This document provides a summary and critique of two articles on the prohibition of interest in Christianity and Islam. Both articles recognize that views on interest have changed over time, being prohibited in Christianity only if excessive, while any form remains prohibited in Islam. They mainly focus on the historical and religious aspects of prohibition. There are some similarities in their arguments but also weaknesses like lacking discussion of modern societal impacts and Islamic banking practices. Overall the document provides an overview and analysis of the two articles on the shared yet also differing stances between Christianity and Islam regarding prohibitions on interest.

1. The Prohibition of Interest in Islam and Christianity.
The two articlestobe criticallyreviewedare:
1. Prohibition of Interest: A unity between Christianity and Islam by Muhammad Sani Liman,
mnse. NEPA TRANSYSCO Transmission Work Centre Yola, Nigeria. (Year 2007)
2. Comparative Financial System in Judaism, Christianity and Islam: The case of interest by Dr
Natalie Schoon and Dr Julinda Nuri. (Year 2012)
The principle underpinningShariaislargelysimilartothose preachedandpractisedby
Christianity.Throughthe ages,interesthasbeenacontroversial subject,extensivelydebatedby
philosophers.Forinstance,duringthe 4th
CenturyBC,the great Greekphilosopher,Aristotle,
believedthatmoneywastoserve asan exchange andnot a meansof profit by use of interest. While
Plutoregardeditas a meanswhere the richcouldexploitthe poor. These articlesare basedonthe
historical andreligiouspartof prohibitionof interestinChristianityandIslamanditisbasedon
secondaryresearch.
The firstArticle tobe criticallyreviewedisLiman.The aimof thisarticle isto examine the unity
betweenprohibitionof interestinChristianityandIslam. There are some strengthsandweaknesses
inhis article, however,one of the strengthsare thathe highlightedthatthe HolyBible isveryspecific
aboutthe prohibitionof interestandcollectinggratificationof anyform. What Limanstatedis
consistentwithwhatthe HolyBible saysinDeuteronomy23:19 “Thoushall notlenduponusuryto
thy brother;usuryof money,usuryof victuals,andusuryof anythingthatislentuponusury”.The
prohibitionof interestinChristianityhasthenchanged,accordingtoLiman,the EnglishLaw in 1541
allowedinteresttobe chargedupto a fixed limitandonlyexcessisconsideredsinful.
Furthermore, LimanenlightenthatIslamisthe onlyreligion thatprohibits interestthusIslam
incorporatesintotalityall aspectsof complete spiritual,financial, andgovernmentsystem. Thisis
reliable,eveninIslamicBankingthe prohibition of interestisappliedandthe Sharialaw doesnot
take intoaccount interest.AccordingtoMahmoudA.El-Gamal (2003) “Almostall contemporary
writingsinIslamicLawand/orIslamicfinance proclaimthatShariaforbidsinterest.”He emphasised
Ribais of two typesinIslam:Ribaal-Nasi’ahwhichisinterestonlentmoney andLimandefined Riba
al-Fadl astakinga superiorthingof the same kindof goodsbygivingmore of the same kindof goods
of inferiorquality. A furtherconsiderationstatedby (EngkuAli) isthatRibaal-Nasi’ahisthe Riba
prohibitedinthe Quranandsome of the followersof the prophetconsideritas the onlytype of Riba
whichisprohibitedinIslam.Ribaal-Fadl isthe Ribaprohibitedinthe Sunnah.
Limanmanagedto developaresearchquestionconcerningthe prohibited of interest. He
highlightedthatinterestcontributestoinflationanditretardseconomicgrowthanddevelopment.
Accordingto Limanwhenlookingatcrisesridden areaof the worldinterestisindirectly linkedto
crisesbecause of the povertyitincreasesandlookingatinterestfromspiritual andmoral pointof
viewitbasedongreed,selfishnessanditnurturesevil inthe moneylender. Itcouldbe suggested
that howeverthese argumentsare secondary tothe religiousunderpinning,the HolyQuranandthe
Sunnatreat interestasan act of exploitationandassuch it isinconsistentwithnotionsof fairness
and propertyrightandinjustice.
In conclusiontothisarticle there are some problems withLiman’sarguments.One of these
problems isthatthe introductionhasvery little relevancetothe topicarea whichisthe prohibition
of interestinChristianityandIslam.It alsolacksanabstract, referencesused,isalittle vague andhas
no conclusion. Limanpointedoutthatprohibitionof interestbytwoHolybookshas wisdombehind

2. it,but he didnot supporthisstatementonhisreasonswhy.He useddifferentquotesfromthe two
HolyBooksbut failedtoexplainthemandhow theyrelate towhathe issaying. The informationin
the mainbody isadequate,relevantanditenlighteningonthe topicarea. Limanwas able to achieve
hisaim onwhyinterestisprohibited.
In the secondarticle,the focusisonthe prohibitionof interestinthe three religions,Christianity
Islamand Judaismandthe wayin whichthe prohibition enteredintolaw andthe impacton the
availabilityof financialtransactionsthatwere executeddespite the restrictions. The strengthsinthis
article isthat Schoonand Nuri statedthat schoolsof thoughthave differentviewsregardingthe
prohibitionof Riba, thisisveryconsistentwith (ZahidZamir) arguesinhisarticle he statedthat
“There iscomplete unanimityamongall Islamicschoolsof thoughtregardingthe prohibitionof riba.
Since the Qur’anis the undisputedsource of guidance inIslam, thereisunanimousagreementon
the fact that Islamhas forbiddenthe practice of riba.”
Anotherstrengthof this article isthatSchoon andNuri mentionedthatasmall minorityof scholars
such as EbusuudEffendi,Sheikh-al-Azhar,MuhammadSayyidTantawi voicedthatriba,inparticular
whenassociatedwithfinancial transactionsshouldonlybe appliedtousury,orexcessive interest
and notall firmsof interestpaymentonaloan.Thisstatementisconsistentwiththatof Farooq
(2006) whicharguesthat “Ebusuuddefendedthe actof interesttakingasa practical matterof
necessity.”Theyemphasisedfurtherintheir article thatcurrently,Islamicfinancialinstitutions
typicallycalculate the mark-uprate of return,costof capital basedona benchmarkinterestrate
such as the LondonInterbankOfferRate (LIBOR).ThisisconsistentwithwhatMahmoudA.El-Gamal
(2003) highlightedinhisarticle he indicatedthat“The bulkof Islamicfinancial practicesformally
base rates of returnor costs of capital ona benchmarkinterestrate suchasLIBOR”.
Schoonand Nuri furtherhighlightedthatthe mainbodyof Islamiclaw constitutingof the Quran
and the Sunnahdidnot howeverprovideaclearanswer to how the differentprinciple wouldapply
inday-to-daylife.SimilartoChristianityreligiousphilosophersapplieddifferenttechniquessuchas
Ijma’a,QiyasandIjtihadto provide furtherclarity.Howeverthisiscontradictingwhatthe Prophet
Muhammad(PBUH) mentionednarratedby Ubidaibnal-Samit‘Goldforgold,silverforsilver,wheat
for wheat,barleyforbarley,datesfordates,saltforsalt,like forlike,inequal weights,fromhandto
hand.If these speciesdiffer,thensell asyoulike,aslongasit is fromhandto hand.” Thisclearly
showsthe Quran givesclearguidance onhow to applythe prohibitionof interestinday-to-daylife.
Schoonand Nuri emphasisedthatinnocentIII statednointerestshouldbe chargedtocrusaders
but forall othersmoderate interestwasacceptable,andChristiansshouldbe onlyprotectedagainst
excessiveinterest.Overtime viewson interestinChristianitywaslaterconsideredthatonly
excessiveinterestshouldbe prohibited,thiswasaimedtoprotectthe impoverishedandthe needy.
Thishowever,consistentwithwhat (VisserandMcIntosh) arguesintheirarticle,theyemphasised
that the rise of Protestantismanditispro-capitalisminfluence is associatedwiththe change of
viewing“Interestasexcessive andusurywaspassedasbeinganoffence againstthe publicmorality
to redefiningusuryasexcessive interest.”
Schoonand Nuri alsomanagedto developaresearchquestion onhow as interestprohibition
benefits society.Intheirarticle theyemphasisedthatinterestprohibitionhasdone more goodthan
harm; ithas helpedtoeliminate some immoral andunlawful actswhichmake society saferand
coveredfromdeviousactivity. Theywentfurthertosay the greedyandungodlyonesmanipulate,
control and exploitthe poorandlessprivilegedbecauseof money. Itcouldbe furthersuggestedby
Chapra (2007) that howeverinterestprohibitionisnotmerelytopreventthe exploitationof the

3. poor butalsoto make the financial system healthierandmore stable byinjectinggreaterdiscipline
intoit.
In conclusiontothissecondarticle thispaperprovidesaninsightintothe wayinwhichopinions
regardingthe permissibilityof interesthave changedovertime. Inthisarticle the introductionwas
relevanttothe topicarea; there wasgood structure andbroad explanationsandanalysisoneach
religion. There are some problemsinthisarticle andone of these problems isthatthe authorsdid
not emphasise interestprohibitioninthe societynow butfocusedmainlyof the historical aspectof
interestprohibition. Anotherproblemwiththisarticle isthatitwasa little vague onthe financial
aspectof interestprohibitionandthere were little orno insightsonIslamicBanking andhow they
deal withinterestprohibition.
The two articleshave some similarities,theybothrecognisedthatinterestinChristianityovertime
has changed andonlyexcessiveinterestis prohibitedandinIslamanyformof interestisprohibited
and itis a sin.Anothersimilarityof these articlesisthattheyall referredtothe HolyBookson their
findingandthatprohibitionof interestismore onethicsandmoralityandlessonreligion. Both
articlesmainlyfocusedonthe historical andreligiousside of interestprohibitionandlittle onhow
interestprohibitionaffectsthe societynow andhow muchit has changed. Inthe societynow,the
prohibitionof interest isrecognisedmore inIslamthaninChristianityandthisisbecause hastime
goesby interestinChristianitystarttochange and itis onlya crime whenitisexcessive oritismore
than interestrate allowedbythe law. RegardingIslamicFinancial industryitwill continue toactively
findwaysto provide financingwithoutinterestinordertoable to meetthe requirementsof lenders
and borrowers.

4. References
ShaykhAbdurrahmanibuYusuf Mangera(Nid)
“Is itwrong and haramto take oathon the Holy Quran?”
Available at:http://spa.qibla.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=2847&CATE=32
[Accessedon 25 March 2014]
GwenSeabourne,LondonN4
“Whenand whydidthe ChristianChurchstopviewingusuryasa sin?”The Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,5753,-1030,00.html
[Accessedon25 March 2014]
Usury Law and Legal definitions
http://definitions.uslegal.com/u/usury/
[Accessedon25 March 2014]
How muchU.S Currencyisincirculation?
http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12773.htm
[Accessedon25 March 2014]
Historyof UsuryProhibition (Nil)
“A shortreviewof the historical critique of usury”
Wayne A.M. VisserandAlastairMcIntosh(1998) pp(175-189)
http://www.alastairmcintosh.com/articles/1998_usury.htm
[Accessedon25 March 2014]
Deuteronomy23:19-20 (KingJames Version http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org)
ZahidZamir(Nil)
“Why does IslamprohibitInterest(Riba)?”
http://www.muslimummah.org/articles/articles.php?itemno=28&&category=Economics
[Accessedon28 March 2014]
Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq (Year2006)
“Riba andInterest:Isthere an Ijma(consensus)?”
http://toyer-farrath.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/riba-interest-equivalence-is-there-ijma.html
[Accessedon28 March 2014]
MahmoudA. El-Gamal (Year2003)
“Interestand the Paradox of ContemporaryIslamicLaw and Finance”
http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~elgamal/files/interest.pdf
[Accessedon28 March 2014]
M. UmerChapra (Year 2007)
“THE CASEAGAINSTINTEREST: IS IT COMPELLING?”
http://www.irti.org/irj/go/km/docs/documents/IDBDevelopments/Internet/English/IRTI/CM/downl
oads/Distance_Learning_Files/B4.39b%20The%20Case%20Against%20Interest%20Thunderbird%20J
ournal%20April%202007.pdf
[Accessedon1 April 2014]
Dr Engku RabiahAdawiahEngkuAli (Nil)
“Riba andits prohibitioninIslam”

5. http://www.nzibo.com/riba/riba%20and%20its%20prohibition.pdf
[Accessedon2 April 2014]