers in the Christian and Islamic faiths take literally. At least in part, most Christians accept the teachings in the Bible, particularly the New Testament, as the Word of God, which must be followed in order to arrive in paradise after death. Likewise, Muslims believe the Qur'an is Allah's word, delivered to humanity through the Prophet Mohammed. But because both texts are subject to interpretation — and because people read different things into both books — wildly divergent attitudes and beliefs are the result. This paper explores how sacred texts can, and do, provide a springboard for radically different interpretations of the information found within them.
How the Qur'an Is Interpreted to Justify Jihad
An article by David Bukay in the peer-reviewed Middle East Quarterly presents the argument that "al-Wala wal-Bara" is central to understanding Islam and the radicalization of believers. Bukay explains that "al-Wala" is an expression of "sincere love for Allah," his prophet Mohammed, and all believers in Islam (Bukay, 2013). "Al-Bara," by contrast, is an expression of "enmity and hatred toward falsehood and its adherents," which presumably refers to persons who adhere to other faiths, such as Judaism and Christianity. For believers in the Qur'an, al-Wala wal-Bara is therefore interpreted as the imperative to draw close to what is pleasing to Allah and the Prophet Mohammed, while "withdrawing from what is displeasing to Allah and His Messenger" (Bukay, p. 3).
Taking this a step deeper into the reasons why radicalized Muslims — often called jihadists — hate the West, and in particular the United States, the extremist interpretation holds that loving Allah means He will love and forgive you, but that "Allah does not love the infidels," and therefore believers must hate them. Taken even further, figures such as Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar — and, by extension, fanatical groups like ISIS — interpret that concept of "hate" to mean killing infidels wherever they may be found.
How authoritative is the Qur'an in providing terrorists with justification for their violence against the West? "There are more than four hundred verses in the Qur'an that describe the torment in hell that Allah has prepared for the infidel" (Bukay, p. 4). However, author and attorney Al Lipold quotes the Qur'an directly: "God changes not what is in a people until they change what is in themselves" (Lipold, 2013). Lipold also cites Qur'anic passages that clearly do not authorize or condone suicide: "Do not cast yourself into destruction… Kill not yourself." These passages demonstrate that terrorists who claim to be carrying out the Qur'an's teachings are in fact perverting that holy text. Moreover, Islam derives from the word Salam, which literally translates as "peace" (Elkayam, 2009).
Anglican Bishop Kenneth Cragg, a respected scholar on both Islam and Christianity, addresses these divergent readings in his book The Qur'an and the West. He argues that "the terrorists of 9/11 perverted the Qur'an's meaning," while acknowledging that misunderstanding of religious tenets "is a condition religions have suffered through the centuries" (Cragg, 2006).
Conclusion: Manipulation of Sacred Texts
Different people have different readings of religious and sacred texts. Taking them out of context is not a difficult task, especially when it suits one's biases and beliefs — as it clearly does for jihadists who use the Qur'an to justify their killings, and for evangelicals and media personalities like Dr. Laura Schlesinger who cite the Bible to condemn gay and lesbian people. Intelligent, well-read, and open-minded people understand that even sacred texts can be manipulated and perverted to serve prejudices and agendas far removed from the original meaning of those texts.
Works Cited
Bible Gateway. (2011). Genesis 19:1–14 / Leviticus 18:22. Retrieved October 25, 2014, from http://www.biblegateway.com.
Bukay, D. (2013). Islam's hatred of the non-Muslim. Middle East Quarterly, 20(3), 11–20.
Cassidy, R. (2004). The clear teaching of the Bible on homosexual practice. The Expository Times. Retrieved October 25, 2014, from
Cragg, K. (2006). The Qur'an and the West. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Elkayam, A. (2009). The Qur'an and Biblical origins. Bloomington, IN: Xlibris Corporation.
Lipold, A. (2013). The permanent establishment of peace. Bloomington, IN: Xlibris Corporation.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.