The historical Muhammad and the historical Jesus: A comparison of scholarly reinventions and reinterpretations

Abstract

Scholars of the historical Jesus and scholars of the historical Muhammad are engaged in seemingly similar activities, but they rarely look to each other to compare and evaluate their methods and theories. Such a comparison reveals that both seek to read thoroughly theological texts as historical texts, or at least ones out of which the historical facts can be rooted. Thus, both sets of scholars approach the texts with assumptions shared by the believers. Furthermore, because of the status accorded Jesus in the development of Christianity and the contemporary relevance assigned to Jesus by scholars of the historical Jesus, these scholars also share similar goals and perspectives with believers. Scholars of the historical Muhammad may be fewer in number, have fewer resources, and have less sophisticated methodologies than their counterparts, but for the most part their conclusions are less theological.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 13 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.