1. Heikki Räisänen: Heikki Räisänen was not only a great scholar of the Bible but also made Heikki Räisänen was not only a great scholar of the Bible but also made significant contributions to Qur’anic and Islamic studies. His books Das kora nische Jesusbild: Ein Beitrag zur Theologie des Korans (1971) and The Idea of Divine Hardening (1972) were important scholarly works that mapped the links between the Bible and the Qur’an on both the narrative and theological planes. He explored similar themes in Finnish in his Koraani ja Raamattu (1986). In significant contributions to Qur’anic and Islamic studies. His books Das kora nische Jesusbild: Ein Beitrag zur Theologie des Korans (1971) and The Idea of Divine Hardening (1972) were important scholarly works that mapped the links between the Bible and the Qur’an on both the narrative and theological planes. He explored similar themes in Finnish in his Koraani ja Raamattu (1986). In the latter book, he mentions fostering intercommunal discourse in the con temporary world as one of his aims.1 the latter book, he mentions fostering intercommunal discourse in the con temporary world as one of his aims.1 Coming from biblical studies, Räisänen was free of some of the disciplinary shackles holding qur’anic studies back. For instance, Räisänen chose to read the Qur’an with the Qur’an: the meaning and interpretation of a word or sentence could be best established by recourse to how Arabic is used elsewhere in the Qur’an.2 This was not, in the 1970s, a common practice among the islamicists, who mostly used the centuries-later Arabic exegetical literature to make sense of qur’anic Arabic. However, it has in recent years become very fashionable and insightful. For example, the late Patricia Crone probed the Qur’an with this method in numerous studies and shed light on the religious milieu of the Pro phet, his followers, and opponents.
2. • Heikki Räisänen, Koraani ja Raamattu (Helsinki: Gaudeamus, 1986), 7–9.
   • Heikki Räisänen, Taistelua ja tulkintaa: Raamatuntutkijan tarina (Helsinki: Kirjapaja, 2014), 141.
3. Late Antique Arabia and Early Islam

What was Muḥammad’s (d. ca. 632 ce) religious background? Much remains unclear, however. One of the main reasons for this is that we have almost no material remains from the Hijaz, Western Arabia, during the crucial centuries before Muḥammad’s mission. Hijaz, Western Arabia, during the crucial centuries before Muḥammad’s mission. The fifth and sixth centuries ce are mute save for some scattered, recently pub lished, inscriptions (Laila Nehmé, Epigraphy on the Edges of the Roman Empire: A Study of the Nabataean Inscriptions and Related Material from the Darb al-Bakrah, Saudi Arabia, 1st–5th Century AD. Vol. 1: Text & Illustrations, Arabian Epigraphic Notes 3 (2017): 121–64). On the basis of these and the more abundant information that we have to the east, north, and south of the Hijaz, it seems that various forms of Judaism and Christianity had been advancing in Arabia since the fourth century ce, although polytheist beliefs might still have had proponents too (Ilkka Lindstedt, “Pre-Islamic Arabia and Early Islam,” in Routledge Handbook on Early Islam, ed. Herbert Berg (London: Routledge, 2018), 159–76). Post-qur’anic evidence dated to the seventh century is scarce, but the little there is indicates, in my opinion, that reified and articulated Islamic identity did not arise until the 690s ce (at the earliest). Up to that decade, the Believers wrote, for instance, inscriptions that are generally monotheistic but not distinctly Islamic (Ilkka Lindstedt, “Who Is in, Who Is out? Early Muslim Identity through Epigraphy and Theory,” JSAI 46 (2019): 147–246) and did not hesitate to mint coins with crosses and fire altars on them. The earliest evidence of the Islamic testimony of faith comprising both parts (God’s oneness and Muḥammad’s prophecy) is a coin minted in 685–686 ce.

1. Some Syriac texts also appear to indicate the blurriness of boundaries at this early stage (John C. Turner, “Social Comparison and Social Identity: Some Prospects for Intergroup Behavior,” European Journal of Social Psychology 5 (1975): 5–34). Furthermore, the designations “Islam” and “Muslims” do not become common in the dated evidence before the eighth century.
2. The Social Identity Approach
3. The social identity approach (SIA) comprises theorization as well as empirical experiments and observations in social psychology. The SIA, as a field of study, began in earnest in the 1970s with the work of Henri Tajfel13 and John Turner.14 Of late, it has been advanced by, for example, S. Alexander Haslam.15 The SIA helps understand and analyze group behavior as well as social competition and prejudice. It is a micro- or mid-level approach,16 and hence very suitable to be used in this essay. The social identity approach (SIA) comprises theorization as well as empirical experiments and observations in social psychology. The SIA, as a field of study, began in earnest in the 1970s with the work of Henri Tajfel (Henri Tajfel, Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psy chology) and John Turner (John C. Turner, “Social Comparison and Social Identity: Some Prospects for Intergroup Behavior,” European Journal of Social Psychology 5 (1975): 5–34). Of late, it has been advanced by, for example, S. Alexander Haslam.15 The SIA helps understand and analyze group behavior as well as social competition and prejudice. It is a micro- or mid-level approach,16 and hence very suitable to be used in this essay. According to the SIA, group identification and conduct are a big part of the human experience, which cannot be reduced to the individual only. This group ness is characterized by 1) the urge of the group members to construe and strive for positive distinctiveness for themselves and their group, and 2) the eager ness to make a distinction between the “in-group” that they identify with and what is construed, on the other hand, as the “out-group.” Groupness affects how According to the SIA, group identification and conduct are a big part of the human experience, which cannot be reduced to the individual only.
4. This group ness is characterized by 1) the urge of the group members to construe and strive for positive distinctiveness for themselves and their group, and 2) the eager ness to make a distinction between the “in-group” that they identify with and what is construed, on the other hand, as the “out-group.” Groupness affects how the members act and view the world, since “individuals who self-categorize themselves similarly also manifest similarities in their behavior and beliefs.”
5. The social identity approach has been a fruitful one to engage with pre The social identity approach has been a fruitful one to engage with pre modern texts, including those considered sacred. The SIA has featured rather prominently in biblical studies carried out in the Faculty of Theology at the Uni versity of Helsinki. For instance, Nina Nikki has utilized it to study Paul’s letters, Raimo Hakola has analyzed the Fourth Gospel with it20 and Jutta Jokiranta has applied this approach to the Qumran movement. These studies have yielded valuable insights into religious identity and group formation, which I hope to benefit from in the current study on the Qur’an. modern texts, including those considered sacred. The SIA has featured rather prominently in biblical studies carried out in the Faculty of Theology at the Uni versity of Helsinki. For instance, Nina Nikki has utilized it to study Paul’s letters (Nina Nikki, Opponents and Identity in the Letter to the Philippians), Raimo Hakola has analyzed the Fourth Gospel with it (Raimo Hakola, Identity Matters: John, the Jews, and Jewishness, NovTSup 118 (Leiden: Brill, 2005); Reconsidering Johannine Christianity: A Social Identity Approach) and Jutta Jokiranta has applied this approach to the Qumran movement. These studies have yielded valuable insights into religious identity and group formation, which I hope to benefit from in the current study on the Qur’an. Nikki close reads Paul’s letter to the Philippians through the SIA, analyzing the flexibility of Paul’s social identifications and his different uses of rhetoric. She pays particular attention to “the realization that all the three levels of text, ideology and real world are constantly present in any textual communication and that the relationship between them is often quite complicated” (Nikki, Opponents and Identity, 222).
6. Raimo Hakola has analyzed a later text from the New Testament, the Gospel of John. The Fourth Gospel is often, and with good reason, called the most anti Jewish text of the New Testament. Conventionally, this anti-Jewishness in the text is attributed to the persecution that the Johannine community faced on the part of the Jewish authorities. However, according to Hakola’s analysis, such a persecution does not need to have taken place for the Johannine community to have adopted an anti-Jewish attitude and, in fact, there is little evidence for the “hostile policy of the rabbis” (Hakola, Identity Matters, 216). Polemics against the Jews can be understood as a means for the Johannine community and author to carve out a distinct religious identity. Despite the harsh censure of the Jews, the Fourth Gospel is optimistic about their eschatological future when, it is hoped by John, they will become believers in Christ (James D. G. Dunn, The Partings of the Ways between Christianity and Judaism and Their Significance for the Character of Christianity, 2nd ed. (London: SCM, 2006), 300).

Categorizations: Believers, Jews, and Christians

As stated above, the words muslimūn and islām do not appear as group-specific designations in the Qur’an or in the later evidence until decades after the Qur’an. The words do occur here and there in the Qur’an but with a few exceptions (perhaps 3:19, 3:85, 5:3, 22:78) simply mean “those who submit” and “submission,” respectively. The designation used most often for the in-group (hundreds The words do occur here and there in the Qur’an but with a few exceptions (perhaps 3:19, 3:85, 5:3, 22:78) simply mean “those who submit” and “submis sion,” respectively. The designation used most often for the in-group (hundreds of occurrences in the Qur’an) are man āmanū (those who believe/have faith) and of occurrences in the Qur’an) are man āmanū (those who believe/have faith) and muʾminūn (Believers). Notably, the same categorization of muʾminūn, on one hand, and muslimūn, on the other, appears in the so-called constitution of Medina, which is dated by the majority of scholars to the Prophet’s lifetime although it only survives in later lit erary compilations and could have undergone changes during the transmission process (Michael Lecker, The ‘Constitution of Medina’ (Princeton, NJ: Darwin, 2004), 43–5). The beginning of the text reads: “This is a compact from Muḥammad the Prophet between the muʾminūn and muslimūn of Quraysh [tribe] and Yathrib [Medina] and those who join them as clients, attach themselves to them and f ight the holy war with them”; it also states that they constitute “one community (umma wāḥida) to the exclusion of others” (Lecker, Constitution of Medina, 32).

1. The word “Muslims” becomes the dominant appellation only in the eighth century, a trajectory we can trace in epigraphic and papyrological evidence. In stead, Muḥammad’s community called themselves muʾminūn, Believers, which was a loanword from Ge’ez or Syriac,31 current in use by the Christians of the late antique Near East. Naturally, a person of Jewish and Christian background joining the community would not have opposed being called a muʾmin and prob ably already referred to him- or herself with that word whether in Arabic or with a cognate in another Semitic language. Indeed, we will see that, far from being totally at odds with the qur’anic in-group, some Jews and Christians are depicted as being part of it.
2. The term naṣārā (Nazareans) and tians” corresponds to the qur’anic naṣārā. The term naṣārā (Nazareans) and some views ascribed to them have led scholars to suggest that what we are dealing with here is in fact non-Chalcedonian, Jewish Christian groups ( Patricia Crone, “Jewish Christianity and the Qur’ān (I–II),” JNES 74 (2015): 225–53; 75 (2016): 1–21). Often, Jews and Christians are grouped together as “the People of the Book” (ahl al-kitāb). This latter term might also have been understood to include other groups, such as the mysterious Sabians mentioned (and promised a heavenly reward) alongside Believers, Jews, and Christians in Qur’an 2:62 and 5:69. The supercategory People of the Book might also have comprised majūs, Zoroas trians, mentioned in 22:17: “As for the Believers, the Jews, the Sabians, the Chris tians, the majūs, and the associators, God will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection; God witnesses all things.”

1. I argue that the People of the Book constitute a grey area, a boundary category, I argue that the People of the Book constitute a grey area, a boundary category, in the Qur’an: some of them are “in,” others “out.” A clear out-group, on the other in the Qur’an: some of them are “in,” others “out.” A clear out-group, on the other hand, is represented by the kuffār (disbelievers) and mushrikūn (associators). Al hand, is represented by the kuffār (disbelievers) and mushrikūn (associators). Al though it is not completely clear what different individuals or groups are consid though it is not completely clear what different individuals or groups are consid ered by the Qur’an to belong to those categories, it is only in a few verses (Q 2:105, ered by the Qur’an to belong to those categories, it is only in a few verses (Q 2:105, 3:186, 4:51) where they are linked with the People of the Book. Most of the time, the qur’anic kuffār and/or mushrikūn are more easily understood to consist of what we might term polytheists or “pagans.” The People of the Book are viewed positively or negatively depending on the context and whom they are contrasted to. The People of the Book agreed with the in-group (Believers) about, for ex 3:186, 4:51) where they are linked with the People of the Book. Most of the time, the qur’anic kuffār and/or mushrikūn are more easily understood to consist of what we might term polytheists or “pagans.” The People of the Book are viewed positively or negatively depending on the context and whom they are contrasted to.
2. The People of the Book agreed with the in-group (Believers) about, for ex ample, God’s oneness, the last judgement, and resurrection, so they are positively ample, God’s oneness, the last judgement, and resurrection, so they are positively described when both them and the Believers are contrasted to the disbelievers. However, according to the Qur’an, most of the People of the Book did not em brace the Qur’an as scripture and revelation; in this capacity, they are similar to the disbelievers and hence pejoratively depicted.
3. Groups in the Qur’an:

1. Jews and Christians: “In” or “Out”?
2. Qur’an 2:109–113 blames the Jews and Christians for trying to make the Be lievers revert to disbelief and for claiming that salvation belongs only to them. According to verses 3:98–100, the People of the Book reject the signs of God whereas 4:153 depicts them as skeptics who demand the Prophet bring down a scripture from heaven. A much-discussed verse, Qur’an 9:29, even demands f ighting the People of the Book until they pay the jizya, poll tax (Mun’im Sirry, Scriptural Polemics: The Qur’an and Other Religions (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 168–82). However, there is a qualification, since the verse demands fighting those People of the Book “who do not believe in God and the Last Day, do not deem forbidden what God and His Messenger have declared forbidden, and do not adopt the religion of truth (wa-lā yadīnūna dīn al-ḥaqq) (Nicolai Sinai, The Qur’an: A Historical Critical Introduction (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2017), 163). Later tradition understands the verse to mean: f ight the People of the Book until they convert to Islam or pay the poll-tax. But this reading does not arise from the text of the Qur’an alone and seems to reflect an eighth-century ce or later conception that retrojects the genesis of distinct Islamic identity to the life of the Prophet and the Qur’an. Jews and Christians of the Prophet’s day certainly believed in God and the last day, although it is of course debatable and depending on the individual whether they would have deemed “forbidden what God and His Messenger have declared forbidden.”Furthermore, some Jews and Christians already had joined the community of Believers. The Qur’an is more anti-Jewish (Aḥbār and Ruhbān: Religious Leaders in the Qurʾān in Dialogue with Christian and Jewish Literature,” in Qurʾānic Studies Today, ed. Angelika Neuwirth and Michael Sells (New York: Routledge, 2016), 258–89) than it is anti-Christian.

This anti-Jewish nature of some verses – and even more so their exegesis in later tradition – has contributed to a history of anti-Semitic thinking and literature in Islam. Indeed, Jews are rarely singled out for a positive description in the Qur’an. This is in contrast to the Christians, who are viewed in a positive vein a few times. What is more, the People of the Book as a super category are said to include individuals belonging to the Believers. But I am get ting ahead of myself – let us first survey the anti-Jewish material in the Qur’an.

Anti-Jewish passages:

The answer to the question posed in the title of this section is that, when all factors are taken into consideration, people among the Jews and Christians are to factors are taken into consideration, people among the Jews and Christians are to be counted both “in” and “out,” depending on the individual. Some had clearly joined the Believers’ movement, accepting its requirements of total monotheism and acceptance of the new prophecy; nevertheless, the majority of them rejected the new prophecy. The reward in the afterlife promised to Jews and Christians in Qur’an 2:62 and 5:69 (perhaps also 74:31) seems to be more inclusive than Be and acceptance of the new prophecy; nevertheless, the majority of them rejected the new prophecy. The reward in the afterlife promised to Jews and Christians in Qur’an 2:62 and 5:69 (perhaps also 74:31) seems to be more inclusive than Be liever group membership since trinitarianism is not mentioned as a hindrance to, liever group membership since trinitarianism is not mentioned as a hindrance to, nor belief in the Prophet as a requirement for, salvation in those verses. That is, even though many Jews and Christians belonged to the out-group in this world according to the Qur’an, they were not beyond the pale of salvation in the es chatological future. It must finally be added that the Qur’an often criticizes the Believer in-group too, in particular for lapses in loyalty and belief. It construes a traitorous, free riding, subgroup among the Believers called the munāfiqūn, usually translated It must finally be added that the Qur’an often criticizes the Believer in-group too, in particular for lapses in loyalty and belief. It construes a traitorous, free riding, subgroup among the Believers called the munāfiqūn, usually translated “hypocrites.”

1. The latter are, for example, not willing to participate in costly signals such as fighting for the in-group (Ilkka Lindstedt, “Religious Warfare and Martyrdom in Arabic Graffiti (70s–110s AH/ 690s–730s ce). To quote Martin Ehala, “emotional attachment to a collective identity is what makes members loyal to a group” (Ehala, Signs of Identity, 13). Another, related, factor is the requirement of authenticity. The munāfiqūn could be further conceptualized by what is called the “black sheep effect” (Hakola, Reconsidering, 59).
2. rinitarianism and the Divinity of Jesus (and Other Human Beings)
3. The Qur’an’s polemics against Christians, rather than Christian doctrines, is The Qur’an’s polemics against Christians, rather than Christian doctrines, is muted. However, the idea that Jesus was divine and the doctrine of trinitarianism muted. However, the idea that Jesus was divine and the doctrine of trinitarianism are fiercely criticized. What is remarkable to me is that even though verses denying trinitarianism as well as Jesus’s divinity or status as God’s son are multitudinous (e. g., 4:171, 5:17, 5:73, 43:57–64), there is only one verse (9:30) that actually ascribes these views to Christians explicitly. In all other verses, such Christological views are ascribed to an anonymous bunch, for example: “Those are disbelievers who say that God is the third of the three” (Q 5:73). This I would interpret as an intentional qur’anic strategy of leaving the door open to Christians who were happy with low Christology, con f ining to Jesus merely the status of God’s messenger and prophet (a view, which, in any case, many Christians in Muḥammad’s environment might have already been espousing) (Crone, “Jewish Christianity”). Sometimes these attacks against trinitarianism are directed at the People of the Book more broadly, as in Qur’an 4:171. Comparing the small number of explicitly anti-Christian verses to the much Comparing the small number of explicitly anti-Christian verses to the much larger number of anti-Jewish verses, one cannot help but ask why this is – particularly when the Qur’an is adamant about absolute monotheism and larger number of anti-Jewish verses, one cannot help but ask why this is – particularly when the Qur’an is adamant about absolute monotheism and rejection of the divinity of Jesus. One would perhaps expect Jews to be depicted in a more positive vein than Christians because the former shared the qur’anic view of absolute monotheism.

I can suggest three different possible answers to the question of why there are a large number of anti-Jewish verses but a small number of anti-Christian verses.

• 1) The first plausible answer to this conundrum is provided by the social identity approach. Experiments and observations have shown that social competition is often the severest between groups that are close to each other in their outlook, practices, or ideology (Tajfel, Human Groups, 276. Hakola, Reconsidering, 126). Hence, anti-Jewish polemics in the Qur’an are (at least partly) explainable by the fact that the Believers and the Jews shared aspects of dogma and ritual. The Qur’an endeavors to construe a monotheist scripturalist identity that has little to do with ethnicity. This is the reason why there are (initial) indications of a breach with Judaism, although it appears that Jews too were accepted as members of the Prophet’s movement if they accepted Jesus and Muḥammad as prophets. Perhaps because of the social identity perspectives cited in this paragraph, the Qur’an depicts less of a breach with Christians.
• 2) If – and this really is an if – the conventional narrative holds true and there were not many Christians around in the Hijaz, this paucity or distance might also explain the lack of polemics against them. Interestingly, the “constitution of Medina” does not mention Christians at all, whereas it mentions many Jew ish groups belonging to different tribes (Lecker, Constitution of Medina, 47–80).
• 3) Another reason for the rather positive description of the Christians vis 3) Another reason for the rather positive description of the Christians vis à-vis the Jews could be that the former (whatever their absolute number in the vicinity) might have joined the community of Muḥammad more eagerly (Identity Matters, 216).