Medieval attacks on the Qur’an obscured its evident piety to unlearned readers

Evidence

The greatest and the characteristic contribution of mediaeval thought to the study of Islam was the persistent sense of how that religion witnesses to Christ. This was often, as when the Qur’an was said involuntarily to teach the Trinity, wholly unintelligible to Muslims; it came a little closer to Muslim interpretation when it developed the Qur’anic ‘corroboration’ of the Christians, and really close when it stressed God’s election of Jesus and Mary. We shall see that in practice there was also some perception of Islamic works of religion and an appreciation of 
 Islamic virtues. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1079 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

His criticism that the Qur’anic story of Christ was as hard to believe as the Christian one was fair; but he would also use Qur’anic passages to make points of startling pedantry. For example, he pointed out that when the Qur’an said that the Jews claimed to have killed the Messias, Jesus, it was quite in error, because the Jews did not believe that Jesus was the Messias. It was the heart of his argument that Muhammad did not understand the truths that he sometimes enunciated; he ‘spoke the truth
 but he did not understand’. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 953 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Mediaeval critics mocked the Qur’an’s chapter names as irrational; Ketton’s medieval Qur’an mistranslated but did not deliberately distort Islam; Medieval Christians read the Qur’an as inadvertent testimony to Christian truth — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1079 (+8 more)

Broader Connections