The Aaron Papers www.the-aaron-papers.net
|
||
| Home
Feedback
|
||
|
Understanding God's Holy Spirit
Aaron’s
question- How
Does Judaism and Islam Understand God’s Holy Spirit? From
Peregrin 4-26 #2 Someone
correct me if I am wrong, however I believe this sums it up: Judaism
sees the "Spirit of the Lord" as the indwelling spirit of God,
and not as one of three "persons" of the Trinity as Christians
do. In
Islam (I think) the "Holy Spirit" is a euthenism for an angel,
probably Gabriel. From
Ray 4-27 #3 Dear
Aaron, In
Islam the Holy Spirit is in fact believed to be the angel Gabriel.
Something I do not understand since in the Quran it is stated that Jesus
was blown into the womb of the Virgin Mary from Gods Spirit. Then their is
mention of Holy Spirit as another entity. The
Holy Spirit can not be an angel since angels are messengers whereas the
Holy Spirit is God. Ray
From
Penpal #4 Angels
are not Holy Spirit in Islam Quran
17:85 5:110 2:253 From
Penpal 4-28 #8 Here
is how Spirit of Allah work [5.110]
When Allah will say: O Isa son of Marium! Remember My favor on you and on
your mother, when I strengthened you I with the
holy Spirit, you spoke
to the people in the cradle and I when of old age, and when I taught you
the Book and the wisdom and the Taurat and the Injeel; and
when you determined out of clay a thing like the form of a bird by My
permission, then you breathed into it and it became a bird by My
permission, and you healed the blind and the leprous by My permission; and
when you brought forth the dead by My permission; and when I
withheld the children of Israel from you when you came to them with clear
arguments, but those who disbelieved among them said: This is nothing but
clear enchantment. Holy
Spirit = Allah's Power From
Isk #9 "Judaism
sees the "Spirit of the Lord" as the indwelling spirit of God,
and not as one of three "persons" of the Trinity as Christians
do." I,
as a Christian, would not seek to make any contrast such as this. The
Spirit in the 'Trinity' is not anything different from "the
indwelling spirit of God". I would not understand the 'Trinity' in a
different way than this. Trinity is not a view of different Gods, but of
'One God, in three persons' - indwelling each other. Maybe in Judaism,
prior to Christ, the Holy Spirit was not well known. It fell on only a few
prophets, the 70 elders under Moses, Saul in his election as King, &c.
However, in the Way, the Spirit filled all believers, from the Pentecost
of Acts ch.2 onwards. From
Abrahamite (A Jewess) 4- #11 In
Judaism, the Holy Spirit is known as Shechina (the Divine
Presence, also referred to as the Indwelling Presence). Remember the
"cloud" over the tabernacle in the Sinai? That was
Schechina. It is the presence of the Holy One in a place, person (or group
of people), or period of time. It comes to dwell there because of the
precepts associated with that place, person, or period of time. Wherever
the Shechina rests, there is an enhanced ability to experience the Divine.
Since
Hebrew has no neuter it form, nouns and pronouns are either
masculine or feminine. Schechina is a feminine form. It is important to
place this interesting fact in the context that Jewishly the Holy One is
beyond divisions, including the masculine and feminine. Also, although the
Indwelling Presence is all Divine, it is not the totality of and thus not
identical to the One whom we call HaShem (the Name). In
summary, the Holy Spirit Jewishly can be thought of as a state/force
completely imbued with the Hod (Glory) of HaShem. This force is
always unfailingly with/amongst us come what may - Vayikra
(Leviticus) 16:16 - "Who dwells with them in the midst of
their 'tumah' (unsuitability and hence impurity)" - be it only as a
spark deep within the soul. However, when externally actualized, the
Schechina is said to also reside upon us. On this level, visible
to all, HaShem's Hod and Chesed (Lovingkindness) are also
revealed. In this state humanity is brought into a plane of existence
characterized by a palpable sense of nearness with the Holy One. Abrahamite From
Isk 4-29 #13 "In
Judaism, the Holy Spirit is known as Shechina (the Divine
Presence, also referred to as the Indwelling Presence). ....Wherever the
Shechina rests, there is an enhanced ability to experience the Divine. ....
Jewishly the Holy One is beyond divisions, ..... although the Indwelling
Presence is all Divine, it is not the totality of and thus not identical
to the One whom we call HaShem (the Name). ...
the Holy Spirit Jewishly can be thought of as a state/force completely
imbued with the Hod (Glory) of HaShem. This force is always
unfailingly with/amongst us come what may - Vayikra
(Leviticus) 16:16 - "Who dwells with them in the midst of
their 'tumah' (unsuitability and hence impurity)" - be it only as a
spark deep within the soul. However, when externally actualized, the
Schechina is said to also reside upon us. ....In this state
humanity is brought into a plane of existence characterized by a palpable
sense of nearness with the Holy One..." Very
interesting, and well expressed. Furthermore,
in "...although the Indwelling Presence is all Divine, it is not the
totality of and thus not identical to the One whom we call HaShem..."
and "... the Holy Spirit Jewishly can be thought of as a
state/force completely imbued with the Hod (Glory) of HaShem",
I see very little distinction with the Christian understanding.
"..the Indwelling Presence is ...not the totality of HaShem",
implies a complexity in the nature of The Name, which is of course the
essence of the Christian understanding of 'Trinity'. From
Abrahamite 4-30 #14 Dear
Isk, I
have found that at the deepest levels of understanding, when hearts and
minds are open, are open and not defensive, a common ground can always be
reached. And we can even come to recognize and embrace in awe and wonder
the reality that each faith must naturally also move between that place of
commonality and their own distinct understanding and spiritual effort in
order for combined harmony to grow. For the whole is greater than the sum
of the parts. This
is the high ground in the flood of religious competitiveness, oneupmanship
and attempts to dispossess other faiths - and it is from this undivided
place alone that the dove can carry the olive branch. Knowing this, and
then seeing how even at some very prominent levels, so-called religiously
enlightened leadership persists in exclusivist strategies and divisive
tactics, is very disappointing and saddening. We must expose these lies
and hold these people accountable for them - and demand that they adjust
their methods to reflect the great truth opposite which there is no
falsehood but only another truth. Abrahamite . From
Corneila 4-30 #15 Christianity
believes in the trinity, God The Father, God The Son , and God From
Isk #16 Christian
statements of Trinity made in 3rd century CE were made in response to
particular controversies, notably, the Arian controversy. It was about
defining the nature of the relationship between Jesus and God, and
reconciling Jesus' divine and human natures. We must not think that the
particular expressions used in the context of these 3rd century
controversies are necessarily as useful in every subsequent circumstance.
We have to recognise the time and place in which those staements were
made. We can't keep ourselves in a time warp of 1700 years ago. I
was very happy to read Abrahamite's expression of Jewish understanding of
Holy Spirit. Of course the early Christians were Jews, and would certainly
have understood Holy Spirit in the same way that Abrahamite expressed it.
It's good, from a Christian standpoint, to get back to the first century
roots, even the Jewish roots, of the faith. There
were certain fundamentals on which the early church and the Jews did not
differ. It was only later that some divergences caused too much tension
between the Synagogue and the church. But still, that was the experience
of those times, and why do we have to remain fixed in that mould? We
should look at things from the perspective of our own times, what is
necessary for today..... It's
just some thoughts. And
I appreciate your thoughts in No. 14 above, Abrahmite. I could say amen to
that. From
Aaron 5-1 #17
To
my dear friends, You
cannot imagine how refreshing I found your responses to my question
concerning God’s Holy Spirit. I think that what I see in these
responses, is conformation for the positive commonality that we all have
within the Abrahamic Covenant. If you would allow me this liberty, I would
conclude that the understandings of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam
concerning God’s Holy Spirit are practically the same. Yes, I too
believe that the Holy Spirit of God is the Power of God. Thus, the Holy
Spirit would seem to be the essence or power of God that works for Him,
His will in the world. This is the same Spirit that God describes for us
in Zech.4:6—where things are accomplished "not by might, nor by
power, but by My Spirit says Jehovah of Hosts." Thanks
again and God bless. Psalm
51: "10Create in me a clean heart, O God; And renew a
right spirit within me. 11Cast me not away from your presence;
And take not your Holy Spirit from me. 12Restore unto me the
joy of your salvation; And uphold me with a willing spirit. 13Then
will I teach transgressors your ways; And sinners shall be converted unto
you." Amen. Aaron From
Rick 5-2 #18 Abrahamite,
Isk, and Aaron, I
don't want to interject a thorn of contention into this otherwise
beautiful display of harmony between Judaism and Christianity, but I don't
think that Christians would refer to the Holy Spirit as a
"force" the way Jews and perhaps Muslims would. For us, the Holy
Spirit is a person. In other words, it is possible for us to address the
Holy Spirit distinctly and separately from an address to the Father or the
Son. I doubt that Jews or Muslims would view the Holy Spirit in this way. Our
points of commonality may be in the Christian idea of the work of the Holy
Spirit and the Muslim/Jewish idea of what God does as a spirit. Rick From
Isk #19 Rick,
Yes,
while Christians believe the Spirit to be a person, he is still a 'force'
- a part of God that acts in the world in a specific way; thus he is a
'personal force'. Does that reconcile the ideas? Furthermore,
for me, I see no teaching or example in the scriptures (either OT or NT),
for addressing the Spirit directly. Prayers were always directed to the
Father, or to the Son, not to the Spirit. I know that some mystics have
claimed a specific relationship with Holy Spirit as a person, but I feel
that that would be a rare exception. The explanation would lie in the
character of the Spirit himself, he always remains very humble, he takes
what belongs to the Son, or to the Father, and brings it to us; he takes
what is deep in our hearts, and communicates it to the Father and to the
Son. He is the Helper, the Comforter, the Interceder. The Spirit does not
bring anything of His own, he takes a very humble, serving role. That's
only my understanding; as far as it may be of use to you...... From
Lewieke 5-3 #20 "It's
good, from a Christian standpoint, to get back to the first century roots,
even the Jewish roots, of the faith. [...] We
should look at things from the perspective of our own times, what is
necessary for today..... It's
just some thoughts." Isk,
I completely agree with you. From
Peregrin #21 I
have to wonder how much of this "Holy Spirit as the third person of
the Trinity" isn't really just 2nd & 3rd century Christian
semantics getting in the way. The Holy Spirit isn't discussed as a
"person" in the NT that I can think of. I believe Christians and
Jews might at least agree the Holy Spirit & the Spirit of the Lord
possess similar "indwelling" qualities for both faiths.
Christians read about the Spirit of the Lord in the Tenach and take it as
one and the same as the Holy Spirit of the NT. Then
as to the concept of the Holy Spirit in Islam - if we take this as the
power of Allah - then Islam's Holy Spirit probably really isn't that far
removed, either. From
Rick 5-4 #22 Isk
wrote, "Yes, while Christians believe the Spirit to be a
person, he is still a 'force' - a part of God that acts in the world in a
specific way; thus he is a 'personal force'. Does that reconcile the
ideas?" Kind
of. I understand what you are saying, but the day that I read these posts
I also read this from Bishop Kallistos Ware: "The Holy Spirit is a
person. He is not just a 'divine blast,' not just an insentient force, but
one of the three eternal persons of the Trinity; and so, for all his
seeming elusiveness, we can and do enter into a personal 'I-Thou'
relationship with him." This is what I meant by saying that he can be
addressed. While dependent and of the same divine essence, He is distinct
from the Father and the Son. Your
description of the function of the Holy Spirit is helpful. The NT speaks
of the Spirit proceeding from the Father and sent by the Son. He glorifies
the Son, was the agent of the Son taking a human body, and commissioned
the Son at his baptism. All of these things imply a distinct personhood
for the Holy Spirit. By personhood I mean that he posesses self-conciousness
and self-determination distinct from the Father and the Son. Peregrin
wrote, "I have to wonder how much of this "Holy Spirit
as the third person of the Trinity" isn't really just 2nd & 3rd
century Christian semantics getting in the way. The Holy Spirit isn't
discussed as a "person" in the NT that I can think of."
I
understand what you are saying, but I wouldn't refer to it as
"getting in the way." I also think that it is much more than
just semantics. The Christian councils were declaring explicitly what the
church had always understood intuitively. It is true that the Bible
doesn't speak of the Holy Spirit in terms of his personhood or essence the
way the councils did. Those were Greek modes of thinking. However, the NT
is clearly Trinitarian at the intuitive level (see examples above). The
councils were forced to be explicit because of the rise of a number of
heresies that threatened the very heart of Christianity. In regards to the
Holy Spirit, they felt that to deny his personhood would have a domino
effect on many other doctrines including the Christian doctrine of
salvation and the doctrine of the church. Triune monotheism, whether
explicit or implicit, is absolutely essential to Christianity. This is why
even today the three major branches of Christianity - Orthodox, Catholic,
and Protestant - declare that those who deny the personhood of the Holy
Spirit are heretics. Rick
From
Aaron #23 Greetings
to all Peace I
appreciate everyone's interest, and that you can also, in a limited sense,
appreciate the commonality within our three religions concerning the
Creator God and God’s Holy Spirit. But
with respect to the additional explanations that we might offer from time
to time, I believe that some Scriptural basis for our thoughts might be
helpful to everyone in advancing our understanding. I
am going to make a little jump here, and I hope that this jump is not into
a hornet’s nest. I mean no offense with my commentary—these are just
some of my thought on this subject that I wanted to share. I
once asked an elderly pastor this question—Does one have to believe in
the Trinity to be saved? He did not give me an answer. The primary reason
for my question came from the numerous times that I had heard sermons
preached on the Trinity. And it seemed that each and every time—I
believe without exception, the minister who was preaching the sermon would
end their sermons by saying—Because of its complexity, they did not
believe that anyone could fully understand or explain the holy Trinity.
This conclusion, I believe, was the result of a lack of absolute Biblical
proof for the Holy Trinity as such. The Bible just does not explain the
Holy Trinity in clear and simple language that we can understand. But it
is an understanding that transcends the human mind—Mysteriously hidden
in God. So
here is only my opinion—If we are dealing with this complex invisible
Creator God, whose ways and being are so very far above us—even past
finding out. Why would we ever want to condemn someone for not believing
in the specific details that we can neither accurately explain nor
understand? I do not believe that the Bible ever makes the Holy Trinity a
prerequisite to one’s Salvation. Nevertheless,
I believe that the Christian Church is fully entitled to believe in what
they believe in, without any criticism from Judaism or Islam: The same
accord to which they are also entitled. Of
course our traditions are a very important part of our faith, but when
traditions become divisive??? Simply because traditions often differ in
many instances. These Christian traditions that we are talking about,
specifically the Holy Trinity, are principally based on the Christian
understanding for that time in history. So are we just to assume that
their understanding in that time in history was perfectly complete? This
is not intended as a challenge to the certain reality of the Holy Trinity,
but just to examine some of the early traditions. I
certainly would not want to sound like a heretic, but I can Scripturally
tell you that they did not perfectly understand all of the intricate
details of God’s universal reconciliation. And their failure here, I
believe, was the result of a deficiency in their eschatological
understandings. I am sure that you have heard the saying—the d…l is in
the details. They had never arrived at a proper understanding of exactly
who the peoples of God are. Finally,
I would ask you this—are we to just follow along without the right to
ask a question? If that were the case, there could be no advancement at
all in our theological knowledge. Thanks
again, and God Bless Aaron From
Rick 5-4 #24 Good
morning, Aaron. I
would agree with you that we can't understand the Trinity. There is
nothing triune in the natural creation that we can compare with the
Trinity, so it really is beyond our ability to comprehend. I
also don't believe that it is necessary to have a formal doctrine of the
Trinity to be a fully functioning Christian. For the first few centuries
of Christianity, there was no formal doctrine of the Trinity. However, as
I said, I think they did understand it intuitively. So many other vital
Christian doctrines can only be understood within a Trinitarian framework
that to throw out the Trinity you have to get rid of much of what is
unique to Christianity. It is not the doctrine of the Trinity or any other
doctrine that saves us. It is God who does that. The doctrine of the
Trinity gives us (Christians) some insight and understanding into how that
happens. For us, the end result is a greater and deeper worship of God,
and a keener insight into what it means to be the people of God in the
world. Personally,
I believe that the Trinity is a reality and not just "one way of
explaining God." Kalo
Pascha, Rick From
Mohamed 5-6 #25 Salam,
Peace, Shalom! The
Holy Spirit in Islam is Angel Gabriel. This is the interpretation hold be
the vast majority of Muslim scholars. A very few scholars however would
say it is the New Testament/Enjeel. An even fewer scholars say it is the
Holy Name of God with which Jesus could make his miracles. Best
wishes, Mohamed
Mosaad From
Cornelia #26 Some
Holy Bible Scriptures concerning the Holy Spirit (New International
Version): Luke 10:21 Luke 11:13 John 14:26 Acts 5:32 Acts 1:8 Acts 1:5 Luke 12:10 From
Isk 5-7 #27 'The
Holy Spirit in Islam is Angel Gabriel' In
contrast, Christians see angels as quite distinct created beings, and Holy
Spirit as one person of the Godhead (uncreated and eternal). "—Does
one have to believe in the Trinity to be saved?" However, If you are
'saved' likely you will not fail to beleive in the trinitarian nature of
God, it will become a part of your experience, and encounter with God, and
with scripture. "a
lack of absolute Biblical proof for the Holy Trinity as such."
Nonsense; the Bible is full of it. Jesus is shown as God, the Spirit is
shown as God, and the Father is shown as God, the Spirit is mentioned as
being of the fathe and of the Son; Jesus says he is the same as the
Father..... just follow the logic. From
Aasim #28 I
think, perhaps, we are trying to compare two different aspects of
theology. 1)
The Holy Spirit as defined in Christian theology: a person of the Trinity,
seperate unto itself, and yet fully part of the godhead. 2)
The Holy Spirit as defined in Islam: the Angel Gabriel, also referenced in
the Quran as the True Spirit, Honest Spirit, or the Spirit. (Please refer
to Dr. Mosaad's post) Islam
does not attribute any personification whatsoever towards God.
Essentially, there is the created and the uncreated; there is Allah(swt)
and there is everything else. Allah(swt) may choose to interact with
creation anyway He deems fit. Afterall, He is the Creator of time, space,
matter and life. As the Creator, Allah(swt) is seperate from creation:
timeless, ageless, tireless. It
is accounted througout Scripture that God has interacted with the world
and spoken to the Prophets by the agent of the Holy Spirit. In Islam, this
would be Gabriel. Gabriel
came to Abraham(pbuh). Gabriel came to Mary(as). Gabriel came to
Jesus(pbuh). Gabriel came to Muhammad(saw). Even Moses(pbuh), who perhaps
came closest to the presence of Allah(swt), fainted in His presence,
overwhelmed by the power and majesty of God. But none of us, according to
Islam, have looked upon the face of God nor have we experienced His
complete presence. Through
Gabriel, Allah(swt) has given Revelation and support to the Prophets to
assist them in their cause. in
faith, Aasim From
Aaron 5-7 #29 Hello
Isk Peace I
never said that there was not Biblical proof for the Father, or for the
Son, or for the Holy Spirit. What I said, was that there was not the
absolute proof--Like the Bible does not precisely explain the Christian
understanding of the Holy Trinity in so many words. Logically, it is an
accepted fact in the Christian tradition. Aaron From
Rick #30 Aasim
or any other Muslim, In
Christianity, "personhood" is defined as self-consciousness and
self-determination. It does not refer to created or uncreated. God is the
Prototype of personhood and humans were created in his image. You wrote,
"Allah(swt) may choose to interact with creation anyway He
deems fit. Afterall, He is the Creator of time, space, matter and life. As
the Creator, Allah(swt) is seperate from creation: timeless, ageless,
tireless. " In my understanding, this would imply
personhood. Regarding
God's interaction with humanity via the agency of Gabriel, does God
Himself have any direct interaction with humanity apart from general
providence, or is all of his specific interaction with humanity through
angels? Warmly,
Rick From
DavidF #31 Hi.
I'm new to this discussion, but I feel that there are many comments about
Judaism that I would like to correct. Here it is from a former yeshiva
student who also has a background in critical scholarship: Aaron's
original question is a bit too detailed to answer in the way that it is
formulated. The problem is that Jewish belief is communicated either in
Hebrew or in translation from Hebrew. If you literally translate
"Holy Spirit" back into Hebrew, it comes out as "Ruah
HaQodesh". Here the problem starts. When Jews say Ruah HaQodesh, they
may mean something very different from what a Christian means when they
say "Holy Spirit". I do not know much about Christiatinity, but
I have heard some Christian friends refer to the Holy Spirit as the spirit
that impregnated Mary. Well, Jews do not believe that Spirits impregnate
women: men do. A Pentecostal friend referred to the Holy Spirit as the
spirit that makes people speak in toungues. Well, most Jews never hear of
speaking in toungues and, i.e., it just is not part of the Jewish
spiritual culture. The upshot is that when a Jews says "Ruah HaQodesh",
he or she is probably talking about something very different from
"Holy Spirit". As you read this paragraph, if you get the idea
that Jews think about spirits in terms of what they do, not what they are,
you are right. Well, what do Jews mean when they say Ruach HaQodesh? That
might vary depending upon context. When speaking of a prophet, it means
the spirit of G-d that is giving them prophecy. When speaking of a
psalmist or a writer of the wisdom literature, it is the divine
inspiration that motivated their holy writing. When a sage is interpreting
the Holy Law, story, or idea from the Torah, it is the spirit of G-d that
inspires him. However, as Maimonides pointed out, the inspiration of
prophecy is qualitatively different from the inspiration of interpreting
Law, a prophet is not even permitted to use the spirit that inspires
prophesy to interpret the Law: the former is supernatural and the latter
is rational. In modern Jewish thinking (i.e. the last two centuries)
Hasidim and other ultra-Orthodox segments apply the term to the
pronouncements, advice, legal decisions, and interpretations of hasidic
Rebbes or masters or Gedolim ("great sages"). The term more
often used for the latter is "daat Torah," but the concept is
the same. Others, Mitnagdim (opponents of Hasidism) and "modern"
Orthodox and other traditional segments of Judaism feel that this is a
mistaken interpretation of Ruach HaQodesh, Daat Torah, and the function
and role of rabbis and sages. I
hope that this clarifies Jewish thinking and did not create more
confusion. So, with this in the background, you can understand how I
address this specific questions: 1)
The source of Ruach HaQodesh? G-d, of course. G-d is the source of
everyting and the destination of everything. 2)
The relationship to the Creator God? The same relationship as everything
has to the Creator God. There is only one God, the Creator God. 3)
I have addressed its function. Ultimately, the function of everything is
to carry out the will of the Creator. The only point of discussion can be
what that will is, how to logically explain the idea that the infinite can
have will, etc. Be
healthy and peace to the world. DF From
Aaron 5-8 #33 Mohamed Greetings
and peace Once
again, I do greatly appreciate the input in all of these interesting
responses. For
example, from the Islamic position, this response came from from Penpal
4-27-02 #4 ‘Angels
are not Holy Spirit in Islam Quran
17:85 Then
this response came from Abrahamite 4-29-02 #11 ‘In
Judaism, the Holy Spirit is known as Schechina (the Divine
Presence, also referred to as the Indwelling Presence).’ Now
with respect to the Scriptures—the Holy Spirit, as I believe that it is
understood in both the Old Testament and the New Testament, has an
omnipresent characteristic. This
is especially evident in Numbers 11: 24And Moses went out, and
told the people the words of Jehovah: and he gathered seventy men of the
elders of the people, and set them round about the Tent. 25And
Jehovah came down in the cloud, and spoke unto him, and took of the Spirit
that was upon him, and put it upon the seventy elders: and it came to
pass, that, when the Spirit rested upon them, they prophesied, but they
did so no more. 26But there remained two men in the camp, the
name of the one was El-dad, and the name of the other Me-dad: and the
Spirit rested upon them; and they were of them that were written, but had
not gone out unto the Tent; and they prophesied in the camp. 27And
there ran a young man, and told Moses, and said, El-dad and Me-dad do
prophesy in the camp. 28And Joshua the son of Nun, the minister
of Moses, one of his chosen men, answered and said, My lord Moses, forbid
them. 29And Moses said unto him, are you jealous for my sake? I
would that all Jehovah’s people were prophets, that Jehovah would put
his Spirit upon them!" (RSAV-1901) This is describing the very same
Holy Spirit that God liberally distributed to His people on the Day of
Pentecost following Christ’s resurrection. (See Acts.2) The
same Holy Spirit that King David was preying for in Psalm 51: "1Have
mercy upon me, O God, according to your lovingkindness: According to the
multitude of your tender mercies blot out my transgressions. 2Wash
me thoroughly from my iniquity, And cleanse me from my sin. 3For
I know my transgressions; And my sin is ever before me. 4Against
you, you only, have I sinned, And done that which is evil in your sight;
That you may be justified when you speak, And be clear when you Judge. 5Behold,
I was brought forth in iniquity; And in sin did my mother conceive me. 6Behold,
you desire truth in the inward parts; And in the hidden part you will make
me to know wisdom. 7Purify me with hyssop, and I shall be
clean: Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow. 8Make me to
hear joy and gladness, That the bones which you have broken may rejoice. 9Hide
your face from my sins, And blot out all my iniquities. 10Create
in me a clean heart, O God; And renew a right spirit within me. 11Cast
me not away from your presence; And take not your Holy Spirit from me. 12Restore
unto me the joy of your salvation; And uphold me with a willing spirit. 13Then
will I teach transgressors your ways; And sinners shall be converted unto
you." (RASV-1901) I give testimony that these words are true words of
liberation for all who can trust in God’s mercy and simply accept it. I
am not absolutely certain of this, but I do not recall that either angels
nor arch-angels were ever given to this level of Divine Omnipresent Power
by God. I
do thank you for your patience. God’s
mercy is always near! Aaron From
Aasim #34 Peace
to all, Rick,
Yes,
I think we find ourselves in sticky situations when using words like
"person" or "image" when referring to God. My
understanding is that Islam supports no "image" of Allah(swt),
this is why iconography or any representation of God is strictly forbidden
in Islamic art. Also,
we do not see God as a prototype for humanity. Rather, we were created as
He desired us to be, and we reflect in no way an image or likeness of
Allah(swt). This would be like comparing ourselves to God, a form of
self-worship according to Islam. Muslims
believe we are guided through life by our inner moral compass, or
fitrah. Fitrah is the natural inclination to worship Allah(swt) alone
and to be obedient to His Will. It is our responsibility to be mindful of
our fitrah and to nourish and strengthen it with prayer and good deeds. Christians
often speak of being moved by the Holy Spirit. As I understand it, as a
Muslim, I am pretty much on my own. Life is a test in the fullest sense,
and if I were somehow Divinely helped along in this test...well, I don't
think it would be much of a test! I
know to Christians this may sound cold and stoic. But it really isn't. We
believe that Allah(swt) is ever present and accounts our every thought and
deed. Allah(swt) cares for us and provides for us and we rely upon His
bounty. But the burden and blessing of the fitrah is upon us. From the
time of creation, we accepted this burden when no other member of creation
would. This is when we accepted our "personhood" and the burden
that comes with it. Personally,
I do not expect Allah(swt) to "move" me by the Holy Spirit. I
pray in repentance and I pray in adoration of Allah(swt). I know He hears
my supplications and is mindful of my life and my deeds. I have faith in
His Mercy and Benevolence. You
asked, ...does
God Himself have any direct interaction with humanity apart from general
providence...
Again,
as far as I understand it, there are two opinions held among Muslims
concerning this: 1)
All Revelation or inspiration of anykind has come to an end in
Muhammad(saw). To believe otherwise would be to question the finality of
Muhammad's(saw) prophethood. 2)
All Revelation has come to an end in Muhammad(saw). However, we may still
be Divinely inspired and guided to new thoughts or understandings of
Quranic interpretation and Islamic Law. Of course, this inspiration is
reserved for those Muslims who would be considered saintly and excellent
in faith. in
faith, Aasim <****> From
Lewieke #35 "Fitrah
is the natural inclination to worship Allah(swt) alone" I'm
afraid our natural inclination is towards polytheism. Hence the
worship of saints in the catholic chuch and, yes, also the collecting of
relics of Muhammad (coat, hairs from his beerd, teeth, etc.). From
Rick #36 Aasim,
This
thread is getting a number of different branches, but that's OK with me. Icons:
In Eastern Orthodoxy icons of God the Father and the Holy Spirit (except
as a dove) are prohibited for the same reason they are prohibited in Islam
and Judaism. Icons of Christ are allowed because he was human. If you had
had a camera during the first century, you could have taken a picture of
him, right? Icons are pictures of Christ. God
as a prototype: By this I am refering to Genesis 1:26 where it says that
God created us in his image. Of course, this doesn't mean that we look
like God or that God possesses all of humanities limitations. Rather, it
means that, like God, we have a "personhood" (read:
self-consciousness and self-determination), free will, moral capacity,
creative ability, and dominion. We have these qualities in extremely
limited proportion to God, but they do separate us from the animals,
plants, rocks, etc. I'm
not sure I see the link between this and self-worship. Obviously, if we
re-create God in our image that would be self-worship, but that is not
what Christians mean by being made in the image of God. We don't look to
ourselves to understand God, we look to God to understand ourselves. You
wrote, "Fitrah is the natural inclination to worship
Allah(swt) alone and to be obedient to His Will." Christians
believe that our natural, selfish inclination is to go away from
God and disobey him. When you have children (insha'allah) you
will see that you don't have to teach them to be bad - they do that quite
naturally! You
wrote, "As I understand it, as a Muslim, I am pretty much on
my own. Life is a test in the fullest sense, and if I were somehow
Divinely helped along in this test...well, I don't think it would be much
of a test!" I
have to confess that this doesn't sound very inviting or loving on God's
part. I don't think the Bible presents life so much as a test, but rather
as an opportunity. During life we have the opportunity to be reconciled to
God, to be healed of the brokenness caused by sin, and the opportunity to
worship him and know him in faith. Why would God need to test us? What's
the point? What's the standard of pass or fail? You
wrote, "From the time of creation, we accepted this burden
when no other member of creation would. This is when we accepted our
"personhood" and the burden that comes with it." Again,
I don't see life and personhood as a burden, but rather a gift. "My
yoke is easy, my burden is light." Religion is a heavy burden,
relationship isn't. You
wrote, "You asked, ...does
God Himself have any direct interaction with humanity apart from general
providence...
Again,
as far as I understand it, there are two opinions held among Muslims
concerning this:" [snip]
Sounds
like a very lonely universe. Sorry! Warmly,
Rick From
Musa #38 As
a former Christian I can say this... I
have never heard the word personhood. To
say God is the Prototype of a word some Christian (so called follower of
the teachings of Jesus Christ) made up, is close to blasphamy. Making
statements about God without knowledge is strictly forbidden and will be
punished severely. Asking
useless questions about the Creator is also forbidden. All you can do is
have faith that there is a God, and He created man in the image that you
see man. No man has ever seen God. No man can say what God looks like. The
Bible stats that God made man in His image, and then it turns around and
says no man has ever seen God's image. Why continue supporting the former?
Why
reject the Quran? The only way you will find answers to these silly
questions, is to be sincere towards the Almighty and worship Him alone. He
will increase your intelligence if you do these simple things. From
Peregrin #40 Musa's: Making
statements about God without knowledge is strictly forbidden and will be
punished severely.
Asking
useless questions about the Creator is also forbidden. Wow.
This sure does bring up memory of some sore spots in religious history. Who
defines what is "useless"? Who defines what is
"forbidden"? Who has the right to declare someone should be
"severely punished" for some act of alleged heresy?
I
don't buy this. It sounds like a forumla for unleashing the Thought
Police, or a new Inquisition.
IMO
Jesus set the right example. He perservered in the face of adverse
circumstances without ever "punishing" anyone. Even as Jesus
perservered, so we should also try our best to simply counter what we
believe are heresies with right information. We should also pray for those
who we believe are committing heresies. But to slip into a new age of
inflicting "severe punishment" does not sound like an exercise
in increasing our intelligence. No, that cannot be the right way to go. Musa
may believe the Quran has all the answers. However, people of other faiths
are not so persuaded. Let us say instead we need to practice mutual
tolerance of those we think are less wise than we think we are are - even
as we share the truths we believe in. From
Mohamed #41 Dear
Aasim, Dear
Aaron, Yours, Mohamed
Mosaad From
Aasim #42 Peace
to all, Rick
& Shy_gurl, Actually,
since becomming Muslim, the universe has become all the more beautiful to
me. I actually feel closer to Allah(swt) and am clear about my purpose in
this life: to serve and worship Allah(swt), alone. Rick,
I am wondering what you meant by: Religion is a heavy burden,
relationship isn't. Islam
is not a burden. My faith in Allah(swt) is not a burden. The teachings of
the Quran and Hadith are certainly not burdens. But
the lives we live are full of hardships and burdens. Islam would consider
these as a test of our faith, to persevere in the face of suffering. You
also asked: Why would God need to test us? What's the point?
What's the standard of pass or fail? Anyone
may profess faith. But to actually live it? How can one's faith be truely
known if it is not tested? Islam
offers Muslims peace. We believe that people are inherently good. But as
our lives progress beyond the womb, we are tested, and many times we fail
these tests. This is why it is imperitive for a Muslim to pray and seek
God, live the five pillars to the fullest, and to earnestly follow the
example of Prophet Muhammad(saw). Peregrin,
you wrote: IMO Jesus set the right
example. He perservered in the face of adverse circumstances without ever
"punishing" anyone. While
I respect your opinion, I would have to say this: Jesus(pbuh) did not have
to rule over a new and growing nation. He never had to fight wars to
protect his people. He never governed and never had to administer the full
extent of the law. He never had a wife and a household to provide for. Instead,
Christ's own Apostles disobeyed him, questioned him, denied him and
betrayed him. In
my own estimation, Muhammad(saw) was the greatest man and Prophet who ever
graced the face of Creation.
in
faith,
Aasim From
Aasim #43 Assalamu
aleikom, Brother
Mohamed, Thank
you for the clarification regarding the nature of revelation. I am always
appreciative of help in better understanding our faith. This
is why I often begin by saying: "As far as I understand..." :) I
have read that some Imams would even consider "visions" as works
of dark jinn. Can we trust that dreams and visions can be truely from
Allah(swt)? Also,
yes, I believe I misused the word "saint". What I understood
from my reading was that inspiration or visions were often reserved for
those who are strongest in faith. Perhaps
we can begin a new thread to discuss the nature of Revelation? in
faith, Aasim
PS
In regards to my last post: In my own estimation, Muhammad(saw) was the greatest man and
Prophet who ever graced the face of Creation. I
know it is bad manners to compare Prophets, and I apologise. I have a
great love for the Prophet(saw) and at times I can be a bit defensive. Again,
sorry if I offended anyone.
-Aasim From
Peregrin #44 Aasim's Peregrin,
you wrote: IMO Jesus set the right example. He perservered in the
face of adverse circumstances without ever "punishing" anyone. While
I respect your opinion, I would have to say this: Jesus(pbuh) did not have
to rule over a new and growing nation. He never had to fight wars to
protect his people. He never governed and never had to administer the full
extent of the law. He never had a wife and a household to provide for. Instead,
Christ's own Apostles disobeyed him, questioned him, denied him and
betrayed him. Aasim:
IMO
Jesus intended Christianity to be a spiritual movement, not a political
one (contrary to its adaptation as such by the Roman Empire). As Jesus
taught, his movement - properly understood - can adapt to just about any
political climate and change it for the better from the inside out. The
best means of helping others "submit" to God is by inspiration,
not by force of arms. As
for Jesus' deciples, only Judas really betrayed Jesus, and he had such
regrets he hung himself for the trouble. After Jesus' assension, Peter and
the others made good on their initial weaknesses. They went on to
distinguish themselves for their devotion to Jesus' message. With the
exception of John (who was banished), the remaining eleven are believed to
have also died or sacrificed themselves for their cause. From
Rick #45 5-9 Welcome
back, Musa: You
wrote, "I have never heard the word personhood."
"Tripersonality
is not tritheism; for, while there are three persons, there is but one
essence." This is the heading that begins 20 pages of discussion on
personhood, personality, and persons in the Holy Trinity in Strong's
Theology. I'm using "person" in the theological sense and not in
the common usage. "Personhood" refers to individuality -
separateness. Islam agrees that God is separate/distinct from his
creation, doesn't it? You
wrote, "To say God is the Prototype of a word some Christian
(so called follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ) made up, is close to
blasphamy." I
don't know what you mean that God is the Prototype of a word some
Christian made up. Did I say something like that? I used the word
"prototype" to refer to the Christian belief that God created
humanity in His image. From the Islamic perspective, there are lots of
Christian doctrines that are blasphemous - deity of Christ, crucifixion,
etc. From a Christian perspective, there are lots of Islamic doctrines
that are blasphemous - denial of Christ's deity, claiming that the Holy
Spirit is an angel, etc. But for the sake of understanding each other, it
usually isn't wise to use such strong language. We're not here to call
each other heretics, but to understand. You
wrote, "Making statements about God without knowledge is
strictly forbidden and will be punished severely." If
you're going to make such bold statements, it is best to back it up with
some quotes. First, what statements about God were made without knowledge?
Second, who said doing so is strictly forbidden and will be punished
severely? You
wrote, "Asking useless questions about the Creator is also
forbidden. " What were the useless questions? Who said they
are forbidden? Come on, Musa. Maybe if you spent some more time asking
questions and less time assuming you had all the answers you would
actually learn something. You
wrote, "All you can do is have faith that there is a God, and
He created man in the image that you see man. No man has ever seen God. No
man can say what God looks like." No one disagrees with
this. Musa, do you read our posts before you comment? You
wrote, "The Bible stats that God made man in His image, and
then it turns around and says no man has ever seen God's image. Why
continue supporting the former?" Where does the Bible say
that we never saw his image? It says no man has ever seen God. If I send
you a picture of my son, you could see the "image" or
"likeness" of me in my son while never seeing me. You
wrote, "The only way you will find answers to these silly
questions, is to be sincere towards the Almighty and worship Him alone. He
will increase your intelligence if you do these simple things." Thank
you, Rick From
Rick #47 Hello
Aasim, |