Islamophobic discourse falsely insists the Quran demands literalist reading while the Bible permits critique.

Evidence

I wish to argue that this distinction is sometimes overstated and can be misleading. As Asad observes, Islamophobic discourse insists that the Quran forces a literalist interpretation—and therefore a prescribed set of actions—on its adherents, whereas the Bible allows for and has thus been repeatedly subject to critical interpretation. He has described the distinctions between the Western critical tradition that in the nineteenth century treated even the Bible as a literary text to be historicized and decoded and an Islamic tradition that operates from the firm conviction that the Quran is divinely revealed. — Peter Morey, Islamophobia and the Novel, 493

Categorization

• XREF: Challenges the critical/uncritical binary the reader is considering using on Hamid and Naqvi.