In this tradition scripture is viewed as inspired by God, or at least parts of it, but written through the filter of men, which is obvious from all the different writing styles and subject emphasis. In it are stories of individuals and of peoples - some covering vast periods of time - told "warts and all," (e.g. King David, whose consequential flaws loom as large as his virtues). Jews and Christians are spiritually forced to employ their reason to reconcile the various parts somehow.

Islam does consider the Old and New Testaments as holy, but at best views them as outdated and incomplete; and at worst riddled with forgeries and mistranslations. On the other hand, the Qur'an is viewed as complete perfection, and given by God verbatim. Even the writing style, considered the best of Arabic, is given as evidence of its direct divinity. To emphasize the point, tradition has it that Mohamed was quite illiterate! Verses from the later Medina period, if in direct conflict with earlier verses from the Mecca period, are viewed as completely superseding them. (It should be noted that as Islam grew in strength during the Medina period, it began to directly confront other faiths and peoples. Verses from this period reflect increased belligerency.)

In this view, God is completely transcendent; even from reason itself. He cannot be held even to his own Word. Our rationality, then, is not his true reflection at all. It is obvious that what Lincoln called "the better angels of our nature" sing in the hearts of the vast majority of the billion or so Muslims, who would never dream of exploring the outer limits to which such a view can lead. Yet by leaving such a door wide open, there is opportunity for a significant number to go through and onto nihilism and savagery, and an even more significant number will be ambivalent about them.