What are the controversial verses in The Satanic Verses?

Origins of the Term “Satanic Verses”

The phrase “Satanic Verses” traditionally refers to a disputed Islamic narrative rather than something found in the Hebrew or Christian Scriptures. The narrative describes a moment in which certain verses allegedly appeared in the early recitations of the Qur’an but were later removed—verses that supposedly praised pre-Islamic deities. Early Islamic sources (e.g., some accounts attributed to al-Tabari) discuss how these verses were said to have been inspired by satanic influence rather than genuine revelation. While modern Muslim scholarship largely rejects the authenticity of these passages, they remain famously known as “The Satanic Verses,” the label popularized in contemporary times by Salman Rushdie’s novel of the same name.

The Controversial Verses in Islamic Tradition

According to traditional reports, the verses in question revolve around a passage in Surah An-Najm (53:19–20) that mentions three pre-Islamic female deities worshipped in Mecca: al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat. Some early narrators claimed that praise for these deities was momentarily included among the recited words and then quickly rescinded. The story goes that Muhammad later stated these words were mistakenly interjected by the devil. Hence, they were removed from what would become the finalized canonical Qur’an.

The precise text of these “satanic” lines does not appear in the standard Qur’an used today, and many Islamic scholars question whether this event ever took place. Despite scholarly debate, the phrase “Satanic Verses” has become a general term for these contested fragments.

Historic Reactions and Debates

Muslim communities historically have had varying reactions. Some viewed the narrative as a lesson illustrating how prophets can be tempted but ultimately remain protected from permanent error. Others dismissed the entire account as rooted in unreliable sources. Academic researchers, including multiple Orientalists in the 19th and 20th centuries, used the story to analyze issues of Qur’anic formation and early Islamic tradition.

Beyond the academic study, the controversy found fresh prominence in modern times through the publication of Salman Rushdie’s novel, which, while a work of fiction, drew its title from this long-standing historical topic. Global reactions ranged from literary critics discussing freedom of speech to religious groups condemning perceived blasphemy.

Comparisons with Biblical Texts

There is no direct parallel to “Satanic Verses” within the text of the Bible. Scripture (as preserved in the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts that have been reliably transmitted, according to manuscript evidence supported by scholars such as Dr. James White and Dr. Dan Wallace) does not recount or acknowledge any permanent corruption of God’s revealed Word. Instead, the consistent biblical testimony affirms that God’s Word is pure and guarded from ultimate falsification.

“Every word of God is flawless; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you and prove you a liar.” (Proverbs 30:5–6)

This stance contrasts with the “Satanic Verses” incident, where words allegedly inserted by an evil source were (according to the traditional narrative) initially mistaken as part of God’s message. The biblical worldview maintains God’s superintendence over true revelation (2 Timothy 3:16).

Archaeological and Manuscript Reliability

Extensive manuscript evidence supports the consistency of biblical texts—most notably in the thousands of existing Greek New Testament manuscripts, early translations, and quotations in the writings of the early church fathers. Archaeological discoveries (including the Dead Sea Scrolls) have further demonstrated the reliability of the Old Testament text across centuries. These alignments provide assurance that the Scriptures as received remain “God-breathed” (2 Timothy 3:16).

By contrast, the “Satanic Verses” controversy highlights a fluid moment in early Islam’s formation narrative. While Muslim scholars offer various explanations for or outright reject the account, the fact that it has been debated underscores challenging textual questions for Islamic history that do not share direct parallels with the established biblical textual tradition.

Philosophical and Behavioral Considerations

Philosophically, the concept of “satanic verses” draws attention to the question of whether a spiritual adversary could misleadingly influence divine revelation. In Christian theology, there is recognition of supernatural opposition—for example, in Jesus’ wilderness temptation (Matthew 4:1–11). However, the biblical record presents God’s revelation as standing firm despite such opposition.

Behaviorally, this also connects to how communities of faith respond to controversies: Christians look to the Word confirmed by Christ’s resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:3–8) as the foundation of faith and practice. Moreover, from the viewpoint that an eternal, intelligent Creator upholds truth, one sees Scripture as internally consistent across both Old and New Testaments, with no room for “inspired error.”

Implications for Historicity and Faith

From a broader historical perspective, ancient documents can contain difficult or unclear passages about deities and practices—yet biblical manuscripts have been continually scrutinized, with consistent findings affirming their reliability. Archaeological evidence, such as finds at ancient biblical sites, tangibly supports described events and places, reflecting the historical texture of Scripture.

For followers of Jesus, the bedrock of faith rests on the certainty of His resurrection, which is extensively documented and affirmed by a substantial body of eyewitness testimony (1 Corinthians 15:14–19). Thus, while the so-called “Satanic Verses” controversy pertains to Islam and does not directly challenge Christian Scripture, it does open a window on group identity, textual transmission, and how believers in various traditions respond to claims about revelation.

Conclusion

The controversial verses labeled “The Satanic Verses” refer to a debated historical incident in early Islamic tradition tied to Surah 53 of the Qur’an, where phrases allegedly praising pagan deities were later repudiated as satanically inspired. Whether one views the account as historically accurate or rejects it as apocryphal, it remains a focal point of discussion around the preservation and purity of scriptural texts.

In contrast, biblical manuscripts have been widely tested and confirmed by rigorous scholarship and archaeology, presenting a cohesive message centered on the eternal Creator and the redeeming work of the resurrected Christ. As such, though the “Satanic Verses” are meaningful for understanding certain aspects of Islamic history, they do not have an equivalent in the biblical tradition, where the integrity and divine origin of Scripture are consistently upheld:

“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” (2 Timothy 3:16)