"Superstitious
Praise" and "Foolish Interpretation" have injured Islam as much
as Direct Opposition.
by Greg Kagira-Watson (2003)
===========================
(This is an effort to promote a more unified understanding between orthodox
Muslim and Christian views. Below are some common sense thoughts
on how to help resolve the occasional and disparate views between Muslims and
Christians on these themes of the Crucifixion and the Trinity—not that the
Christians are so united on these topics or concepts that they avoid disputes
and debates among themselves. )
Synopsis:
An article by Professor Alan Jones seems to contain a
bias, or present statements made in ignorance, and may even represent an
attempt to discredit the divine authenticity of the Qur'an. Since Professor
Jones has reportedly taught Arabic and Islamic studies at Oxford from 1957 to 2000 it hardly seems
likely that his statements were made in ignorance, so it calls into question
his motive or his bias. There are two types of conflict or misunderstanding
that get perpetrated by misinterpretation of scripture— one intentionally
results in opposition to the text and the other ironically is thought to be in
support of it, yet inadvertently undermines its real meaning. Some Muslim
"doctrines" (from Muslim clergy) seem to have unintentionally created
as severe a stumbling block for Christians who are attempting to investigate
the truth of the Qur'an -- as have the intentional forces of opposition from
Christian clergy. Moreover, many stories about Muhammad, which some
Muslims have foolishly thought to be his praise, were embellishments and fabrications,
without textual basis or verification by any Hadith
(i.e., the authenticated "sayings" attributed to Muhammad). These
foolish embellishments are not taken as authentic by any serious student of
Islam, and are discounted as mere superstition and invention. Thus, some of the
followers (Muslims) have injured their own Cause and exacerbated the artificial
divide between Islam and Christianity. Just as damaging, the Christian
critic who discounts the Revelation of the Qur’an as mere "meditation
induced recitations, of the kind that can be heard when a charismatic preacher
speaks from the heart," or something referred to as "channeling"
simply is ignoring the history of Islam (and its influence on the progress of
civilization). Indeed such denial is the denial of the stuff of history
and equivalent to a denial of every great religion.
Literal interpretation of the Qur'an, by both Mulims and Christians alike, attempts to suggest that the
Qur’an is saying that Jesus did not die on the cross (i.e., that someone else
was substituted for Him), while the Qur'an—in its symbolic and figurative
language—may simply be saying that the Holy Spirit which animated Jesus cannot
be killed. Similarly, critics of Islam
attempt to say that the Qur’an denies the divine origin of the Revelation of
Christ because it negates, they say, the Trinity. However,
Christians themselves are still divided on the meaning of the Trinity
(<< see PowerPoint presentation), and the term "Trinity" is not
even in the Bible. Christ said that He
too spoke in figures to confound and test the hearts of the pure souls—those
truly seeking truth rather than idle disputation.
‘Unto you it is given to know the mystery of
the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done
in parables: That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may
hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted,
and their sins should be forgiven them.’” (Holy Bible,
Mark 4:11 and Luke 8:10)
Fortunately, He also promised that “The time cometh, when I shall
no more speak to you in figures, but I shall show you plainly of
the Father” (John 16:25). The time has
come! …with the Revelation of
Bahá’u’lláh—Who has clearly elucidated
the abstruse meanings of both the Qur’anic and
Christian dispensations. (For example,
consider the simple analogy in the ENDNOTES,
shedding light on the Trinity reality.)
Here are some facts: The Qur’an and Muhammad affirm
that God exists, that Jesus lived and that "the Christ" (Jesus’s station as the “Anointed One”) and the Holy Spirit exist. That is
"the Father," the "son" and the "Holy
Spirit." What’s left?.... except to haggle
over the mysterious relationship among them, which the Bible itself declares a
mystery (Ephesians 5). Moreover, the Qur’an affirms the Virgin Birth of
Jesus, so what is the problem if an interpretation of the "Sonship" of Jesus means something greater – something
spiritual? The purpose of this verse could simply be to caution against
anthropomorphizing God. Understanding this is a matter of interpretation – by
which God tests the hearts of the sincere.
If you come to the dialogue believing that both the
Qur'an and the Bible come from One and the Same God, then you must look for the
interpretation that reconciles views or interpretations -- not those with
inevitable conflict. This is the same exercise for the believer within his OWN
holy book. For example the Christian must seek to reconcile the divergent
statements of Christ ("He who hath seen Me hath
seen the Father," and "No one hath seen God at any time"), and
certainly those that would seem contradictory. Consider, for
example, that John the Baptist said he was not Elias (John 1:19-21) whereas
Jesus on the day of the transfiguration on Mount Tabor Christ said plainly that
John, the son of Zacharias, was the promised Elias. Likewise, consider in
direct contrast to John 14:9 ("He who hath seen Me
hath seen the Father") and John 12:45 that you also have verses like
these: “No man hath seen God at any time.” (1 John 4:12) and "And the
Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither
heard His voice at any time, nor seen His shape." (John 5:37. And
please see John 5:30-36.) Also, you may wish to review Luke 18:19 and
Mark 10:18.
These seemingly contradictory statements can easily be reconciled but not
unless you seek for the truth that lives higher than the superficial level of
the language. You first have to know that the higher truth MUST exist and then
seek to discover it. This is the effort of reconciliation that must be done
now, to help bring these two authentic religions from the one same God
together. If they are both indeed from God, then we must know that these
Divine teachings exist in essential harmony. That they seem to differ
must be attributed to our own limited understanding -- which we must seek to
improve if we want peace and harmony on earth. This is a very deep
subject (perplexing scholars for years) and we shall not settle every controversy
in just a few moments. For the orthodox Bahá'í interpretation on the
subject of the Trinity, type the word "trinity" into the search
engine found online at http://reference.bahai.org/en/ Similarly,
you may wish to examine The
"Station of the Manifestation" and an explanation of the
"Trinity" (<<
click here) found elsewhere on my website.
For Bahá’ís the attempt to understand the
Trinity reality is an attempt to understand the reality of the Christ—which the
Bahá’í Writings refer to as the “station” of the “Manifestation” of God.
===========================
"People have a
superstitious respect for certain doctrines which are against science and the
wise men of the country have thought that religion is opposed to science. Know
thou that the great ethical foundation of knowledge is divine revelation and
the basis of religion is reality itself. It is like unto the sun which shines
on all things making them clear and luminous, whereas lesser lights as well as
superstitious beliefs illumine but one aspect of things leaving room for shade
and doubt. I have great confidence in
the wisdom and understanding of the world leaders of thought that they may
discover this reality.” (Abdu'l-Baha, Divine Philosophy, p. 186 – from a talk given in Paris in 1911.)
Expanded discussion or commentary
(taken from a contribution I made to a study group):
I have been reading some excerpts on Islam,
taken off the web, that were given to a Baha'i / Islamic studies group. An
article by Professor Alan Jones seems to contain a bias, or present statements
made in ignorance, and may even represent an attempt to discredit the divine
authenticity of the Qur'an. Since Professor Jones has reportedly taught Arabic
and Islamic studies at Oxford
from 1957 to 2000 it hardly seems likely that his statements were made in
ignorance, so it calls into question his motive or his bias. Nonetheless,
I suppose the possibility exists that because so much exchange or interplay
exists between the texts of the Holy Books and the doctrines which emerge from
them that even a scholar of many years could substitute one for the other
without even realizing he had done it.
For example, in the article Professor Jones
states that the Qur'an denies the Crucifixion and the Trinity. From my limited
understanding I will attempt, with the help of God and the Baha'i Writings, to
explain his error. Those of you who might offer some additional insight will
please contact me, and through dialogue we can modify this document to improve
it, since I am not a deep scholar of Islam.
It seems to me that Professor Jones should have at least offered some
scriptural basis for his interpretation (assuming he had some) and also
declared that this statement he made was indeed an “interpretation” -- either
his, or a "doctrine" in Islam -- rather than something explicit or
clearly stated in the Qur'an (which is what his article implies so misleadingly).
There are two types of conflict or
misunderstanding that get perpetrated by misinterpretation in scripture—one is
intentionally in opposition to the text and the other ironically is thought to
be in support of it, yet inadvertently undermines its real meaning.. Thus, a
sincere scholar must always search the texts directly for himself or herself.
For example, it is not enough for the Christian scholar (or seeker) to accept
the Muslim interpretation as if it were the Qur'an itself. The Muslim
interpretation could be in error and thus lead to unnecessary prolixity and
avarice within the Muslim / Christian dialogue.
If you come to the dialogue believing that
both the Qur'an and the Bible come from One and the Same God, then you must
look for the interpretation that reconciles views or interpretations -- not
those with inevitable conflict. This is the same exercise for the believer
within his OWN holy book. For example the Christian must seek to reconcile the
divergent statements of Christ, and certainly those that would seem
contradictory. Likewise, other Biblical statements with those
of Jesus. Consider, for example, that John the Baptist said he was not
Elias (John 1:19-21) whereas Jesus on the day of the transfiguration on Mount
Tabor Christ said plainly that John, the son of Zacharias, was the promised
Elias. These seemingly contradictory statements can easily be reconciled but
not unless you believe and seek for the truth that lives higher than the
superficial level of the language. You first have to know that the higher truth
must exist and then seek it.
Let us consider the topic under
consideration: First of all the Koran (more currently correct to use the
spelling Qur'an) is difficult to understand, and like the Bible should not be
simply interpreted in a literal manner. For example, the dove that descended on
Jesus Christ during His baptism by John (the Baptist) in the Bible was not a
physical dove but symbolic of the Holy Spirit. Much of the Bible meanings are
hidden behind a veil of metaphors, in order to test the sincere seeker from
those whose only aim is to dispute idly. This is the separation between
"sheep and goats" via the sword of His word. The sword Christ carried
was the sword of His tongue, with which He divided the good from the evil, the
true from the false, the faithful from the unfaithful, and the light from the
darkness. His Word was indeed a sharp sword! (Mathew 10:34-35 and Matthew
25:33)
It is indeed ironic, and I cannot fully
understand why God should have chosen to create scriptures in this genre, that
the "believers" themselves (both Muslims and Christians) have often
understood various verses in a literal and superficial manner. However, it does
seem obvious that the symbolism within the language often hides the higher truth
that simply cannot be expressed directly. Abdu'l-Baha
has explained this fully in Some Answered Questions (p.92) see http://www.ibiblio.org/Bahai/Texts/English/SAQ/SAQ-16.html
As a close friend of mine explained, some
writings have both literal and symbolic meanings -- through
"equivocal" language. He states: By equivocal I mean that it was intended to be interpreted literally to
persuade person's of that outlook, while also written so as to be interpreted
symbolically, to instruct and illumine minds of that capacity. That way, out of
love for every soul (Iqan 175, 237), "whether
high or low" they "may obtain, according to his measure and
capacity" their "share and portion thereof" and "That all
sorts of men may know where to quench their thirst."
(For more on this see >> http://watsongregory.homestead.com/files/Esoteric.htm
)
At the same time it also seems to be true that
some texts are meant to be understood more through symbolism -- and not their
literal meaning, which often does not make sense at all. The greater truths are
often hidden behind of the veil of metaphors, parables and epiphany stories,
etc. Perhaps believers are not even "true" believers if they don't
gain the higher spiritual insight in this case, but of course we humans are in
no position to judge. (God help us all!) For this perspective I am relying on
the verse of Christ: "And he said, Unto you it
is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God:
but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they
might not understand." (Bible, Luke 8:10) This type of teaching
separated believers from unbelievers. Different levels of
interpretation -- and insistence that one is better than another -- is
what has led to the 23,000 sects of Christianity (World Christian Encyclopedia,
D. Barrrett).
From a Baha’i perspective, we believe – based
on Biblical texts – that much of the symbolic and prophetic text was
"sealed" (see Daniel 12:4, 12:9, and Isaiah 6:10, for example.) until
Baha’u’llah came to "unseal" their hidden and symbolic meanings,
primarily in the "Book of Certitude." (Refer to Revelation 5:1-5, and
similarly Revelation 10:4.) These verses in Revelation are the basis of
Christian belief that only Christ, at the time of His return, has the authority
to make such interpretations. This is what we, as Baha’is, also believe.
Nonetheless, you find a thousand clergy ready to "add" their interpretation
to the book, despite such prohibitions as these:
"For I testify unto
every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of
this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God
shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if
any man shall take away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the
holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." (Bible,
Revelation 22:18-19)
"O my Lord, what shall
be the end of these things? And He said, Go
thy way [ask not], Daniel: for the words are closed up and
sealed till the time of the end." (Daniel 12:9)
"Ye shall not
add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may
keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." (Deuteronomy 4:2)
I doubt that any Christian will interpret the
last verse to mean that God could never send the Christ (Jesus), yet the Jews
used this very verse to justify crucifying Jesus, based on their interpretation
that Jesus was a mere mortal – that He therefore had no authority to add to
Moses. It is my understanding that the
verse really meant that the priests should not interpret or add to the
revelation of Moses, not that God could not act again in history – that He could not send another "Mediator
of the Covenant" like
Moses. Jesus was indeed the new Mediator
of the Covenant (Hebrews 12:24).
Some Muslim doctrines seem to have
unintentionally created as severe a stumbling block for Christians attempting
to investigate the truth of the Qur'an as have the intentional forces of
opposition. Moreover, many stories about Muhammad, which some Muslims have
foolishly thought to be his praise, were embellishments and fabrications,
without textual basis or verification by any Hadith.
They are not taken as authentic by any serious student of Islam, and are
discounted as mere superstition. Thus, some of the followers have injured their
own Cause. Just as damaging, the Christian critic who discounts the Revelation
of the Qur’an as mere "meditation induced recitations, of the kind that
can be heard when a charismatic preacher speaks from the heart," or
something referred to as "channeling" simply is ignoring the history
of Islam and every great religion. First of all, in this case, Muhammad was
uneducated and illiterate and would not have been able to generate all these
verses from himself. Moreover, he was not a
charismatic preacher. In fact, he was opposed by most of the people around him
at the time. Secondly, if you read the book such an analysis just doesn’t make
sense. It is too eloquent and elevated (high-minded). Third, Muslim apologists
argue, the Qur’an contains ideas (scientific and otherwise) that have only been
discovered in modern times. Fourth, Muhammad's camel was convinced otherwise.
I am trying to be a little humorous; but,
indeed, in the authenticated Hadiths the camel is
said to have been brought to his knees by the power of the revelation, if
Muhammad was riding at the time. There are many other ways to discuss this, but
perhaps Muhammad’s own challenge will be sufficient, that if the Qur’an be
only that of human origin then anyone else should produce its like. The
fact that Islam has had such a tremendous impact on civilization and history
should not be attributed to an "unlearned and ignorant camel driver,"
(as detractors have called Him) but rather to the influence of the Holy Spirit.
In the Bible, Moses gives a criteria for a true Prophet (Deut. 18:18) and
states that anyone attempting to make this claim will not be able to accomplish
his mission except by the permission of God. God will cut him off.
Now let us return to consider the two statements
from the article that jumped out at me, namely, the mistaken belief that the
Qur’an denies the crucifixion and the Trinity. First let me
recount some of the verses from which this interpretation is undoubtedly taken.
First, let us consider...
THE
CRUCIFIXION:
"That they said (in boast), 'We
killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Apostle of God";- but they killed
him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who
differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only
conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not: Nay, God raised him
up unto Himself; and God is Exalted in Power, Wise.' " (The Qur'an --Yusuf Ali translation,
Qur’an: Sura 4:157)
"And for their saying, 'Verily we
have slain the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, an Apostle of God." Yet
they slew him not, and they crucified him not, but they had only his likeness.
And they who differed about him were in doubt concerning him: No sure knowledge
had they about him, but followed only an opinion, and they did not really slay
him, but God took him up to Himself. And God is Mighty, Wise!' " (The
Qur'an -- Rodwell translation, Sura
4:157)
Notice the difference in the two translations
– Yusuf Ali’s being regarded the more accurate among Arabic scholars.
Nonetheless, in all translations of this passage the "resurrection"
is confirmed ("God raised him up unto Himself"), as it is elsewhere
in the Qur’an. But this requires a spiritual interpretation. One possible
interpretation of the likeness (Rodwell) could be this: The
"likeness" of Christ was His own physical nature, a veil for those
who see and still do not believe. Christ came eating and sleeping and thus
appeared like any man, and thus He passed among the Jews unloved and unrecognized.
His body was killed, but His spirit was not. The reality of Christ is the Holy
Spirit. Moreover, the human spirit itself is immortal, which was Christ's
central message. These two spirits cannot be killed. This truth would be
equivalent to Christ saying, "You see me killed (it appears to you that I
am killed), but I am not killed." …just as he said "the Son of Man is
in heaven" while he was standing there on earth talking to his followers
at the time. Essentially, to me, the verse means you cannot kill the reality of
the Christ. Thus, it is correct to say they did not kill Him, just as it
is also correct to say that He was killed. Both are true in one
sense. This meaning requires an understanding of the "twofold
language" of the Prophets.
(See #182 at the link) http://www.ibiblio.org/Bahai/Texts/EN/IQA/IQA-2.html#182
For example, Christ said "let the dead bury their dead" and "I
stand at the door and knock" (Rev. 3:20)
There is another meaning,
equally important. Consider this explanation or interpretation from
Michael Sours:
Jesus
allowed Himself to be crucified. It would be incorrect to say that the
Jews killed the Messiah against His will. Had Christ wanted to escape He
could have done so by recanting His claims. His willingness to die is a
great testimony to His truth. This is, according to Baha'i belief, the
meaning of the Qur'anic verse, "They [the Jews]
declared: 'We have put to death the Messiah-Jesus the son of Mary, the apostle
of Allah.' They did not kill Him, but they thought they did." (Surah 4:157) [Taken from Michael Sours, The
Prophecies of Jesus, footnote 42, p. 38]
This is the principle of
preemption. In other words, they thought they "killed" Him,
whereas He had already willingly laid down His life. He willingly
sacrificed Himself. From the Bible we read:
"As
the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and
I lay down my life for the sheep. And other sheep I have, which are not
of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there
shall be one fold, and one shepherd. Therefore doth my Father love me,
because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of
myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This
commandment have I received of my Father." (John 10:18
)
Therefore, Christ's enemies
did not "kill" Him. Many Muslims who interpret the Qur'anic verse "literally" (superficially) think
it to mean that someone else was substituted for Jesus. Their insistence on
this obvious misinterpretation does not help the interfaith dialogue since it
is equivalent to saying that Jesus was never crucified -- which is a denial of
the Christian holy book -- the New Testament Bible. Moreover, when
Muslims insist on this they are also in denial and contradiction to one of the
meanings in the Qur'an -- namely, that "...God took Him up to
Himself" (Surah 4:157).
This Qur'anic
verse (Surah 4:157) should be seen as a compliment
(stating that the "Christ" cannot be killed) and not a denial of the
crucifixion, which would otherwise pervert the obvious meaning of the Christian
text. (Why should insistence on the latter be necessary?) This type of
contradiction between Muslim and Christian interpretation is clearly an example
where ignoring the symbolism creates an unnecessary religious
controversy. It is often the work of those whose only desire is mere
opposition--never reconciliation. If God is ultimately the author of both
the Bible and the Qur’an then we must seek some understanding of how these
divergent verses are in agreement. We have to go back and look at the original
texts themselves, and the complete context of the respective revelations of
Christ and Muhammad.
Incidentally, the Baha’i writings support the
Biblical interpretation that Jesus suffered physical death on the cross and was
subsequently resurrected spiritually. The following Bible passage sheds some
additional light upon the concept of resurrection, indicating that the body is
not what it appears to be -- or any type of body we are familiar with as
physical:
"… some man
will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body
do they come? Thou fool, that which thou sowest is
not quickened, except it die: And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body
that shall be. . . So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in
corruption; it is raised in incorruption: It is sown in dishonour;
it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: It is
sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body,
and there is a spiritual body." (Paul
the Apostle in the Bible, 1 Corinthians 15:36-44)
These type of verses
(from Bible and Qur’an) are among those of which Christ spoke thusly:
Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear
not, neither do they understand. And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of
Esaias, which saith, By
hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and
shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their
ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any
time they should see with their eyes and hear with their
ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted,
and I should heal them. . . (Matthew 13:13-16)
As stated previously, one must not take just
one verse from the text of the Bible or Qur’an and examine it in isolation.
There is no way that critics of Islam could say that the Qur’an denies the
divine origin of the Revelation of Christ. This is what the critics of Islam
are attempting to say by saying that Islam negates the Crucifixion (or the
reality behind the Trinity concept).
In other words, the presentation of a
different interpretation of the same truth is not equivalent to the denial of
that truth. (If this were so, then all those Christian sects that do not
believe in the "Trinity" doctrine would also be accused of not
believing in the divine authority of Christ.) To illustrate, again, how clearly
the Qur’an advances the Revelation of Christ, here is another verse from the
Qur'an that confirms the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ:
"When God said, 'O
Jesus! I will make Thee die and take Thee up again to Me and will clear thee of those who misbelieve, and will
make those who follow thee above those who misbelieve, at the day of judgment,
then to me is your return. I will decide between you concerning that wherein ye
disagree. And as for those who misbelieve, I will punish them with grievous
punishment in this world and the next, and they shall have none to help them.'
But as for those who believe and do what is right, He will pay them their
reward, for God loves not the unjust." (The Qur'an, translated by E.H.
Palmer, Sura 3 - Imran’s
Family)
I don’t think it is fair to say that Islam
does not uphold mainstream Christianity (simply because of a difference in
interpretation), when Christianity itself is so divided (based upon difference
of interpretation). You would have to ask, "Uphold Christianity? Which
variety of Christianity? …based on which interpretation?" The fact
that a particular variety of Muslim interpretation of the Christian text does
not agree with a particular variety of Christian interpretation does not make
it "anti-Christian" – only that it is like many other sects of
Christianity which offer different interpretations from those of other sects.
Some interpretations of the source text confirm (rather than contradict) the
other religion, as we have already illustrated.
THE
TRINITY QUESTION:
As to the false accusation that Islam denies
the reality behind or underneath the Trinity, let me explain my understanding
with a quote concerning the intensity of the "Trinity debate" among
the Christians themselves (from the time of the early history of the church,
continuing until the present day):
"It is recorded that at
the time of the reinstatement of the Arian Bishop Macedonius,
in Constantinople, three thousand people lost
their lives in the fighting. Probably more Christians were slaughtered by
Christians in these two years, than by all the persecutions of Christians
by pagans in the history of Rome." (E. Kirk, A
Short History of the Middle East)
H.G. Wells writes in his history
that:
"We
find all the Christian communities so agitated and exasperated by tortuous and
elusive arguments about the nature of God as to be largely negligent of the
simpler teachings of charity, service and brotherhood that Jesus had
inculcated." [There is much more on this history of the so-called
"trinity debate" here: http://watsongregory.homestead.com/files/IslamicCivilization.html ]
Christians themselves are still divided on the meaning of Christ's station
or reality—a topic that often gets reduced to the hotly debated concept of the
Trinity. And so it is not accurate to say that
Christians believe in the Trinity doctrine (because not all do in the way that
it is taught), or to say that you are not a Christian if you do not believe in
the doctrine.
Be clear, I am not suggesting that the Qur'an
supports the “doctrine” of the Trinity.
All I am suggesting is that the Qur'an affirms the reality upon which
the notion of the trinity arose-- upon which it was based. Of course the churches are divided in their
understanding of what the general concept means, unless one asserts that, as a
doctrine, it has only one meaning. Here
are some references from the Baha'i Writings on the matter. (I thought I should clear this up a bit.)
http://watsongregory.homestead.com/files/station.html#Trinity
http://watsongregory.homestead.com/files/station.html#Trinity2
Also...
"The Lord Christ
said, 'He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father' --
God manifested in man. The sun does not
leave his place in the heavens and descend into the mirror, for the actions of
ascent and descent, coming and going, do not belong to the Infinite, they are
the methods of finite beings. In the Manifestation of God, the perfectly
polished mirror, appear the qualities of the Divine in a form that man is
capable of comprehending. This is so
simple that all can understand it, and that which we are able to understand we
must perforce accept. Our Father will
not hold us responsible for the rejection of dogmas which we are unable either
to believe or comprehend, for He is ever infinitely just to His children. This example is, however, so logical that it
can easily be grasped by all minds willing to give it their
consideration." (Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, p. 26)
The mirror analogy seems to alleviate so much
confusion, especially when combined with the concept of the Intermediary:
http://watsongregory.homestead.com/files/station.html#Intermediary
And with this... “explanation of verse twenty-two, chapter fifteen, of the
first epistle of st. paul
to the corinthians” (Abdu'l-Baha,
Some Answered Questions, p. 118) http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/SAQ/saq-29.html and the “Three Stations of the Divine
Manifestations”: http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/SAQ/saq-38.html
Consider the perspective of Islam on the
topic concerning what Baha’is refer to as the “Three stations or conditions of
the Manifestation”—It seems quite clear: The
Qur’an and Muhammad affirm that God exists, that Jesus lived and that "the
Christ" and the Holy Spirit exist. That is "the Father," the
"son" and the "Holy Spirit." What’s left? Moreover,
the Qur’an affirms the Virgin Birth of Jesus, so what is the problem if an
interpretation of the "Sonship" of Jesus
means something greater—something spiritual—rather than the mere physical body
since a person could erroneously infer that God has a body, which is totally
non-Biblical (yet some Christians maintain). For example, in the Bible
Jesus says:
"And the Father himself,
which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice
at any time, nor seen his shape." (John 5:37)
The body aspect of Jesus’s
"sonship" is already confirmed in the
Qur'an by its affirmation of the Virgin birth, from which the original
Christian doctrine of "sonship"
evolved. Nonetheless, the following verse is a challenge to this
understanding because on the surface it seems to contradict the sonship and divinity of Christ:
"God is only
one God! Far be it from His glory that He should have a son!" (Qur'an
4:169).
The purpose of this verse could simply be to
caution against anthropomorphizing God. Again, understanding this is a matter
of interpretation and a test of the believer's understanding of the entire
revelation of his own holy book – it is a test by which God tests the hearts of
the sincere. Some folks continually search for greater meaning in the
scriptures because they know that God is difficult to understand and they know
that man must continually pray for greater understanding. Others simply limit
themselves to existing interpretations and defend their position as if to
validate themselves and their position. They believe what they want to
believe, and consequently God cannot teach them anything. This is the
principle of God giving man free-will.
"Love Me that I may love thee. If
thou lovest me not, my love can in no wise reach
thee" (Baha'u'llah).
It is as if some folks are so identified with
their belief systems that if the belief were to change what they imagine for themselves
that their identity would cease to exist. Consider (in this instance)
that Jesus does not call Himself the "son of God",
rather He diametrically refers to Himself as the son of man. Why should
this be so? Perhaps this was distinguish between
the Divine Spirit (which came from heaven) and this body (which came from
Mary). Nevertheless, the purpose of the early Christian theologians
(beginning with St. Paul and the Gospel writers) in assigning of the title
"son of God" to Jesus was to assert His Divine origin, was it
not? The virgin birth places an emphasis on His physical reality,
while His anointing by the Holy Spirit which dwells in Him emphasizes His
transcendent spiritual nature or divine reality. For the opponents of Islam
to suggest that because the Qur'an has a different interpretation of nature of
God and what it mans to have a son that it denies the virgin birth or the
Divine origin of Jesus is simply to ignore the text of the Qur'an. The
Qur'an, in fact, clearly and unequivocally affirms the virgin birth and the
divine origin of Jesus. Thus, it is unfair to suggest that the Qur'an
does otherwise simply because the opponent does not understand what is meant in
Qur'an 4:169. To my understanding this blessed verse in the Qur'an is saying
more about God than it is about Jesus. It saying that the glory of God
transcends corporeality—which the Bible also affirms (John 5:37, 5:30-36, Luke
18:19, Mark 10:18). Again, God tests the hearts of His servants--to see
the degree of their sincerity in yearning for Him. Each person must
search his or her own heart to see one's own motivation: "Am I
interested in seeking a deeper understanding of these mysterious things of God,
or is my motive mere disputation and opposition because of my limited understanding?"
For more on the Trinity debate, click here
>> The
"Station of the Manifestation" and an explanation of the
"Trinity"
Although Christ has a unique station above
the rest of humanity, the Bible clearly explains that the greater meaning of sonship — for all of us — is to be re-born of the
Spirit of God, and this is the meaning of the second birth, which
Christ came to teach:
"But as many as received
him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that
believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the
flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (Bible, John 1:12)
"Behold,
what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called
the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth
us not, because it knew him not. Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth
not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we
shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this
hope in him purifieth himself, even as He is
pure." (Bible, 1 John 3:1)
In summary, the Qur'an teaches the virgin
birth of Jesus; it has a complete Surih—the 19th—devoted
to Mary. It denies (does not hold with) the notion of three Gods (4:169;
5:77). It requires a spiritual interpretation to understand this. All this is
explained clearly in the Baha’i writings, and thus the disputations and
wrangling between the different religions (and even between the different sects
within these respective religions) may cease.
The purpose of the Baha’i
Revelation is to
reconcile the different creeds so that all the religions may become united.
I have made my own little attempt at that here, in this email, today. Let me
end with these quotes of Baha’u’llah (emphasis italics, underlines, etc., I
have added):
"The Purpose of the one
true God, exalted be His glory, in revealing Himself unto men is to lay
bare those gems that lie hidden within the mine of their true and inmost selves. That the divers communions of
the earth, and the manifold systems of religious
belief, should never be allowed to foster the feelings of animosity among men,
is, in this Day, of the essence of the Faith of God and His Religion. These
principles and laws, these firmly-established and mighty systems, have proceeded from one Source, and are the rays of one
Light. That they differ one from another is to be attributed to
the varying requirements of the ages in which they were promulgated."
(Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 287)
"It is incumbent upon
every man, in this Day, to hold fast unto whatsoever will promote the
interests, and exalt the station, of all nations and just governments. Through
each and every one of the verses which the Pen of the Most High hath revealed,
the doors of love and unity have been unlocked and flung open to the face of
men. We have erewhile declared -- and Our Word is the truth --
: "Consort with the followers of all
religions in a spirit of friendliness and fellowship." Whatsoever hath led the children of men
to shun one another, and hath caused dissensions and divisions amongst them,
hath, through the revelation of these words, been nullified and abolished.
From the heaven of God's Will, and for the purpose of ennobling the world of
being and of elevating the minds and souls of men, hath been sent down that
which is the most effective instrument for the education of the whole human
race. The highest essence and most perfect expression of whatsoever
the peoples of old have either said or written hath, through this most potent
Revelation, been sent down from the heaven of the Will of the All-Possessing,
the Ever-Abiding God. Of old it hath been revealed: "Love of
one's country is an element of the Faith of God." The Tongue of Grandeur
hath, however, in the day of His manifestation proclaimed: "It is not his to boast who loveth
his country, but it is his who loveth the
world." Through the
power released by these exalted words He hath lent a fresh impulse, and set a
new direction, to the birds of men's hearts, and hath obliterated every trace
of restriction and limitation from God's holy Book. O people of Justice! Be as
brilliant as the light, and as splendid as the fire that blazed in the Burning
Bush. The brightness of the fire of your love will no doubt fuse and unify the contending peoples and kindreds of the earth, whilst the fierceness
of the flame of enmity and hatred cannot but result in strife and ruin. We
beseech God that He may shield His creatures from the evil designs of His
enemies. He verily hath power over all things." (Gleanings from the
Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 94)
I hope that these reflections of mine, on the
Crucifixion and the Trinity, as one who is neither a scholar of Muslim or
Christian doctrine, but one who is merely relying on his Bahá'í understanding
of the texts, are of some use to the dialogue between Christians and
Muslims—thus helping to reconcile unnecessary differences based on mere
interpretations.
Greg Kagira-Watson (2003)
http://GW.homestead.com
<< go to home page
ENDNOTES
“Behold, ...an
intermediary is necessary between the
sun and the earth; the sun does not descend to the earth, neither does
the earth ascend to the sun. This contact is made by the rays
of the sun which bring light and warmth and heat. The Holy Spirit is the Light from the Sun of
Truth bringing, by its infinite power, life and illumination to all mankind,
flooding all souls with Divine Radiance, conveying the blessings of God's Mercy
to the whole world. The earth,
without the medium of the warmth and light of the rays of the sun, could
receive no benefits from the sun…
…Man,
then, is in extreme need of the only Power by which he is able to receive help
from the Divine Reality, that
Power alone bringing him into contact with the Source of all life. An intermediary is needed to bring
two extremes into relation with each other. Riches and poverty,
plenty and need: without an intermediary power there
could be no relation between these pairs of opposites. So we can say there must be a
Mediator between God and Man, and this is none other than the Holy Spirit,
which brings the created earth into relation with the 'Unthinkable One', the
Divine Reality.” …The Holy Spirit it is which, through the mediation
of the Prophets of God, teaches spiritual virtues to man and enables him to
attain Eternal Life.
. . . the Holy
Spirit is the Intermediary between the Creator and the created. The light and heat of the sun cause the earth
to be fruitful, and create life in all things that grow; ... the Holy
Spirit quickens the souls of men.”
(Abdu'l-Bahá, Paris Talks, p. 58-59)
“The door of the
knowledge of the Ancient of Days being thus closed in the face of all beings,
the Source of infinite grace.. hath
caused those luminous Gems of Holiness to appear out of the realm of the
spirit, in the noble form of the human
temple, and be made manifest unto all men, that they may impart unto the
world the mysteries of the unchangeable Being, and tell of the subtleties of
His imperishable Essence. These sanctified Mirrors, these Day-springs of
ancient glory are one and all the Exponents on earth of Him Who is the central Orb of the universe, its Essence and
ultimate Purpose. From Him proceed their knowledge and power; from Him is derived their
sovereignty. The beauty of their countenance is but a reflection of His
image, and their revelation a sign of His deathless glory. They are the
Treasuries of Divine knowledge, and the Repositories of celestial wisdom.
Through them is transmitted a grace that is infinite, and by them is revealed
the Light that can never fade.... These Tabernacles of Holiness, these Primal
Mirrors which reflect the light of unfading glory, are but expressions of
Him Who is the Invisible of the Invisibles. By the revelation of these Gems of
Divine virtue all the names and attributes of God, such as knowledge and power,
sovereignty and dominion, mercy and wisdom, glory, bounty, and grace, are made
manifest.” (Gleanings from the
Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 46)
“The Perfect Man is as a
polished mirror reflecting the Sun of Truth, manifesting the attributes
of God. The Lord Christ said, 'He
that hath seen Me hath seen the Father' -- God manifested
in man.
The sun does
not leave his place in the heavens and descend into the mirror, for the actions
of ascent and descent, coming and going, do not belong to the Infinite, they
are the methods of finite beings. In the Manifestation of God, the
perfectly polished mirror, appear the qualities of the Divine in a form
that man is capable of comprehending.
This is
so simple that all can understand it, and that which we are able to understand
we must perforce accept.” (Paris
Talks, p. 25-26 --Also, Some Answered Questions, pp: 205-207)
Below are some Bible verses giving some basis for the mirror analogies
and metaphors:
Who [Jesus] is the image of the
invisible God, the firstborn of every creature. . . (Colossians 1:15)
Who [Jesus] . . . the express image of
His person. (Hebrews 1:3)
But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them
that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them
which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who
is the image of God, should shine unto them. (2 Corinthians 4:3-4)
But we all, with open face beholding as in a
glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image
from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the LORD. (2 Corinthians 3:18)
Back to home page: http://www.homestead.com/watsongregory/files/
or http://GW.homestead.com