When the Homily is about Immunology

Religious Spam

Lately I have been receiving emails from a muslim gentleman who is bent on trying to show (I think) that the New Testament does not support the classic Christian understanding of the Divinity of Christ nor the Trinity. He generally does so in true protestant fashion by tossing together masses of prooftexts and a brief examination of the dreaded "original greek" (i.e. the great conversation ender...the trump card as it were.) He is apparently email a host of Christians he just happened to find online in order to foster a discussion group of somesort.

Anyway, I offer here my reply - some of which may not quite make sense because I will not reproduce his original email. By the way...why don't the mormons give spam a try? I mean, they come directly to my front door...why not my email box? I can imagine some frightened young mormon missionary trying to get out of going door to door by suggesting this...hehehe...

Anyway...my response to the Muslim with a Protestant approach:

Hello Mohammed et al.

A couple of things I might mention. First that I do not believe I would fit into the context - the underlying presumption concerning where authority comes from in the Christian (or Islamic) faith. Everything you are doing here assumes that the sole authority on matters of faith and doctrine proceeds soley from Scripture (Sola Scriptura), which is of course a well know doctrinal tenet of Protestantism and I suspect also for most muslims in regard to the Quaran.

It would be worth noting that presently there are around 35,000+ Protestant sects - all claiming to be "Bible-Based" - but believing different things about the Christian faith. Now of course in most cases the differences are minor...but not minor enough to prevent further schism and seperation from one another. The same is true in the Muslim faith where we see Sunnis, Shi'ites, and Sufis (and very likely further divisions therein). But under the banner of "Christian" there are a number of fairly large groups who espouse a Christology that would very likely fit better with the Muslim understanding of who Jesus is than the more traditional (and in my humble opinion the more TRUE) undertsanding of Christ being wholly God and wholly man and one of the Holy Trinity.

As for myself, I have played the prooftext game for ages with such groups and it has never produced much fruit. They are ultimately convinced by their interpretation and I am convinced of mine...comparable to the division we see in Islam over the issue of terrorism, clearly some say that Allah permits (perhaps even encourages) it while others say it is forbidden. So you can prooftext, you can exegete, and you can delve into the declension of Greek words, but you cannot easily escape your presuppositions.

The hermenuetic problem is context...and by that I do not mean an attempt at a
scholarly understanding of who was writing to who and at what time etc...rather
I mean something bigger: a sort of living context.

And so when you say you hope to:

2) Study the Bible from my own perspective consider to Islamic background to
find if all Christian's understanding of Bible is correct

I would ask: Well, WHICH Christian's understanding will you be trying to determine the correctness of? It is the very process of coming to any conclusion about interpretive correctness that I believe is foundationally erroneous. While this is not to say that it is impossible, rather it is more impossible to prove to your intellectual opponent that your interpretation is correct.

And furthermore when you say you will:

3) Study the Bible text and compare it with principles (such as Ten
Commandments), various verses and meanings to find if there is any wrong text in
it. (Changing in text or wrong translations ...)

4) Show the Muslims that the belief of Christians could be only from their
understanding of Bible and not the Bible itself

I would offer: So, in the end you will approach the New Testament texts with the foundation of Islam, while those Christians will approach with their own presuppositions. You may be able to gain some debate points from one another, but my experience (and indeed supported by the very fact that there are thousands of Bible believing denominations) has been that this approach will be unlikely to convince either of the firmly entrenched to give up their ground.

I think a more interesting starting point would be to look for that “living context” into which the New Testament fits quite organically. It is a curiouys thing to me that a Muslim might remotely consider the 27 books of the New Testament to be authoritative – even if wrongly interpretted by Christians. For we must remember than an affirmation of these 27 books as being authoritive neccesitates that we also ascribe authority to the late 4th century Church that finally said that these – and ONLY these- 27 books were to comprise the New Testament.

The New Testament did not evolve in a vaccuum, and neither is it the product of one man’s revelation (ala the original Muhammed and the Quaran). Rather it is a community book, born of a community, witnesses by a community, and indeed is itself a record of the revelation given to that community. And equally important, it was sanctioned by a community. It is NOT the “Word of God”….for Jesus is the Word of God.

For all of this, I noticed that you really did not address my point in response to your original email, which was to say that your study of the translated word “begotten” is unnescesary. The Creed of Nicea clearly defines what the term means and furthermore what the Christian faith teaches about Jesus – as handed down by Christ himself and his Holy Apostles (e.g. St. Paul who exhorts us to “hold fast to the traditions (paradosis) that I have handed down to you, whether by word or epistle”) The Creed says:

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, Begotten of the Father before all ages, Light of Light, True God of True God, Begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father, by whom all things were made

The New Testament, the Creed, the Councils, the Liturgies, the prayers, the lives of the Saints…that is to say: The Church herself is the LIVING context. All of these and more a part of what we Orthodox call Holy Tradition. Pull one portion out (e.g. the New Testament) and you will inevitably end up with error and divisions…a brief glance at the “Churches” section of your local phone book will affirm this.

So, it seems you will be attempting to study the New Testment outside of it natural environment and thus I cannot hold much faith in the conclusions that will arise. Like observing an animal in a zoo, we cannot expect to understand how the creature lives its normal and natural life by watching it play with an Xbox controller given to it by a joking zookeeper.

So…it seems to me your intent is to engage Protestants and not so much me, an Orthodox Christian. In that quest, I wish you Godspeed.

Peace and love
James