Medieval Christian polemic interpreted Qur’anic texts as nastily as possible

Evidence

The infinite respect for authority did not extend to the letter of the text. Provided that the words of the Qur’an cited proved the untruth of Islam, they were correctly cited. Verbal accuracy was not sought at all. The Qur’an would be quoted as rendering correctly some tenet of Islam (whether true or supposed ) to which it was desired, for polemic reasons, to draw attention; for example, ‘they were ordered to rob, to make prisoner and kill’ or ‘whatever (those in Paradise ) desired would immediately be supplied’. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1410 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

The implications of the text as this puts it are obvious. A careful comparison with the Qur’anic original will show how, with a minimum of inaccuracy, it gives an erroneous sense. Thus the Prophet’s being allowed more wives than the other believers becomes promiscuous access to all women; a suggestive phrase about their offering their bodies derives really from permission for marriage without a dowry. The final verse refers to the obligation of the Prophet to sleep with his wives in rotation; instead of conferring promiscuous licence, it regulates marital rights. It was to this Revelation that ‘A’ishah referred when she said that God hastened to satisfy Muhammad’s desires; but the reprobatio understood something much more shameful. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 565 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

San Pedro’s account of the miracles of Christ in the Qur’an suggests an appreciative sense of the marvellous: ‘whatever Jesus Christ said, instantly it was so’ - this ‘Muhammad said, and has written in his Qur’an’; but he strongly attacked the Christology of the Qur’an as inconsistent. It made Jesus out to be a man, and yet not to die; made Him holy and sinless, yet supposed that He would allow another to die in His place; made out, in fact, that He was born by the power of God, only to deceive men by this false crucifixion, in a world already full of deceivers. San Pedro was oppressed by the thought of so many lies, of such great heresies in the Qur’an and in the sayings of Muhammad which his followers had collected (hadith); by the thought of the loss of souls of those who died Muslims. — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 950 (#exemplifies, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Christian polemicists distorted Qur’anic verses with small, impactful translation shifts; Medieval Christian polemic distorted Qur’anic texts with minimal inaccuracy — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 565; Medieval European conflation of Qur’an and Traditions may have been a deliberate polemic tactic (+12 more)

Related

• Christian polemicists distorted Qur’anic verses with small, impactful translation shifts (similarity 0.92)
• Medieval polemicists quoted the Qur’an inaccurately without scruple (similarity 0.91)
• Medieval Christians polemicists routinely conflated the Qur’an with reported sayings of Muhammad (similarity 0.90)
• Christian annotators charged the Quran with self-contradiction on points later seen as mere nuance (similarity 0.89)
• Medieval European conflation of Qur’an and Traditions may have been a deliberate polemic tactic (similarity 0.89)
• Medieval Christian polemic distorted Qur’anic texts with minimal inaccuracy (similarity 0.89)
• Medieval attacks on the Qur’an obscured its evident piety to unlearned readers (similarity 0.88)
• Mediaeval Christian polemicists dismissed Quranic metaphors by misreading them as literal physics (similarity 0.88)
• Medieval Christians valued Qur’anic Christ references over Islamic monotheism (similarity 0.88)
• Polemical scholars adopted textual accuracy only as a tactical weapon against Islam (similarity 0.87)
• Medieval Christian polemicists attacked the Qur’an’s Christology as internally inconsistent (similarity 0.87)
• Ketton’s medieval Qur’an mistranslated but did not deliberately distort Islam (similarity 0.87)
• Medieval polemicists quoted Qur’anic praise of Christ chiefly as ammo against Islam (similarity 0.87)
• Medieval polemicists attacked the Qur’an with pedantic misreadings to prove Muhammad misunderstood truths (similarity 0.86)
• Medieval Christian readers judged the Qur’an by its Christology (similarity 0.86)

Broader Connections

• Medieval polemicists quoted the Qur’an inaccurately without scruple #corroborates (0.90) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1410
• Medieval Christian polemic distorted Qur’anic texts with minimal inaccuracy #contradicts (0.85) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 565
• Medieval Christian polemicists attacked the Qur’an’s Christology as internally inconsistent #exemplifies (0.85) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 950
• Medieval European conflation of Qur’an and Traditions may have been a deliberate polemic tactic #expands (0.80)
• Medieval Christians polemicists routinely conflated the Qur’an with reported sayings of Muhammad #expands (0.80)
• Medieval Christians read the Qur’an as inadvertent testimony to Christian truth #corroborates (0.75) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1079
• Medieval Christians treated Qur’anic Paradise as proof of Islam’s invalidity #exemplifies (0.75) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 843
• Some medieval Christians grasped the Qur’anic Christ accurately #qualifies (0.75)
• Medieval Christian readers judged the Qur’an by its Christology #expands (0.72)
• Medieval Christians valued Qur’anic Christ references over Islamic monotheism #expands (0.72) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 920
• Medieval Christians viewed Qur’anic truths solely as borrowings from Scripture #expands (0.70) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 910
• Medieval Christians admitted the Qur’an as an authority only where useful to their polemic #qualifies (0.70) — Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, 1408