The role of Paul in the history of christanity and forming christian doctrine seems to be rather odd given the fact that he was not even a companion of Jesus(pbuh). Can you discuss this role more in detail and especailly his relationship with the other desciples of jesus who witnessed paul's actions like Barnabous.
Answer
Dear Sr Rabia,
asalaam aleikum wa rahmatullah.
The whole business of St Paul and his relationship to the original Christian Church is most interesting indeed, and many books have looked into the subject. It was an important part of my own journey from Christian theologian to Muslim, and you will find my own thoughts laid out in detail in my books 'The Separated Ones', (Jesus, the Pharisees and Islam) SCM Press, and 'Mysteries of Jesus' - a Muslim look at the origins of the Christian Church', Sakina Books.
Paul, originally Saul, was of a Turkish family hailing from Tarsus, but he grew up in Jerusalem where he was trained as a Pharisees, by the highly eminent Gamaliel - one of the best.
However, he seems to have become something of an extremist, and was employed as an official by the High Priest to seek out and persecute Christians - who were of course at that time not regarded as separate from Jews but as a renegade or reforming Jewish sect, depending on which side you were on. He was on his way to Damascus (not necessarily the Damascus in Syria but it could have been a code word for a headquarters of the Essene community (the Dead Sea Scrolls writers) when he was suddenly converted to Christianity by a vision of the risen Jesus.
He never really fitted in with the original church members who he had been previously persecuting. The leader of the original Church at Jerusalem was Jesus' brother James, and the epistles of the New Testament reveal that there was a great deal of conflict between James and Paul, which is largely toned down by St Paul's friend the Greek doctor Luke who wrote the Acts of the Apostles. It is very interesting to compare the details given in Acts with those of the epistles.
Eventually, Paul was allowed to preach and teach, and called himself an apostle, although he never had seen Jesus in the flesh, and had an uneasy relationship with St Peter - who went off to become the head of the Church in Rome.
Of great interest to Muslims is the fact that the Jewish tradition contains no shirk whatsoever, and Jesus is accepted as a great teacher and reformed and even prophet and messiah, and one can find throughout the gospels references to Jesus referring to worshipping 'God alone, and Him only shall you serve' and other similar sentiments. There are quite a lot of these, and almost nothing which would justify the Trinitarian doctrines that came to be taught ABOUT Jesus later. Trinities were the common religion of many ancient peoples all around the Mediterranean and elsewhere, and the prophets (our prophets!) of the Old Testament were vehement against them throughout. It is quite a shock to find Jesus and doctrines about him presented in terms almost identical to Mithraism, for example, within sixty years of his death. Many Muslims, including myself, have wondered if this alteration from the pure monotheism of Judaism to a kind of Baalism stemmed from St Paul. One can read the sort of thing I mean in the epistle to the Colossians. I do not mean in any way to lessen the amazing life and contribution of Paul to religious history, or his personal bravery and martyrdom - but at the end of the day, Unitarian Christians and those who like me have become Muslims, believe he was wrong in his teaching. We prefer to go back to the teaching of Jesus himself, which is completely in keeping with the teaching of Muhammad, peace be upon both of them.
Wasalaam,
Ruqaiyyah.
Name
Al-Amin
- United States
Profession
IT
Question
As Salaamu Alaikum. My question is 2 fold. First, what was the original tongue of Isa(as)? I have read that it was Aramic. Also, how do we dispute the ideology of Christians when they say that Jesus is the son of God?
Answer
Dear Brother,
asalaam aleikum wa rahmatullah.
As far as I know, from scholarly studies, the natural language of Jesus would indeed have been Aramaic, a kind of dialect of Hebrew. From the earliest sources, including St Mark's Gospel, we have several examples of things Jesus said that are in the Aramaic language. As that Gospel was written in (quite rough and colloquial) Greek, for Greek speakers, translations are given of all those phrases except one. So, we have 'Talitha Cumi' - 'little lamb, get up', when he raised a young maid who had died; 'eloi, eloi lama sabacthani?' - 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?' when Jesus was on the cross etc etc. I believe there are six in St Mark's Gospel.
At the time, many of the Jews in Galilee were highly educated, and bilingual if not trilingual. Most of them would have spoken Greek, and some Latin. I believe Hebrew was already becoming a classical language rather than one commonly spoken - but I'd 'ask a friend' on this. Aramaic and colloquial Greek known as koine were the two languages commonly used.
The second part of your question is so important to us Muslims, and of course, it is a hard thing to answer shortly. I do have a recent book called 'What Every Christian should know about Islam' that spells it all out in detail.
It may interest you to know that many Christians who become reverts often find themselves becoming Muslims FROM NEW TESTAMENT teaching, rather than from the Qur'an. There are a great number of things. For example, In Matthew and Luke, Jesus faces three temptations - to turn stones into bread, to jump off the temple pinnacle and to take an army and rule the world. But if you read carefully, they were really three temptations for Jesus to call himself Son of God, which he absolutely refused to do. 'You shall worship the Lord your God and Him Alone shall you serve.' was one answer he gave. Look them up.
Once a rich official said to him: 'Good Master, what must I do in order to gain eternal life?' Jesus said: 'Why do you call me good? There is only One good, and that is God.' Then he told him to keep the already-given commandments.
He was also asked something similar in John's Gospel; there he said to gain eternal life one must 'believe in God and in him who He has sent.' Etc
So, you would find a lot of examples similar to these. On the other hand, you will not find that Jesus took for himself the title Son of God, but instead the humble title Son of Man. He did not like being called 'lord' and made it clear this was only to acknowledge him as a teacher, not as a 'god'. There are, however, some passages Trinitarians will point out, such as 'I and the Father are One', and 'No man comes to the Father but by me.' (both in John's Gospel. This could certainly be due to the fact that editors worked over those gospels, especially St John's, where it is acknowledged in the text itself towards the end that there was more than one author involved. There is one famous verse where the meaning is entirely altered if one leaves out one comma. This is why scholars are so meticulous, and go back to the Greek etc. As for the two texts I have given above - the first goes on with Jesus also claiming that he was one with his disciples - which certainly did not imply that they were all gods, or Sons of God; the second I would say was actually true for the time in which it was said. Then, Jesus WAS the true Messenger from God, and people would have to find their way to God 'through' him. He said this before his death and ascension, and mentioned nothing about believing in his self-sacrifice to be saved. One can point out that six centuries later, when the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) came, times had changed and beliefs had become corrupted, and a new revelation and new Messenger had become necessary. God bless you,
wasalaam,
Ruqaiyyah.
Name
muslim
-
Profession
Question
Assalaamualaikum.
I had a question regarding the origins of the new testament. I have read that christians have over 6000 manuscripts of the NT from within 100 years of Isa's (AS) time (some say within 25 years of his time), still extant, from which they can reproduce authentically the NT. How fair is that statement?
Answer
Dear Brother,
asalaam aleikum wa rahmatullah.
I would certainly agree that the documents of the New Testament as we have it now did exist by, say, 130 years of Jesus' death, assuming him to have died at the age of around 33, and assuming he was born in c6BC. Some documents were still being disputed, and some that were originally included in the New Testament were in the end rejected. You can find details if you consult a library and look up the subject of Apocryphal Gospels.
Secondly, as there was no printing, and as worshippers were extremely eager to have copies of texts, the practice of writers copying them took off very promptly. Whether the number you mention is accurate I have no idea. The point is, do you mean 6000 variations of manuscripts, or 6000 different copies of the same texts? Many Muslims get steamed up about supposed changes that have been made in the gospels - in fact, most of this criticism only applies to variations in translations and are of very little significance. The earliest bits of text still existing are little bits of papyrus dating very early, and they can easily be compared with the texts we have today. There are only a handful of verses where the text difference is of any significance. For example, I can give you one. One verse reads: 'It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of Heaven'. A famous variant has 'rope' instead of 'camel' - which might look as if it makes more sense, but then the narrow gates to Jerusalem were known as 'needle eye gates' and laden camels had to take off their baggage before they could get in.
There is another verse where the placing of a comma makes all the difference to the meaning. None of this is of very much concern to the man in the street - it is the theologian's playground. The earliest texts we generally use to compare all later texts with are the Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus (a Latin translation from the Greek) - which date from the fourth century so far as we know.
In any case, as you know with the business of whether a translation of the Qur'an is as valid as the original Arabic, all texts of the gospels and other Christian writings were originally in Greek (with some earlier source-documents in Aramaic), so all Bibles since those originals depend on the skills of the individuals who translated them, and their various styles. So, the New English Bible is very different from the old Authorised Version, and so on. Hope this answers at least some of your question.
wasalaam,
Ruqaiyyah.
Name
Fatihi
-
Profession
Question
The conception of Issa(pbuh) in Christianity seems to have assumed the role of the Prophet Muhammad(Pbuh) was designated to play in the development of revealation. I mean that the place accorded to Jesus in Christianity is in fact the glorous position which should be alotted to the Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) by all believers(except for th fact of making him the son of God). Do you know how such a confusion and a reversal of roles might have taken place in the history of Christianity?
Answer
Dear Fatihi,
Many thanks for your question. Do you think I can refer you to the first question I answered in this session? God bless you
wasalaam,
Ruqaiyyah.
Name
Noha
- Egypt
Profession
student
Question
I knew a girl that was a muslem,but she became a christian. some of her friends were able to convince her with that.
How do you think i can help her?
Answer
Dear Sister, AAWR. How to give you a sensible answer? So many people, in their lifelong search for truth, move towards this path and that path. I know someone who was a Christian, then a Buddhist, then an evangelical Christian, before becoming a Muslim. I know many many Muslims who have never really thought things through who start wondering, and some do become Christians - especially when the Christians they meet are kind and generous and sympathetic and working hard for the good of others, whereas the mosque brothers may appear hard, or not interested in the world at large, or maybe do not even let women into their mosque to worship!!
Christians and Jews are People of the Book. What is vital is that this lady does not stop believing in God at all, and thus becomes kafir. That is a tragedy. The phases she goes through as she follows her path through life cannot be judged until she finally ends that life. People become all sorts of things if it seems right for them to do so. I do not know, of course, the age of this lady.
All I would say is, if you try to coerce her back into Islam you are going beyond what Muslims are requested to do. Warn (by this, we really mean give reasoned teaching about Islam), and definitely show by example what the noble Muslim life is - but it is not your duty to go beyond that. Even the Prophet (pbuh) himself was told he could only warn, and then stand back. If God had wanted all communities to be the same, and be Muslim, then He would have made them so Himself. This is one of His revealed statements. Sorry I haven't the reference in front of me. If you need book help, please do refer to my list, especially the one that outlines the differences between Muslim and Christian theology. God bless you.
wasalaam,
Ruqaiyyah.
Name
Omar
- United States
Profession
Question
My questions has more to deal with the Christians Psyche then their faith. In all my exposure to committed Christians not amount of rationality seems to work in convincing them of the irrationality of their faith. With every logical and factual argument presented to them only seems to reinforce their "Psychosis" whereby they resort to intellectual flips to justify their beliefs(like "but the bible says" or "Jesus loves you" or "jesus died for your sins" and etc, despite the fact that you tell them there is no concrete proof for these things). So I am begining to believe that we need to change our approach to dialogueing with Christains from a more rational approach to more emotional/spiritual one whereby we can show the Christians that ever comforting think they find in the Christians faith(like the sacrifice and love of jesus) they can find in the Islamic faith(like the sacrifice and love of Muhammad(pbuh) and all of the other prophets). What are your observations on this matter.
Answer
Dear Brother Omar,
AAWR.
I absolutely agree with you about presenting Islam in the best way. People interested in Islam are not bothered about the rules and regulations, some of which seem extremely odd to me anyway. They are interested in the theology, and the love of God, and the presentation of His qualities as ar-Rahman, ar-Rahim - and then the other names.
However, firstly I would point out that just as it is wrong to 'group' Muslims as if they were all the same, similarly you must be aware of the many types of Christians. EG, Sufi and Salafi, Deobandi and Wahhabi. The type of Christian you have mentioned in your letter is what I would call an Evangelical, people who consider themselves to be 'saved' by the love and sacrifice of Jesus. There is enormous faith and love amongst these, but not much in the rational department, as you have observed. But may God bless them all - for their love and devotion and intentions.
It is a very good start to point out to Christians that what is often taught in doctrine ABOUT Jesus is not actually what he taught. Please refer to some of the answers I have already given in this session. Also, draw their attention to the Parable of the Prodigal Son. The Father is supposed to be God in this story, and there are two sons - one good one bad. The bad one is bitterly sorry when he ends up in the gutter and decides to go home and ask his father if he can just be his servant. The father sees him coming a long way off and runs to him to fetch him home. (Remember the hadith qudsi about God coming to you at the run). The point is, the moment that a person repents genuinely of their sin, God forgives - there is no need for Him to sacrifice Himself, or be born as a human or a God-Man. That whole doctrine depends on believing it to be literally true that the sin of Adam was passed on genetically to all future humans - the Original Sin. Most Christians do not really believe this anyway, they usually doubt that Adam and Eve were real people. The sacrifice of a God-man only becomes necessary if that doctrine was true - and Ezekiel (Dhulfikl) Chapter 18 is the text to show them, to reveal that God never blames a son because of the sin of a father. You stand alone at judgement and are judged as an individual. God bless,
wasalaam,
Ruqaiyyah.
Name
a muslim
-
Profession
Question
Are the prophecies in the Bible about Muhammad (SAW) really objective or are they seen through the eyes of a Muslim with a view to finding things like that in the Bible. I have heard of refutations of the various verses that Muslims say prophecy the Prophet (SAW) by Christians. How valid are they?
Answer
Dear Muslim,
AAWR.
Such a difficult subject. There are just a few passages in the Old Testament which might possible refer to a prophet to come after Jesus, and then there are the references to the Paraclete in St John's Gospel. You can really argue about these until the cows come home, without getting anywhere - although the topic is highly interesting. It is a fair point to make, though, that being predicted in advance is not a necessary qualification of a prophet. As far as I know, most of the Old Testament prophets were not predicted in advance at all. Muslims obviously want to find obliging references, and Christians obviously don’t want that at all.
As far as I know, the St John verses about the Paraclete (Holy Spirit as defense counsel to Christians) that should be rendered periqlytos were never discussed with that significance or idea before the coming of Islam. Therefore, it cannot really be taken as conclusive evidence either way - just something of rather great interest.
Wasalaam,
Ruqaiyyah.
Name
Hans
- Georgia
Profession
engineer
Question
A christian friend of mine tries to convince me of the truth of his religion by showing me pictures of Bleeding statues of Jesus and Marry. If not a hoax how can such phenomenan be explained in Islam? Please answer in a way that can be explained to a non-muslim ! Thanks
Answer
Dear Brother Hans,
AAWR.
What a difficult question for me! I have also seen pictures of aubergines and tomatoes that say Allah, Hindu cow statues that give milk, etc etc. I got so interest in tomatoes at one stage that I carefully sliced every single one - and in a year, found three that said Allah. I took photos, but sadly they were not clear. I also found Allah in cloud shapes, on tree bark, in shadows and many other places, so it seems to be a fairly common feature of nature.
As to Christian weeping statues, I dare say there will be a logical explanation, such as the temperature of the material of the statue or something. Or maybe the statues weep - I cannot see a reason why God should not produce such phenomena if He so wished. He has only to say 'Be!'
However, I cannot think that faith based on such things is very useful - it is a great pity for all the millions who do not share the privilege of seeing them, and to me, the important thing is to live the noble life, submitted to God. If such things impress people, well, that is their business I suppose. I must admit, I would be absolutely fascinated to see such a phenomena - but I don’t think it would make a jot of difference to may faith - I have always believed that God can perform such miracles as He pleases anyway - they are more often healings and saving of lives than dripping statues. I doubt they are hoaxes, but just odd phenomena. I believe, for example, that Padre Pios hands and feet etc did bleed a cup of blood per day for many years. I believe the impression of a crucified man on the Shroud of Turin may well be genuinely the image of Jesus. I have discussed that and other things in my book 'Mysteries of Jesus' incidentally.
In Sufism, you will find numerous examples of similar things, and also in all world faiths I expect. I would put these under the heading of psychic phenomena, with which I had quite a lot to do when I was young, but have wandered away from interest in it these days. I saw enough myself, however, to know all sorts of things did happen, and to keep an open mind - also not to encourage anything that could lead to being duped by something evil.
