The Law is Useless, Only Jesus can Save Us?
Posted: January 31, 2012 Filed under: articles by Sami Zaatari, Christianity 337 Comments »Christian missionaries often argue that the law that was given to the Israelites was practically impossible to follow as the people would often break the rules by going against it (sinning), and so the law was not perfect and something else was needed. They argue that this something else was provided in the form of Jesus’ death on the cross, and his resurrection after 3 days. Salvation now relies on one putting his complete trust and faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus, and through that he shall be saved and granted eternal life.
On paper the argument sounds good, after all it is true, we are not saints, nobody is able to perfectly follow the law that was given by God, we have all gone against it. But does that make it imperfect and useless? If we want to use the same analogy, then we must also argue that our current judicial law is also useless, as people continually break the law by committing acts of murder, and theft and so let’s do away with it. Secondly, what the missionaries fail to realize is that even with the death and resurrection of Jesus, people continue to sin! And when I say people, I am referring to people who believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus. So what’s the difference? With the law people were sinning, without the law, people are still sinning, so if Jesus was meant to provide something different, he failed.
One might argue back that according to the law, you will be punished if you do break the law, and you won’t be right with God and so a sinner will never be able to be with God. Indeed the law does teach punishment for breaking it, but it also teaches about repentance and forgiveness, in other words if you do sin, it doesn’t mean your finished, rather you can still repent of what you did and you will be forgiven. The same applies to one who believes in the death and resurrection of Jesus, if one sins, what does he do? He repents! Similarly, when one broke the law, he too repented, so therefore you still have the exact same method in place, and nothing’s really changed. People are still sinning, and people are still repenting, so what’s the main difference? And just like with the law, if a Christian persists in sin, and does not repent, he will be thrown into the lake of fire. Just like a person who persists in breaking the law, and does not repent, he too will be punished according to the law. So in both cases we still have a punishment to be handed out to the guilty, and in both cases the guilty one can avoid a punishment, through the means of repentance.
Last but not least, if the law was imperfect and impossible to ever follow, then why on earth would God have made it? Isn’t that unjust? Isn’t that unfair? And isn’t that quite ignorant to make a law which you have to follow in order to attain salvation, but in actuality you will never be able to follow this law which will damn you to hell? If the missionary is correct, then this God cannot truly be God in the first place! Why in the world would anybody have confidence in a God that makes a law that he knows you can’t possibly follow, and will then punish you for it? I prefer to follow an understanding God, who makes a law for me to follow, but understands and forgives when I break it, opening up the means of repentance through that very same law.
The Quran: The Divine Quality Control Over Previous Scriptures
Posted: January 30, 2012 Filed under: articles by Toobaa Kurd, Christian extremism, Islam 9 Comments »If you saw my debate with Rev Dr Steve Latham you will recall that during my opening presentation I quoted the following passage from the Quran:
And unto thee O Prophet have We vouchsafed this divine writ, setting forth
the truth, confirming the truth of whatever there still remains of earlier revelations
and determining what is true therein.Judge, then, between the followers of earlier revelation in accordance with
what God has bestowed from on high, and do not follow their errant views,
forsaking the truth that has come unto thee.
(Surah 5:48)
Recently, my use of this passage has come under sustained attack from some fundamentalist Christians who say that this is a false & tendentious translation of the passage.
So I asked a good friend of mine Toobaa Kurd (a qualified Arabist) for her assessment of the passage: I asked her to evaluate the text and let me know if she considers it to be a good translation of the original Arabic. I am very grateful for all her time and effort.
She replied as follows:
Here is my understanding of the question:
In order to illustrate what the Qur’an (“TMQ“) claims of the position of previous scriptures, you quoted TMQ 5:48, as translated by Asad:
And unto thee O Prophet have We vouchsafed this divine writ, setting forth the truth, confirming the truth of whatever there still remains of earlier revelations and determining what is true therein.
Judge, then, between the followers of earlier revelation in accordance with what God has bestowed from on high, and do not follow their errant views, forsaking the truth that has come unto thee.
This assertion was subsequently criticised and the following arguments made:
- that the Qur’an, which is described as musaddiq and muhaymin over previous scriptures, suggests that it protects previous scriptures from being lost or corrupted; and
- that the words “whatever there still remains of earlier revelations and determining what is true therein” are an interpolation.
A very simple response to argument (1) would be that, insofar as the Qur’an confirms or corroborates any specific part of previous revelation, those parts are “preserved” through the Qur’an. However, the Arabic does not point to “preservation” in this ayah and the Qur’an is doing something much more advanced, including setting a standard for what qualifies as “the book”/”earlier revelations”, as I will show below. In any event the ayah does not demonstrate argument (1) above. This leaves Ken to rely on a “lone English translation”, (Ahmed Ali: preserving them (from change and corruption)” – I will show below that the “preservation” idea does not really stand and, even here, Ahmed Ali tentatively uses brackets).
With regards to Argument (2), it should be noted that translations of the Qur’an cannot be word-for-word translations, and at best will be interpretations of, or meanings of, the Qur’an. Indeed, the variety of meanings for any one word in Arabic cannot be expressed in any other language. I have considered the Arabic ayah against Asad’s delivery of it and found that Asad’s translation is a good example of this reality. (I’ll refer to it as a translation for ease of reference in this email). This is mainly because the translator: (i) does not use parentheses where he has made inferences that are not directly mentioned in the Arabic; and (ii) sets the meaning of nuanced phrases in beautiful terms but, in fact, is not very different from the others, such as those that Ken cited. I will demonstrate this below.
I have considered the question mainly from a linguistic point of view and have set out my reasoning under the following questions:
- What is the translator’s drafting style?
- What does musaddiq mean?
- Which “scriptures” are being referred to?
- What does muhaymin mean?
1. Asad’s Style
- And unto thee O Prophet have We vouchsafed this divine writ, setting forth the truth,
In the simplest terms possible, the Arabic says: “And we have sent down to you the book in truth”. It is usually inferred that “you” refers to Muhammad (s). However, you will note that other translators, such as Muhsin Khan, will put “Muhammad/Prophet” in brackets to show that it is not in the Arabic, but inferred.
The Arabic also simply says ‘the book’ – it doesn’t say “divine writ” – again, this is an example of interpretation rather than a translation.
The Arabic, “bilHaqq” can mean that the Book is revealed “in truth”, or “with the truth”.
So far, you will notice that the underlined are inferred meanings (which should be marked in brackets) or interpretations, or just flowery language as opposed to word-for-word translations. His style of ornate language and not using parentheses continues below.
2. Musaddiq
- confirming the truth
The root (s-d-q) means to speak the truth; to prove to be true; to fit exactly; to keep, or fulfill, one’s promise. What Asad has quite reasonably translated as “confirming the truth” is the word musaddiq, which is the participle of the second form of this root, meaning: to deem credible, accept as true; to consider or pronounce as true. Musaddiq is also used to mean certification or attestation. Almost every translator has translated this as “confirming” or “verifying”. This “confirmation” can also point to what the early scriptures promised of Allah’s final Prophet (s). This meaning is also highlighted by Sher Ali, who makes use of the first form of the verb and translates it as “fulfilling”.
3. The Book
- of whatever there still remains of earlier revelations
What is being confirmed or verified here? The subject of the confirmation is what is “bayna yadayhi” of “the book” (“of the book” being, “min al kitaab”).
(i) “bayna yadayhi”
Literally, “bayna yadayhi” means “between his two hands” and, as an idiom, means “in front of or before him; in his presence; in his power”. Some translators deliver this as “what came before”.
To understand the use*, note the preceding ayah (TMQ 5:46), where it is used in reference to Jesus (as) and the Injeel “confirming” (musaddiq) what was “bayna yadayhi” of the Torah. Ibn Kathir, in his exegesis (here), explains this as meaning that Jesus (as) adhered to it (the Torah) and ruled by it (i.e. it was in his presence and power). It also appears that the Injeel abrogated parts of the Torah (TMQ 3:50: “And [I have come] confirming what was before me of the Torah and to make lawful for you some of what was forbidden to you.”). If the Injeel abrogated the Torah, then what is the nature of the “confirmation” of it? This does not point to “preservation”. On the contrary, it points to fulfilling or confirming what is correct of it (understanding naskh and how the Qur’an abrogates itself, will explain this – the abrogation and the abrogated were both “correct” but the abrogated no longer valid).
(ii) “of the book”
In light of the above, “whatever there still remains” is one valid interpretation of “bayna yadayhi min al kitaab” (“min al kitaab” – “of the book”). To be clear, the ayah states “We reveal to you the book [...] confirming what was bayna yadayhi of the book. In other words, it is not referring to or contrasting with specific scriptures like the Torah or Injeel. Indeed, corruptions of “the book” would not be considered part of “the book” and would not be “confirmed”. As such, it appears to be confirming what would actually qualify as “the book”. Hence, Asad suggests it only confirms what remains of it in its original form. This translation agrees with the other translations.
Also, contrary to what critics may assert, there is no language in the Arabic ayah to suggest preventative action from future corruption or loss of the old scriptures. At best, it “confirms” or “fulfills” what currently existed of it in its original form when TMQ 5:48 was revealed (hence Asad’s choice of words). This is further emphasised by the below.
4. Muhaymin
- and determining what is true therein.
The word that Asad has translated as “determining” is muhaymin. This is from the root (h-y-m-n) (an unusual quadriliteral root) which means to say “amen”. When used with the preposition “alaa” (as it is here), it means to guard; to watch; to control; to keep an eye on. The derivative, muhaymin means supervising; controlling; guardian; master of. Following from these meanings, some have translated this as a “criterion” or “hegemony”. ”[D]etermining what is true therein” is another way of saying “guarding what would qualify as “the book”" and is a valid interpretation ofmuhaymin. The critics suggest that it means “to preserve” – it simply does not (notably, the Qur’an uses words with the root of (h-f-dh) when describing the promised preservation of the Qur’an (see TMQ 15:9).
As such, we can see that Asad’s translation is thoughtful and deeply involved in the interpretation and meaning – but it has to be or these phrases and terms would not make sense in English. In any case, it is not a deviant or lone translation and the ayah itself does not point to the “preservation” of earlier revelations.
*This phrase is used at least 17 times in the Qur’an. See TMQ 2:97, 3:3, 5:46, 5:48, 6:92, 10:37, 12:111, 13:11, 25:27, 34:12, 34:31, 35:31, 41:42, 46:21, 46:30, 76:67.
Far from an ‘expert’ view, this is just my own opinion, but I hope this is helpful, and my apologies in advance for any incoherence.
Salaam.
One year on: Arab Spring – The 4 Burning Questions
Posted: January 29, 2012 Filed under: Islam, The News, Videos Leave a comment »What I Wrote From My Heart – Malcolm X
Posted: January 29, 2012 Filed under: Islam 33 Comments »
- Malcolm X
Never have I witnessed such sincere hospitality and overwhelming spirit of true brotherhood as is practiced by people of all colors and races here in this ancient Holy Land, the home of Abraham, Muhammad and all the other Prophets of the Holy Scriptures. For the past week, I have been utterly speechless and spellbound by the graciousness I see displayed all around me by people of all colors.
I have been blessed to visit the Holy City of Makkah, I have made my seven circuits around the ka’bah, led by a young religious guide (mutawaf) named Muhammad, I drank water from the well of the Zam-Zam. I ran seven times back and forth between the hills of Mt. as-Safa and al-Marwah. I have prayed in the ancient city of Mina, and I have prayed on Mt. Arafat.
There were tens of thousands of pilgrims, from all over the world. They were of all colors, from blue-eyed blondes to black-skinned Africans. But we were all participating in the same ritual, displaying a spirit of unity and brotherhood that my experiences in America had led me to believe never could exist between the white and non-white.
America needs to understand Islam, because this is the one religion that erases from its society the race problem. Throughout my travels in the Muslim world, I have met, talked to, and even eaten with people who in America would have been considered white – but the white attitude was removed from their minds by the religion of Islam. I have never before seen sincere and true brotherhood practiced by all colors together, irrespective of their color.
You may be shocked by these words coming from me. But on this pilgrimage, what I have seen, and experienced, has forced me to rearrange much of my thought-patterns previously held, and to toss aside some of my previous conclusions. This was not too difficult for me. Despite my firm convictions, I have always been a man who tries to face facts, and to accept the reality of life as new experience and new knowledge unfolds it. I have always kept an open mind, which is necessary to the flexibility that must go hand in hand with every form of intelligent search for truth.
During the past eleven days here in the Muslim world, I have eaten from the same plate, drunk from the same glass, and slept on the same rug – while praying to the same God – with fellow Muslims, whose eyes were the bluest of blue, whose hair was the blondest of blond, and whose skin was the whitest of white. And in the words and in the deeds of the white Muslims, I felt the same sincerity that I felt among the black African Muslims of Nigeria, Sudan and Ghana.
We were truly all the same (brothers) – because their belief in one God had removed the white from their minds, the white from their behaviour, and the white from their attitude.
I could see from this, that perhaps if white Americans could accept the Oneness of God, then perhaps, too, they could accept in reality the Oneness of Man – and cease to measure, and hinder, and harm others in terms of their ‘differences’ in color.
With racism plaguing America like an incurable cancer, the so-called ‘Christian’ white American heart should be more receptive to a proven solution to such a destructive problem. Perhaps it could be in time to save America from imminent disaster – the same destruction brought upon Germany by racism that eventually destroyed the Germans themselves.
Each hour here in the Holy Land enables me to have greater spiritual insights into what is happening in America between black and white. The American Negro never can be blamed for his racial animosities – he is only reacting to four hundred years of the conscious racism of the American whites. But as racism leads America up the suicide path, I do believe, from the experiences that I have had with them, that the whites of the younger generation, in the colleges and universities, will see the handwriting on the walls and many of them will turn to the spiritual path of truth – the only way left to America to ward off the disaster that racism inevitably must lead to.
Never have I been so highly honored. Never have I been made to feel more humble and unworthy. Who would believe the blessings that have been heaped upon an American Negro? A few nights ago, a man who would be called in America a white man, a United Nations diplomat, an ambassador, a companion of kings, gave me his hotel suite, his bed. Never would I have even thought of dreaming that I would ever be a recipient of such honors – honors that in America would be bestowed upon a King – not a Negro.
All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of all the Worlds.
Sincerely,
Al-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz (Malcolm X)
*
A Letter by Malcolm X, (may Allah have mercy upon him). Quoted from The Autobiography of Malcolm X printed by Penguin Classics
The Christology of the Synoptic Gospels: some introductory comments
Posted: January 29, 2012 Filed under: articles by Paul Williams, Christianity, The Bible Leave a comment »Today, however, such a reading of the gospels is no longer possible. To start with the most obvious observation: there are four gospels, and each has a different picture of Jesus and his teaching. The fourth gospel, that of St John, presents the reader with a substantially different account of the teaching of Jesus, a conflicting chronology of his life (for example the date of Jesus’ crucifixion) and perhaps most significantly, presents a christology that is radically different from the synoptics. Thus NT scholars have long concluded that the gospels tell us as much about the views of their authors as they do about the events they allegedly describe.
As Christopher Tuckett (Professor of New Testament Studies in the University of Oxford) in his critically acclaimed work Christology and the New Testament: Jesus and His Earliest Followers Edinburgh University Press 2001) comments:
‘The picture of Jesus in John is in many respects very different from the picture in the other three, so-called ‘synoptic’, Gospels. Furthermore, most would agree that, in general terms, the synoptic picture is more likely to reflect the realities of Jesus‘ own time, and the Johannine account represents an (at times) extensive rewriting of the Jesus tradition by a later Christian profoundly influenced by his own ideas and circumstances. However, it is now recognised that what applies to the Fourth Gospel applies equally to all the Gospel: the synoptic Gospels, quite as much as John, have been influenced by the ideas and the circumstances of their authors. Thus in reading all the Gospels, we have to be aware of the fact that we reading accounts of Jesus‘ life as mediated by later Christians and hence we may learn much, if not more, about the latter as about Jesus himself in studying the Gospel texts.’
pp. 105-106 (emphasis in original)
‘Jesus is Lord’
Posted: January 29, 2012 Filed under: articles by Paul Williams, Christianity, The Bible Leave a comment »by JDG Dunn
The history of this confession of Jesus as Lord in earliest Christianity largely revolves round the question, How significant is the application of this title to Jesus? What role or status does this confession attribute to Jesus or recognise as belonging to Jesus?…The problem is that ‘lord’ can denote a whole range of dignity – from a respectful form of address as to a teacher or judge to a full title for God. Where do the early Christian references to the lordship of Jesus come within this spectrum? The answer seems to be that over the first few decades of Christianity the confession of Jesus as ‘Lord’ moved in overt significance from the lower end of the ‘spectrum of dignity’ towards the upper end steadily gathering to itself increasing overtones of deity.
We need not doubt that the Aramaic mari underlies the Greek kyrie (vocative)…Mar was used of the first century BC holy man Abba Hilkiah, presumably in recognition of the charismatic powers attributed to him. Moreover, ‘lord’ was largely synonymous with ‘teacher’ at the time of Jesus, and Jesus was certainly recognised to have the authority of a rabbi or teacher (Mark 9:5 etc). We can therefore say that the confession of Jesus as Lord was rooted within the ministry of Jesus to the extent that he was widely acknowledged to exercise the authority of a (charismatic) teacher and healer (cf. Mark 1:22,27).
Whether ‘Lord’ already had a higher significance for Jesus himself during his ministry depends on how we evaluate Mark 12:35-37:
‘While Jesus was teaching in the temple courts, he asked, ‘Why do the teachers of the law say that the Messiah is the son of David? David himself, speaking by the Holy Spirit, declared:
‘ “The Lord said to my Lord:
‘Sit at my right hand
Until I put your enemies
Under your feet.”‘David himself calls him “Lord”. How then can he be his son?’
Even if it contains an authentic word of the historical Jesus (as is quite possible) it need only mean that he understood Messiah to be a figure superior to David in significance and specially favoured by Yahweh. It does not necessarily imply that he thought the Messiah was a divine figure (Psalm 110 after all probably referred to the king).
*
From: Unity and Diversity in the New Testament: An Inquiry into the Character of Earliest Christianity (emphasis in the original) pp.53-54.
So Dunn recognises that the title ‘lord’ originally denoted a human being. As the term began to be used in pagan contexts as the Gentile mission spread, where it was well established as a title for the cult deity in the mystery religions (especially Isis and Serapis), and also in Emperor worship – ‘Caesar is Lord’- a radical alteration of the meaning of the term occurred. Above all, St Paul advanced this change in meaning quite deliberately. He uses Old Testament texts that speak of Yahweh and applies them to Jesus (e.g. Romans 10:13). For Paul, ‘Lord Jesus’ had become a title of divinity.
In a profound sense, Paul founded the religion of Christianity we know today.
The Purpose of Life – Jeffrey Lang
Posted: January 28, 2012 Filed under: Atheism, Islam, Videos 1 Comment »Dr Jeffrey Lang is currently Professor of Mathematics in the University of Kansas
I attend Jumuah for the first time
Posted: January 28, 2012 Filed under: articles by Ashmath, Guest article, Islam Leave a comment »by Ashmath
About 17 years ago, I had just read Karen Armstrong’s book, A History of God and was telephoning a local masjid to ask about the possibility of attending services. The man who answered the phone asked me a little bit about myself and seemed a bit taken aback when I told him that I was of Jewish descent. “We don’t get many Jews,” he told me.
I’d always had a bit of a theological bent, but Karen Armstrong’s book was my first exposure to Islam, and it piqued my curiosity. Alas, at that time my life was rapidly disintegrating, along with my second marriage, and my plans to attend Friday worship fell by the wayside.
Over the years I’ve attended a few synagogues and literally dozens of churches. There were some Sundays when I was looking for a church home, that I’d attend two churches on one Sunday. But attending a mosque? Perhaps it reveals that I am still prey to some residue of the popular misconceptions about Islam that I was so intimidated by the thought.
I work in the downtown area of a major metropolitan area on the west coast of the U.S. and found, via Salatomatic, that I am just three blocks away from where services are held during lunch hour on Fridays. Pretty lucky, eh? No excuse not to go and check it out, right?
So today, almost two decades later, and only about 4 years after I began reading the Qur’an, I actually did it -I attended Jumuah.
After a brief walk in the beautiful winter sunshine, I began to spot kufis converging a few blocks ahead of me and knew that I was in the right area. Services were being held in the auditorium of a downtown church, and as I walked in I could see the area set aside for prayer, with rows of rugs laid down in preparation for worshippers.
Some folks noticed that I looked a bit lost and very kindly asked after me and directed me to someone who could talk with me. A very tall gentleman shook my hand warmly and began to talk to me about his journey into Islam. He was very warm and welcoming and gave me some pamphlets to read. I asked whether it would be alright for me to just observe the prayers today, as I was not familiar enough with them to perform them myself. He offered me a chair in the back and went off to help others.
I was surprised by the number of worshippers who showed up. I expected people to show up, but wasn’t expecting over a hundred people. All of the prayer rugs were taken, and some men knelt on the hardwood floor of the auditorium to pray. It was a different experience to see all these worshippers on the floor instead of sitting in wooden pews. It brought to mind humility before God, and the commonality of the worshippers as members of the ummah, the community of believers. And, much as Malcolm X described his eye-opening experience of the Hajj, I was surrounded by every shade of skin from palest white to darkest brown.
The men trickled in and performed their individual prayers before a sermon was given. As I’ve mentioned, the place filled up. The sermon wasn’t fancy, but it was good – without the showmanship and histrionics of so many evangelical Christian services. It seemed to be over pretty quickly so that everyone could get back to work.
In the middle of this busy workday, it was no surprise or disappointment that most people didn’t pay any attention to me, but a few men did approach me and offer handshakes. Their gestures of welcome were very much appreciated.
I do plan to attend again, but I’ll need to learn more about how to perform wudu and salat before next time.
Why the Christian Understanding of Salvation is ‘Morally Grotesque’
Posted: January 27, 2012 Filed under: articles by Paul Williams, Christianity, Islam, The Bible 26 Comments »
Here is an extract from my opening presentation at London Central mosque in December 2011:
Islam places great stress on God as a God of mercy and forgiveness whom the individual can approach directly without the need of any mediator or priest. God says in the Quran:
‘O My servants, who have transgressed against their souls. Do not despair of the mercy of God, for He forgives all sins, He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.’
(39:53). From this understanding, which was shared by Jesus, flow certain critical observations regarding the later Christian view of the necessity of Jesus’ alleged vicarious atonement.
The Christian idea that guilt can be removed from a wrongdoer by someone else being punished instead is morally grotesque. Or if we say that God in the person of God the Son punished himself in order to be able to justly forgive sinners, we still have the absurdity of a moral law which God must satisfy by punishing the innocent in place of the guilty. As the medieval theologian St Anselm wrote in his work Why God Became Man (Cur Deus Homo), ‘it is a strange thing if God so delights in, or requires, the blood of the innocent, that he neither chooses, nor is able, to spare the guilty without the sacrifice of the innocent’.
I believe the basic fault of the Christian understanding of salvation is that it has no room for divine forgiveness. For a forgiveness that has to be bought by the bearing of a just punishment, or the offering of a sacrifice, is not forgiveness, but merely an acknowledgement that a debt has been paid in full. The Cross is not a symbol of forgiveness at all: on the orthodox Christian view, it denotes the repayment of a debt, as the infinity of Original Sin is atoned for by the infinite sacrifice of God’s own temporary death. But what humanity really needs, as we look back over our long record of disobedience, is a model of true forgiveness by a God who does not calculate, who imposes no mean-spirited ‘economy of salvation’ worthy only of accountants and bookkeepers. As the Bible teaches: The letter killeth – the spirit giveth life.
But in the authentic teaching of Jesus to be found in the synoptic gospels (that is the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke) there is, in contrast, genuine divine forgiveness for those who truly repent. In the Lord’s Prayer we are taught to address God directly and to ask for forgiveness for our sins, expecting to receive this, the only condition being that we in turn forgive one another. There is no suggestion of the need for a mediator between ourselves and God or for an atoning death to enable God to forgive.
One of the most famous of all Jesus’ parables is found in Luke’s gospel: the so-called parable of the prodigal son. It is a story about how God treats repentant sinners. Note that the father when he sees his repentant son returning home does not say ‘Because I am a just as well as a loving father, I cannot forgive him until someone has been duly punished for his sins’, but rather he had compassion, and ran and embraced him and welcomed him home. So God does not need a sacrifice in order to forgive anyone. As the English convert from Christianity to Islam Ruqaiyyah Maqsood wrote: ‘the split-second of turning from Christianity to Islam is the realisation of the truth of the parable of the Prodigal Son. In the parables, God is loving enough to forgive directly. That was the whole glory of the Judaism which Jesus upheld.’
Another example is to be found in Luke’s story of the tax collector and the Pharisee, the tax collector standing far off would not lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner’. Jesus declared that this man went home justified before God. Jesus insisted that he came to bring sinners to a penitent acceptance of God’s mercy: ‘Go and learn what this means, he said, quoting God: “I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.” For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners (Matt 9.13)
In my experience Christians often use the analogy of a ‘debt’ to explain how God needs someone to pay off our sin debt to him, and, because of his justice, he must take the payment from someone. Jesus however had very different ideas about God, namely that God is quite able to just cancel our debt of sin and forgive the sinner.
In Matthew 18 we read Jesus’ teaching:
The Kingdom of Heaven can be compared to a king who decided to bring his accounts up to date with servants who had borrowed money from him. In the process, one of his debtors was brought in who owed him millions of pounds. He couldn’t pay, so his master ordered that he be sold—along with his wife, his children, and everything he owned—to pay the debt.
“But the man fell down before his master and begged him, ‘Please, be patient with me, and I will pay it all.’ Then his master was filled with pity for him, and he released him and forgave his debt.
“But when the man left the king, he went to a fellow servant who owed him a few thousand pounds. He grabbed him by the throat and demanded instant payment.
“His fellow servant fell down before him and begged for a little more time. ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay it,’ he pleaded. But his creditor wouldn’t wait. He had the man arrested and put in prison until the debt could be paid in full.
“When some of the other servants saw this, they were very upset. They went to the king and told him everything that had happened. Then the king called in the man he had forgiven and said, ‘You evil servant! I forgave you that tremendous debt because you pleaded with me. Shouldn’t you have mercy on your fellow servant, just as I had mercy on you?’ Then the angry king sent the man to prison to be tortured until he had paid his entire debt.
“That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you if you refuse to forgive your brothers and sisters from your heart.”
So God freely forgives our sins and expects us to forgive our neighbour too. The Lord’s Prayer, of course, has the same commandment.
So how is a human being to attain eternal life, that is, how are we to be saved? Interestingly, Jesus was asked this very question and you can read his answer in the gospel according to Mark chapter 10. Here is the story:
As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. “Good teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. You know the commandments: ‘Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, do not defraud, honor your father and mother.’”
“Teacher,” he declared, “all these I have kept since I was a boy.”
Jesus looked at him and loved him. “One thing you lack,” he said. “Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
Note that Jesus does not tell the man that he must put his faith in Jesus, or that salvation is solely dependent on Jesus dying to atone for his sins. No. As a humble Jew Jesus recognizes that the attribute of goodness is found perfectly in God alone, not in himself; that to sincerely obey the commands of the Torah is the main road to salvation, but in this individual’s case he lacked just one thing – he needed to give away his wealth to the poor and this would result in his gaining treasure in heaven. Note carefully the sequence.
That this passage caused embarrassment to later gospel writers (who used Mark’s gospel when compiling their own gospels) is evident from the changes they made to Jesus’ words by removing his denial that he is good
Here is Matthew’s altered version in 19:17 (compare this with Marks original)
And Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.’ (Instead of Mark’s original ‘why do you call me good?’)
By way of contrast let us turn to Paul’s answer to the same question about salvation in Romans 10:9:
If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved
The differences are startling. As we have seen, Jesus’ answer to the question about salvation focuses on obedience to the Torah and giving to the poor. As a Prophet to the Jewish people, Jesus taught that faithfulness to God is to be expressed in adherence to the Creator’s commands and precepts in the Torah. Paul’s religion focused on Jesus and he claimed that the Torah had been abolished. Jesus in Matthew chapter 5 taught precisely the opposite.
Jesus’ teaching was fully in accord with contemporary Jewish understanding. Leading Jesus scholar EP Sanders, in his authoritative work on Jesus’ Jewish background says, and I quote, ‘The forgiveness of repentant sinners is a major motif in virtually all the Jewish material which is still available from the period (p 18, Sanders Jesus and Judaism). For Judaism sees human nature as basically good and yet also with an evil inclination that has to be continually resisted. However, God being aware of our finitude and weakness is always ready to forgive the truly repentant. In Islam there is a very similar view.
God is frequently described in the Quran as ar Rahman ir Rahim (The Merciful and the Compassionate).
Jesus, mirroring the teaching of the Quran, teaches that God knows our weakness and forgives those who, in the self-surrender of faith, bow before the compassionate Lord of the universe. Once, the Prophet Muhammad reported that the Devil said: ‘By my honour, O Lord, I shall never stop misguiding your servants so long as life remains in their bodies! The Almighty, the Glorious Lord, said: By My honour, I shall never cease forgiving them, so long as they ask forgiveness of Me!‘ (Ahmad).
Another wonderful saying is: ‘O son of Adam – so long as you call upon Me and ask of me, I shall forgive you for what you have done, and I shall not mind. O son of Adam, were your sins to reach the clouds of the sky and were you then to ask forgiveness of Me, I would forgive you. O son of Adam, were you to come to Me with sins as great as the earth itself, and were you then to face Me ascribing no partner to Me, I would bring you forgiveness in equal measure.’ (Tirmidhi, Ahman).
However, it needs to be pointed out that just as some people refuse to stop on the crazy path to their own destruction, despite the intercession of their loved ones, so the future lives of some people will be extremely unpleasant because of their absolute refusal to accept the love and mercy of God and to live in a way that is acceptable to him.
God tells us in the Quran: ‘If God were to punish people according to their wrongdoing, he would not leave on earth a single living creature; but He gives them respite for a stated term; and when their term expires, they will not be able to delay their fate for a single hour, just as they cannot bring it forward by a single hour.‘ (16:61)
Our salvation lies in our own hands and in the supreme compassion of Allah, who loves each individual He has created.
***
I would like to share with you some teaching about God’s mercy and forgiveness that is to be found in authentic Hadith. The way they speak of God may surprise you if you think that Muslims believe in a remote and distant deity.
The prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said, Indeed, God is more happy with the repentance of His servant than a man who stops in a barren, desolate land; with him he has his riding animal. He then goes to sleep. When he wakes up he realizes that his mount is gone. He searches for it until he is on the verge of dying (for the mount was carrying his supplies and provisions). He then says, “I will return to the place wherein I lost it, and I will die there.” He went to that place, and he was then overcome by sleep. When he woke up, his mount was standing right beside his head: on it was his food, his drink, his provisions, and the things he needed. God is more happy with the repentance of his believing servant than the aforementioned man when he finds his mount and his provisions. (Bukhari & Muslim)
*
A man heard chirping in a thicket, found some young birds, and took them. Their mother came and flew around his head, so he uncovered them and, when she alighted on them, wrapped them up together in his garment and brought them to the Prophet. He commanded the man to put them down and he did so. The mother would not leave them. The prophet said, “Do you wonder at the mercy of the chick’s mother for her young? By Him who sent me with the truth, God shows more mercy to His servants than this mother shows to her young. Take them back and put them where you found them, and their mother with them.” (Abu Daud).
*
The Quran says:
“Say, if you love Allah, obey me (Muhammad), Allah will love you and forgive you your sins, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful” Quran 3:31
*
For them will be a Home Of Peace in the presence Of their Lord: He will be Their Friend, because they practiced righteousness. (Quran 6:127)
*
“To those who believe and do deeds of righteousness hath Allah promised forgiveness and a great reward” Quran 5:9
*
The messenger of God said, ‘When God completed the creation He wrote the following, which is with Him above His throne: ’My mercy takes precedence over My wrath’
*
The Prophet said, “Among those who came before you there was a man who had murdered ninety-nine people. Then he set out asking whether his repentance could be accepted or not. He came upon a monk and asked him if his repentance could be accepted. The monk replied in the negative and so the man killed him. He kept on asking till a man advised him to go to such and such village. So he left for it but death overtook him on the way. While dying, he turned his chest towards that village where he had hoped his repentance would be accepted, and so the angels of mercy and the angels of punishment quarreled amongst themselves regarding him. Allah ordered the village towards which he was going to come closer to him, and ordered the village whence he had come to go far away, and then He ordered the angels to measure the distances between his body and the two villages. So he was found to be one span closer to the village he was going to. So he was forgiven.”
The messenger of God pbuh said: ’No one will be saved from the hell-fire and admitted into Paradise by his deeds alone. When asked, ‘Not even you O messenger of God? he said, ‘Yes, not even me, unless God covers me with His mercy.
*
And finally,
A man came to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and asked,’ When will the day of judgment come?’ The Prophet replied, ‘What have you prepared for the judgment day that you are so concerned for it? He replied, ‘I do not have any good deeds in my account, but I do have one thing: I love Allah and His Messenger.’ The Prophet then said, ‘In that case, do not worry; you will be with those whom you love.’”
(Bukhari)
*
This is Islam’s great secret, unknown to most in the West: the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). This man’s life and teaching came to me as a complete surprise. What an amazing man! A real prophet of God.
But above even this - dare I say it - is the outrageous and astonishing grace and mercy of God!
Adam Deen on BBC ‘The Big questions’ :Is there evidence for God? 15/1/12
Posted: January 25, 2012 Filed under: Uncategorized 60 Comments »Taking part are the priest and particle physicist, Dr Andrew Pinsent; The Times columnist, David Aaronovitch; the Muslim thinker, Adam Deen; leading atheist scientist, Professor Peter Atkins; bible scholar, Francesca Stavrakopoulou; author, Charles Foster; Patsy McKie, founder of Mothers Against Violence; and the former Triad gangster turned Methodist Minister, Kim Goh.
Debate: Is Hell Just? Abdullah al Andalusi vs Farhan Qureshi
Posted: January 24, 2012 Filed under: articles by Abdullah, Debates | Tags: afterlife, farhan qureshi, hell, judgment, justice 23 Comments »
Do sinners deserve to go to Hell forever? Will only one group of people be saved, and the rest damned? Should finite sins merit eternal punishment? Should God punish those who reject him? Is Hell Just? Welcome to the public debate.
Wednesday, 18th January 2012
Abrar House, 45 Crawford Place, London
Guests:
Abdullah Al Andalusi – Portuguese revert to Islam, and International speaker on Islamic thought.
Farhan Qureshi – American Ex-Qadiyani Agnostic speaker on Eastern Philosophy and Universalism.
UPDATE: 11th February 2012
From: Farhan Qureshi
To: Abdullah MDI
Sent: Saturday, 11 February 2012, 5:28
Subject: Statement for MDI
Here is my statement:
In January 2012 I had the opportunity to engage the entire Muslim Debate Initiative team which was by far a spectacular and spiritual experience for me. MDI showed me nothing but kindness and hospitality and represented their faith and tradition completely in a positive and respectful manner. Being a former Muslim I was absolutely humbled by their character and professionalism throughout my stay in London. I thank them again for their invitation and willingness to engage in debate on controversial issues. This speaks volumes in terms of their genuine faith and dedication.
Farhan Qureshi
The Virgin Birth of Jesus in Islam
Posted: January 21, 2012 Filed under: articles by Sami Zaatari, Christianity, Islam Leave a comment »The belief in the virgin birth of Jesus is a belief that is held by both Christianity and Islam. Many often wonder and ask what is the significance of the virgin birth within Islam? In other words what’s Islam’s reasoning for having a virgin birth?
The reason for the virgin birth in Islam is quite simple, it was a mighty miracle, and a mighty sign that God had carried out in order to the show people of the time as well as the coming generations. According to Islam Jesus was the Messiah, so indeed what better way to give a mighty sign for this, by having the Messiah being born of a virgin. The virgin birth also goes to show the high status and honorable position of the Messiah as he is born in miraculous circumstances.
Muslim commentator Ibn Kathir in his well-known interpretation (tafsir) of the Quran provides the following commentary on the significance behind the virgin birth:
This means a proof and a sign for mankind of the power of their Maker and Creator, Who diversified them in their creation. He created their father, Adam, without a male (father) or female (mother). Then, He created Hawwa’ (Adam’s spouse) from a male (father) without a female (mother). Then, He created the rest of their progeny from male and female, except `Isa. He caused `Isa to be born from a female without a male. Thus, Allah completed the four types of creation (of the human being), which proves the perfection of His power and the magnificence of His authority. There is no god worthy of worship except Him and there is no true Lord other than Him.
One must bear in mind that God performs several signs and wonders, the virgin birth happens to be one of them, amongst many other signs and wonders. Other examples of God’s miracles being worked is also in the example of Prophet Zechariah, in his old age he prayed to God for a son, who would be able to carry on his legacy, one must also bear in mind that while Zechariah was in old age, his wife was barren as well. Yet God heard the prayer and granted Zechariah a son, in John the Baptist, and so this was another miracle and sign that God had performed. One can read about this story in the Quran in chapter 19 verses 2-15.
So in essence the reasoning behind the virgin birth was to grant a mighty sign for the people.
Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and the Messiah
Posted: January 21, 2012 Filed under: articles by Sami Zaatari, Christianity, Islam | Tags: judaism 8 Comments »Jews, Christians, and Muslims agree in the concept of there being a Messiah. A man who would be a king, a leader, a man of great standing, a man of honor, and a man of God. In the Jewish Bible we read about how the Messiah will usher in a kingdom of God, a kingdom in which the Messiah shall ruler over as the leader, a kingdom in which people will serve God, and a kingdom in which there will be peace and security. In the Gospels of the New Testament we read about how Jesus preached about the upcoming kingdom of God. What about Islam? How does the belief in the Messiah relate to Islam? This is a topic that is not often touched upon, Muslims often say yes Jesus is the Messiah according to the Quran, and often leave at that failing to fully appreciate what this actually means and entails.
Within the texts of Islam we are also told of this kingdom that will be ruled by the Messiah, namely Jesus, and that this kingdom will in fact be ushered in when Jesus returns in his second coming and that this would be a major sign of the end times. Just like how the Jewish Bible teaches, this will be a great kingdom, which will serve God, and a kingdom in which peace and security shall reign.
Interestingly it is the Christian concept of Jesus that has caused problems in it’s own understandings of who the Messiah actually was and what he was going to do. According to the Gospels, Jesus who was the Messiah, was in fact captured, and held to a humiliating death on the cross. So humiliating in fact that Jesus supposedly cried ‘My God my God why have you forsaken (abandoned) me’ as he was about to die. This picture of the Messiah stands in stark contrast with what was actually taught about the Messiah, for the Messiah was not to be humiliated and killed by his enemies as a common criminal, rather the Messiah was to be a king who would reign over his enemies and establish his kingdom. As a result of this the Gospels stand in direct contrast to what and who the Messiah actually was. In fact if one were to read the Gospels themselves, it records the disciples being saddened by the death of Jesus, it was a major jolt to their faith. Now why would that be so? Because they believed that Jesus was the Messiah, and according to their correct understanding, the Messiah was not going to be killed by his enemies, rather he was going to establish his kingdom and triumph over his enemies.
Christian missionaries may argue that Jesus did in fact conquer over his enemies by rising from the dead after 3 days, yet the problem for them is that this was not taught about the Messiah, this is a Christian concept that they themselves invented. The Jews never believed that the Messiah was going to die and rise in 3 days, surely if this was such an important cornerstone of God’s divine plan for the Messiah, then surely he would have taught about it. Missionaries may once again argue that God did in fact foretell the death of the Messiah, yet if that was the case, then why were the disciples of Jesus saddened by his death, and why were they totally not expecting it to happen? Surely if God had foretold of this, then they alongside all the other Jewish followers of Jesus would have been expecting this, rather than being ignorant about it, and being completely saddened by his death. Secondly when one reads the Gospel of Luke one reads that the disciples were expecting Jesus to establish the kingdom, if God had foretold of the Messiah’s death and rising why did they not say they were expecting Jesus to rise in a few days, and why were they not excited and happy awaiting such a miraculous event if indeed it was foretold in their scripture? The answer is simple, it’s because no such teaching existed, there was no belief in a dying and rising Messiah, so future Christians after Jesus simply invented such a teaching to rescue Jesus from being a false Messiah, for if he was killed by his enemies as a common criminal. So what better way to fix this mess up? Simply say he was actually raised from the dead in 3 days. Yet the problem remains no matter what as the Messiah was not going to be killed by his enemies as a common criminal.
How does Islam play into this? Interestingly enough, for Islam, there are no problems, as Jesus was never killed by his enemies. In the Quran we get a contrasting version of events, according to the Quran God performed a miraculous deed and saved Jesus from death, God had saved Jesus from his enemies, and by doing so Jesus had truly triumphed over his enemies as God had foiled their plans. According to Islam God had raised Jesus unto himself, God had raised Jesus into paradise, where he awaits his eventual return, in which he shall establish his kingdom, i.e. the kingdom of God that was foretold in the Jewish Bible, and the kingdom of God that was taught by Jesus in the Gospels.
The Jewish Bible stresses that the Messiah would conquer evil before he establishes his kingdom, as there would be oppression and an evil force in place of which the Messiah would come and break. This belief and concept of the Messiah is also found and continued within Islam, as Islam teaches that when Jesus returns, he will first slay the anti-Christ, and then he shall establish his kingdom.
So when it comes down to it, Islam doesn’t merely call Jesus the Messiah simply for the sake of it with no meaning, Islam teaches the great significance of Jesus and what he will do, Islam reminds the people of who the Messiah is, and what he will do. The reason why it is important for this to be said is because Christian missionaries often like to claim that Islam has no actual proper understanding of who the Messiah is, and what he will do. They claim that Islam merely calls Jesus the Messiah but devoid of all substance of what the Messiah actually is. It is very important to know the actual facts and that these claims are completely false as Islam demonstrates that it does hold an important role for Jesus as the Messiah, a role that was taught previously in the Jewish scripture, a role that the Jews had believed in, and if anything it is the Christian missionaries own scripture that contain the contradiction and error in the true understanding of the Messiah.
Interestingly enough a large reason as to why Jews reject Jesus as the Messiah is because of Christianity and what it invented concerning Jesus, that he died and rose for the sins of the world, and that he was God and the unique divine Son of God, it is all of these teachings that have made most Jews reject Jesus as their Messiah as all of these concepts are completely foreign to their Jewish Bible and what they were taught within it concerning the coming of Messiah.
Compel belief? The Quran Says No!
Posted: January 18, 2012 Filed under: articles by Paul Williams, Islam 3 Comments »باسم الله الرحمان الرحيم
If it had been the Lord’s Will they would all have believed all who are on earth! Wilt thou then compel mankind against their will to believe!
No soul can believe except by the Will of Allah and He will place doubt (or obscurity) on those who will not understand.
Surah 10 verses 99-100. Abdullah Yusuf Ali comments:
If it had been God’s Plan or Will not to grant the limited Free Will that He has granted to man, His omnipotence could have made all mankind alike: all would then have had Faith, but that Faith would have reflected no merit on them. In the actual world as it is, man has been endowed with various faculties and capacities, so that he should strive and explore, and bring himself into harmony with God’s Will. Hence Faith becomes a moral achievement, and to resist Faith becomes a sin. As a complementary proposition, men of Faith must not be impatient or angry if they have to contend against Unfaith, and most important of all, they must guard against the temptation of forcing Faith, i.e., imposing it on others by physical compulsion, or any other forms of compulsion such as social pressure, or inducements held out by wealth or position, or other adventitious advantages. Forced faith is no faith. They should strive spiritually and let God’s Plan work as He wills.
To creatures endued with Will, Faith comes out of an active use of that Will. But we must not be so arrogant as to suppose that that is enough. At best, man is weak and in need of God’s grace and help. If we sincerely wish to understand, He will help our Faith; but if not, our doubts and difficulties will only be increased. This follows as a necessary consequence, and in Qur’ānic language all consequences are ascribed to God, the Cause of Causes.
