In these readings, I found that a number of things piqued my interest. From the Peters reading, I thought that the interactions between the earliest Muslims and Jews were incredibly interesting. In particular, I thought it was interesting that many Jews clung to each other as a people, but, according to this account, were actually considered more pagan. I imagine this somewhat similar to those who culturally claim to belong to a religion, but do not allow it to make a claim on them. Certainly, I could see how Muslims would be frustrated at the impasse here; perhaps Jews who were faithful would be more open to faith in the first place. However, these interactions explain how the conflict between Muslims and Jews is practically as old as Islam itself, at least while Muhammed was still receiving his first revelations.
I was also intrigued by the article by Herbert Berg. I found it helpful for understanding the evolution of the Qur’an and its canonization. In particular, I found the commentary on the close relationship between the Qur’an and the person of Muhammed. Although this thought might be contested, one could see how the Qur’an would naturally have a little reflection of the Muhammed in it. Christian and Jews would believe this too, and holding such belief does not diminish the divinity of the text.
My main question ties together the two readings and has to do with the Muslim view of other texts. Since the Qur’an recognizes numerous biblical figures as prophets, such as Noah, Abraham, Solomon, John the Baptist, and so on, it is clear that Muhammed had interaction with local religions, like the aforementioned Jewish population. Given that these individuals were found in Scripture, would Muhammed have recognized the Torah as Scripture? Would this extend to the Bible, given the New Testament mentions? Or is it that Qur’an, seen as the fullest source of God’s sending down, would then “trump” those other texts (as in, the Qur’an would have a higher degree of divinity than the others)?
Islam & Christian-Muslim Relations, Hamaty 
Hi Andrew! This is a helpful question that I hope we can explore in class. It seems to me that Muslims wouldn’t view the Hebrew Scriptures and New Testament as Scripture– for example, certain portrayals of the divinity of Jesus in the Gospels aren’t likely to be accepted– but I wonder where that leaves things given the textual relationship between the Qur’an and the Bible.
–Stephanie
LikeLike
It’s an interesting question to raise, and I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this at greater length. It first glance, I would image that Muslims would consider much of the biblical material (particularly New Testament material) as a human corruption of divine revelation. Even on that hypothesis, though, there is still the question of how far these texts can remain valuable in themselves while being imperfect — something which the category “People of the Book” seems to affirm.
LikeLike
Thanks for this post! Many Christians have wondered whether Muhammad — if he had access to the Bible and Christian teaching — would have embraced it. It seems actually that the Bible was not yet translated into Arabic, although Muhammad could have known many Christians. In any case as others have said here later Islamic tradition relates that the Bible was corrupt. It could be that Muhammad’s own prophetic convictions would not have allowed him to understand the Bible as Christians do.
LikeLike