God, gender and Jesus

[Paul Williams]

Salam

I was reading an article today on Islamonline.net by Abdal Hakim Murad entitled Islam, Irigaray, and the retrieval of gender , and a question came to mind about Jesus.

But let me quote a few paragraphs from the article first...

'Islamic theology confronts us with the spectacular absence of a gendered Godhead. A theology which reveals the divine through incarnation in a body also locates it in a gender, and inescapably passes judgement on the other sex. A theology which locates it in a book makes no judgement about gender; since books are unsexed. The divine remains divine, that is, genderless, even when expressed in a fully saving way on earth.

When we turn to the Qur’an, we find an image of Godhead apophatically stripped of metaphor. God is simply Allah, the God; never Father. The divine is referred to by the masculine pronoun: Allah is He (huwa); but the grammarians and exegetes concur that this is not even allegoric: Arabic has no neuter, and the use of the masculine is normal in Arabic for genderless nouns. No male preponderance is implied, any more than feminity is implied by the grammatically female gender of neuter plurals.

The modern Jordanian theologian Hasan al-Saqqaf emphasises the point that Muslim theology has consistently made down the ages: God is not gendered, really or metaphorically. The Qur'an continues Biblical assumptions on many levels, but here there is a striking discontinuity. The imaging of God has been shifted into a new and bipolar register, that of the Ninety-Nine Names.'

Now all this is helpful and true. But I have a question. How are Muslims meant to regard Jesus' reported sayings where he addresses God as Abba (father)? According to the gospels in the New Testament this was his characteristic way of addressing God. I am not aware of any biblical scholar, however liberal, who has serious doubts that Jesus referred to God in this way.

Are we required, as Muslims, reject a priori this evidence because it would be inappropriate for a prophet to address the Almighty in these terms, as Islam so adamantly teaches. Are we required to believe that as God is genderless Jesus could never have used such language?

Bilaal

 

[Abdul Fattah]

I think "father" was methaphoricly to indicate the relationship between "creator" and "creation". In Catholisism and Chritianity mankind was created in gods image. Islam does not make that claim. In Islam whenever we apoint a charesteristic to Allah our tongues speak of what we do not have knowledge. To point out the danger in describing God in human charesteristics see the following example:
If we were to say God sees with eyes, then we implicate he relies on that instrument/organ. And indirectly on could say that he cannot see IR (infrared) or UV (ultraviolet) light. I don't know in which words Jesus (pbuh) refered to God. Did he say father? Did he say it all the time, only once to illustrate a metaphore? I guess there's no way of finding out now.

 

[scentsofjannah]

MashaAllah this is a really beautiful thing about Islam...Shaykh Abdal hakim Murad is such an intelligent man you can read more of his articles on this site www.masud.co.uk

In the Bible God is the Father who has a Son ..this language didnt sit well with many christian feminists and ive heard they made an attempt to 'desex' the Bible

whether or not Prophet Isa peace be upon him said that ..God alone knows..but i think not.



P.S brother Bilal welcome to the forum and to Islam

 

[Woodrow]

We do not know what words in the Bible are true. We do not know what I'sa(a.s.) ever said. We only have the words written by others alledging what he said.

The actual Bible no longer exists. What we see in todays Bible are translations and interpretations of the original. We can assume that some truth still exists in the ?Bible, but we have no verification as to what words are true.

 

[Umar001]

Eesa Peace be upon him and his family and his followers said
and I quote, my beloved Eesa peac ebe upon him and his family and his followers:

"Never said I to them aught except what Thou didst command me to say, to wit,
'worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord';
and I was a witness over them whilst I dwelt amongst them; when Thou didst take me up Thou wast the Watcher over them, and Thou art a witness to all things.​

Takbeer....Allahu Akbar!

 

[syilla]

Jazakallah brother ISA...

even you are a new to Islam...but your knowledge in Islam is so much better than mine.

 

[Phil12123]

We do not know what words in the Bible are true. We do not know what I'sa(a.s.) ever said. We only have the words written by others alledging what he said.

The actual Bible no longer exists. What we see in todays Bible are translations and interpretations of the original. We can assume that some truth still exists in the ?Bible, but we have no verification as to what words are true.

Is that the official position (if there is one) of Islam---that we do not know what words in the Bible are true? I've heard something like that stated before, and I've often thought that it is so stated in order to avoid anything that Islam disagrees with. Very convenient, it would seem, for a later religion to teach anything contrary to an earlier one by just saying whatever they want to change was not really taught by the earlier one.

Sounds like what the serpent said to Eve, "Has God really said...." to get her to ignore or disobey what God HAD said.

But perhaps that belongs in another thread. Suffice it to say, the Bible, and specifically the New Testament portion, regardless of version or translation, has many, many references to God as Father and Jesus as Son. In the case of Jesus, God in human flesh, that entailed of necessity one gender, namely, male. In the case of God "the Father," who is a Spirit, it is a figurative expression only. Consider this O.T. passage from Psalms 91:

Psalms 91
1. He who dwells in the secret place of the Most High Shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.
2. I will say of the Lord, "He is my refuge and my fortress; My God, in Him I will trust.''
3. Surely He shall deliver you from the snare of the fowler And from the perilous pestilence.
4. He shall cover you with His feathers, And under His wings you shall take refuge; His truth shall be your shield and buckler.

Verse 4 obviously expresses figurative language to describe God's care as the care of a mother hen for her chicks. After all, God is not some cosmic chicken with feathers and wings, literally. So, likewise, when Jesus taught His disciples to pray to God saying, "Our Father in heaven..." (Matt. 6:9) He was likening God to a caring, loving Father with Whom we may have a relationship as a child of God. Only extreme feminists (who probably don't have such a relationship) would object and seek to "desex" the Bible.

Peace

 

[Woodrow]

Is that the official position (if there is one) of Islam---that we do not know what words in the Bible are true? I've heard something like that stated before, and I've often thought that it is so stated in order to avoid anything that Islam disagrees with. Very convenient, it would seem, for a later religion to teach anything contrary to an earlier one by just saying whatever they want to change was not really taught by the earlier one.

Sounds like what the serpent said to Eve, "Has God really said...." to get her to ignore or disobey what God HAD said.

But perhaps that belongs in another thread. Suffice it to say, the Bible, and specifically the New Testament portion, regardless of version or translation, has many, many references to God as Father and Jesus as Son. In the case of Jesus, God in human flesh, that entailed of necessity one gender, namely, male. In the case of God "the Father," who is a Spirit, it is a figurative expression only. Consider this O.T. passage from Psalms 91:

Psalms 91
1. He who dwells in the secret place of the Most High Shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.
2. I will say of the Lord, "He is my refuge and my fortress; My God, in Him I will trust.''
3. Surely He shall deliver you from the snare of the fowler And from the perilous pestilence.
4. He shall cover you with His feathers, And under His wings you shall take refuge; His truth shall be your shield and buckler.

Verse 4 obviously expresses figurative language to describe God's care as the care of a mother hen for her chicks. After all, God is not some cosmic chicken with feathers and wings, literally. So, likewise, when Jesus taught His disciples to pray to God saying, "Our Father in heaven..." (Matt. 6:9) He was likening God to a caring, loving Father with Whom we may have a relationship as a child of God. Only extreme feminists (who probably don't have such a relationship) would object and seek to "desex" the Bible.

Peace

"Is that the official position (if there is one) of Islam---that we do not know what words in the Bible are true? I've heard something like that stated before, and I've often thought that it is so stated in order to avoid anything that Islam disagrees with. Very convenient, it would seem, for a later religion to teach anything contrary to an earlier one by just saying whatever they want to change was not really taught by the earlier one."

We believe that the Bible was originaly true. However, the Bible was revised and altered through time because of interpretations and translations. We have great Love for I'sa(a.s.) and his mother Maryam. We agree with the miracles he performed in the name of Allah(swt) and see him as a true Propher(pbuh)

You are correct this is the subject for another thread. To keep this thread on it's original topic I will try to find the thread pertaining to why we believe as we do.

PEACE

I believe this is a more appropriate thread for us to discuss the Bible on:
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/24001-do-muslims-believe-original-bible-word-god.html?highlight=BIBLE+corrupted

 

[Zulkiflim]

Salaam,

Woodrow,the quran has no mention of the bible but the gospel according to propeht Jesus as and the Torah/Zabur ie are the rest...

So the bible is never true.

The Gospel according to Propeht Jesus as was true but is lost ...

 

[Joe98]

The Gospel according to Propeht Jesus as was true but is lost ...

There was never a gospel according to Jesus. No Christain ever said there was.

 

[Woodrow]

There was never a gospel according to Jesus. No Christain ever said there was.

The second part of your statement is true. However, we do believe a Gospel was revealed to I'sa(a.s.)

 

[Joe98]

But why would you believe that?

Nobody has ever claimed any such thing!

 

[Woodrow]

But why would you believe that?

Nobody has ever claimed any such thing!

We believe the Injeel was revieled to I'sa(a.s.), that is mentioned in the Hadeeth and also referred to in the Qur'an. However, I can not recall exactly how it was referred to in the Qur'an.


To believe in all the revealed scriptures:

Tauret
Zaboor
Injeel
Qur'an

Are part of our fundemental believes.

 

[scentsofjannah]

There was never a gospel according to Jesus. No Christain ever said there was.

read the bible, in many places it tells us when Jesus/Prophet Isa peace be upon him went to this or that place he 'had a gospel' ..he preached 'the gospel'..obviously he didnt have the gospels of Mark ,Matthew, John and Luke in the possession of Christians today.

thats the Gospel Muslims believe in to be the one revealed by Almighty God.

the current one does contain truth as well as falsehood.

Peace

 

[scentsofjannah]

listen to recitation of Surat Maryam (peace be upon her) with translation its really beautiful...its a flash presentation.

http://www.sparklywater.com/files/flash/maryam.html

 

[duskiness]

read the bible, in many places it tells us when Jesus/Prophet Isa peace be upon him went to this or that place he 'had a gospel' ..he preached 'the gospel'..obviously he didnt have the gospels of Mark ,Matthew, John and Luke in the possession of Christians today.

"gospel" = euangelion - from greek "good news" (for example about salvation...). That was what Jesus was proclaiming -a good news and not a book (at least that is what we believe)
additionaly "gospel" is a term we use when we refer to literature genre about Jesus life and His massage - "good news"(and that's why we say gospel by Mark, John...etc)
n.

 

[Umar001]

"gospel" = euangelion - from greek "good news" (for example about salvation...). That was what Jesus was proclaiming -a good news and not a book (at least that is what we believe)
additionaly "gospel" is a term we use when we refer to literature genre about Jesus life and His massage - "good news"(and that's why we say gospel by Mark, John...etc)
n.

Lets say I agree with that for the sake of arguement, because I dont know for sure the Islamic view and so forth.

But ok, when it says Jesus spoke the Gospel meaning good news.

This good news is a message for Jesus didnt say anything of his own will, right?

So this message is from the Almighty, its good news, which could be preserved in a book, how do we know this good news could not have come in the form of a book, oral or whatever.

So where is this Gospel, good news that Jesus preached, some say that this good news, is in the Gospels of the New Testaments, though these are named the Gospels, good news according to Matthew,Mark,Luke,John, where I ask is the Good News, the Gospel, according to Jesus. Whether book or Oral.