WHY MIGHT THE CHRISTIANS HAVE MADE THIS GROUNDLESS CLAIM?
|
WHY MIGHT THE CHRISTIANS HAVE MADE Trinitarianism has been the cause of considerable debate from the time of its appearance right up to the present day. In fact, these arguments have spread to ever wider areas since the eighteenth century. Biblical researchers of that time first asked why belief in the trinity was not openly expressed in the Gospels, and then questioned under what conditions it appeared. Today, many theologians, scientists, researchers, writers, and independent Christian movements reject many traditional beliefs, particularly the trinity and the belief in the atonement for sins. Some of them, examples of which we shall consider in due course, adopt an Arianist understanding instead of trinitarian belief based upon the Bible and research into surviving works by the earliest Christians. Following the decisions taken at the Councils of Nicaea (325) and Chalcedon (451), belief in the trinity became Christianity's foundation stone, and refusal to accept it made one a heretic. Those who said that such an idea contradicted faith in a monotheistic God, who maintained that the trinity did not appear in the Gospels or who had reservations on the subject, were either silenced or pressured into acceptance. In his Articles of the Apostolic Creed, Theodore Zahn says that "the article of faith up until about 250 AD was, 'I believe in God, the Almighty'. Between 180 and 210 AD the word 'Father' was added 'the Almighty'. This was bitterly contested by a number of the leaders of the Church … since they regarded it an unthinkable sacrilege to add or subtract any word to the Scriptures."46 Duncan Heaster, known for his Biblical research, set out his views in a debate on the trinity in 1988:
Heaster's words are unequivocal, and many other scholars today express the same views. John Hick, for example, author of The Rainbow of Faiths, reaches the following conclusion: (Surely God is beyond all the expressions in the following summary): 1. When we look at the research carried out in recent years, we see that Prophet Jesus did not teach that he was God, or the Son of God, the second element in the Trinity. In complete contrast to that belief, he always taught that he was the son of Man. 2. Christian authorities and theologians are unable to expound the traditional Christian belief that Prophet Jesus is both fully God and also fully human in a comprehensible manner. 3. Belief in incarnation does irreparable harm to Christians' relations with other religious traditions and their adherents. That is because this belief implies that Christianity is superior to other religions.48 One matter needs to be clarified here. This book does not seek to judge either those people who first proposed this belief or those sincere Christians who adhere to it, but to reveal the truth about trinitarian belief according to the Qur'an and to explain how it came to be produced and adopted. It must not be forgotten that true Muslims believe in all of the prophets and books sent by God, and respect Christians beliefs and values. Muslims feel great affection for all Christians who sincerely believe in God, fear and respect Him, are sincerely devoted to Him, and who respect His messenger, Prophet Jesus (pbuh), and approach such Christians in a spirit of friendship and tolerance. There may be people who propagate belief in the trinity with secret designs of their own, who look to only their own interests. In much the same way, others of sincere intent may possibly have moved away from the true path gradually, without being aware of it. The belief in question, originally expressed in a different form, may have become distorted over time. Communities of individuals who supported beliefs similar to the trinity and played a role in its becoming accepted must have held very different ideas from one another. Some may well have supported such claims, with the aim of emphasizing the superior moral values of Prophet Jesus (pbuh), while others may have misinterpreted metaphorical expressions. Still others, influenced by the prevailing political and cultural conditions of the time, may have wanted to ensure a more rapid spread of Christianity. In rejecting the trinity, therefore, we need to bear in mind the possibility that the first Christians may have fallen into error through being influenced by the historical, political, and cultural conditions of their time, or else may have been adversely affected by the persecution and oppression to which they were subjected. The probable reasons for the claim about the trinity being put forward are revealed in this chapter. (Surely God is beyond all the superstitious expressions employed in this chapter to describe Christians' mistaken beliefs. We once again state that Prophet Jesus [pbuh] has nothing to do with such ascriptions.) The word "son" in the New Testament was not used to support the Trinity At the heart of the belief in the trinity lies the erroneous belief that Prophet Jesus (pbuh) is the son of God. (Surely God is beyond that!) However, when one examines how and why son was used when Christianity was born and in earlier periods, a very different picture emerges. Son is used to refer to Prophet Jesus (pbuh) in four very different ways in the New Testament: the son of Mary, the son of David, the son of man, and the son of God. The term son of Mary refers to the fact that Prophet Jesus (pbuh) was physically born through by Mary, and the son of David denotes his lineage. The term the son of man is of enormous importance, both from the point of view of how he described himself and how those around him regarded him. In fact, this term appears more frequently in the New Testament than the Messiah and the son of God. The term the son of man is unique to Jewish theology and is used far more in the Old Testament, particularly in the Book of Psalms. It refers directly to human beings and is a very familiar expression. For instance, it is used 90 times in reference to Prophet Ezekiel (pbuh), who is certainly depicted as a mortal human being. The Aramaic equivalent of this term, bar nash(a), was used for everyone also at the time of Prophet Jesus (pbuh). However, the New Testament term the son of man is not used for everyone, as in Judaic scriptures, but is employed many times to refer to Prophet Jesus (pbuh)49. The term the son of man is used 69 times in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and 13 times in John. In only one place it is used for humanity in general (Hebrews, 2:6-8). The description is used several times both regarding and by Prophet Jesus (pbuh), in the sense of I. Some of these passages are as follows:
As stated above, the term the son of man was used by the first Christians in the sense of human being, for most of the first Christians were Jewish and had always used this term in that sense. Its use in the Old Testament supports that view and reveals that Prophet Jesus (pbuh) was a human being created by God and in need of His mercy. The New Testament's expression the son of God constitutes one of the so-called foundations of trinitarianism. This interpretation has led to centuries of debate in the Christian world, however. In fact, every researcher familiar with Jewish culture and language at that time has stated that the expression is metaphorical. The widespread view is this: The son of God was a metaphorical term already in wide use in Jewish society and frequently used to refer to important individuals.
Throughout the book, Hick concentrates on the fact that the term the son of God is a belief put forward after Prophet Jesus' (pbuh) death, one that he never communicated himself. 51
Among the Jews of that time, the son of God had the metaphorical meaning of belonging to God. Someone referred to in this way was considered close to God, one who served Him with all his heart, and who lived the kind of life that would be pleasing to Him. It never meant that the person in question possessed attributes resembling or equivalent to His, or implied any divine status. (Surely God is beyond that!) Indeed, there was no room for such a belief in Judaism. Therefore, the first Christians may have used this term to express their respect for Prophet Jesus (pbuh) and their belief that he was His servant and close to God. In fact, many Christian theologians say that the term the son of God was given to him by his followers to honor and praise him. Moreover, they stress that it is a metaphor. The title son was a particular form of expression in Hebrew and was used, together with other concepts, to indicate that he had a particularly close relationship to something. According to The Catholic Encyclopedia:
Dr. Mahmut Aydin of the 19 Mayis University Theology Faculty in Turkey reports John Hicks' views on this subject in these terms:
After considering Hick's views in some detail, Aydn says this about the use of the term the son of God:
P. M. Casey, a New Testament scholar and author of several books on the origins of early Christianity, says: "… Jesus could have been called a son of God by anyone who thought that he was a particularly righteous person."56 He also draws attention to how, within the Jewish tradition, important individuals and events were referred to by mythological and metaphorical expressions, either individually or socially.57 According to the concept of the Messiah in Jewish belief, the Messiah, a king, would be descended from the line of Prophet David (pbuh). The kings descended from that line were regarded as "the sons of God in the sense of being appointed to the rank of kingship…"58 Those who believed in Prophet Jesus (pbuh) as the Messiah may have seen nothing improper in referring to him by that term as an extension of this belief.
In The Historical Figure of Jesus, Sanders also notes that the Jews never understood the son of God in the literal sense. According to him, they used the term the sons of God in a metaphorical sense for both men and women and as a symbolic statement of one's devotion to God.59 Sanders interprets the son of God by the first Christians in the following way:
As Sanders states, when Prophet Jesus' (pbuh) words and deeds passed from the Jews to the Gentiles, at that time the pagan world, this metaphorical expression began to acquire a new meaning and to be used to refer to his alleged divine status. In this way, by being regarded as the Messiah by the first Christians and as having a fully human identity, he gradually became divine. (Surely God is beyond that!) William C. Varner examines how the first Christians perceived this term:
Proponents of the trinity do not accept the interpretation that the concept of the son of God in the New Testament is an expression of honor and respect, even though many New Testament statements clearly use it in that very sense. For example, the sons of God is used for all who have faith in God and follow Prophet Jesus' (pbuh) path:
As is apparent from the examples above, the term "the sons of God" is used in many passages in the New Testament. Clearly, the meaning is the same as that in which it is used in Jewish culture in general: people who have taken God as their friend, who endeavor to draw close to Him, and who live by His laws. Indeed, Luke's Gospel mentions Prophet Adam (pbuh) as the son of God (Luke 3:38). The term the son of God is also used many times in the Old Testament. For example, son is used for the Israelite people in the Old Testament:
In another extract from the Old Testament the same expression is used to describe angels:
The term son of God is also used to refer to Prophet Solomon (pbuh) in the Old Testament. The relevant passage reads:
This holy individual referred to by the title "son of God" is the Prophet Solomon (pbuh), one of the sons of Prophet David (pbuh).
The same chapter continues:
Another piece of evidence showing that the term the son of God provides no basis for belief in the trinity concerns the use of the name of God in the New Testament. In his paper "Who is Jesus? Do the creeds tell us the truth about him?" Anthony Buzzard writes: Thousands upon thousands of times in the Bible (someone has calculated over 11,000 times), God is described by personal pronouns in the singular (I, me, you, He, Him). These pronouns in all languages describe single persons, not three persons. There are thus thousands of verses which tell us that the "only true God" is One Person, not three. There is no place in the New Testament where the word "God" can be proved to mean "God-in-Three-Persons." The word God, therefore, in the Bible never means the Trinitarian God. This would immediately suggest that the Trinitarian God is foreign to the Bible.62 As we have emphasized throughout this chapter, the term son was widely employed in Jewish culture and bore no divine significance. Therefore, those who use it in the belief that Prophet Jesus (pbuh) was literally the son of God, who claim that he has powers equal to God's (Surely God is beyond that!), are making a serious mistake in terms of Jewish belief. The Qur'an warns people several times not to use this term to ascribe divine status to Prophet Jesus (pbuh). This is a grave sin in the sight of God. For example:
The use of Father in the New Testament One common New Testament term used by Christian theologians who defend belief in the trinity is father. (Surely God is beyond all the expressions used in this chapter to reflect the Christians' erroneous beliefs.) But, in fact, like the term son, this word also has a metaphorical significance. In addition, it appears that the word is not only used by Prophet Jesus (pbuh), but by all people of sincere faith who fear and respect God, and pray to Him for help. The word father refers to the fact that God is these people's only Lord, friend, and parent, and thus does not support belief in the trinity.
Some of the ways in which this word is used are as follow: (Surely God is beyond all these expressions)
Clearly, the authors of the New Testament use Father to refer to the essence of God. It is no more than a sign of respect that applies to all people, rather than giving one particular person divine status. The term does not merely express a special bond between God and Prophet Jesus (pbuh), but is addressed to everyone who has submitted to God and lives the kind of life that meets with His approval. Indeed, even today many Christians begin their prayers with Our Father. Similar prayers of Prophet Jesus (pbuh), recorded in the New Testament, should not be interpreted any differently. Once again, we need to emphasize that these statements do not eliminate the errors of those who use the term Father to ascribe divine status to Prophet Jesus (pbuh). They are committing a grave sin in the sight of God, and verses of the Qur'an describe their situation as follows:
Our Lord's infinite might and power, and the fact that He is unsullied by any imperfection, are clearly emphasized in the Bible. John Hick sets this out in an interview: Classic Christian theology developed a long time after the death of Prophet Jesus. Contemporary historical criticism of the New Testament seeks to enlighten us as to which of the words ascribed to Prophet Jesus in the New Testament texts in our possession may really have been spoken by him … It is impossible to interpret the term "Father" (in the Gospels) literally. The expression "the son of God" appears many times in the Old Testament. For example, Adam is the son of God; the angels are the sons of God; the kings of Israel are the sons of God and the nation of Israel, as a whole, is also the son of God. Clearly the concept of "Father" and "Son" in these expressions does not express a literal relationship, but symbolizes only a metaphorical expression of God-human relationship. Let us immediately add that seeking to interpret these expressions literally is considered a major sin in Judaism. Metaphorical expressions of this kind were, in any case, in existence in the time of Prophet Jesus. The metaphorical description of any human being as the "son of God" dedicated to any deity can be regarded as a part of the general religious symbolism at that time. In short, the expression "son" is a symbolic reference to closeness to God. As far as I know, it is the literal interpretation of this term that disturbs Muslims. Similarly, I must say that as a Christian I, too, will feel uneasy at such a literal interpretation.63 Many other New Testament passages need to be understood in a figurative sense, such as God's Children: (Surely God is beyond all the expressions in the extracts that follow.)
They may have used it in the sense of God is the Lord of all
Given that parents cannot have a child unless God sets the appropriate causes in motion, He is the One Who creates everything that exists. In that sense, mothers, fathers, and their children all belong to God. All the entities you see around, living or inanimate, belong to Him. The chair you are now sitting in, the building you live in, all cities, countries and nations all belong to God. If you see a river, it is God's river. It is His sea, His mosque, His church and His fountain. Therefore, all sons and daughters also belong to God. Our Lord has no need of a mother, a father, or anything else to bring a human being into existence. It is sufficient that He say Be! It is our Lord Who created all physical, biological and chemical laws. It is therefore also our Lord Who brought into being all the laws and causes assumed to be necessary for the creation of a new human being. Almighty God created Mary, as well as all the mothers who have ever lived, and all those mothers' reproductive systems. It is God Who brings about each and every birth. It is God Who creates a mother and father. Our Lord is unsullied by any flaw, deficiency or need. This is revealed thus in verses:
The Qur'an records one of Prophet Abraham's (pbuh) prayers thus:
In the context of the above verses, certain Christian concepts acquire significance. Prophets Jesus, Moses, Salih, Noah, Hud (peace be upon them all) and Prophet Muhammad (may God bless him and grant him peace) are all God's servants, for all prophets belong to Him. It is revealed in verses that the Jews referred to Prophet Ezra (pbuh) as the son of God. In fact, both they and Prophet Ezra (pbuh) are His servants. Our Lord created Prophet Adam (pbuh), from soil and without parents, and the angels. It is a serious mistake to say otherwise. Not only Prophet Jesus (pbuh), but every mother, every father and every son belongs to God. The early Christians may have used the son of God in this sense. A similar explanation can be found on a Christian web site: Son is not intended to mean a physical relationship or birth by procreation. We only say Christ is the Son of God to mean that Christ came from God… In many linguistic expressions, the word son is not used to indicate physical generation. For example, we say that students are sons of knowledge; citizens are sons of the homeland; an Egyptian is a son of the Nile; and an Arab is a son of the desert… Sura al-Baqara 2:215, "Whatever you bestow in charity must go to your parents and to your kinsfolk, to the orphan and to the poor man and to the stranger." Interpreters say that stranger (Ibn al-Sabil, the son of the path) indicates the traveler… Therefore, the term son of God does not mean procreation in human terms…64 Some Christians say that the son of God (Surely God is beyond that!) needs to be regarded as a manifestation. This is both understandable and compatible with what the Qur'an says. God created the universe from nothing and has absolute dominion over it. The heavens and the earth belong to Him. He is everywhere, and all parents and children are manifestations of Him. His essence may be manifested in many places and in many forms. Indeed, such an idea is found in the Qur'an:
The expression manifested Himself is used in the sense of to appear, emerge, be expressed ... In his Qur'anic commentary, Hamdi Yazir of Elmali writes as follows:
Other verses reveal that:
Therefore, God can manifest Himself where and as He wills. Everything that exists is a manifestation of God. As He revealed to Prophet Moses (pbuh), human beings can never see His true essence. However, they can have dealings with His manifestations. For example, when dealing with Prophet Moses (pbuh), He manifested Himself in a bush and in his staff. God never manifests Himself wholly, but only in the manner and in the entity that He wills. His presence pervades all things, for as the Qur'an reveals:
As is also seen in the New Testament, Prophet Jesus (pbuh) called on his people to believe only in God. He answered his critics with very fine examples and explanations. Thus, it is quite possible that the son of God is a particular explanation used to counteract the pagan style in wide usage at that time. One who wished to tell people that God is the sole friend and helper of all people may have used the phrase I am the son of God, not of my father in this sense to overcome the pagans' persistence and attitude that valued and expected assistance from beings other than God. God knows best. The Meaning of the Word of God One baseless foundation of trinitarian belief is the word (logos), which is used right at the beginning of John's Gospel. Here, John asserts that Prophet Jesus (pbuh) is the Word of God and has existed, together with Him, for all time: (Surely God is beyond that!)
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, Who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John, 1:14) In short, Prophet Jesus (pbuh) is depicted as the Word of God, as a result of which divine status is ascribed to him. (Surely God is beyond that!) However, this concept rests on a serious misinterpretation of the facts. As the Qur'an reveals:
John's mistake lies in his expression and the Word was God. This expression, which portrays the Word of God as being equivalent to His essence, is a serious error. Surely God is beyond all such terminology. The problem lies in how the word (logos) is understood. In reality, this belief has been around since the sixth century bce, at which time the Greek philosopher Heracleitus taught that there was an intellect—the logos—in the universe similar to the human mind. In the third and fourth centuries bce, the Stoics used logos in such senses as God, nature and the soul of the universe.66 The fact that John's Gospel, written in Greek and evidently addressed to a Greek audience, begins with this concept, and that it is understood in the sense accorded to it by Greek philosophy, is no coincidence. The Encyclopedia Britannica says: "The author of The Gospel According to John used this philosophical expression, which easily would be recognizable to readers in the Hellenistic (Greek cultural) world, to emphasize the redemptive character of the person of Christ…"67 To put it another way, the author of John's Gospel constructed a false meaning for the truth of Prophet Jesus is the Word of God by confusing it with Greek philosophy. The misinterpretation of expressions and metaphorical explanations that are open to interpretation One of the subjects most concentrated on by Biblical scholars is the need to interpret gospel expressions in a figurative sense. Looked at from this point of view, it appears that the expressions in question bear very different meanings. The Qur'an also uses many terms that are open to interpretation. Indeed, many Christian researchers are seeking to establish a relationship between Qur'anic expressions and certain New Testament terms as they make their interpretations. In the book Three Gods or One? The Trinity in Monotheism, Carlos Madrigal comments:
This is important with regard to the Gospels' metaphorical expressions employed. Our Lord reveals the following regarding the Qur'an: "We have sent down the Book to you making all things clear, and as guidance, mercy, and good news for the Muslims" (Surat an-Nahl: 89) and "We have not omitted anything from the Book – then they will be gathered to their Lord." (Surat an-Nahl: 38) Everything in the Qur'an is explained in the most perfect, wise, and compact way. In some verses, our Lord guides us according to such figurative terms: God's hand
God's face
The Qur'an also reveals:
Each expression in the above verses tells of His infinite might and power in the finest possible terms. People who meditate on these verses will find beautiful and wise advice in them. They may have been used to emphasize Prophet Jesus' (pbuh) superior servitude and closeness to God
The Disciples and the first Christians witnessed Prophet Jesus' (pbuh) devotion to God, his sincerity, deep faith, patience, courage, determination to implement God's revelation, the miracles he performed through God's will, and his superior moral values. His entire life was full of miracles: his conception and birth, his speaking from the cradle, his healing the sick, raising the dead, and ascending to God's presence all clearly reveal his extraordinary position. Such information is provided in detail in both the New Testament and the Qur'an. Our Lord emphasizes that Prophet Jesus (pbuh), his mother Mary, and the family of Imran were all chosen individuals. The first Christians' enthusiastic tone when referring to Prophet Jesus (pbuh) has been noted by many Christian theologians. In his work Jesus in His Lifetime, New Testament expert John Marsh emphasizes that: "The earliest followers of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) used the term 'the son of God' to describe how he had been chosen by God for a very special task and therefore had a very special bond with God."69 Sanders states: "Jesus is a special 'Son of God', living in a nation of 'Sons of God'."70 In his work No Other Name , Paul Knitter writes:
|
In 1977, seven biblical experts including Anglican theologians published The Myth of God Incarnate, which provoked considerable interest. In the foreword, editor John Hick, wrote:
All of the above statements make it clear that in the Jewish tradition, the son of God was used to refer to people who took God as their friend, who were sincere and devout. This is why it was used to refer to Prophet Jesus (pbuh). Just as in the cases of Prophet Adam (pbuh) and Prophet Solomon (pbuh), it is a metaphorical term that stems from Jewish traditions. It was chosen by the first Christians, who were Jewish and who knew the Torah and lived by the Mosaic Law until becoming followers of Prophet Jesus (pbuh), to express Prophet Jesus' (pbuh) respect, devotion, and closeness to God.

Prophet Jesus (pbuh), who possessed deep faith and superior moral values, trained his disciples and the first Christians to be his helpers on God's path. Therefore, they interpreted everything that happened to them and his message according to their deep faith. They were perfectly aware that God possesses infinite might and power, is the Sole Lord of the universe, that nothing can be unless He so wills, and that nobody has any power to do anything. Thus, they may have thought of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) as the son of God in the same sense when using the term. They may have wished to make it clear that our Lord had created all fathers and mothers, as well as all sons and daughters, and that He is the Lord of all.

John then writes:
