In dialogue with Islamic views of Jesus
A response to the annual lecture of Mona Siddiqui by Marcel Poorthuis, Tilburg School of Theology
The rich book by Mona Siddiqui on Christians, Muslims and Jesus, (Yale University press 2014) offers
several fundamental themes. My contribution will be to reflect upon them from a perspective of a
Christian theologian, who studied Qur’an and post-Qur’anic literature. This may allow me to
understand better the Islamic hesitance toward central Christian convictions, such as the crucifixion
of Jesus, the conviction that in Jesus God’s Word has been revealed, and the Trinity. Aim of this
reflection is not only to understand Islam better, but also to understand Christianity better.
Jesus as a prophet
The view of Jesus as a prophet and a messenger is not contrary to Christian belief. Although these
views do not reveal all of what can be said about Jesus, they offer dynamics that have been forgotten
in Christianity. Jewish tradition and Jewish Christian currents have also emphasized Jesus as a
prophet and as servant of God (pais tou theou can mean both servant of God and son of God!). One
may think of the early Church order Didache (beginning 2d century) or of the Jewish Christian
Pseudoclementine writings). The most important reminder for Christians nowadays is that a prophet
emphasizes the necessity to change one’s life, to take up one’s responsibility and to better one’s
deeds. Sometimes, Christian theology has undervalued this responsibility and has undervalued the
importance of deeds at the expense of faith alone. It seems that the prophetic dynamics of Jesus do
justice to the appeal to each individual to realize his unique responsibility. Christian faith cannot
create an alibi for this responsibility.
The idea of an unbroken chain between the earlier prophets and Jesus is also important for
Christianity and has always been cherished in Eastern Christianity. The feasts of Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob on the liturgical calendar of Jerusalem testifies to that. The Letter to the Hebrews underlines
this, while at the same time emphasizing Jesus’ unique position:
God, who, at sundry times and in divers manners, spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets,
last of all, 2 In these days hath spoken to us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things.
Whereas prophets spoke the Word of God, Jesus embodied the Word of God, without however,
taking away anything of the significance of the prophetic message.
Muhammed a prophet
The slanderous approach to Muhammed in Medieval Christianity and even nowadays in protestant
fundamentalist circles does not do justice to the affinities of Muhammed with the Biblical prophets,
Noach, Moses, Abraham. His hesitance to receive the propohetic message: Iqra bismilla: recite in the
Name of God, to which Muhammed answers: I cannot read! Is comparable to Moses’ stammering,
Jeremiah’s refusal and Jona’s flight. Still the question pf Muhammad as a prophet is not easy for a
Christian. Although some theologians have advocated this idea in the Netherlands and even read
from the Qur’an in the Church, I personally would hesitate to do that. Not out of a lack of respect,
but precisely because I feel that a certain distance maintains the respect. Recognizing someone as a
prophet can only be meaningful if one is prepared to direct his life accordingly. In that respect
Christians do not need Muhammed. That Muhammed can convey a prophetic message to Muslims,
seems to me beyond doubt, however.
Crucifixion
The crucifixion of Jesus is a central tenet of Christian faith. It can be seen as the ultimate love of God
towards humanity and sign of salvation. That does not detract from the fact that the crucifixion is at
the same time a horrible manifestation of what men can do to one another. The bringing to light of
this violence and evil, not only of that historical event, but also of the evil of all of us, especially of
myself, is part of the revelation of God: discovering one’s evil makes forgiveness and renewal of
one’s own life possible. I understand why Mona’s book is hesitant to affirm God’s revelation in the
cross. The matter is, however, complicated by the fact that the Qur.an is supposed to deny the
crucifixion of Jesus. :
"And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew
him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it
are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not
for certain". S. 4:157 Pickthall
This passage is harsh against the Jews: , who would boast having killed the Messiah. I think that the
Qur’an wants to state that man as such is not capable to do real harm to Gods anointed. This is why
the Qur’an continues with saying, that God raised Jesus up to Him: this word RAFA’A is the same as
that used in connection to Enoch (Idris). God has taken up Jesus. This is quite similar to the Christian
conviction that death could not hold Jesus, but that God raised Him up.
A few centuries later, the immensely learned Islamic author al-Tabari tries to argue that
someone else had taken the place of Jesus. It is obvious that this idea takes away the whole idea of
Jesus being willing to surrender his life for all. The deeply ethical and religious idea of being prepared
to give your life for others as the ultimate sacrifice to God, makes way for the totally unethical idea
to let someone else die instead of you. I think that the cross as sign of Christianity had in the
meantime become offensive to Islam. Churches were no longer allowed to have crosses on top of the
church, a prohibition still valid in some Islamic countries. This may explain the consistent attempt in
Islam to discredit the historical event of the crucifixion, which I think, is not what the Qur’an itself
states. We can even find in the Qur’an the idea of Jesus being taken up (< rafa’a) to God himself,
similar to what happened to Enoch (Idris). This is not far away from the Christian idea of the
ascension of Christ.
In a way, Islamic theology has to face a similar mystery as Christianity. Christianity
understands how God Himself enters history in Jesus. The mystery of how the eternal and inscrutable
God can reveal himself in Jesus who is at the same time truly human refers to the general question of
the relationship between eternity and history. Believing in an eternal God who cares for history and
reveals Himself without destroying time and history by rendering them totally worthless, is
something Judaism, Christianity, and Islam , have to think through. Neo-Platonism has been of some
help although there the unique significance of history, emphasized in Bible and Qur’an alike, seems
to get lost.
The Christological debates about Jesus truly human and truly divine, show how difficult it is
to express this central mystery of eternity entering history. Christ is both the first born of creation
and the incarnation of God’s eternal Word. I think Islam faces a similar challenge, but not about
Muhammad but about the Qur’an. Is the Word of God created or uncreated? Is the Qur’an an
expression of the Divine Word in human terms, or is the divinity intrinsically connected to the words,
which are at the same time historical and understandable by man. These debates are far from
obsolete, but have strong implications for human existence. The religious integrity of the body,
history as the stage of divine revelation, the importance of religious ethics, are all consequences of a
faith that takes seriously the entering of the divine into history. The development of a kind of “two
natures” theology of the Qur’an, both human and divine, may even enable the development of
historical exegesis of the Qur’an. The fact that the Qur’an uses human and historical language does
not diminish its possible revelatory character. This remains, however, problematic in Islam.
I have to admit that coming to the chapter about Mary in Mona’s book, I felt much more at
ease. The beauty and grace of the Sura on Mary in the Qur’an is for Christians a wonderful
experience. Christians know about the flight to Egypt and remember the beautiful story of the tree
bowing down to Mary to offer her fruit. This story is known to us Christians from apocryphal infancy
gospels preceding the Qur’an, as the palm tree who fed Mary on her flight to Egypt. A beautiful
Christmas Carol connects the motif to Joseph’s jealousy of Mary, completely ignoring the flight of
Egypt. The palm tree has become a cherry tree. This is the fruitful ways of storytelling! The Qur’an
certainly belongs to the same orbit of storytelling.
The Qur’an relates a similar story about Mary having to flee and being fed by a palm tree.
The flight of Mary to the East may also remind of the woman in the Apocalypse who is threatened by
a dragon and is protected by God’s throne.
The Qur’an tells about those who take God as three: God, Jesus and Mary. When I taught lessons
together with an Islamic teacher, Abdelilah Ljamai, he asked me: is it possible that there were
Christians who considered Mary divine? I the said: no, but in the meantime I think that there were
indeed Christians who considered Mary as a divine person. One of the Trinity. I even think that some
Catholics nowadays exaggerate their devotion to Mary, forgetting about her revolutionary Magnificat
where the rich are despised and the poor are exalted. Instead they turn Mary sometimes into a
queen of heaven. I see in Mona’s book a consistent attempt to steer away from idolatrous attitude.
Christians and Muslims can recognize each other with respect in that they both consider idolatry as
the gravest deterioration of faith. The mystery of the Trinity has nothing to do with the idea of three
gods!
I consider idolatry not a purely antithetical attitude: idolatry is how the others think, whereas my
religion is completely pure. Idolatry is a self-critical concept and exists everywhere where human
responsibility is undermined. Idolatry is when man venerates his own projections, his own ambitions
and desires, as if they are divine. As such, everything can be turned into an idol. It also means that
religious statues a such are not intrinsically idolatrous. The holy text on the other hand can be turned
into an idol: fundamentalism is an idolatrous attitude towards the holy text.
Of course the Christian idea of the divinity of Christ is the opposite of idolatry: Christ is not a God
next to God, but in Christ we meet God himself.
In a more general way, Islam will be an important partner of Christianity in Western society. The
maintenance of religious rituals, education of children in a religious framework, all these things are
on a tremendous pressure in modern secularized society. Christians can learn from Islam, that rituals
are not something to be ashamed of. It is no coincidence that the centre of silence here on the
campus is mainly used by Muslim students for their prayer. Christian students here present are
generally from abroad, but not any more from this country, apparently.