Posted by Leesa Hejazi on November 19, 1997 at 15:55:00:
In Reply to: What Does the Bible Say about God. posted by Mohamed Ghounem on November 19, 1997 at 10:29:59:
: {Exo. 31:17} "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth and on the seventh day he Rested, and was Refreshed."
: {Koran 50:38} "We created the heavens and the earth and all between them in six days, nor did any sense of weariness touch us."
: The question to Christians is simple, do you choose as a Protector, "a God that needs to Rest", or a "God that does Not need Rest".
: {Psalm 13:1} "How long will You Forget me, O Lord"
: {Koran 20:52} "My Lord Never Errs, Nor Forgets"
: Humans are imperfect, God throughout the Bible is given human traits, unlike a Supreme Being. Do the Christians choose a God that Forgets over a God that does Not make errors.
: {Heb. 5:5} "God said to Jesus,'You are my son today I have begotten you" *Also* {Psalm 2:7} "God said to David, 'You are my son today I have begotten you" [K.J.V.]
: {Koran 112:1} "Say: He is Allah, The One; Allah, the Eternal Absolute; He does Not Beget, Nor is He Begotten, and there is None Like unto Him."
: Do you Christians believe in a God that "Sires" children {i.e. David and Jesus}, Who is God's Christian "Wife", or does the Biblical God "Beget" these children "without being married"
: To my Christian Brothers and Sisters, Judge both Books Critically, Look at the Defense for Both and then choose the Right Path.
: For any concerns about the Koran Click Here Give your Soul a "Fair Trial"
: Peace and Blessings,
: Your Bother in Islam: Mohamed.
Dear Mohamed,
While I understand and congradulate your objective, I am left to wonder why you persist with enmity. Are you not familiar with the adage, "More bees are caught with honey than they are with vinegar?" If I were to begin a conversation with you by opening with antagonistic remark, would you not immediately find yourself on the defense? Consider this: Two people have a difference between them; one approaches the other saying that their differences have moved him to attack. The other is then put in a position to defend himself; his energy and resources are then expended in an attempt to a)ward off the attack and b) defend his position. However, had one come to the other and said, "We have differences that I want to resolve, may we discuss the situation?", the other's resources would be available for more productive use, thereby increasing the possibility of reaching an understanding. That having been said, I'd like to rejoin your declarations point by point so you will understand what I mean by my bees and honey analogy.
If we understand the Quran to be the final Word in a succession of messages sent from God, we can therefore safely assume that any clarification of earlier messages God deemed necessary would be contained in the final message, ie; the Quran. Proceeding with this premise, let us examine both the verses you've cited and the comments you've made regarding those verses. Regarding the passage in Exodus and the comparable Quranic verse in Sura 50. In Exodus, the reference to God "resting" is a literary device used to illustrate that on the seventh day God ceased from his labours. This is not meant to imply that God has ceased from ALL his labours, but specifically from His work in creating the world. The passage, however, has greater import. God's "rest" is meant to exemplify His instruction for the keeping of the Sabbath, ie; Remember the Sabbath and keep it Holy. Refer to Exodus 20: 11, " . . . for in six day the Lord made the heaven and eath, and rested the seventh day; therefore, the Lord blessed the savvath day and hallowed it." We can therefore understand by way of explanation that God "rested" not because He was fatigued but because He sought to provide an example of conduct which He wanted man to follow. Let us now assume that man, in his imperfect understanding of God's wisdom, failed to understand that God's resting on the seventh day was meant for him as didactic instruction. Let us assume that man, reading the passage you cited, incorrectly assumed that God rested on the seventh day because he was weary. Given that mistaken assumption and not understanding the full import of the meaning implied in both passages of Exodus, man could wrong reach the conclusion that God was falliable, like man, because He required rest -- specifically "rest" as man understands it. Now, turn your attention to the Quran. Given our presuppositions and given our understanding that the Quran is the final word of clarification in a succession of revelations, that Sura 50 was given not to contradict Exodus 31:17, but to clarify it -- lest man, in his imperfect understanding, misconstrue what God meant? Could it not be, in plain language, that God was saying, "I created the world in six days. I didn't "rest" on the seventh because I was tired; I rested because I want you (mankind) to set one full day aside exclusively for My worship. I'm telling you this now because it is likely you didn't understand my meaning in earlier revelations." Next, Psalm 13:1: The Psalmist here is David. Psalms means "praises." Each of the psalms exhibits the formal character of Hebrew poetry, whereby succeeding phrases either repeat or in some way elaborate the previous line. The pslam in question has a penitiential quality, and must be understood as such. Here, David is not saying that God has forgotten him; he is imploring God to provide him with instruction. It is important to note that what man perceives of God's action and what God ordains are two very different things. In short, the opening of this psalm is indicative of man's doubtful nature to trust that God is always with us, even when it *appears to us* that He is not. In the ensuing passages of the same psalm, David acknowledges that his doubts are unfounded, " . . . I have trusted in the steadfast love . . . I will sing to the Lord, because he has dealt bountifully with me." In this psalm, it is not God who is purported to have human attributes; rather, it is David's human attribute of doubt, doubt in God's will, that is evidenced. David is imperfect and his psalm is an expression of his imperfect feelings, in effect he is saying, "I feel you have forgotten me God." Again, turn your attention to the Quran and Sura 20:52. Can we understand this verse to provide clarification? Of course. Lest there is any doubt that God does not forget, He makes it clear that He "never errs, never forgets." This verse is meant as a comfort, as it is a comfort for the lamenting doubts that man
continually has because of his imperfect understanding of the nature of God. If you refer to Isaiah 49:14-18, you will see that God answers David in the same language used in Sura 20:52, "But Zion said, 'The Lord has forsaken me, my Lord has forgotten me.' Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should have no compasson on the son of her womb? Even these may forget, yet it will not forget you." Clearly, the Quran is comfirming the most important information that God wants man to understand. Next, Hebrew 5:5: It is important to note the critical distinction between "being begotten" and "begetting." God is not begotten, but it is within His power to beget anything of His chosing. Were this not the case, the immaculate conception of Mary would not have been possible. The problem, obviously, in reconciling the notion of "begetting" lies within the word itself -- specifically its meaning and import. Beget has two meanings, each very distinct from the other. The first is to procreate as the father; the second is to produce especially for an effect. A tremendous misunderstanding of God's action springs from the misappropriation of the correct meaning implied through the use of beget in the Bible. Consider this: think of the two meanings of beget and apply them both in the passages you cited. Take first Pslams 2:7. Using the first meaning of beget, the reader could mistakenly understand the meaning of this passage to mean that God physically sired a son (here it would be David). The same holds true for the passage in Hebrews, though the reference would have been to Jesus. But, if we read the aforementioned passages using the latter meaning of the word beget, a completely different light is shed on them. Instead, we understand that God produced (not physically but metaphorically) David and Jesus espeically for an effect. In other words, their existence was ordained by God for a specific purpose. Again, turn your attention to Sura 112:1. Is it not possible, again, that Quran is dispelling any possible misunderstandings about the word "beget" with this passage? Is is not reasonable to conclude that God is saying, in effect, "It seems that there is quite a bit of misunderstanding about the word and concept of "beget." I'm telling you now that when you read "beget" in previous revelations, ie; the Bible, I don't want you to take up the wrong notion. I am God, I do not sire children as man sires children. I, do, however, beget in the sense that I produce men (ie; David, Jesus, Mohammed) for a specific effect, which is namely to bring you further understanding of Me."
You are correct that both the Bible and the Quran should be judged critically -- but not because one revelation should be discredited to the other. Rather, it is important read critically to ascertain what consistencies exist between them. God is not the author of confusion; His word is consistent. It is our understanding of His word that falls short of the mark. By illuminating the confirmation that the Quran brings the to the Bible (honey) rather than discounting out of hand its merit (vinegar), it will facilitate mutual understanding.