Duvduv

Perhaps the authors were more concerned with what they deemed were incorrect Christian dogma rather than actual texts, although the Quran devotes space to the Baptist. Strangely, the virgin birth involves no Joseph.
I suppose it could have taken a swipe at a false teacher named Bulus -Paul
Especially if there were texts that did condemn paulism in the period before Islam.

Duvduv

The writers of the Quran were in the 7th century, which was just a few decades after the death of Justinian. It just seems hard to imagine that these writers in Arabia (who could not have been illiterate) would have knowingly made such mistakes in recounting the story of Jesus and the deification issue, and take no swipes at the author of the epistles for distorting the "true Injil."

And even if they only wrote from orally transmitted stories, it is hard to imagine that with international contact to Egypt and Syria they would have NEVER heard the complete stories or about Paul. They could never have resisted the temptation of taking a swipe at Paul for ostensibly advocating idolatry.

There must be more here than meets the eye.

Duvduv

Does anybody have any thoughts on this? I think it is rather interesting, but I can't seem to pin down anything about Christianity in Arabia or the familiarity of Arabs with Christianity in Antioch or Alexandria.
According to a number of historians of the Arabs, Christianity was not only known but had a presence in Arabia (Glubb, Watt). If that is true and it relates to even Nestorian Christianity, then presumably the authors of the Quran would have been familiar with the NT texts, but the Quran does not in fact appear to reflect knowledge about them.

Duvduv

AA, why do you think the authors of the Quran had no problem conceiving of a physical human Jesus born from the virgin? The Jesus of the Quran is neither a ghost nor a docetic being

Duvduv

It seems that the stories in Sura 3 and Sura 19 about the birth of Jesus and John the Baptist are directly related to the accounts in the Gospel of Luke. This may also include the description of Mary as the "daughter of Aaron" since GLuke states that Elizabeth was a descendant of Aaron, and of course Mary is identified as Elizabeth's cousin.

Regarding the miracles of Jesus, these include healing the leper (GMark) and the blind (all four gospels), resurrecting the dead (Mark, Luke, John), and the additional two of speaking at birth and creating clay birds, the latter appearing in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas and Toldoth Yeshu. Exodus Rabba 2:12 states that Moses could speak at birth, so the author of the Quran heard that from Jews. Howver the miracles are merely stated as a matter of fact without the historical background.

If the authors of the Quran knew about the four gospels plus others, how was it they did not specifically know about the Pauline epistles?

The doctrine of the trinity is condemned in Suras 4 and 5.

sotto voce

If there was one thing that they knew, it was that justification was by faith, and no-one had made that more clear than Paul. But it was the one thing they didn't want to know.

Duvduv

However close the description of the annunciation to Mary in the Quran is to GLuke, the Quran mysteriously ignores Joseph entirely, who is not ignored in GLuke.

sotto voce

It's not mysterious if the authors were influenced by Romanism.

Duvduv

I don't understand what you mean.
There is a possible "hint" of Joseph in Surah 3:44 where lots are drawn for a guardian of Mary which also is mentioned in the Infancy Gospel of James.

sotto voce

Romanists devised a whole new 'Mary' while relegating Joseph. The Qur'an invents in like manner.