abuyusufalshafii
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 104
- Reaction score
- 61
- Points
- 28
I would say that in issues of creed, history, and Quranic exegesis they do supplement each other and sometimes correct one another like the new testament corrects some mistakes of the Jews in their understanding of the old testament like Daniel and Isaiah introduce the issue of the resurrection and the Quran corrects some misunderstanding of the Church in issues of theology etc. (I favor Arius the Presbyter).
But you are right that in issues of legal validity each scripture was valid for a specific time and place but still many scholars studied other religious texts to gain insight on their own understanding.
In terms of legal validity they are not all valid for all times and places but in terms of understanding one another and adding to ones own knowledge base and that great scholars like Abur Rayhan al Biruni (specialized in comparative religion) and even great companions of the Rasul Muhammad one could use them to gain further knowledge (in a general sense) and that great Muslim historians and exegetes of the Quran relied heavily on the Bible, apocrypha and pseudepigrapha in their specific fields especially ancient history and even creed issues (see ibn 'Abbas and his understanding of fallen angels etc.).
Lastly, I've found in my studies of the Quran, Bible and even ancient philosophies that when they are put together they either agree in wording and meaning, agree in meaning but not in wording, supplement each other or genuinely differ from one another.
The texts of the Bible and Quran do differ in somethings but agree in most things and I couldn't imagine studying one without the other, like many Muslim historians and exegetes and I do agree that the Christian creeds conflict with the Quran in several issues but the texts of the bible and the Quran agree on most things.
But you are right that in issues of legal validity each scripture was valid for a specific time and place but still many scholars studied other religious texts to gain insight on their own understanding.
In terms of legal validity they are not all valid for all times and places but in terms of understanding one another and adding to ones own knowledge base and that great scholars like Abur Rayhan al Biruni (specialized in comparative religion) and even great companions of the Rasul Muhammad one could use them to gain further knowledge (in a general sense) and that great Muslim historians and exegetes of the Quran relied heavily on the Bible, apocrypha and pseudepigrapha in their specific fields especially ancient history and even creed issues (see ibn 'Abbas and his understanding of fallen angels etc.).
Lastly, I've found in my studies of the Quran, Bible and even ancient philosophies that when they are put together they either agree in wording and meaning, agree in meaning but not in wording, supplement each other or genuinely differ from one another.
The texts of the Bible and Quran do differ in somethings but agree in most things and I couldn't imagine studying one without the other, like many Muslim historians and exegetes and I do agree that the Christian creeds conflict with the Quran in several issues but the texts of the bible and the Quran agree on most things.
