H20, et al
re: What was the topic of this thread again?????
Topic title is, How do Christians read the Quran. Had you intended only to lecture, say so. Nonetheless if you know of any credal statement for Quran, as courtesy share the information with the readers, before lecturing. As for semantic problem of traditional and orthodox, word meanings can be disciplined if genuine discussion is desired. Until you see fit to do more than guess the brand of Islam encountered, I will assume reality of difference is only in your head.
Just so JCF members will know, obstruction to productive discussions will not come from myself. Muslims, who have contacted me for email discussions, find my agreement for investigating Islam and Christianity, more than fair. None were first asked to reciprocate philosophically the Trinity as valid possibility. I did recommend consistency, but there was no hammer waiting over heads when some inconsistency occurs. And made it clear, I would not put-up with special pleading. Any Muslim here believing aforementioned considerations in earlier and present post, are unsatisfactory, please let me know why. I am ready and willing to listen.
re: Sorry Joseph you lost me here bold.
My stupidity for assuming you understood crux of the Quran and Sunna, and apologizes for giving undue credit. For readers' benefit, I will clarify.
reference material: "Dawagandist show little conscious in telling every non-Muslim that Islam Canonical traditions are untrustworthy like the Bible"...Muslims use the terms, Sunna and Hadith, interchangeably unless specifying
Islam holds the Quran and Sunna as inseparable i.e. both revelations have well-nigh equal authority, though the relationship is rarely mentioned in the propagation of Islam. Believed second only to Quran in perfection, light and truth, the Sunna necessarily embodies the spirit of Mohammed. The Sunna is known through the Hadith and the Hadith contains the Sunna. So if one dismiss the traditions then Sunna is thrown out by default and Quran is left wanting. Supposedly in Islam there is a "scientific," method for Sunna and interpretations, and not to be confused with mere theological science. Whatever the method is called, I am certain it is bewildering. Unless more information is received, it's correct to state the Sunnah is created(invented), contradictory and complex. Following is my summary on relationship of the Quran and Sunna.
The uncreated, non-contradicting and "clear" text, depends on the created, contradicting and complex method for understanding the "simple" religion.
Now, how do Muslims deal with Sunna difficulties. Many simply use a magic formula much like the following, "We believe in the Taurat, Zabur and Injil, but we don't believe in the Bible." Which is, "We believe in the Sunna but don't use Hadith contradicting the Quran." Perhaps latter formula could be true, but neither are Sunna contradictions to be disregarded, although a Muslim can do so at his/her own peril. The ruling and warning comes from the keepers of Islam and not something I invented. Furthermore, imo, crux of the relationship can and does get worse. On an Islamic site, I came upon the following question being asked by a Muslim.
Question. "Recently I read that Imam Malik ibn Anas judged that certain forms of Sunna (or hadith, however you choose to look at it) could abrogate the Qur'an. This was found in the Chapter in Imam Malik in "The Four Imams" published by Dar at Taqwa....I am curious to find out what possible legal reasoning Malik could have had for this Idea."
Answer should have been quite simple. But I'm interested in how Muslims here would answer and matching the answers with ones he received.
joseph