[SalamChristian]

Peace e'erbody!

So, some of you may have heard of the Muslim interpretation of the "paraclete" as a prophecy about Muhammad. When I first heard this, I thought it was interesting, but obviously was not compelled to post a thread about it. For those that don't know, the "paraclete" is interpreted by most Christians today to be the Holy Spirit.

However, the other day I was reading the work of early church father Tertullian (160-220 ad), and I was amazed to find that this esteemed church father believed the "Paraclete" was also a prophecy that referred to an actual person, to come after Jesus. Monatanus, another early Christian, actually claimed to be the "paraclete." If you want some references, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montanism

http://www.archive.org/stream/tertullianagains00tertrich#page/26/mode/2up

^look on p. 27 of Tertullian's work to see the reference to the "paraclete."

In addition, I have been finding some compelling studies written by Western scholars arguing that the "paraclete" was intended to be mean a physical person, like Jesus. Here is a scan of relevant pages, underlines with notes, from Roman Catholic Priest Raymond Brown:

http://www.mostmerciful.com/paraclete.htm

As paraclete means comforter or legal advisor, and as he is also called the Spirit of Truth, anyone familiar with the Qu'ran or Islam sees certain connections. Islam is a very legalistic religion, especially considering that the Sunnah is considered an essential part of the faith. Also, nearly every surah of the Qu'ran opens by calling it the "clear book" and the clear Truth--this is one of the most common phrases I have found in the Qu'ran.

Lastly, in John's prophecies in "Revelations," about the things to come after Jesus, the first of these is the "white rider on a white horse." When I first read this, before I was in college and before I had even encountered Islam at all, I thought this was an obvious reference to Muhammad. I am not alone in this; it is quite common for Christians I speak with to interpret this as Muhammad. As John writes:

"So I looked, and here came a white horse! The one who rode it had a bow, and he was given a crown, and as a conqueror he rode out to conquer." Revelations 6:2

"Conquering" in Revelations is not portrayed as a bad thing at all. As it is written earlier "The one who conquers I will make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he will never depart from it. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God (the new Jerusalem that comes down out of heaven from my God), and my new name as well." Revelations 3:12. Of course, this verse almost certainly refers to the specific Church John is writing to, but as you can see Conquering is repeatedly (both here and earlier in the letter) described as the most commendable of acts.

I want to know what you think (that's why I wrote the thread)! What are the thoughts of the Christians on the forum? What are the thoughts of the Muslims?

Peace

 

[Woodrow]

Very interesting thought. Before I add my own opinion I want to see what others think.

 

[MustafaMc]

Brother Woodrow, I agree. I find this post interesting and would like to hear what our Christian friends have to say as well as what you have to say.

 

[Woodrow]

Brother Woodrow, I agree. I find this post interesting and would like to hear what our Christian friends have to say as well as what you have to say.

Brother Mustafa,

I had been waiting to see if any Christian member would reply.But I most likely will not be on line much before Thursday. so I will add a few of my thoughts now.

The word Paraclete is of Greek origin and in English means advocate or helper. The word has no exact equivalent in Hebrew, but the Greek Jews considered a Paraclete to be a human intercessor of advocate or comforter. The Early Christians seen it as referring to a human advocate who was yet to come.

I find it interesting to see the evolution to have it refer to the "Holy Spirit". Interesting because in my view that would invalidate the "Sacrifice" of Jesus(as) on the cross. If Jesus(as) had died for man's sins and opened up the door to heaven, what need would their be for God to make a return visit and act as an intercessor? If the Trinity were real, what would be the logic in having a double visit to Earth by God, in two different forms and one of them being a comforter. Would not being freed from the fires of hell have been enough comfort?

Now, if as the Jews and early Christians believed and if the Paraclete was to be a man yet to come. The only one I see matching the prophecy/revelation is Muhammad (PBUH).

 

[selsebil]

Assalaam Alaikum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh,

Bediuzzaman Said Nursi RA explains in Risale-i Nur that there are many verses in Torah and Gospels which point out the prophethood of Muhammed PBUH.Just a few of them:

First: In the Psalms, there is the following verse:
O God, send to us after the period between prophets one who will establish an exemplary model.306
Here, “One who will establish an exemplary model” refers to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).
A verse from the Gospels says:
The Messiah said: “I am leaving for my father and your father, so that He may send you the Paraclete,”307
that is, Ahmad Muhammad.
A second verse from the Gospels:
I ask from my Lord for the Paraclete that he may abide with you forever.308
Paraclete, meaning ‘the distinguisher of good from evil,’ is the name of our Prophet in those Books.
In several places in the Gospels, a prophet who will come after Jesus is referred to as “the Master of the World.” He is described as:
He will have with him a staff of iron with which he will fight, as will his people.318
This verse indicates that a prophet will come with a sword, charged with waging jihad. Qadib min hadid (literally, staff of iron) means sword. And so will be his community. In agreement with the Biblical verse mentioned above, and referring to it as well as some other verses, the following Qur’anic verse at the end of Sura al-Fath also states that his community, like him, will be commanded to wage jihad.
In the Fourth Chapter of the Book of Micah, are the following verses:
But in the last days it shall come to pass that the mountain of the House of God will be the most renowned one of all the mountains of the world, praised by all nations; people from all over the world will make pilgrimage there. “Come,” they will say to one another, “let us go up to the mountain of God and the House of God.”325
These verses obviously describe the most blessed mountain in the world, Mount ‘Arafat, and the worship and proclamations of “God is Most Great!” of those making the Hajj, who will flock there from all climes, and the Community of Muhammad, famous for the Divine Mercy it will receive.
Again, the Turkish translation of John’s Gospel, Chapter Fourteen verse twenty,327 says:
I shall not speak with you for much longer, for the ruler of the world is coming, and I am nothing compared with him.
Thus, the title Ruler of the World means Glory of the World. And the title of Glory of the World is one of the most famous of Muhammad the Arabian’s (Upon whom be blessings and peace) titles.
Again in John’s Gospel, Chapter Sixteen verse seven, it says:
But I am telling you the truth. My departure is but for your benefit. For, unless I depart, the Comforter will not come.328
Now see, who other than Muhammad the Arabian (Upon whom be blessings and peace) is the Ruler of the World and true consoler of men? Yes, the Glory of the World is he, and he is the one who will save transitory man from eternal extinction and thus comforts him.
Again, the eighth verse of Chapter Sixteen in John’s Gospel:
When he comes, he will give the world convincing evidence concerning its sin, its righteousness, and its judgement.329
Who other than Muhammad the Arabian (Upon whom be blessings and peace) has turned the world’s wrongdoing into righteousness, saved men from sin and associating partners with God, and transformed politics and world rule?
Also from the Gospel of John, the eleventh verse of Chapter Sixteen:
There is deliverance from judgement, for the Ruler of this World has already been judged.330
Here “the Ruler of the World” is certainly Ahmad Muhammad (Upon whom be blessings and peace), for he is known as the Master of Humanity.331
Also, in John’s Gospel, the thirteenth verse of Chapter Twelve:332
But when he, the Spirit of Truth, comes, he will guide you all to the truth, for he will not be presenting his own ideas, but will be passing onto you what he has heard. He will tell you about the future.333
This verse is explicit. Who apart from Muhammad the Arabian (Upon whom be blessings and peace) has called all men to the truth, whose every statement was based on Revelation, has spoken what he had heard from Gabriel, and informed man in detail about the resurrection of the dead and the Hereafter? Who other than he could do this?
Also, the Books of other prophets include names in Syriac and Hebrew that correspond to the various names of the Prophet (PBUH), such as Muhammad, Ahmad, Mukhtar. For example, in the scriptures of the Prophet Shu‘ayb, his name is Mushaffah,334 and means ‘Muhammad.’ In the Torah, he is mentioned as Munhamanna, which again means ‘Muhammad,’ and as Himyata,335 which means ‘the Prophet of al-Haram.’ In the Psalms, he is called al-Mukhtar.336 Again in the Torah, the name is al-Hatam al-Khatam.337 Both in the Torah and in the Psalms, it is Muqim al-Sunna,338 in the scriptures of Abraham and in the Torah, he is mentioned as Mazmaz,339 and again in the Torah, as Ahyad.

306. Yusuf Nabhani, Hujjat Allah ‘ala’l-‘Alamin 104, 115.

307. Halabi, al-Sirat al-Halabiya i, 352; Jisri, Risale-i Hamidiye (Turkish trans.) i, 250; Qastalani, al-Mawahib al-Ladunniya vi, 201.
308. ‘Ali al-Qari, Sharh al-Shifa’ i, 743; Yusuf Nabhani, Hujjat Allah ‘ala’l-‘Alamin 99; Jisri, Risale-i Hamidiye i, 255; Gospel of John, 14:16.
318. Yusuf Nabhani, Hujjat Allah ‘ala’l-‘Alamin 99, 114.

More information can be found at:

http://lightofquran.info/q5.htm

 

[Sol Invictus]

i wonder why we don't let the text interpret itself because frankly the majority of christians and jews did not believe that the paraclete was to be a human individual. but most importantly, we should let the text concerning the paraclete speak for itself rather than going on on a tangent when the matter is pretty clear when we analyze the text:

the paraclete is said to abide with christians forever. not only that but the world cannot see him nor hear him but he will live inside christians forever: "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever - the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you." John 14:16-17

notice that the disciples whom christ was talking to would experience the advent of the paraclete: "But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me. And you also will bear witness, because you have been with me from the beginning. John 15:27

furthermore, the comforter is to glorify christ seeing as his teaching will come from christ: "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me; Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged. I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew [it] unto you." John 16:7-14

considering all of the above, it is rather wrong to claim that christians supposed that the paraclete could be a human individual for there is no way that a human can abide in another person much less inside every christian. also the paraclete would be invisible, and he was to abide within the disciples of christ, montanus himself was only active after the original 12 disciples had died and so he could not fit the bill. that said, montanus did not claim that he was the paraclete but rather that he was a mouthpiece for the paraclete!

 

[SalamChristian]

First: In the Psalms, there is the following verse: O God, send to us after the period between prophets one who will establish an exemplary model.306 Here, “One who will establish an exemplary model” refers to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

Can you give me verse and chapter numbers for all of the references you make in the Torah? It's difficult to consider your argument without being able to look at verses.

I shall not speak with you for much longer, for the ruler of the world is coming, and I am nothing compared with him. Thus, the title Ruler of the World means Glory of the World. And the title of Glory of the World is one of the most famous of Muhammad the Arabian’s (Upon whom be blessings and peace) titles.

What word in Hebrew/Arabic would be used here to signify "glory?"

There is deliverance from judgement, for the Ruler of this World has already been judged.330 Here “the Ruler of the World” is certainly Ahmad Muhammad (Upon whom be blessings and peace), for he is known as the Master of Humanity.331

How do you interpret John 14:30? "Hereafter I will not talk with you much for the ruler of this world is coming and he has nothing in me?"

Keep in mind that almost all Christians interpret "ruler of this world" to refer to Satan in those verses, so be prepared for me to ask you some tough questions later.

Peace brother

 

[Woodrow]

One may want to look further into the Writings of Tertullian:

Tertullian, Latin in full Quintus Septimus Florens Tertullianus (born c. 155, /160, Carthage [now in Tunisia]—died after 220, Carthage), important early Christian theologian, polemicist, and moralist who, as the initiator of ecclesiastical Latin, was instrumental in shaping the vocabulary and thought of Western Christianity

It is interesting to note that this early theologian and a main developer of today's Christian doctrine eventually became known as a heretic, but his writings are still the basic foundation of Christian interpretation of the Bible.

Tertullian as a Montanist

Sometime before 210 Tertullian left the orthodox church to join a new prophetic sectarian movement known as Montanism (founded by the 2nd-century Phrygian prophet Montanus), which had spread from Asia Minor to Africa. His own dissatisfaction with the laxity of contemporary Christians was congenial with the Montanist message of the imminent end of the world combined with a stringent and demanding moralism. Montanism stood in judgment on any compromise with the ways of the world, and Tertullian gave himself fully to the defense of the new movement as its most articulate spokesman. Even the Montanists, however, were not rigorous enough for Tertullian. He eventually broke with them to found his own sect, a group that existed until the 5th century in Africa. According to tradition, he lived to be an old man. His last writings date from approximately 220, but the date of his death is unknown.

Source for the above quotes: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/588511/Tertullian/7176/Tertullian-as-a-Montanist

Montanism was accepted as legitimate Christian teaching by even Augastine. It was later Church doctrine writers that decided it was heretical. Today it seems there is a swing back to seeing it as having been legitimate Christianity.

Montanism originated in Asia Minor, the theatre of many movements of the church in this period; yet not in Ephesus or any large city, but in some insignificant villages of the province of Phrygia, once the home of a sensuously mystic and dreamy nature-religion, where Paul and his pupils had planted congregations at Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis.759 The movement was started about the middle of the second century during the reign of Antoninus Pius or Marcus Aurelius, by a certain Montanus.760 He was, according to hostile accounts, before his conversion, a mutilated priest of Cybele, with no special talents nor culture, but burning with fanatical zeal. He fell into somnambulistic ecstasies, and considered himself the inspired organ of the promised Paraclete or Advocate, the Helper and Comforter in these last times of distress. His adversaries wrongly inferred from the use of the first person for the Holy Spirit in his oracles, that he made himself directly the Paraclete, or, according to Epiphanius, even God the Father. Connected with him were two prophetesses, Priscilla and Maximilla, who left their husbands. During the bloody persecutions under the Antonines, which raged in Asia Minor, and caused the death of Polycarp (155), all three went forth as prophets and reformers of the Christian life, and proclaimed the near approach of the age of the Holy Spirit and of the millennial reign in Pepuza, a small village of Phrygia, upon which the new Jerusalem was to come down. Scenes took place similar to those under the preaching of the first Quakers, and the glossolalia and prophesying in the Irvingite congregations. The frantic movement soon far exceeded the intention of its authors, spread to Rome and North Africa, and threw the whole church into commotion. It gave rise to the first Synods which are mentioned after the apostolic age.

SOURCE

I do agree that it is probable that the allegations he called himself the paraclete were erroneous as I made bold. However if you note in what I made red the belief of the time seems to be the "Holy spirit" was yet to come trinitarian belief seems to have still been in it's infancy and not fully accepted. I find any reference that the "holy Spirit" is the Paraclete, to be a bit vague and not conclusive.

 

[SalamChristian]

the paraclete is said to abide with christians forever.

very, very good point.

montanus did not claim that he was the paraclete but rather that he was a mouthpiece for the paraclete!

Are you sure he wasn't claiming to speak not for himself, but whatsoever he heard?

because it neither sees him nor knows him.

I would really like to hear the opinion of our Muslims brothers on this one. How can this be Muhammad?

for he lives with you and will be in you

Hmm. I have a thought about this one, but now is not the time. Perhaps I will share it later.

Peace

 

[Sol Invictus]

One may want to look further into the Writings of Tertullian:
It is interesting to note that this early theologian and a main developer of today's Christian doctrine eventually became known as a heretic, but his writings are still the basic foundation of Christian interpretation of the Bible.

i would then have to ask where at all tertullian was pronounced to be a heretic.

Source for the above quotes: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/588511/Tertullian/7176/Tertullian-as-a-Montanist

Montanism was accepted as legitimate Christian teaching by even Augastine. It was later Church doctrine writers that decided it was heretical. Today it seems there is a swing back to seeing it as having been legitimate Christianity.

initially montanism was simply analogous to the present-day charismatic movement and montanus himself did not leave behind any writings. as i remember it, it was mostly the individuals who came after him who really took the movement in another direction.

SOURCE
I do agree that it is probable that the allegations he called himself the paraclete were erroneous as I made bold. However if you note in what I made red the belief of the time seems to be the "Holy spirit" was yet to come trinitarian belief seems to have still been in it's infancy and not fully accepted. I find any reference that the "holy Spirit" is the Paraclete, to be a bit vague and not conclusive.

i would have to ask you how the section you have in red could at all be used as an argument against the trinitarian understanding. even if the age of the holy spirit is to be seen as an age where the holy spirit is first delved out to believers this could still not be seen as an argument against christianity. perhaps merely as an objection to the date of pentecost.

that said if the following: "All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Comforter, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you." --- JOHN 14:25, 26 can at all be considered as vague then certainly the belief that the paraclete of the bible could at all refer to muhammad is baseless.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Are you sure he wasn't claiming to speak not for himself, but whatsoever he heard?

no, at most montanus claimed to have a higher degree of and even exclusive knowledge which stemmed from the holy spirit but he did not consider himself to be the holy spirit. if this were the present, he would be a teacher in the charismatic movement.

 

[SalamChristian]

the belief of the time seems to be the "Holy spirit" was yet to come trinitarian belief seems to have still been in it's infancy and not fully accepted

Tertullian, the same guy we are quoting, also invented the term Trinity. Or, at least he was the first person to write it down that we know of. That being said, the trinity Tertullian believed in certainly is not the same trinity many Christians believe in today.

 

[SalamChristian]

no, at most montanus claimed to have a higher degree of and even exclusive knowledge which stemmed from the holy spirit but he did not consider himself to be the holy spirit.

Can you drop some quotes/links plz? I dropped a to sources which say Montanus claimed to be the "paraclete" and the Holy Ghost above. It's kind of hard for me to cite you in future conversations.

 

[SalamChristian]

if this were the present, he would be a teacher in the charismatic movement.

Hmm. In Acts the early church is made to look a lot like the charismatic movement. Paul frequently talks about early churches speaking in tongues too much. I'm not sure if I buy this. If he was simply a charismatic, why would he have been rejected? As I read Acts and Paul's letters, most all of the early churches were charismatics.

 

[Fivesolas]

What Sol Invictus answered with is a sound reply. I am not sure how much more can be added to it. I will say this though. Without researching what Tertullian thought, or Montanus, I hardly see how it is relevant. Neither Tertullian and certainly not Montanus carry any apostolic authority nor are their writings Scripture. Therefore, while there may be some points of historical interest, to know what is meant by the Paraclete in Scripture, we must consult the Scripture. I think Sol did a good and sufficient job in showing that no human being could ever be the paraclete spoken of by the Lord Jesus.

This may help you for your research: The word Paracletos is found five times in the Greek of the KJV of the Bible. (my research tools at the moment don't include the Critical Text). It is translated in the KJV 4 times as Comforter and 1 time as advocate. Here are the references: John 14:16, 14:26, 15:26, 16:7, 1 John 2:1.

The legal assistant idea is not as a lawgiver, but rather as a legal advocate. Someone who intercedes.

John 14:26 makes it plain that the Helper/Paracletos is the Holy Spirit. The article modifying the word is "ho" G3588 in the Strongs, and is the definite article here. Basically, it undoutbably refers to THE Holy Spirit. Therefore, the case would have to be made that Mohammed is THE Holy Spirit. Biblically speaking this is absurd.

 

[Fivesolas]

Hmm. In Acts the early church is made to look a lot like the charismatic movement. Paul frequently talks about early churches speaking in tongues too much. I'm not sure if I buy this. If he was simply a charismatic, why would he have been rejected? As I read Acts and Paul's letters, most all of the early churches were charismatics.

Salam,

It would be a mistake to equate the operation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit seen in the books of Acts and spoken of in Paul's letters to the Corinthians with the modern Charismatic movement.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Can you drop some quotes/links plz? I dropped a to sources which say Montanus claimed to be the "paraclete" and the Holy Ghost above. It's kind of hard for me to cite you in future conversations.

this is from the catholic encyclopedia when speaking of montanists:

The prophets did not speak as messengers of God: "Thus saith the Lord," but described themselves as possessed by God and spoke in His Person. "I am the Father, the Word, and the Paraclete," said Montanus (Didymus, "De Trin.", III, xli); and again: "I am the Lord God omnipotent, who have descended into to man", and "neither an angel, nor an ambassador, but I, the Lord, the Father, am come" (Epiphanius, "Hær.", xlviii, 11). And Maximilla said: "Hear not me, but hear Christ" (ibid.); and: "I am driven off from among the sheep like a wolf [that is, a false prophet--cf. Matthew 7:15]; I am not a wolf, but I am speech, and spirit, and power." This possession by a spirit, which spoke while the prophet was incapable of resisting, is described by the spirit of Montanus: "Behold the man is like a lyre, and I dart like the plectrum. The man sleeps, and I am awake" (Epiphanius, "Hær.", xlviii, 4).

while the above does indeed sound heretical, it should be noted that neither montanists nor montanus claimed to be the holy spirit, or god, but rather being possessed by these. furthermore, one will note that the holy spirit is identified as the Lord God which bears witness to a trinitarian understanding.

here is an excellent article on the matter with other sources: http://www.tertullian.org/montanism.htm#3

 

[Fivesolas]

Tertullian, the same guy we are quoting, also invented the term Trinity. Or, at least he was the first person to write it down that we know of. That being said, the trinity Tertullian believed in certainly is not the same trinity many Christians believe in today.

Salam,

If you study the arguments and context in which Tertullian wrote, it is plain that he was contending against Modalism. He was also senstive to Polytheism and trying to assure the Christians that they indeed were monotheists. To say that the doctrine that Tertullian advocated with regard to the Trinity is different from what is understood by orthodoxy today is historically untenable and conjectural. You might be able to show the view that holds a hierarchial view in Tertullian's understanding of the Trinity, but his belief was clearly that there is one God eternally existing in three Persons. Now, it may be said of Tertullian that he did not hold to the eternal Sonship of Jesus, making a difference between Jesus being in the beginning the Word/Logos and "becoming" the Son at His incarnation. But this is hardly a different trinity.

 

[SalamChristian]

Now, it may be said of Tertullian that he did not hold to the eternal Sonship of Jesus, making a difference between Jesus being in the beginning the Word/Logos and "becoming" the Son at His incarnation. But this is hardly a different trinity.

He is agreed upon to be a subordination. Most sources point out that the logical endpoint of his trinity was the Aryan-Athanasian controversy which ended with the trinity which he advocated being deemed heretical.

 

[SalamChristian]

*Subordinationist*--that is what I meant to say. Tertullian is agreed upon to be a subordinationist. No doubt.