Reading the Qur’an Through the Bible

[Siddhartha]

Of course, both Christians and Muslims will agree that there are serious differences between the teachings of the two scriptures, especially when it comes to Christology. The Qur’an, committed to the absolute transcendence of God, insists that he could have no son. Yet the Qur’an’s rhetoric on this point is always directed against Christian teaching, not against the Bible. Thus in rejecting the notion of a divine son the Qur’an tells the Christians, “Do not go to excesses in your religion!” It does not tell them, here or anywhere else, to stop reading the Bible.

A Christian might respond that the idea of divine sonship is explicit in the New Testament and hardly a product of Christian interpretation. But what seems explicit to Christians may not seem so to others. The cases of gnosticism, Manicheanism, Mormonism, and Baha’ism (not to mention the imaginative Christian theologies in vogue today) show the Bible to be a flexible document.

In any case, the Qur’an exhibits both a familiarity with and an amicability toward the Bible. It is not the record of confused proclamations in a barbarous context where the Bible was barely known. Instead, the Qur’an emerged in a late-antique religious context where Jews and various Christian sects were arguing over the Bible’s proper interpretation. When delivering its religious message, the Qur’an counted on its audience’s knowledge of the Bible, and it continues to do so today.

Muslims, then, should read the Bible not only when they want to answer the questions of Christians but also when they want to answer their own questions about the Qur’an. So too Jews and Christians should learn to appreciate the intimate relationship between the Bible and the Qur’an, a text that should be recognized as part of the biblical tradition in universities and seminaries alike.

 

[ralphinal]

I am not sure that I would agree. How can the Qur’an be a part of Biblical tradition when it adds to, changes, or contradicts that which is in the Bible?

 

[Siddhartha]

I am not sure that I would agree. How can the Qur’an be a part of Biblical tradition when it adds to, changes, or contradicts that which is in the Bible?

Jews could say the same thing about the New Testament. In fact, Jews do say the same thing about the New Testament!

 

[ralphinal]

Jews could say the same thing about the New Testament. In fact, Jews do say the same thing about the New Testament!

Yes and no. They will say that the NT forces OT prophecies into forms they were never intended, but they cannot say that it changes the story of Noah, or Abraham, or Moses, etc

 

[Siddhartha]

Yes and no. They will say that the NT forces OT prophecies into forms they were never intended, but they cannot say that it changes the story of Noah, or Abraham, or Moses, etc

Oh, I see what you’re saying. The only major story that the Qur’an seems to change, is the story of the binding of Isaac. Are there other major changes in the Qur’an?

 

[ralphinal]

Oh, I see what you’re saying. The only major story that the Qur’an seems to change, is the story of the binding of Isaac. Are there other major changes in the Qur’an?

They added a child into Noah’s story, who was washed off the Ark and drowned.

I am not sure about other changes off the top of my head. I keep thinking that there was a change to Moses, too

 

[jakasaki]

Oh, I see what you’re saying. The only major story that the Qur’an seems to change, is the story of the binding of Isaac. Are there other major changes in the Qur’an?

Technically, the koran does not state that it was Ishmael who Abraham was going to sacrifice. There is no mention of which child it was by name.

Islamic **tradition **has claimed that it was Ishmael.

 

[Siddhartha]

Technically, the koran does not state that it was Ishmael who Abraham was going to sacrifice. There is no mention of which child it was by name.

Islamic **tradition **has claimed that it was Ishmael.

Correct, which was why I wrote “seems”.

 

[Jay53]

If I remember correctly, the Quran also has Blessed Mother giving birth to Jesus under a palm tree or something like that. I’ll have to look and see if I can find it.

EDIT: Here it is:

(2) And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm-tree: She cried (in her anguish): “Ah! would that I had died before this! would that I had been a thing forgotten and out of sight!”
( سورة مريم , Maryam, Chapter #19, Verse #23)

 

[Siddhartha]

If I remember correctly, the Quran also has Blessed Mother giving birth to Jesus under a palm tree or something like that. I’ll have to look and see if I can find it.

EDIT: Here it is:

(2) And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm-tree: She cried (in her anguish): “Ah! would that I had died before this! would that I had been a thing forgotten and out of sight!”
( سورة مريم , Maryam, Chapter #19, Verse #23)

It doesn’t explicitly say she gave birth under the tree, only that pains once drove her to the trunk of a tree.

 

[dzheremi]

Why do we have to give the Qur’an any sort of respect at all? I am sick of syncretist garbage that denies the wisdom of the holy men like St. John of Damascus in favor of promoting heresy like the following (from the article linked in the OP):

So too Jews and Christians should learn to appreciate the intimate relationship between the Bible and the Qur’an, a text that should be recognized as part of the biblical tradition in universities and seminaries alike.

Excuse me? The Qur’an is part of the Biblical tradition? Not to Jews or Christians!

Enough blind acceptance of Islamic precepts. Enough treating Muhammad and his “revelations” as sacrosanct just because Muslims do. Enough, enough, enough appeasement!

Where is all the correction and hand-wringing of Muslims who will not touch a Bible except to apply their Qur’anic falsehoods to it?

 

[ralphinal]

I would be less bothered by it if the same cultural heritage gave us the Qur’an and the Bible.

You might as well say that Inca tablets are important. Totally different era and group

 

[Jay53]

It doesn’t explicitly say she gave birth under the tree, only that pains once drove her to the trunk of a tree.

Ok, but where is the palm tree story or reference in the Bible?

 

[jakasaki]

Ok, but where is the palm tree story or reference in the Bible?

Yes indeed, where is it ~ can we also add where is this in the Bible…

Mary points to Baby Jesus as people ask her how can they talk to a baby… And then, Jesus as an infant speaks…

29 But she pointed to the babe. They said: “How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?”

And then, Jesus as an infant speaks…

30 He said: "**I am indeed a servant of Allah. He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet; **

 

[jakasaki]

The Qur’an names Moses 136 times, Abraham 69 times, Jesus 25 times,** but Muhammad only 4 times**

This tidbit above in quote is from the OP’s article.

How many times people say that mohamad is only mentioned by name 4 times. Enough!

It’s nonsense because people should count how many times mohamad is mentioned by

allah’s apostle
allah’s messenger
allah’s prophet

And add that to the list of times mohamad is mentioned in the koran.

 

[Siddhartha]

Ok, but where is the palm tree story or reference in the Bible?

The Jews can say similar things about the New Testament. For instance, a Jew could ask, “Where in the Torah does it say that Moses allowed divorce simply because of the hardness of the hearts of the people?”

Matthew 19:8:

Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.”

 

[ralphinal]

The Jews can say similar things about the New Testament. For instance, a Jew could ask, “Where in the Torah does it say that Moses allowed divorce simply because of the hardness of the hearts of the people?”

Matthew 19:8:

That would be one part of what Jesus said. That passage starts with Jesus saying that it was originally one man and one woman forever. Divorce was added by Moses after a time. In fact, it was added after it was seen how fallen man was. No Jew could dispute that.

 

[jakasaki]

The Jews can say similar things about the New Testament. For instance, a Jew could ask, “Where in the Torah does it say that Moses allowed divorce simply because of the hardness of the hearts of the people?”

Matthew 19:8:

Quote:
Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.”

It would be nice if you posted the verses properly…

**3 Some Pharisees approached him, and tested him, saying, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause whatever?” **

4 He said in reply, "Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’

5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?

6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate."

7 They said to him, “**Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss (her)?” **

8 He said to them, "Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.

9 I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery."

You see poster, if you post the conversation, it reads beautifuly!

 

[Siddhartha]

It would be nice if you posted the verses properly…

You see poster, if you post the conversation, it reads beautifuly!

I’m not disputing that it makes sense from a Christian perspective.

 

[jakasaki]

I’m not disputing that it makes sense from a Christian perspective.

You see, I don’t look at it as a Christian perspective.

It’s a conversation and it flows.

Some Pharisees approached JESUS, and tested him, saying, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause whatever?”

**JESUS **said in reply, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate.”

They, THE PHARISEES said to JESUS, “Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss (her)?”

**JESUS **said to them, “Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.”

It’s crystal clear poster!