From Christianity to Islam

What follows are simply my opinions on various issues pertinent to my accepting Islam. It is my opinion that I did not "reject" Jesus by accepting Muhammad. Rather, I took the "next step" and even follow Jesus more closely because of my encounter with Muhammad and the Qur'an. In general, I'm not interested in arguing about this with evangelical types. So please don't e-mail on this if you are one.

1. Avenue of Revelation. Jesus and Muhammad are not comparable. It is more proper to compare Jesus with the Qur'an. God's revelation occurred in and through and by means of Jesus' own personality, but in the form of a book for the Islamic revelation. We could say that Jesus' life "displays" the revelation while the Qur'an "spells it out". The political machinations behind the choice of the four canonical Gospels (out of a field of about 24 accounts that we know of today) are well known. All legitimate Muslim and non-Muslim scholars agree that the Qur'an is the collection of utterances made by Muhammad at certain times which he claimed to be from God and dictated by the Archangel Gabriel.

2. Historicity. In the words of Albert Nolan "The four small books that we call the gospels are not biographies and were never intended to be." This is simply a fact. Those who would read the Gospels as if they are biography are simply engaged in a hermeneutical error. The Gospels are not objective accounts of Jesus' activities, rather, they are already an interpretation of those activities. The striking differences between the Gospel of John and those of Matthew, Mark and Luke are especially notable for the hermeneutic advances made. (Remember, Mark ends only with an empty tomb. The appearance stories are all later developments.) When we add in the rest of the New Testament writings we move even further away from the actual incident of revelation (Jesus' life) and further into interpretations of the original incidents. It is generally agreed upon by both Muslim and non-Muslim scholars that this issue is not present in the Islamic tradition. The hadith literature is a vast body of un-interpreted reports of Muhammad's sayings and actions. The Qur'an is as it was first written and recited. We do not "have" the original Jesus, but we do have the original Qur'an and hadith.

3. Jesus and Paul. When talking about the nature of God's revelation through Jesus I do not accept the use of Acts and the various letters of the New Testament as on par with the Gospels. They are already two hermeneutic steps away from actual events. Paul, in particular, is concerned with making Jesus the Jew palatable to Gentiles (think of his fights with Peter over circumcision and kosher food). He develops a uniquely non-Jewish theology (influenced by Greek-Roman mystery religions) with which I firmly disagree in parts. Many have written, and I agree, that it was Paul who invented a new religion called Christianity, not Jesus.

4. Divinity. Jesus does not claim divine status and all indications for such are the result of early followers' hermeneutics. This is the general view of all responsible scholars. Nowhere does Jesus tell people to pray to him, nowhere does he say he does things of his own power. Jesus refers all to "abba". The earliest Resurrection testimonies were "he was raised" i.e., by "abba", not his own power. At one point he says "You call me good? No one is good but God alone." Such a claim of divinity would be a most heinous blasphemy to Jesus the Jew. Rather, he uses the more ambiguous description of "Son of Man". The oft-quoted phrase "I am the Way the Truth and the Life" can be interpreted quite differently than the usual-- especially when read within the context of the entire speech Jesus is giving. Also, it is only in the Gospel of John-- the Gospel with the most developed interpretative framework. To say that God's revelation is communicated in, through, and by means of Jesus' own life and personality is not the same as making him the equal of God. This divinization is considered a grave error by two of the three Abrahamic traditions.

5. Trinity. Quite simply, I think this was a bad dogmatic move. Too complicated for most people. Demands a tortured process of thought and interpretation to legitimize. A gross error according to two of the three Abrahamic traditions. "Hear oh Israel, the Lord your God, the Lord is One..." "Say: He is God, the One..."

6. Original Sin. Islam doesn't have it. We are born good and in submission to the will of God. Creation is seen as good, not fallen, nor under the control of Satan. Adam is forgiven his transgression. Eve, and thus women, are not blamed for the "fall of man".

7. Balanced and Holistic. Islam addresses and is concerned with all four aspects of human experience: physical, social, subjective and spiritual. Christian thought has traditionally been skewed away from the physical and social and towards the subjective and the spiritual. "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." Islam says: "All is God's!" Islam addresses all human expression, including the political and the economic. Religion belongs everywhere and in all parts of human life.

8. Ritual. Muslims pray five times a day. Enough said.

9. Tolerance and Freedom. Islam accepts that there are sincere believers among the Jews and Christians as well as other sincere monotheists. Those who do not believe exactly as we do are not necessarily going to hell. "There is no compulsion in religion" says the Qur'an, laying the foundation for individual freedom of conscience and plurality. We are to stand for justice even if it goes against ourselves or our own family.

10. Science. There is no conflict between the Qur'an and science. The Qur'an encourages learning and study of all sorts. In Islam science (or simply, the pursuit of knowledge) and religious dogma are two sides of the same spiritual coin.