Analytical-Critical examination of Christian theologian’s views in encountering the Quran in the eighth and ninth centuries A. D.

The Qur’an has put much information about Jesus Christ and Christianity, and in some cases has challenged Christian beliefs. After the spread of Islam in the Christian regions, Christian theologians, who saw their religious beliefs in danger, engaged in apologetic reaction to defend their beleifs, and in this regard, they studied the Qur’an. The oldest sources concerning the matter belong to three Christian theologians in eighth and ninth centuries A.D., John of Damascus, Ammār Al-Basri and Abū Rāʾitạ l-Takrītī. Denying of the revelatory identity of the Qur’an, John of Damascus claimed that this book had been an incomplete copy of the Bible, which had been appeared through the teachings of an Arian monk to the Prophet of Islam. By examining the Quranic teachings, He tried to demonstrate that the content of the Qur’an can not be the Word of God. Ammār Al-Basri emphasized, as the only way of recognizing a divinely originated religion in his view, on the miracles and claimed that because there was no any miracle happening in supporting the Qur’an and prophethood of Mohammad, so the Qur’an can not be word of God.  He appealed to the Qur’an and the Islamic tradition to prove his claim. Abū Rāʾitạ without considering the revelatory identity of the Qur’an, tried to interpret Qur’anic passages in a way that would decrease the theological gap between Christian beliefs and Islamic teachings. In this research, the historical and intellectual context of any one of these theologians was analyzed in an historical method, and then their views in encountering with the Qur’an were evaluated in a descriptive-analytic method. In this work historical data, biblical and Qur’anic teachings, Christian and Islamic traditions, and sometimes rational arguments were taken into consideration for analyzing the views. Based on the investigations in this research, the views of these three theologians about the revelatory identity of the Qur’an’s origin and the Qur’anic teachings are partial looks on the Qur’anic verses, and consideration of the Qur’anic text as a whole does not confirm their views. John of Damascus’ theory, that is, transcription of the Qur’an from the Bible, is not acceptable, because of the differences between the content of these two books. Also his views concerning the Qur’anic teaching such as Word of God, Spirit of God, Camel of God, Sister of Aaron, and the marriage laws, is incompatible with historical data and other Qur’anic teachings. Ammār Al-Basri’s views are incompatible with the miraculous character of Qur’an and the historical narrations in regard with miracles of the Prophet of Islam. Also Abū Rāʾitạ l-Takrītī’s view points concerning the Qur’anic verses to prove Christian teachings, like Son of God, Trinity, and Incarnation, are a kind of arbitrary interpretation of Qur’anic verses, because of lacking comprehensive considereation of Qur’anic verses.