Scripture and the Other

            Muslims and Christians, both conscious of the existence of the other seek guidance from texts of their scriptures on which each of them may draw, considering attitudes in relation to the other. This Chapter “Scripture and Other” explores scriptural resources and religious perspective related to this issue, through two papers presented during the seminar.

            The first paper by Frances Young discussed the dimensions of particularity and universalism in the two books included in the Christian canon. He suggested that Christian scriptures provide warrants to positions varying from the evangelization of others and hostility outsiders till the transcending of boundaries. He began by referring to the Old Testament where the beginning texts present the God, creator of all beings Who chose Israel to be His priestly kingdom and a holy nation. Nevertheless universalism of the scriptures is reinforced through Israeli history as accounted specially by the books of Jonan and Ruth, challenging the spirit of isolation and exclusion by affirming God’s care and sovereignty over all of creation even those who do not know Him, but act on His behalf. Besides, there is “the wisdom literature” including the books of Proverbs, Job and Ecclesiastes, Ecclesiasticus and the wisdom of Solomon. The close parallels between this literature and that of ancient Egyptians’ Babylonians’, and Hellenistic philosophy assured positive response to the Ancient Near East’ culture and its ethical and cosmological ideas.

Moreover we find texts of Moses’ Torah defining the treatment of the resident aliens “Gerem” with respect and protection against injustice and violence, as features of openness which gave way to exclusivist

 Spirit only in the post-exilic period; “Ezra law forbidding marriage with foreigners”.

            The New Testament implied that Christianity inherited a spirit of exclusiveness and supersessionism over the Jewish tradition from which it arose. It regarded Jesus as the Messiah through whom God’s promises were to be fulfilled, and who was expected to bring in God’s kingdom. This means that the Church became the true holy purified people of God. Nevertheless, presuppositions of the fulfillment of the prophecy, the cosmic outlook concerning the cosmic struggle of the son of light against those of darkness ending by God’s judgment on everyone even those resurrected from the dead, modified this spirit. A kind of universalism was more ensured by Gospels since they depicted Jesus as breaking across boundaries, through his commandments to love even enemies, his preaches concerning strangers, his dealings with the marginalized and even the sinners. And his announced principle “whoever is not against you is for you”. The Gospels also gave the answer to the hitherto contested question whether Jesus was a bringing a revelation also to the lost sheep of the house of Israel or bringing a revelation also to “Gentiles”, St. Paul’s Epistle were against the argument that salvation through Christ presupposed acquiring the Jewish identity and its markers. The view was that a new humanity has been forged in Christ, healing and transforming the divisions of the apocalyptic, and hence shaping the significance of Christ, whether as delegated the role of the final Judge or as fulfilling the role of Wisdom as God’s instrument of creation.

John’s Gospel share this pattern of thinking and universal outlook, yet the definitive statement of Christ “I am the way, the truth and the life, no-one comes to the father but me” aroused arguments indicating that only understood in its context, during the farewell Discourses, addressing the disciples who late on, led by the Spirit to all truth, will understand

 The whole message of Gospel, specially its Prologue referring to the Logos or wisdom-like Word of God, and his relationship both with all created things and the Creator God.

            The apparent tension between the particular manifestation of the Word in Jesus Christ and the universal presence of the Logos in all creation can be took to resemble a case of the universal God choosing to work through particularities. Jesus is the full embodiment of the Word given to all prophets, and present in all wise persons of every culture. He is in that sense, the way, the truth and life to which all philosophy, all religion strives.

            This argument leads us to the conclusion that if the plain meaning of the text created serious moral or theological problems, scripture is to be read in the light of reason, universal moral values and contemporary experience. This uncovers the universalism of the scripture while at the same time affirms the gifts received by Christians superiority whether its supersessionism or its exclusivism.

Thus we stand to the challenge of modernity and find the way of Jesus for today, grounded on recognition of God’s transcendence and immanence in the universe with its rich diversity.

            Though his presentation entitled “Affirming the self through accepting the other “Basit Koshul” exposed Islamic perspective concerning this issue. He based his discussion on the modernist and post modernist parameters ascertaining that the Qur’anic model embraces basic aspects of both models while transcending the limitations inherent in each of them : namely the dechotomsus dualisms and universalizing ethos of modernism leading to the unbridgeable division between the self and the other “exclusive attitude”, and the solipsistic monism of postmodernism that effaces and marginalizes the self in the face of other through pluring all distinctions between them “inclusive attitude”. The Qur’an adopted

The logic of relational duality affirming distinct identities of the self and the other while establishing reflexive relation between them.

            This is clear from the very first ayat revealed to Prophet Mohammad basing the foundation of Qur’an’s position as a revealed self to the written other. God is depicted as the creator Who taught the human being-through the use of the pen-what he didn’t know. The reference to the science or art of writing testifies acknowledging and accepting the written other, and recognizing a different mode of divine teaching and instructions other than revelation. The pen is the symbol for the art of writing and human knowledge transmitted through the written records generating the continuous accumulation of mankind’s knowledge with every human being partaking in this dynamic in one way to another.

            Besides, the first verse of the Qur’an after the preface “Al Fatiha” begins with self affirmation of the Qur’an as an undoubted book of guidance. But at the same time defines certain prerequesitions for benefiting from its guidance they include, alongside with faith and good work, the belief in the revelation bestowed on Mohammad as well as in that bestowed before. The Qur’an, further, criticizes the maculation and misinterpretation of these previous scriptures calling to rectify this in the light of Qur’anic revelation, while urging their believers to remain faithful to them as they contain even in their maculated form-valuable guidance. True observance of the Torah and Gospels empowers those believers to partake all the blessing of heaven and earth. Qur’anic narrative does not deny the distinct identities of the Qur’anic self and other scriptures’ (Bible included) while insisting on the intimate relation with them.

            The essay gives a practical example reflecting Muslim attitude towards this as embodied in the life of the prophet, through the accounts and results of his encounter with delegation of Najran Christians. He received them in the Mosque where he allowed them to do their prayer “the Sunday and the Eucharist”.

Post modernist behavior effacing all distinction between the self and the other, at the ethical level. Contrary to this, at the doctrinal level the difference was about to reach the point of imprecation, a concluded with Christians refusing to take the matter as far as organizing their relations on mutually beneficial terms. This embodied the concept of “relational duality” where separate indentity of the two parties is acknowledge by both, while building mutually beneficial and affrimitive relations. Thus blazing a path for reflexive relations among variety of selves affirming themselves by accepting and embracing a variety of others.

            Two scriptural dialogues built on two parallel passages of the Bible and the Qur’an addressing the issue of the space open to other, are exposed in this chapter. The first group including Biblical text Jonah 3 and 4, and Qur’anic texts al Baqara (2) 62, and Al’Imran (3) 113-15, which are considered as emphasizing the universality of God’s acceptance of people of different religious backgrounds. The story Jonah proves the reality of God’s universal love for humanity open for all through repentance, hinting that even unhuman creatures can be seen as obediently serving the divine purpose. The Qur’anic parallel text points that divine disfavor is no respecter of an inherited religious indentity and divine favour reaches across religious boundaries. The text praise some people of differing faiths affirming their sharing with Muslims in the divine promise at the final judgment.

            The second pair of texts include the Biblical text John 14.

1-14 and two other passages of the Qur’anic verse Al Imran (3) 19-20, 85. Which are considered as supporting a narrower and harsher approach. The Biblical text about the Farewell Discourse where Jesus Christ’s statement previously quoted reflected and exclusivist attitude

concerning the issue of spiritual salvation of people from the other faiths.

            The parallel Qur’anic text state categorical exclusion of all religions other than Islam as ways to God’s acceptance.

            The tenor of both groups of scriptural text varies to the extent that reflects tension on this contested issue within scriptural witness.

A unified Biblical or Qur’anic teaching on issues of religious plurality is sought whether by harmonizing apparently desperate passages or by prioritizing some over others. Here we recognize the urgent need to challenge the urgent need to the challenge exclusivism and suprsessionism of texts through openness of reading and interpretation. The example for this is the variety of responses to the question of salvation in recent Christian theology ranging from exclusivism (salvation only for believers in Jesus Christ) till pluralism (salvation for all through their own religious paths).

Moreover there is some consideration of the limitations of this threefold schema looking for a way beyond it of affirming the universality of God. While in Islam this challenge is faced through doubts about the issue of abrogation of some verses specially in matters of belief for its equivalence to falsification or internal contradiction, alongside with asserting the very foundation of Islamic belief in God’s mercy and concern for all human beings meaning that divine acceptance is open for all.

             The differences of religious paths and conflicts of religious truth claims may be irreducible, but the imperative of pluralism cannot be avoided in the contemporary world, meaning recognition of the reality and integrity of their religious road maps to God and of the sincerity and coherence of their religious claims. Hence Muslims and Christians have to hold to the distinctive understanding of God revealed through their scriptures, and within the universality of that God’s concern, to affirm a generous place for other. This is more important as the challenge of the other is not only theological but also

social, to ensure integrity of communities of different faiths sharing life. Patterns of religious plurality were developed both in Islamic history where the civic pre-eminence of the Muslim community was assured while guaranteeing freedom and security to “People of the book”, and in Christian history where a broadly secular context embracing different faith groups sharing the commitment to human rights, replaced the Christendom model, safeguarding religious freedoms requires interrogating the theological and philosophical basis of pluralism. Adopting a fuller and wider sense of the term “religion” guides us to interfaith dialogue to build up a culture of pluralism and mutual respect.

            Then, comes the essay of the Archbishop which was originally delivered as a lecture at Birmingham University shortly after the Doha seminar. Its core is a logical exploration of the theological implications of coming to terms with the otherness of the other and highlighting the importance of the exploration of difference as a legitimate area for inter faith dialogue.

            The point of the premise is that religion is a system of ideas, beliefs and practices that connect the entire visible Universe with non-visible powers to which we have to pay attention, worship, or negotiate with for ensuring the maximum security in life. There can’t be agreement about these invisible holy powers. People of different religions and spiritual traditional faiths, even those built on mythology, perform different inherited rituals that are variations of the same thing, and all religious practices go along with habits of disciplined logical thinking. Hence religious language differences reflect themselves in a variety of human life styles and how it is to be lived so as to be in fullest accord with “the grain of the universe”. The Archbishop adopted the old Indian parable of the blind men and the elephant to illustrate that we can never tell the full religious truth as it is beyond our limited facilities.

            As various religious languages give answers to different questions, no one owns or decides the religious truth, cause there is no  

vantage point above all religious from which a detached person, or a board of examiners or tribunal can assess right and wrong answers.

Experiencing the world differently and sharing a different sort of life only may lead to change from one religious tradition to another in which the universe portrayed is more full or resourceful or the humanity imagined has greater possibilities and virtues. Though painful for former fellow believers as a judgment on their whole life and language, such change presents chance for deeper self critical understanding. The possibility of real sharing of worlds is ensured only in non-theocratic social order open for engagement and interaction of different experiences and constructions of the universe.

Hence recognizing theological differences and the awareness of plurality of religious practice finds the way for better and more collaborative relations for the common interest in the public arena. Besides it sets the foundation for fruitful interfaith and inter-scriptural dialogue.

            In such social order of religious plurality and religious freedom, and in the contemporary world of globalization where secular attitudes escalate, all faith communities have something in common to challenge this secular neutrality frame of reference, to assert their credibility, and to lay grounds for a “global ethic” facing the mere materialistic motives and parameters of secularity. This can be achieved through supporting attempts by government or international agencies, programmes for human improvements, through the following a broadly liberal social agenda, and expressing protest against the failure of achieving such agenda. This will in turn, motivate the secular attitude to strive to make itself credible, to clarify the goals of secular justice, where secularists may find themselves working alongside religious believers looking for the same goals for different reasons.

Scriptures in Dialogue

Dr. Michael Ipgrave

            The Qatar seminar was distinctive in building its dialogue

Around the joint reading by Christians and Muslims of passages from the Bible and the Qur’an. Held at a time when dramatic events in the region were impinging on Muslim-Christian relations globally coalition troops were entering Baghdad at the time of the meeting in Doha- this way of dialogue through engagement with scripture made deep sense. For Muslims and Christians, the scriptures are central to identity, beliefs, ethics, worship and ways of living. As great changes affect our world and our communities, there is an argument need continually to remember, study and interpret these formative texts in order to be faithful to God in new circumstances. Christianity and Islam both have long traditions of scriptural understanding, and many ways of developing these traditions further to meet new situations and questions. But there are almost no places and occasions where Christians and Muslims can learn from each other and engage in dialogue around the scriptures together. It is also sadly true that many of the most disturbing things that happen in the name of Islam and Christianity are justified by reference to the Qur’an and the Bible. Any progress towards deeper understanding and peacemaking between the two faiths must, therefore, take these scriptures seriously, because they are linked to the best and the worst in history and in the current situation.

            The textually based method shaped the pattern and the character of the dialogue in Qatar. With scripture at the centre of reflection, discussion and deliberation, it was the scriptural narrative that identified the parameters within which particular issues and concerns were discussed.

In contrast to some other modes of inter faith discussion, where scripture may be almost incidental to the discussion, or be brought in only sporadically and haphazardly, one participant observe that here it felt that it was the living breath of the revealed word that was the moving spirit behind the discussion, rather than abstract conceptual constructs of academic or theological discourse.

Once the scriptures were opened and read, he said, an air of familiarity seemed to pervade the room; a peaceful and trustful atmosphere emerged, seemingly out of nowhere. It was this sense of shared intellectual and spiritual striving in response to the Word which made it possible for Christians and Muslims together to address some pointed and difficult issues in forceful yet positive discussions. As our scriptures permits our lives, so listening to each other grapping with texts offered us all a glimpse of each other’s hearts as well as minds.

             It was notable that a dialogue base around scripture led as much into the exploration of differences as into the identification of common ground. This was even true of passages which at first appeared to share a common focus- those relating to Abraham, for example. More generally, in both scriptures we found passages which are “inclusive”, in the sense that show God’s universal purposes, but in both also we met more demanding passages, which emphasize the need for response to a specific revelation and the threat of judgment to those who proved faithless.

            Differences are also apparent at a methodological level, in the ways in which Christians and Muslims approach their respective scriptures, and at a mythological level, in the ways in which they receive them as conveying the divine Word. It is clear that, by and large, Muslims and Christians view the inspiration of scripture in very different ways, for the one, it is possible to take account of the history of a text’s transmission (including its background in oral tradition) as well as its later redaction, and at the same time to hold to

The text’s inspired status. For the other, divine inspiration is understood more directly and precludes literacy and historical considerations regarding the text of scripture, even if there other elements in the traditions are not exempt from such study.

            Reading scripture in the company of the other underlines the importance of certain humility in exegesis. It reminds the readers that there are many things in his or her “own” scripture which he or she will never fully or definitively comprehend. The bible and the Qur’an speak to Christians and Muslims ask texts which are full of meaning at many different levels and texts whose meaning will elude them at ambiguous verses whose import is known only to God. Augustine describes the Bible as a great and high room, but with a door so low that that one must stoop in humility to enter into it. In an age when many in both faiths brush aside the very possibility of any uncertainty in their interpretation of scriptural truth, this lesson of exegetical humility is a valuable one for us to learn from one another. None of us has, and none of us ever will have, explored all the riches of our scriptures.

            There is clearly ample scope for further engagement of Christians and Muslims together in a dialogue grounded in their reading of the scriptures together. One long and pressing agenda for such dialogue is set for us by the massive transformations of recent centuries. This is especially obvious in relation to gender issues, but in other ways too dialogue cannot be only with one another (and with people of other religions); it must also engage with the secular world. Guided by their engagement with scriptures, Muslims and Christians face the challenge of discerning together what in these tendencies is to be affirmed, what rejected, and what formed. Nevertheless, the greatest “issue” which draws us into dialogue must be the reality of God and

The seeking of his will for our world. Unclear as the way ahead may be, it does seem to be God’s purpose that Muslims and Christians should continue to follow through a dialogue of truth-seeking and peace-making. It is for the sake of God, in line with God’s will and wisdom, that we come together to engage in study of scriptures together. Each of us loves our scriptures above all as writings through which God is revealed. As one participant at the Qatar seminar said, “Long – Term devotion to God is the best context for understanding our scriptures”

            The beginning of the twenty-first century is a time when there is an urgent need for the sake of understanding, peace-making, blessing unprecedented conditions and opportunities for such engagement. We have found in the Qur’an and the Bible texts that can sustain us in a deep and searching dialogue with one another. The challenge facing us now is to developed ways of continuing this in the future so that each of our traditions and all of our societies can be shaped by the wisdom to be gained from our scriptures.

Arabic