The Theology of Revelation
Historical analysis of Christians
Evidence of a Christian
presence on the peripheries of 7th century Arabia is well
established, but fragments of sources suggest a presence even in Arabia proper
and the Hijaz.
North West – Syria:
St. Paul said: “I went off to Arabia” (Gal 1:17), most likely the territories
controlled by the Nabateans, which were incorporated into the Roman Empire as
the Province of Arabia in 106CE. The Christian communities had grown so numerous
that there were five representatives at the council of Nicea, 325CE. The
churches in this Arab milieu had strong ties with the Syriac-speaking churches in
Mesopotamia, especially Melkite Edessa. The Ghassānids became the principal
group of Arab tribes allied to Byzantium on the Arabian frontier in the sixth
century (#2). As for the Ghassānids’ territories, recent archaeological
excavations have revealed extensive church and monastery buildings. Many of these installations
include beautiful mosaics, some with Greek inscriptions, testifying to material
and cultural wealth. (#7)
North East – Iraq and The Persian Gulf: The Lakhmid territories under Persian influence, in the lower Euphrates, were Syriac speakers allied to the Nestorian ‘Assyrian Church of the East’ (#2). The church had flourished in the area and archaeological investigations on the coast of southern Arabia especially along the Persian Gulf have uncovered a number of sites with extensive church remains typical of the Nestorians, particularly in the territory of modern Kuwait (#7).
North East – Iraq and The Persian Gulf: The Lakhmid territories under Persian influence, in the lower Euphrates, were Syriac speakers allied to the Nestorian ‘Assyrian Church of the East’ (#2). The church had flourished in the area and archaeological investigations on the coast of southern Arabia especially along the Persian Gulf have uncovered a number of sites with extensive church remains typical of the Nestorians, particularly in the territory of modern Kuwait (#7).
South West – Ethiopia, Red Sea and Najrān: A strong Ethiopian or Abyssinian Monophsite Christian
presence had been established to the West and South of Arabia, through military
expedition and trade, for some time prior to revelation. The Abyssinian Negus
had come to the aid of the Najrān (in the South) in 520CE, probably at the
behest of the Byzantines, to liberate persecuted Christians from the Himyarite
king (#2). A bustling community grew out of the shrine of the ‘Najrān Martyrs’,
the Church of San’ā’ becoming a spiritual magnet rivalling even that of the Ka’bah.
The viceroy to the Negus, Abraha, even tried to monopolise the pilgrims and
invade Mekkah in 570CE – the year of the Prophet’s birth – in retaliation for
some Mekkan vandalism. The Qur’an preserves the story of this ill-fated
military expedition in the chapter ‘The Elephant’ (105). The Ethiopians became
scattered throughout Arabia following Persian occupation at Abraha’s demise,
one such community forming the Mekkan AHābish tribe (#1)
The movement of monks,
traders and caravans from all these areas into central Arabia was unhindered as
was the seasonal movement of the nomadic Arabs from the heart of the desert to the pastures on the periphery. These were the
traditional routes of Christianity's spread eastward and southward from the
beginning. By the time of Muhammad's birth, there is every reason to think that Christianity would
have been well known, if not widely practiced, in the very heart of Arabia (#7).
Qur’anic Christians
Christians are referred to,
not by the direct translation MasīHiyyūn, but either ahul-kitāb (people of the
book) collectively with the Jews or NaSāra most likely from the Syriac version
of ‘Nazarene’ (Acts 24.5) meaning ‘of Nazareth’. The term NaSāra
appears in pre-Islamic poetry and Syriac Christians were known as the Nașrāyê
and this spread into parts of the Eastern Roman Empire, such that this was how
the Christians became exclusively known there (#3). There are numerous other
instances in the Qurʾān in which the Arabic religious vocabulary used is of Greek
origin through Syriac or Ethiopic (#1). Injīl (Gospel) for example, is of
non-Arabic origin deriving from the Greek ‘evangelion’ (good news) most likely through Ethiopic ‘wangēl’. Other Ethiopic words can be found, familiar to the
Christians, such as Hawāriyyūn (disciples). Isā (Jesus), likewise, is not an
Arabised version of the Hebrew Yashū’, but rather Greek Iēsous, most likely
from Syriac (#11).
Arabic translations of the Bible date from the 9th century, although a Monophysite scholar Johannes is said to have completed a translation by the mid-7th century; there are some suggestions incomplete translations existed before then. At that time, Christian teaching was orally from Syriac and Ethiopic translations of the Greek text, and it is in this linguistic heritage, the language in which Christianity first established itself in Arabia, that Christians are addressed. Furthermore, contemporary ecclesiastical language is from this same Greek tradition (#5, see chapter 1).
Arabic translations of the Bible date from the 9th century, although a Monophysite scholar Johannes is said to have completed a translation by the mid-7th century; there are some suggestions incomplete translations existed before then. At that time, Christian teaching was orally from Syriac and Ethiopic translations of the Greek text, and it is in this linguistic heritage, the language in which Christianity first established itself in Arabia, that Christians are addressed. Furthermore, contemporary ecclesiastical language is from this same Greek tradition (#5, see chapter 1).
Arabia was long known as a
breeding ground for heresies (Arabia haeresium ferax), which is perhaps implied
by {those who say, ‘We are Christians,’ but they too
forgot some of what they were told to remember, so We stirred up enmity and
hatred among them} [5:14], but the target audience of the Qur’an
appears primarily to be the Melkite, Nestorian and Monophysite congregations readily
found in and around Arabia as mentioned above (#5, see chapter 1) and so therefore what we might think of as 'normative' Christianity today. There is no evidence of Judeo-Christian
Ebionites, that observed the Mosaic Law, surviving the 4th century, a sect some Muslims have claimed the Qur'an reserves praise for exclusively. The Injīl too, then might be
seen to be what those Christian groups understood as the Gospel.
The Gospel (Injīl)
{Step
by step, He has sent the Scripture down to you [Prophet] with the Truth,
confirming what went before: He sent down the Torah (Tawrāh) and the Gospel
(Injīl) earlier
as a guide for people and He has sent down the distinction (fur’qān)} [3:3-4]
The Tawrāh usually refers to
the five books of Moses and the Injīl – singular, never plural – to the Gospels,
but whether they are identical to the modern Pentateuch and New Testament is
debated. Due to the singular use, the Qur'an may in fact be referencing The Diatessaron (150-175CE); a single text that harmonised the Gospels, written in Syriac and normative amongst Syriac speaking Christians (#5 pg 155). There is no Qur’anic suggestion the Injīl {sent
down} [3:3] and {taught} [3:48]
to Jesus was different to the Canonical Gospels {that
is with them} [7:157], so one conclusion might be that the Gospels
are the same {Gospel with guidance and light}
[5:46] that Christians possess and are exhorted as the {followers
of the Gospel} to {judge
according to what God has sent down in it} [5:47]. It may be argued,
however, that Jesus as {a messenger
from God} would therefore be {reciting
out pages [blessed with] purity} [98:2] and so the Injīl is in
reference to a revealed book, that is mentioned in some apocryphal epistles or
the theoretical “Q source” that now only partially remains in the extant
Gospels. The Injīl, however, may not be
like the Qur’an; rather than direct revelation through Gabriel it is the
Divinely inspired message of the good news brought by Jesus. Christian monks
are praised for their monasticism that {was something
they invented} rather than prescribed, simply they wished {only to seek God’s pleasure} [57:27]
and so were sanctioned and guided to virtue. This indirect process of guidance
would conform to how Christians themselves understand the notion of the Gospel;
the truths and commands of the Injīl given to Jesus are communicated to
Christians through {that which
they had with them} and {what was
before} [2:89] the Qur’an. The Injīl then, could be considered to include
both the text and the tradition around the text that conveys Jesus’ original
message (#4, see 3:3-4).
Irrespective of how the Injīl is
understood, the New Testament must be understood as preserving at least ‘some’
Divine revelation and so forms part of the authoritative texts of Islam.
Fur’qān
{This is a true
promise given by Him in the Torah, the Gospel, and the Quran. Who could be more
faithful to his promise than God?} [9:111]. The Torah,
Gospel and Qur’an are seen as a sacred succession; not outdated but still giving
guidance and light to mankind. The Qur’an seen here as {confirming
what they already have} [2:91]. The Qur’an alludes, comments and
re-tells Biblical stories rather than quotes, suggesting an assumed familiarity
with the Bible, such that the Qur’an can be said as using the Bible as a
subtext (#6): {you [people] can ask those who have
knowledge if you do not know} [16:43], many commentators, such as
Qurtubī, Tabarī, Tabrisī and Zamakhsharī (#4) understood ‘those who know’ as
Christians and Jews.
The Qur’an is often
identified as the fur’qān or discernment by commentators; distinguishing
between the correct and incorrect interpretations of previous scripture {He has sent down the distinction (fur’qān)} [3:4]. However,
the fur’qān may also be understood more in the general sense of wisdom {We gave Moses the Scripture, and the means to
distinguish (fur’qān)} [2:53] especially as an attribute of
prophethood. {We sent to you [Muhammad] the
Scripture with the truth, confirming the Scriptures that came before it, and
with final authority over them: so judge between them according to what God has
sent down. Do not follow their whims, which deviate from the truth that has
come to you} [5:48].
The Qur’an then could be
understood as a confirmer, clarifier and protector of earlier revelations, and not so much an abrogator. Early Qur'anic commentaries, such as Tabarī, were once replete with Biblical references, which is a tradition that should be revived in order to fully understand the Qur'an.
Taḥrīf
In the first
centuries of Islam, TaHrīf (falsification) was not a central theme, though
well-known. Muslim authors understood the falsification as either TaHrīf al-maʿnā, distortion of the meaning of the
text, or TaHrīf al-naSS, falsification of the text itself. Many scholars, such
as Ibn Khaldūn
(d. 1406CE) rejected the latter: “since custom prevents people who have a
(revealed) religion from dealing with their divine Scripture in such a manner”.
Since Ibn Hazm’s writings (d. 1012CE), in a period of turbulent Christian-Muslim
relations, it has become commonplace for Muslims to view the Christian
scriptures as textually corrupted (#8), which as M. Watt laments: ‘the net result of
all his [ibn Hazm’s] study and writing was not a better understanding of
Christianity, but a strengthening of the very inadequate perception of
Christianity,’ (#12, pg 91). Despite Ibn Hazm's polemical intent, he is generally credited with initiating the academic field of Biblical criticism.
{Jesus, son of Mary, said, ‘Children of Israel, I am sent to you by God, confirming the Torah that came before me and bringing good news of a messenger to follow me whose name will be Ahmad.’} [61:6] from 740CE have linked this verse to John 14:16 {and he shall give you another Comforter (paraclete)}. It has been suggested that AHmad (lit. praised) is the translation of periklutos “celebrated”, which was corrupted to paraklētos “comforter”. But the argument comes from the Aramaic menaHHemānā, which based on the assonance was linked to Muhammad; although plausible from a Semitic language it is impossible in Greek (#13). In fact, AHmad was not understood as a proper name, an abbreviation of Muhammad, until linked to the paraclete, but originally as an adjective; ‘ismuhu aHmadu’ meaning ‘his name is praised’.
Historical research has shown that the New Testament was recorded word-for-word as standard by the time of the Byzantines. However earlier than this, the various anonymous scribes that labourisly made copies, sometimes interpreted the text as they copied it; tidying some more ambiguous verses to make them more explicitly theologically sound as a response to Christological controversies at the time (#16). One such example might be {Thus he declared all foods clean} [Mark 7:19], which appears to be a summary statement by a commentator that misunderstood Jesus' figurative {Because it [food] enters not into his heart} indicating that the true cause of uncleanliness was not external but internal sinfulness (#17). The commentary is in direct contradiction to Jesus' emphatic statement {It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, away than for one stroke of a letter in the law to be dropped} [Luke 16:17] (also see Matt. 5:17-18 and Paul's apparent observance of dietary law Acts 10:14). How much of this 'tidying' remains in the extant texts or whether it simply influenced the formation of what became orthodoxy is less clear, but the meaning of the original message is still discernible from The New Testament
Qur’anic Criticisms
Whilst the Qur’an is
respectful of the ahul-kitāb (people of the book) it does not go as far as
calling them believers (it does not deny this either) and employs a ‘corrective
polemic’ toward certain beliefs, such as the use of ‘Isa bin Maryam’ (Jesus son
of Mary) to correct ‘the Son of God’ and stress Jesus’ humanness (#5). Verses
that are positive to Christians use NaSāra - which itself could be viewed as
corrective redirection away from Christ as Divine given the Qur’an’s Christology - whereas
ahul-kitab is used when critical.
Commentators link {God is the third of three} [5:73] and {‘Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to people, “Take
me and my mother as two gods alongside God”?’} [5:116] to imply Mary
is believed to be part of the Trinity; God, Mary and Jesus. Non-Muslims
criticise the Qur’an as mistaken, and some Muslims, likewise, are mistaken of
Christian beliefs. Some have claimed the Qur’anic view of the Trinity is in
reference to the heretical Collyridians who, flourished in 5th
century Arabia, known to have worshipped Mary as a goddess (#15), but this is
pure speculation. It is most likely, given the Qur’an’s direct address to the contemporary
Christians, that ‘third of three’ is in reference to Jesus’ Syriac epithet:
tlîthāyâ ‘one of three’ (#5). It can be clearly shown that 5:116 is simply
exonerating Jesus and Mary from any wrong doing rather than in any reference to
the Trinity even without acknowledging the epithet, but it is likely that this
verse refers to an intra-Christian debate.
Monophysite used the title theotokos ‘Mother of God’ for Mary since it
affirmed the divinity of Jesus consubstantial Son of God the Father, but this
was rejected by the Nestorians for much the same reason as the Qur’an; theotokos
is an exaggeration of Jesus’s human mother. The Qur’an is resolving a
church-dividing controversy that was significant at the time.
It is beyond the scope of
this post to discuss each criticism (see future posts), but they are an
important area of dialogue for Christians-Muslim relations, sometimes they are denied,
seen as antagonistic or are met with apologetics rather than an area for
further reflection.
Conclusion
The article has shown that
the normative Christians are addressed in the Qur’an, rather than an extinct
Judeo-Christian or heretical sect, both the positive and the negative verses.
The New Testament may not contain the entire revelation of Jesus or perhaps
only the Gospels are recognised, but whatever was recorded of the message remains so:
alluded to, confirmed, augmented and preserved by the Qur’an. Not all Christian
beliefs and practices are accepted in the Qur’an, not so much because they’re
un-Islamic, rather they’re claimed as un-Christian: {Say,
‘People of the Book, you have no true basis [for your religion] unless you
uphold the Torah, the Gospel, and that which has been sent down to you from
your Lord,’} [5:68]. Both Jews, Christians and Muslims are redirected to the Bible as a shared source of truth and guidance.
Islam has an undeniably
pluralistic layer, but is often believed by Muslims to be superior and abrogate
other religions. {If anyone seeks a religion
other than ‘islām’, it will not be accepted from him} [3:85] and
{Today I have perfected your religion for you,
completed My blessing upon you, and chosen as your religion ‘islām’} [5:3] are
understood to refer specifically to Islam as the formal religion. However, the
Qur’anic use of ‘al-islām’ can be argued to generally mean ‘total devotion’
(#14). In this sense ‘al-islām’ is not a religion vying to establish a cultural
and ritualistic hegemony, but rather the religion of man that transcends form
for the total devotion to God: {Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all
your soul and with all your mind} [Matt. 22:37].
References
#1 The Encounters of Eastern Christians with Early Islam,
2006, D. Thomas (edit.) et al, Brill. Note: particularly chapter 1 ‘Islam and
Oriens Christianus’ by Irfan Shahīd.
#2 Arabia and the Arabs, 2001, R.G. Hoyland, Routledge.
Note: particularly the section ‘The Byzantine/Sasanian period (c. AD 240 –
630)’ in chapter 2 South Arabia.
#3 Jesus in the Qur’an, 2013, G. Parrinder, One World
Publications. Note: especially chapters 15 and 16.
#4 The Study Qur’an, 2015, S.H. Nasr (edit.), Harper One.
#5 The Bible in Arabic, 2013, S. Griffiths, Princeton
University Press.
#6 The Qur’an and its Biblical subtext, 2012, G.S.
Reynolds, Routledge.
#7 Brill online reference works – Encyclopaedia of the
Qur’ān: Christians and Christianity
#8 Brill online reference works – Encyclopaedia of Islam,
Second edition: Taḥrīf
#9 Islamic Interpretations of
Christianity, 2001, L Ridgeon, Routledge. Note: especially chapter 1
‘Christianity in the Qur’an’
#10 Early Muslim-Christian
Dialogue, 2005, M.A. Sirry, Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations, 16:4, 361-376
#11 Brill online reference works – Encyclopaedia of the
Qur’ān: Jesus
#12 Muslim-Christian
Encounters: Perceptions and Misperceptions, 1991, W.M. Watt, Routledge.
#13 Brill online reference works – Encyclopaedia of the
Qur’ān: Ahmed
#14 Arabic-English Dictionary Qur’anic Usage, 2008, E.M
Badawi and M.A. Haleem, Brill
#15 Heresy, 2009, A. McGrath, Harper-Collins
#16 The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, 2011, B.D. Ehrman, Oxford University Press
#17 Christians Beginnings: from Nazareth to Nicea, AD30 - 325, G.Vermes, 2013, Penguin
#16 The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, 2011, B.D. Ehrman, Oxford University Press
#17 Christians Beginnings: from Nazareth to Nicea, AD30 - 325, G.Vermes, 2013, Penguin
No comments:
Post a Comment