There are several approaches to the interpretation of the Quran. One of the most widespread methods is exegesis or tafsir which focuses on the textual evidence and formal characteristics of a particular passage. This paper aims at examining the methodology of tafsir developed by such scholar as Ibn Kathir. Usually, he insists on finding a single correct reading of the Quran. In other words, he does not usually want to admit that multiple interpretations of this text are possible. Additionally, in his analysis, Ibn Kathir attempts to eliminate any form of subjectivism which can be based on a person’s conceptions of justice or rationality.
These assumptions have to be confirmed by textual evidence available in the Quran, hadiths or other sources that are deemed to be authoritative. Furthermore, one can argue that he takes a very critical approach to those narratives or arguments that are derived only from Biblical passages. Nevertheless, one can also state that sometimes Ibn Kathir’s tafsir can be driven by his individual convictions or dogmas, rather than textual evidence. This is the main thesis which should be examined.
The main principles of Ibn Kathir’s approach
Overall, it is possible to identify several peculiarities of the method advocated by Ibn Kathir. In particular, he believes that opinionated interpretation of the Quran is not permissible. In other words, conclusions of readers should be based only on the relevant and credible textual evidence. A person must not make subjective comments about the meaning of Quranic messages. For instance, these subjective comments can be derived from a person’s notions of justice or rationality.
Additionally, these assumptions can rely on people’s respect for a particular tradition of interpretation. In Ibn Kathir’s view, such comments are not permissible, because the authenticity of evidence used for the analysis can be questioned. This is one of the aspects that should be taken into account.
Apart from that, this author identifies the sources of evidence which can be accepted by Islamic theologians. In particular, one should speak about the following sources: They are the Quran, hadiths, sayings of the Prophet’s companions and opinions of tabi’un or those people who were the pupils of Muhammad’s immediate followers. In turn, a theologian should certainly attach more importance to the evidence which is directly available in the text of the Quran, rather than other sources.
Moreover, Ibn Kathir states that the correct interpretation should be consistent with the truths which were revealed to the Prophet. Overall, one can say that this framework is exclusionary because it significantly restricts the range of interpretations that can be available to an Islamic scholar.
Additionally, one should note that Ibn Kathir adopts a specific approach to the use of Biblical passages. In his opinion, they should be viewed very critically, especially when they are used for tafsir. This is why, he often disagrees with those commentators who take the validity of Biblical narratives for granted. In his opinion, the validity of these passages can be accepted only if they are explicitly confirmed in the Quran. If this requirement is not met, a person should not use Judaic or Christian narratives to justify his/her conclusions. This is one of the points that he stresses and this principle is often followed by other Islamic theologians.
Furthermore, one should note that Ibn Kathir prefers to find single and definitive reading of a specific passage. He is usually reluctant to admit that multiple interpretations of the Quran are possible. These are some of the traits that distinguish him from other Islamic scholars such as Tabari, Razi, or Qurtubi who recognize the idea that one can identify several possible meanings within a specific passage of the Quran. This is one of the aspects that should be taken into account.
Example of Ibn Kathir’s tafsir
In order to illustrate his approach one can examine the way in which Ibn Kathir examines the story of Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael. According to the Bible, Abraham was ready to sacrifice his only son, Isaac, to prove his dedication to God. This narrative has been accepted by many theologians, including Islamic scholars. In contrast, Ibn Kathir departs from this tradition and argues that Abraham intended to sacrifice Ishmael, rather than Isaac.
In order to elaborate this assertion, he argues that Abraham was required to sacrifice his “only son.” Furthermore, one should keep in mind that Isaac was born after Ishmael, thus, he could not be called the only son. Moreover, he argues that Isaac is not mentioned as the proposed sacrifice in the Quran. Certainly, Ibn Kathir admits that the conventional narrative is supported by some of Muhammad’s followers. However, he argues that this statement was accepted without any proper proof. In his opinion, mentioning of Isaac was simply a later falsification.
This example is important for understanding Kathirs approach to tafsir. It should be mentioned that the debate about Isaac and Ishmael attracted so much attention because Ishmael was considered to be the forefather of various Arabic tribes. Furthermore, he is regarded as an important Islamic prophet. In contrast, Isaac was primarily associated with Judaism. Besides, by depicting Ishmael as the intended sacrifice, some Islamic theologians tried to highlight the supremacy of Islam. This is one of the details which should not be overlooked by people who analyze the arguments put forward by Ibn Kathir.
Apart from that, one should note that Ibn Kathir may sometimes contradict the principles which he postulates. As it has been said before, he insists on the critical examination of Biblical passages. Nevertheless, he immediately accepts that the statement that Abraham was asked to sacrifice his only son. This premise is taken for granted because it helps him to develop his arguments.
Later, he rejects Biblical narratives and disagrees with the assumption that Isaac was offered to God as a sacrifice. It becomes obvious that the problem is not “simply one of scripture versus dogma.” Thus, one can say that Ibn Kathir’s analysis can also be driven by theological conviction, but it is not always supported by the textual evidence.
Evaluation
The main advantage of this method is that it can be useful for questioning or critiquing the assumptions that have long been taken for granted. Apart from that, this method can help commentators to find a contradiction in the religious texts. These contradictions can be critical for better understanding of the message conveyed through the text. For instance, theologian should explain why Isaac could be called the only son, even though he was born after Ishmael.
These are some of the positive aspects that can be distinguished. Nevertheless, one can argue that Ibn Kathir can also be biased because some of his assertions can sometimes be driven by dogmas, rather than available evidence. Furthermore, the example that has been included indicates that he can treat textual passages in an arbitrary way. In other words, Ibn Kathir may accept some of the statements without questioning their authenticity, but at the same time, he may reject the evidence taken from the same source. These are some of the limitations that should not be overlooked.
“The scholarly tradition is characterized then by an even-handed approach to the matter.” Apart from that, by insisting on finding a single interpretation, Ibn Kathir can significantly restrict the meaning of the Quran. In turn, this interpretation can impoverish the meaning of this text. That is why, many commentators do not agree with the method adopted by Ibn Kathir.
Admittedly, they also accept the premise that several conflicting interpretations cannot be valid. However, they also recognize the idea that a person may not always be able to pinpoint the intended idea. These are some of the aspects that can be distinguished.
Conclusion
On the whole, the approach adopted by Ibn Kathir is based on the premise that much attention should be paid to the quality of evidence which is used for the interpretation. This is why, he identifies four types of sources which can be regarded as legitimate or acceptable for tafsir. Furthermore, he urges interpreters to take a very critical look at the narratives that are derived from other religions such as Judaism or Christianity.
To some degree, this method can help to identify inner contradictions within texts and questioning the assumptions that can be accepted without questioning. However, one can say that Ibn Kathir often focuses on dogmas or theological convictions, rather than textual evidence which he often treat in an arbitrary way. These are the main elements that can be identified.
Works Cited
Calder, Norman. “Tafsir from Tabari to Ibn Kathir. Problems in the Descriptions of a Genre.” In Approaches to the Quran, edited by Gerald Hawting, 101-140. London: Routledge, 1993.
Demiri, Lejla. Muslim Exegesis of the Bible in Medieval Cairo: Najm Al-Din Al-Tufi’s (d. 716/1316) Commentary on the Christian Scriptures. New York: BRILL, 2013.
MacAuliffe, Jane. The Cambridge Companion to the Qur’ān. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Tlili, Sarra. Animals in the Qur’an. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
There are different theories that explain the understanding and interpretation of the Qur’an. The study of these theories is called Qur’an hermeneutics. Qur’an hermeneutics is important as it enables the Qur’an texts to be meaningful and applicable to the contemporary Muslims. Currently, there are several groups of Islam that came about because of diverse interpretations of the teachings contained in the Qur’an.
The interaction of Muslims with the rest of the world is influenced by their understanding of the interpretations of the Qur’an. The intensity of interpretations of Qur’an verses differ from one group to another.
These interpretations determine how different groups of Islam perceive the various facets of their faith (Rahman 2002). This discussion intends to look at how contemporary scholars are challenging the traditional Qur’an interpretations.
Discussion
The Qur’an is one of the chief sources of law in Islam. It also contains the rules that Muslims should adhere to while worshipping and the religious obligations of each person. The Qur’an does not clearly differentiate between the law and ethical issues.
Therefore, these instructions needed to be added on. Prophet Muhammad and other scholars came up with supplementary interpretations and instructions. These instructions and interpretations were used in formulating the Islamic law (Knysh 2007).
Muslims regard the Qur’an as the source of all truth. But some issues in the Qur’an are contradictory and therefore it was necessary to find solutions that could clear the ambiguities.
This necessitated a thorough interpretation and creation of commentaries on the Qur’an in order to guide the Muslims in their daily lives. Some verses are also unclear and it is not easy for an ordinary Muslim to understand them without interpretation (Rippin 2006).
The Qur’an has many meanings and therefore man can interpret it to any level. There is no end to the interpretations of the Qur’an. The texts have the outer and deep meaning. Anyone who is able to interpret its deepest meanings finds happiness. Some understand the inner meanings as future revelations of what is to come (Schimmel 1994).
The Muslims have a practice of reciting the Qur’an verses. Reciting enables the Muslims to read and at the same time listen to the verses. This helps the Muslims to comprehend their deep meanings. While reading the Qur’an, the reader is supposed to understand that those are the words of God the creator.
The reader should also have the fear of God. This can be achieved by thinking about the qualities of God like omnipresence, omnipotence, among others. The reader must also seek to understand the message and assume that God is speaking to him/her in that text. He/she should contextualize the text to his/her personal situation and perceive the text as a message from God (Sands 2006).
There are various reasons why the interpretation of the Qur’an was necessary. Firstly, the Islamic religion spread to different countries and there was a need to explain some difficult words contained in the holy book. The Qur’an was written in Arabic and when other people who spoke different languages converted to Islam, they could not fathom some difficult Arabic words.
Thus, interpretation was necessary so that every believer of Islam could understand the Qur’an. Another reason is that some concepts in the Qur’an are clear while others are ambiguous. Therefore, there was a need to clarify the ambiguous concepts for everyone’s understanding. The ambiguous texts could easily be misunderstood by the readers and therefore wrongly applied.
Consequently, the interpretations ensured that the messages were correctly construed. Moreover, the stories narrated in the Qur’an have scanty details and therefore there was a need to expound on them so that the readers could understand them.
In addition, problems arose after the death of Prophet Muhammad because he was the leader. People did not know who to turn to for guidance. This necessitated the interpretation of the Qur’an so that people can seek answers from Qur’an interpretations (Leaman not dated).
There are various groups of Muslims. These include the liberal, conservative, reformist, progressive, socialist, traditional, and secular Muslims, among others. These groups believe in different interpretations of the Qur’an. Many Muslims still rely on the traditional Qur’an hermeneutics for their daily guidance in behaviour and ethics (Dakroury not dated).
Throughout history, there have been many contentious interpretations of the Qur’an. The traditional interpretation of the Qur’an is referred to as the tafsir and it started with Prophet Muhammad. The remarks of Prophet Muhammad have been a major subject of interpretations. According to the Qur’an, the Muslims are supposed to do what the Prophet has commanded and stay away from what he has prohibited.
Prophet Muhammad interpreted several teachings to his followers. He explained to them the implication of various texts in the Qur’an. For example, he explained to his followers how to perform prayers five times daily. The prophet also interpreted unclear texts to his followers, for instance, the expressions about the whiteness of day and the darkness of night.
He also explained various concepts about the worship of God alone and his messenger, the omnipotence of God, the dead animals that can be eaten , life after death and various other Islamic issues in the Qur’an. The interpretations of Prophet Muhammad are brief and touch on certain verses of the Qur’an and not the whole text.
The interpretations of the Qur’an by Prophet Muhammad are not recorded because the prophet did not want the people to confuse them with the Qur’an. These interpretations have been passed on through word of mouth from one generation to the next.
The Prophet considered the confusion of his interpretations with the Qur’an as a very great violation. He wanted a clear distinction between his words and those of God so as not to confuse the Islam believers (Abdul-Raof not dated).
After the death of Prophet Muhammad, his followers came up with different interpretations depending on the general knowledge. They applied their own wisdom and other commonly known facts to explain the Qur’an. In addition, they used the knowledge of Islamic proceedings and the wisdom they had gained from their closeness with the Prophet.
They used the knowledge they had gained from the prophet through personal questions that they asked him. Some of the followers who continued with the interpretation of the Qur’an after the death of the prophet include Ali Talib, Abd Abbas, Abdi Mason and Ubai Kab. Ali Talib has given several interpretations but some scholars claim that some of his narrations are true while others are false.
Abbas explains unclear matters in the Qur’an from the viewpoint of the People of the Book. He interprets some concepts like the dimensions of the ark Noah built, among others. The students of Abbas have recorded his teachings in a book. Masud’s interpretations are mainly concerned with legal matters.
Kab is from a Jewish background and therefore he has a sound knowledge of both the old and new testaments. He does not support the recording of Qur’an interpretations for fear of peoples confusing it them with the word of God (Al-Sheha not dated).
The companions of the prophet base their interpretations on the Qur’an, the teachings of the Prophet and their own opinions. The Qur’an offers interpretations of some concepts within the text. For instance, similar expressions can appear in different parts of the Qur’an. A concept can appear in one verse and then be repeated in another one. In addition, parables are given in one part and then explained later in the Qur’an.
The followers moreover relied on the teachings of Prophet Muhammad to carry out their own interpretations. The teachings of the prophet offered them the necessary guidance that they needed while interpreting the Qur’an on their own. If they failed to get a concrete explanation from the Qur’an and the teachings of the Prophet, they relied on their own opinion and general knowledge.
They applied their own experiences and wisdom in making judgments about the Qur’an teachings. The interpretations by the companions of Prophet Muhammad are brief and do not explain all the verses in the Qur’an. Some of them have been recorded for the purpose of learning. Their interpretations are not structured according to the Qur’an verses.
Therefore, the verses do not flow the way they do in the Qur’an but are arranged according to the themes that they explain. The interpretations of different companions are similar in terms of legal rulings because they used to live in close proximity but their artistic knowledge and linguistics skills vary (Abdul-Raof not dated).
The students of the companions, known as successors came up with their own interpretations. The successors’ interpretations are brief and touch on certain Qur’an verses. Their interpretation is based on the view of the companions.
The successors have also explored contentious theological issues like the traits of God. The opinions of different successors vary depending on their teachers and their proximity from one another. The successors have also relied on the information from Christian and Jewish converts in their interpretations (Schimmel 1994).
The interpretations of the Qur’an that Prophet Muhammad, the companions and successors offered was only relevant at that time. Many laws were derived from the traditional interpretations and such laws are irrelevant today.
Almost all Muslims agree that the most credible interpretations of the Qur’an are the interpretations contained in the Qur’an verses. Next is the interpretation by Prophet Muhammad. If sufficient understanding can not be extracted from theses two, people should then turn to the interpretations by the companions, successors and other scholars (Leaman not dated).
Currently, the Islamic scholars have turned to new ways of interpreting their religion. They seek to challenge the traditional interpretations and replace them with current ones. These scholars seek to find ways in which the twenty-first century Muslims should understand the Qur’an teachings.
The scholars are attempting to give contemporary meaning to the teachings of the Qur’an while retaining the message and basic beliefs of the Islamic religion. However, they have faced hostility and mistreatment because the conservative Muslims feel that they are propagating anti-Islamic ideologies.
The Muslims who still uphold the traditional interpretations feel that these modern scholars are misleading other Muslim believers and are going against the teachings of God (Welchman 2007).
In the contemporary world, the viewpoints of scholars about the interpretation of the Qur’an have changed. These scholars agree with the basic principles of Islam like fasting during Ramadan, praying five times daily and other Islamic practices like giving of alms. However they are against some interpretations of the Qur’an teachings, which they argue are not relevant in the current times.
Modern Muslims can not understand the relevance of some laws in this era. The society has changed and therefore the Muslims’ view of issues should change too. It is not easy to apply traditional interpretations to modern issues relating to human rights, women emancipation, and holy war, among others (Rapoport 2005).
Many Muslim scholars have faced many problems while trying to interpret some of these issues in the modern context. The contemporary Qur’an hermeneutics was brought about by the need to explain the Islamic teachings to meet the demands of the current world.
The Muslim scholars are trying to find a way to interpret the Qur’an teachings so that they can be applicable to modern Muslims, governments and international organizations (Freamon 2006).
There are several scholars who are pushing for reforms in the interpretations of Islamic texts. Some of them feel that the traditional interpretation of the Qur’an does not fit in the modern setting and therefore re-interpretation should be done.
These scholars advocate for gender equality in Islamic practices, reform on views about some customs and inappropriate dress, independent interpretation of the Islamic teachings, among others. The interpretations that are being used and which are the source of Islamic law were only meant to be applied by the people who lived during those times.
Currently, those laws and interpretations are out-dated and archaic and therefore have no place in the modern setting. Thus some changes need to be made to those interpretations so that they can be applicable in modern life (Haddad 1988).
Other scholars propose that the Qur’an should be considered a source of godly motivation and the interpretations should be ignored. Others suggest that the Qur’an alone should be considered as the Holy book and all other texts written by Islamic scholars should not be used.
These scholars advocate for the rejection of any other writings apart from the Qur’an as a source of guidance for the Muslims. Scholars like Ghulam Ahmed Pervez of Pakistan feel that only the Qur’an should be read and used for daily guidance and any other writing should be disregarded.
These scholars claim that some interpretations of Islamic law are not applicable worldwide as they do not fit in the current context. The scholars also accept the basic Islamic teachings as true but are against their interpretations and applicability to modern life (Khadduri 1984).
Contemporary scholars feel that Hadith and Sunna are not authentic and that these two do not bring out the original meanings from Qur’an verses. They should therefore not be relied upon in making any decisions. These traditions were passed down by word of mouth for hundreds of years before they were recorded. Therefore there is a likelihood of them getting distorted by each generation.
Moreover, some rules derived from Hadith and Sunna like stoning of adulterers and female circumcision are old fashioned and against the teachings of the Qur’an. The Qur’an does not advocate for such actions and therefore those are rules made by the interpreters.
Additionally, Some Qur’an verses have been interpreted out of context in order to validate the interpretations of the Sunna and Hadith. The interpreters construed them wrongly in order to meet their own personal ends (Abou El Fadl 2001).
One of the controversial issues is the interpretation of Islamic laws. Contemporary Muslim scholars reject traditional Qur’an interpretations which are old-fashioned and instead advocate for readings which can be applied in the contemporary setting. They are also against the use of single verses from the Qur’an to develop Islamic laws.
For instance, Nasir Abu Zayd argued that the teachings of the Qur’an should be interpreted based on the time that they were written and are not applicable to current matters. He proposed for a reinterpretation of the Qur’an which takes into consideration new opinions about the religion and should consider that modern Muslim societies have undergone a lot of change.
Nasir has conducted several researches and the aim is to promote modern Islamic thinking. He intended to create a link between the traditional and modern Islamic views about democracy, human rights and equality. However his beliefs landed him into trouble with the conservative Muslims with claims that he was against the Islamic faith (Rahman 2002).
Scholar Ghulam Ahmad Parvez feels that the Qur’an has enough teachings to guide the Muslims in their daily lives and therefore the laws derived from early interpretations should be done away with. He argues that each generation can find relevance by reading the Qur’an alone and interpreting it in their context. He therefore does not see the need for the Hadith or the Sunna (Farah 1984).
Muhammad Abduh also advised the Muslims to stop relying so much on the traditional interpretations of the Qur’an but instead use logic while interpreting the Qur’an in order to fit in the current world. He urged the Muslims to exercise their freedom of will, thinking and expressing their views. In addition, he was opposed to traditional Islam practices like polygamy. Such practices are degrading to the women.
He advocated for equal human rights for all and was against slavery and any form of discrimination. According to him, all human beings are equal before God and therefore should be treated equally and with respect. Moreover he believed in making peace with everyone and made efforts to create friendships between Muslims and people from other religions like Christians (Wadud 1999).
Rashid Rida also saw over-reliance on traditional Qur’an interpretations as the reason why Muslim communities lag behind in technological developments and other matters. Therefore they should adopt more civilized and current laws and ways of reasoning in order to be at the same development level with other communities. He felt that the Qur’an should be reinterpreted to suit the current circumstances (Webb 2000).
In the tafsir tradition, no one was supposed to read the Qur’an on their own and derive an interpretation. They feared that unless a person was trained, he /she would misunderstand the meaning of the texts. However, in the contemporary world, even untrained people are reading and interpreting the Qur’an on their own.
Islamic scholars are in support of this as they feel that every Muslim has a right to read the Qur’an on his/her own and apply its meaning according to his individual experiences.
The Muslims have a right to make independent interpretations of the Qur’an as the available interpretations are sometimes misleading and biased. Today, the Qur’an has been translated in many languages and is readily available on the internet and other sources (Saeed 2006).
Contemporary Muslims also do not agree with the traditional interpretations about human rights. They believe that all human beings are equal and their human rights should be respected. Therefore the traditional interpretations allowing injustices like slavery are not applicable in the modern world.
The Qur’an contains information about slaves and how they should be treated. Such verses were only applicable at the time when slavery was practiced and are therefore not relevant in the current setting. Therefore, such teachings and the laws derived from them should be ignored by the modern Muslim (Abu Zayd 2001).
In addition, contemporary scholars do not agree with traditional Islamic interpretations which discriminate against women. Some of the laws that they do not agree with include the tolerance of polygamy for the men while women are not allowed to practice polyandry (Esposito 1982).
Another law states that women are entitled to a less inheritance than the men. These laws clearly show that Muslim women have less authority and rights than men. In the current world, people believe in gender equality and equal opportunities for both men and women (Mattson not dated).
Some Muslim scholars are also opposed to the traditional role of women in prayers where they are supposed to pray at a separate place or behind the men. In some mosques, women are supposed to enter through the back door and perform their prayers at a secluded place away from the men.
The scholars argue that this is not in line with the Qur’an teachings as even prophet Muhammad allowed women to pray together with the men. Therefore, such rules were intentionally distorted by the interpreters of the Qur’an so as to deny women their rights (Corbin 1986).
Women are also not allowed to lead prayers in a congregation comprising of both men and women. Women are only allowed to lead their fellow women in prayer. Contemporary Muslims advocate for women to be treated equally with men and even encourage them to take up leadership positions in their countries.
They also feel that women should not be segregated from men during prayer and should also be allowed to lead the prayers provided they are sufficiently knowledgeable about the Qur’an (Badawi 1995).
Scholar Amina Wadud is a great advocator of women leading prayers. She broke the norm by leading Friday prayers. Some Muslim scholars were in support of this while conservative Muslims termed it as wrong and against the teachings of Islam. Amina continues to lead Friday prayers in different places around the world.
Conservative Muslims have not accepted this and they threaten renounce the Muslims who attend those prayer meetings. Amina has written several books encouraging Muslims to treat both men and women equally (Mutahhari 1991).
Abu Zayd and Leila Ahmed also advocate for equal rights for women as the Islamic laws discriminate against them. These laws were written when the society was male-dominated. Now the society has changed and such laws that degrade women are not applicable.
Samira Bellil wrote books detailing how Muslim women suffer under traditional Islamic laws which undermine them. She argues that the traditional Islamic beliefs are very constraining and are not relevant in the contemporary world (Khan 1995).
Other Muslims feel that women should not be forced to wear the head veil or hijab as they can wear any other clothes provided they look modest. Ahmad Ghabel argues that it is not a must for Muslim women to cover their head and neck but they are obligated to cover their bodies only.
Modern scholars argue that the Qur’an commands both men and women to dress modestly but that does not mean that the women should always cover their heads (Masud 1997). In fact, some of them like Hedi Mheni and Fadela Amara support the banning of the hijab in some countries like France.
They feel that holding on to such traditions will lead to women being denied more of their rights. The Qur’an was wrongly interpreted because it does not mention the covering of the head with the hijab. They call for the emancipation of Muslim women so that they can fit in the modern society (Barlas 2002).
Modern scholars like Fatima Mernissi argue that the traditional Qur’an interpretations have been manipulated to take advantage of the women. She says that the Qur’an does not support the discrimination against women as the wives of Prophet Muhammad were treated as equals.
The writers of the Sunna and Hadith distorted the Qur’an verses and denied women their rights for their own interests and material advantage. She challenges Muslims to be wary when following some of the teachings from the traditional Qur’an commentaries because they might not be reliable (Mernissi 1985).
The Muslim personal law discriminates against women in matters of divorce, polygamy, marital property and children’s custody. Modern Muslim scholars are opposed to this law and are proposing reforms. These reforms should be made with the inclusion of women’s views and other opinions based on the Qur’an teachings.
The law should be reformed because when these laws were put in place, the society was male-dominated and therefore it favours men. These interpretations completely degrade women and they can not continue being discriminated in this era (Barazangi 2004).
Mohammed Arkoun feels that contrary to the past beliefs that aspects of western culture should be removed from Islam, the Islamic and western worlds should be connected. He argues that Muslims should combine both the Islamic and western ways of thinking.
Muslims should not just understand their culture but also that of other societies. Arkoun offers a method of interpreting the Qur’an by making it open to several interpretations. Therefore, the Qur’an can be interpreted to fit in the modern context (Gunther 2004).
Discussion of topics related to sex openly is prohibited in Islam. However modern scholars argue that this should not be the case as these topics are discussed openly in the Qur’an. In addition some verses have been misinterpreted in the hadith to validate actions like the beating of women by their husbands (Kurzman 1998).
Contemporary scholars are against the idea of perceiving Islam as a political group. They are in favour of separating contemporary secular democracy with religious matters.
They believe that the teachings of the Qur’an were meant to be applied during the time when it was written and their application to the current world should be done sensibly. Traditional interpretations maintain that the Qur’an and the hadith authorize an Islamic government (Sonbol 1996).
Liberal Muslims are also against the traditional interpretation of the concept of Jihad as armed violence. They propose that this should be interpreted to mean an inner religious struggle. These Muslims advocate for non-violence and forbearance, and are open to peaceful solving of conflicts with other Islam groups, Christians, Jews, Hindus and other religions (Barlas 2006).
Contemporary Muslim scholars are also against the Islamizing of knowledge and coming up with divisions meant for Muslims, for instance divisions like the economics of Islam or the science of Islam. These scholars feel that the secular sources of knowledge are sufficient and there is no point in studying knowledge from religious perspectives.
Supporters of Islamizing knowledge propose that the knowledge that should be used by Muslims should have concepts of civilization and western culture eliminated from it. In addition, Islamic concepts should be infused in all branches of current knowledge (Lampe 1997).
Conclusion
From the above discussion, it is clear that most of the traditional Qur’an hermeneutics are not applicable in the current world. Most of the interpreters of the Qur’an teachings either misinterpreted or included their own opinions in the interpretations. Moreover some of the laws derived from those teachings have no place in the current setting.
This has compelled modern scholars to try and come up with more applicable hermeneutics of the Qur’an which suit the modern Muslim. These scholars are faced with a very daunting task as they are challenging the beliefs that Muslims have been espousing for a very long time. All the same, there is a need for the Muslims to transform their views on several issues, lest they will lag behind in development.
Reference List
Abdul-Raof, H., n.d. Schools of Qur’anic exegesis: Genesis and development. London, Routledge.
Abou El Fadl, K., 2001. Speaking in God’s Name: Islamic Law, Authority and Women. Oxford, Oneworld.
Abu Zayd, N. H., 2001. The Qur’anic Concept of Justice. Web.
Al-Sheha, A. Human Rights in Islam and Common Misconceptions. Web.
Badawi, J., 1995. Gender Equity in Islam: Basic Principles. Indianapolis, American Trust Publication.
Barazangi, N. H., 2004. Women’s Identity and the Qur’an: A New Reading. Gainsville, University of Florida Press.
Barlas, A., 2002. Believing Women in Islam: Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur’an. Austin, Texas University Press.
Barlas, A., 2006. Un-reading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur’an: Beyond the binaries of tradition and modernity. Web.
Corbin, H., 1986. Temple and Contemplation. London, Islamic Publications.
Dakroury, A.I. Toward a Philosophical Approach of the Hermeneutics of the Qur’an. Web.
Esposito, J., 1982. Women in Muslim Family Law. Syracuse, Syracuse University Press.
Farah, M., 1984. Marriage and Sexuality in Islam: A Translation of Al-Ghazali’s Book on the Etiquette of Marriage from the Ihya. Salt Lake City, University of Utah Press.
Freamon, B. K., 2006. Some Reflection On Post-Enlightenment Qur’anic Hermeneutics. Web.
Gunther, U., 2004. Mohammad Arkoun: Towards a Radical Rethinking of Islamic Thought. Modern Muslim Intellectuals and the Qur’an. Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 125-67.
Haddad, Y. Y., 1988. Islam and Gender: Dilemmas in the Changing Arab World. Islam, Gender and Social Change, Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 1-29.
Khadduri, M., 1984. The Islamic Conception of Justice. Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press.
Khan, M. W., 1995. Woman Between Islam and Western Society. New Delhi, The Islamic Centre.
Knysh, A., 2007. Multiple Areas of Influence. Great Britain, Cambridge University Press.
Kurzman, C.,1998. Liberal Islam: A Sourcebook. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Lampe, G. E., 1997. Justice and Human Rights in Islamic Law, Washington DC, International Law Institute.
Leaman, O. The Qur’an: an Encyclopedia. London, Routledge.
Masud, M. K., 1997. Shatibi’s Philosophy of Islamic Law. New Delhi, Kitab Bhvan.
Mattson, I. The Story of the Qur’an: Its History and Place in Muslim Life. London,Blackwell publishing.
Mernissi, F., 1985. Beyond the Veil: Male-Female Dynamics in Muslim Society. London, Al Saqi.
Mutahhari, M., 1991. The Rights of Women in Islam. Tehran, World Organization for Islamic Services.
Rahman, F., 2002. Islam. Chicago, Chicago University Press.
Rapoport, Y., 2005. Marriage, Money and Divorce in Medieval Islamic Society. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Rippin, A., 2006. The Blackwell Companion to the Qur’an. London, Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Saeed, A., 2006. Interpreting the Qur’an: towards a contemporary approach. New York, Routledge.
Sands, K. Z., 2006. Safi Commentaries on the Qur’an In Classical Islam. New York, Routledge.
Schimmel, A., 1994. Deciphering the Signs of God: A Phenomenological Approach to Islam. Albany, State University of Islam Press.
Sonbol, A. E., 1996. Women, Family and Divorce Laws in Islamic History. Syracuse, Syracuse University Press.
Wadud, A., 1999. Qur’an and Woman: Rereading of the Sacred Text from a Woman’s Perspective. New York, Oxford University Press.
Webb, G., 2000. Windows of Faith: Muslim Women Scholar-Activists in North America. Syracuse, Syracuse University Press.
Welchman, L., 2007. Women and Muslim Family Laws in Arab States: A Comparative Overview of Textual Development and Advocacy. Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Press.
Introduction: Diving into the Freudian World of Dreams
What makes psychologists plunge into the weird world of people’s subconscious and research it thoroughly, with all the absurdities and controversies that it offers, is a complicated question.
One of the greatest psychologists of the XX century, Sigmund Freud, cannot be denied his merits as a pioneer in psychological analysis. However, the reasons that pushed him to research the realm of people’s dreams remain to be analyzed. According to Meghnagi, the author of the article
Of course, it is worth keeping in mind that, now that the great psychologist is gone and there is no way to deny the existing interpretations of his works, it is rather tempting to read as many issues into Freud’s researches as possible.
However, when the evidence for Freud’s obsession with reclaiming his identity as a member of a Jewish community is too obvious not to notice it, one has to interpret the existing facts the only way possible, which is exactly what Meghnagi does.
Freud’s Oedipal Desires Analysis in the Social Context: Reading between the Lines
Like any other research, the given paper has a specific theoretical foil to back the arguments up with. However, it is worth mentioning that in the given case, the analysis of the issue is rather tricky; by interpreting Freud’s correspondence, Meghnagi tries to prove that Freud did have the problems of the Jewish community in mind when developing his theories.
Therefore, the theories of psychoanalysis must be used to prove the point. Hence, a psychological theory is being used to research the basis for another psychological theory, which is rather ironic. Anyway, Meghnagi uses the analysis of Freud’s correspondence in a rather efficient way.
Feudist theories, revived: a different vision of dreams
When speaking of the theories that are mentioned in the paper, Freud’s theory of dreams must be brought up. Meghnagi often refers to the latter, making it clear that the theory of dreams is the key point of his research.
Regaining identity by analyzing the society
No matter how much the given article relies on the analysis of Freud’s personality through the interpretation of his correspondence, the need to use a relevant social theory is obvious, since, according to Meghnagi, Freud was expressing his social concerns through his psychological theories. Hence, Meghnagi applies another theory to analyze Freud. The given theory can be referred to as the theory of social identity (Stets & Burke, 2000).
Hitting the Chord with the Readers: The Positive Aspects of the Article
Analyzing the given article, one should keep in mind that Meghnagi raises quite a debatable issue. Therefore, no matter how subtly the author might approach the problem, there are still going to be a number of debatable issues regarding both the national integrity of the Jewish Community and the interpretation of Freudian theory.
Hence, it is crucial to emphasize the efforts that the author has made to reduce the controversy of the topic and address the problem in a proper way.
The analysis of Freud’s concept of desires and dreams
When considering the positive aspects of the article, it is necessary to stress that Meghnagi has managed to offer a fairly decent and by far one of the most original analyses of Freud’s theories.
Even though at certain points, the idea of tying in Freud’s personal concerns and his scientific research seems somewhat forced, it is still necessary to admit that Meghnagi’s allegations concerning the real driving force behind Freud’s work are rather thrilling. Moreover, it is clear that Meghnagi offers a very detailed overview of Freud’s dream theory.
For example, the fact that “The dream incorporates elements of his childhood and an adolescence with its unresolved conflicts” (Meghnagi, 2011, 682) is derived from a quote from Freud’s work that the author of the article offers above. Hence, it can be claimed that Meghnagi provides a well thought-out analysis of Freud’s works.
Another emphasis on the national identity
There is no need to explain that in the modern world of globalization, the issue of national identity is especially significant (Blum, 2007). With the culture fusion that comes on the heels of globalization, the concern for belonging to a specific culture, as well as for the viability of the given culture, has gained especial importance (Herzog, Herzog & Lapp, 2008).
It is evident that Meghnagi stresses the importance of the issue throughout his article: “In the relentless examination of his own dreams […] we are indirectly led to another aspect of the issue of Jewish emancipation, which centres on the preoccupation with not falling victim to identification with the aggressor” (Meghnagi, 2011, 677).
Therefore, Meghnagi’s article allows to evaluate the necessity for people to form national groups and approach the idea of belonging from a psychological perspective, which is a unique approach.
Something to Ponder over: Concerning Flaws and Misconceptions
However, it cannot be denied that Meghnagi’s article also has problems. Even though the flaws mentioned below cannot be considered as great as to ruin the premises for the research completely, these issues still have to be mentioned.
Though they do not make the article less credible, they still offer enough room for discussion. In the light of the given doubts concerning the correctness of Meghnagi’s conclusions, it is necessary to reconsider the author’s major findings, as well as reevaluate the positive and the negative aspects of Meghnagi’s article, therefore, making it clear whether Meghnagi’s ideas have any grounds to base on.
Attempting to bring the far-fetched issues closer
First and foremost, the idea that Freud’s personal problems stood behind the great theories that the latter came up with does not sound right. Even though one must give Meghnagi credit for analyzing Freud’s letters and searching for the grain of truth in them, as well as interpreting Freud’s theories in a rather witty manner, Meghnagi’s idea still somehow diminishes the researcher’s role in the creation of these theories.
Meghnagi’s supposition means that Freud’s discovery of Oedipus’ complex (Keitlen, 2003) could have been not the result of thorough work, but the result of the loss of integrity, which brings Freud’s works a few notches down.
Freud’s correspondence and its interpretation
Another problem with Meghnagi’s research is that the materials that Meghnagi had at his disposal, i.e., Freud’s letters, could have been interpreted in a million of ways other than the ones suggested by the researcher (Lieberman & Kramer, 2012).
Without knowing the most detailed background of the given letters, a precise interpretation of the correspondence is hardly possible, which raises doubts about the correctness of Meghnagi’s suppositions.
On the one hand, some of the pieces of evidence deserve being considered credible: “This interplay of biblical references is brought out clearly by Freud: It will be noticed that the name Joseph plays a great part in my dreams” (Meghnagi, 2011, 676), since it is taken from Freud’s correspondence.
O n the other hand, the paper contains such unsupported claims as the ones that make assumptions concerning Freud’s change of mood, which does not seem legitimate for a scientific research. In the given passage, the above-mentioned comes especially clearly:
This had filled Freud with pleasure but, fearing to be disappointed, he had resigned himself to the possibility of not seeing his aspirations fulfilled, since many other more senior and equally deserving scholars had waited in vain for such an acknowledgement. (Meghnagi, 2011, 675)
Therefore, it is obvious that Meghnagi’s reports on Freud’s responses towards certain events in his live should be taken with a grain of salt. While the author offers a range of interesting ideas, he does not account for every single theory that he produces, which means that the article might not represent the facts in the uncompromising light of the reality.
Recommendations and Suggestion: What Can be Improved
When thinking of what can be done to make the research more solid, one might think of adding more social context into it, while explaining every single factor that could have influenced Freud’s theoretical findings from a standpoint of a certain psychological theory, namely, the theory of social identity (Tajfel, 2010). Since at present, the article lacks theoretical basis, it could use more social theory contexts.
When Politics and Science Collides: About the Controversy
It cannot be denied that Meghnagi offers an interesting theory to consider. Like any other people, Freud was driven by the social factors that made the environment in which the psychologist lived, which means that he was influenced by the moods in the society greatly.
However, Meghnagi’s interpretation of Freud’s letters, as well as rethinking Freud’s theories through the prism of the social events of the Freud’s epoch, still needs more research. The article is clearly controversial; however, when it comes to pinning down the exact point at which Meghnagi’s ideas start rubbing the readers the wrong way is quite hard.
The problem of the article is that Meghnagi mixes the spheres that seldom collide, i.e., politics and science (Price, 1965). Hence the controversy about the paper and the uncertainty of the conclusions comes.
Conclusion: The Time Has Come to Reconsider Freudian Theories
Although Meghnagi’s article has problems, not in its logical structure or the veracity of the facts that the researcher introduces, but in the angle at which he looks at Freud’s theory, it still has to be admitted that logical theory is rather viable.
The idea that Freud was subconsciously guided by his own attempt to find his national identity and understand what his place under the sun was becomes even more logical given the fact that Meghnagi’s idea is based on Freud’s theory as well.
Hence, it can be considered that Meghnagi’s arguments are worth taking a closer look at. Even though it is hardly believable that Freud was intentionally forcing his concepts of national identity of the Jewish people into his papers, the idea that subconsciously, Freud included some elements of critique of society into his works.
Reference List
Blum, D. W. (2007). National identity and globalization: Youth, state, and society in post-Soviet Eurasia. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Herzog, H. H., Herzog, T. & Lapp, B. (2008). Jewish identity and Jewish writing in Germany and Austria today. New York, NY: Berghahn Books.
Keitlen, S. (2003). The Oedipus complex: A philosophical study. College Station, TX: Virtual Book Publishing.
Lieberman, E. J. & Kramer, R. (2012). The letters of Sigmund Freud and Otto rank: Inside psychoanalysis. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Meghnagi, D. (2011). From the dreams of a generation to the theory of dreams: Freud’s Roman dreams. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 92, 675-696.
Price, D. K. (1865). The scientific estate. Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press.
Stets, J. E. & Burke, P. J. (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(3), 224-237.
Tajfel, H. (2010). Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Mark 7:24-37 is a series of Bible verses, which tell about Jesus’ deeds and His communication with ordinary people in need, living in Tyre and Decapolis. It tells about the mighty works and the way Jesus became known due to His amazing others. Still, one might think that this excerpt is just a story of a woman and a man, who met Jesus and witnessed His miracles. It is more than that – it is a unique text, which was perceived in different manner overages. To obtain a better understanding of the message, several interpretation levels can be identified – the text itself, the purpose of the excerpt, and the application of the story to various contexts and during differing epochs.
To begin with, it is essential to understand the message itself, its structure, and its boundaries. Because this excerpt is two separate stories, it is not complicated to determine its boundaries. The first passage, the story of healing a Syrophoenician woman, is seven verses – Mark 7:24-301. It begins with Jesus coming to Tyre and seeing a woman with a child obsessed with demons and ends with a miraculous exorcism. The second part of the text is devoted to telling about the healing of a deaf man. It is described in six verses – Mark 7:31-372. This story begins when Jesus moves from Tyre to Decapolis and people take him to see a deaf and mute man and end with his curing. As seen from the references, it comes from Mark’s Gospel. It is the seventh chapter – the middle of the book because there are sixteen chapters in general.
Like other Biblical writings, the excerpt is specific in the genre. It cannot be said that it is a letter, poem, or novella. Instead, it is special theological writing. At the same time, because the verses share the story of Jesus, it can be said that the genre is a biography. It is possible to come up with this conclusion because of the context of the seventh chapter and Mark’s gospel as such. Because other verses within a section speak about Jesus’ life and deeds, this passage in intertextually connected to other parts of the Bible. As for the structure of the text, it is both a description and problem-solution text. Calling it description is evident because the text is detailed. Speaking of a problem-solution structure, it can be proved by the fact that both stories begin with the problem shared with Jesus and end with a miracle, helping to cope with it3.
Also, to interpret the meaning of the message, it is beneficial to evaluate the grammar and word choice. The text is written in indicative mood – it simply tells the story of Jesus and describes details of His deeds. More than that, the tense is past, which is appropriate for theological and biographical texts. Reading the passage, it is perceived as a recollection of Christ’s life. Speaking of the subjects of sentences, in most cases, these are Jesus, man and woman who needed help, and their problems as well as other people witnessing miracles. In all sentences, subjects come before predicates. Sentences are written in both active and passive voice. As for the word choice, the language is simple without intricate and complicated phrases. It might point to the desire to deliver a clear and easy message to make the Bible available to all people, especially illiterate.
The next level of analysis is the investigation of the world behind Mark 7:24-37 – the author, the audience, and the epoch. It is essential to note that the author of the Gospel is anonymous. Nevertheless, according to the Christian tradition, it is believed that John Mark wrote it under the guidance of apostle Peter. It was written during 60-70 A.D., which corresponds to the years of apostle and John Mark’s lives. During this epoch, Christians were persecuted by Nero in Rome, there was a revolt against Jewish leaders, which led to the persecution of Jews4, and Pharisees became dominant in the Jewish communities5. It was written to Gentiles to point to the power of Jesus’ deeds instead of focus on his words6. The text is closely connected to the developments of that time because, in his Gospel, Mark recalls events of the uprisings against Jewish leaders7 and persecution of Christians, as he accepts the fact that Christianity was perceived as a sect in Judaism8. In this way, Mark 7:24-37 is a passage of a historical text because it does comply with recognized and well-known events in the history of civilization development.
Still, except for historical and biographical purposes, this message is as well an educative one. Except for the focus on doing, not words, it is paramount to note the way it was used during that time. Because Mark recalls the Power of Jesus and he was a pastor, it is possible to assume that these passages were read aloud in the Church of Alexandria he had found9, as well as to Jews and Gentiles outside of the church, to make them believe in God’s power expressed through Jesus’ miracles. Besides, it represents some theological concerns such as recognizing that Jesus is God’s son (a woman calling Him Lord in Mark 7:2810), acknowledging that the Gospel is the source of truth11, the Godly power of Jesus because He healed people without any rituals12, and Messiahship of Christ13.
Finally, the message was interpreted differently over time. For instance, one of the modern scholars, Owens, believes that hearing in Mark’s context is more than just a physical ability – it is connected to the ability to show respect for others and hear them in need14. At the same time, the story of healing a deaf man can be related to healing by reading the Gospel or having no desire to hear God’s message15. In one of the theological papers written around five decades ago, Burkill points to the symbolic nature of bread in Mark 7:27, as bread is as important to the human body as Gospel to the soul16. On the other hand, another current-day theologian, Smith, does not pay significant attention to symbols in the message. Instead, she focuses on the purity of faith in God and claims that this chapter is written to share the miracle of healing and exorcism with people17. In this way, it can be said that contemporary researchers interpret Mark 7:24-37 to question human faith in God and His power without seeking obscure meaning18.
To sum up, the passage under consideration is a unique world. Even though it tells similar stories and glorifies the power of God, it can be interpreted in different ways and from different perspectives. Still, it is essential to note that time does not play a critical role in understanding its message, as it is the spirituality and internality of a reader that affects the perception of the verses. Nevertheless, either perceived symbolically or literally, the meaning of the stories is profound, as they do point to the strength of faith and the power of God.
Bibliography
Burkill, Alec T. “The Historical Development of the Story of Syrophoenician Woman (Mark ii: 24-30).” Novum Testamentum 9, no. 3 (1967), 161-177.
Owens, Catherine. “’Hear, O Israel’: Exegetical Blindness and Mark 7:31-37.” Sewanee Theological Review 56, no. 3 (2013): 251-261.
Skinner, Matthew L. “’She Departed to Her House’: Another Dimension of the Syrophoenician Mother’s Faith in Mark 7:24-30.” Word & World 26, no. 1 (2006), 14-21.
Smith, Julien C. H. “The Construction of Identity in Mark 7:24-30: The Syrophoenician Woman and the Problem of Ethnicity.” Biblical Interpretation 20, no. 4-5 (2012): 458-481.
Footnotes
“Mark 7:24-37 (NIV),” Bible Gateway, Web.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Alec T. Burkill, “The Historical Development of the Story of Syrophoenician Woman (Mark ii: 24-30),” Novum Testamentum 9, no. 3 (1967): 162.
Ibid, 167.
“Gospels,” Bible Dictionary, Web.
Burkill, 162.
Ibid, 163.
“Mark,” Bible Dictionary, Web.
“Mark 7:24-37 (NIV),” Bible Gateway, Web.
Matthew L. Skinner, “’She Departed to Her House’: Another Dimension of the Syrophoenician Mother’s Faith in Mark 7:24-30,” Word & World 26, no. 1 (2006): 17.
Catherine Owens, “’Hear, O Israel’: Exegetical Blindness and Mark 7:31-37,” Sewanee Theological Review 56, no. 3 (2013): 258.
Scriptural authority and theological interpretation play a major role in understanding God’s word. Scriptural authority entails the degree to which Christians can consider the Mosaic Laws and dogmas within the Bible as commanding over anthropoids’ credence and behavior. Theological interpretation covers the procedure to biblical explication based on clear assumptions, queries, and concerns with the purpose of listening to God’s voice. The distinction between the Holy writ and theological presupposition should be well established to reduce human errors which might occur from Biblical interpretation. Truly, theological explanation of the ecclesiastical scriptures requires an understanding of God as the source of guidance.
The distinction between scriptural authority and the theological interpretation of the scriptures is important in discerning the flaws of human beings as interpreters of God’s instructions. Entwistle (2015) admits that the Bible is commanding, but humans are liable to mistakes in their bid to interpret the Gospel. The Consecrated Scriptures further advance this argument that the Holy writ is Godly-inspired and its understanding must come from the Sacred Spirit. John the Apostle writes in the Gospel that in the beginning, the Word was with God, and it was God Himself (King James Bible, 1769/2017, John 1:1). In addition, the Good Book talks of the scriptures as breathed by God, useful for teaching and rebuking in righteousness for the servants of God to be truly equipped for God’s good work (King James Bible, 1769/2017, 2 Timothy 3:16-17). Accordingly, the enchiridion stands out as God’s order which requires divine exposition, and, thus, the distinction between the power of the word and interpretation is central.
The separation of Holy writ authority and Christian interpretation of the Bible enables Christians to understand the truthfulness of the Gospel. Entwistle (2015) reaffirms that the Scripture is accurate in all the things It explains, and this cannot be equated to saying, It teaches truth in everything in every area. The Christian understanding of the word of God is presumably based on Biblical teachings, and that is why the Bible is regarded as the source of veracity. When Jesus is teaching his disciples, he is telling them that they shall know the truth and it will set them free (King James Bible, 1769/2017, John 3:28). In essence, the areas of Biblical teachings are covered with verity and explanations, which are wholly crucial if viewed through the clear contradistinction of the authority of the scriptures and theological explanations.
Moreover, by recognizing the dissimilitude of scriptural authority and religious interpretation, Christians are able to appreciate the impacts the former has over the latter and vice versa. Entwistle (2015) says that failing to acknowledge the distinction between canonical authority and theological explanation disparages the influence of divine elucidation on doctrinal reasoning. Christian teachings also acknowledge the importance of Holy authority by obeying God’s commandments. Jesus promises blessings to those who hear the word of God and observing it (King James Bible, 1769/2017, Luke 11:28). Furthermore, the Gospel talks about obeying God rather than man (King James Bible, 1769/2017, Acts 5:28). As evidenced, heeding to God’s commandments align Christians to the ecclesiastical understanding of the scriptures.
In conclusion, there is a distinction between scriptural authority and the theological interpretation of the Bible. This distinction is relevant to the Christian life for many reasons. The dissimilarity between canonical authority and theological explanation enables Christians to acknowledge their weaknesses as humans. The truthfulness of the Bible is also highlighted as being important, and, therefore, divine power is held in high regard. In addition, the dissimilarity of the spiritual ascendancy and theological exposition serves to elucidate the prime relationship between the two. In consequence, religious dominance and theological exegesis are interrelated and act together to sharpen the Christian view of the world.
References
Entwistle, D. (2015). Integrative approaches to psychology and Christianity: An introduction to worldview issues, philosophical foundations, and models of integration (3rd ed.). Wipf and Stock Publishers.
King James Bible. (2017). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1769).
There are many ways of how people can interpret the idea of suffering and the essence of human beings in terms of Christ’s impact on life. Though the ideas of Julian of Norwich are not the most popular in the world, they are frequently discussed in terms of religion and theology. Her writing Revelations of Divine Love is one of the oldest texts that describe the power of Christ on a human life. In this paper, the interpretation of Christ’s sufferings and the understanding of a human being from the ideas offered by Julian of Norwich will be discussed to explain the power of human suffering and the necessity to understand why people are eager to accept the idea of physical suffering in order to gain understanding of a Holy Spirit.
One of the most powerful aspects of Julian of Norwich is the attention to a human being not only as a body with a number of needs and demands. A human being is a powerful unity of a body and a soul that helps to understand the purpose of life. At the same time, a human being should not be interpreted as a meaningful combination of the body and soul. Julian of Norwich explains that a human being may pass through a reunification process with a divine in order to grasp the essence of life and get the required portion of revelation.
The blessed revelation helps to realize that people, who “choose to occupy themselves with earthly business and are always pursuing worldly success have nothing here of God” (Julian of Norwich, Spearing, and Spearing 8). People, who fail to achieve revelation, are not able to rest in this world and enjoy the beauty of the world offered by God. Anyway, the blessed revelation is the result of sufferings that gain the form of three graces defined by Julian of Norwich: vivid perception of Christ’s Passion, bodily sickness, and three wounds that are “the wound of contrition, the wound of compassion and the wound of an earnest longing for God” (Julian of Norwich, Spearing, and Spearing 4).
Julian’s personal understanding of God’s suffering is connected with the possibility to provide people with hope. She shares her dialogue with God and his explanations of sufferings: “Are you well pleased that I suffered for you?… If you are pleased… I am pleased. It is a joy and a delight and an endless happiness to me that I ever endured suffering for you, for if I could suffer more, I would suffer” (Julian of Norwich, Spearing, and Spearing 18). Julian explains that as soon as she understood the power of these words, she got a chance to reach the heavens that were open to all people.
From a theological point of view, Julian explained sin as a necessary aspect of a human life because it helps to develop self-knowledge and the possibility to accept God in a human life. Her theology is based on the ability to understand and enjoy God’s love and compassion. It is not an easy task that people can cope with. Still, its completion is possible, and sufferings turn out to be one of the possible ways to achieve success and blessing.
In general, the ideas offered by Julian of Norwich are powerful and unusual. Physical sufferings are not always understood by people properly. She tries to explain that there is nothing bad or terrible in such sufferings in case they help to achieve the greatest good on the earth.
Bibliography
Julian of Norwich, Spearing, A.C., and Spearing, Elizabeth. Revelations of Divine Love. New York, NY: Penguin Books, 1998.
This paper attempts to interpret and discuss James 1:22-27, a passage that consists of only a few sentences but carries a strong and influential meaning. Also, the meaning of the passage is not communicated directly; instead, it is disguised behind allegories and thus requires a proper and careful interpretation. Many scholars have worked on the translation of this passage and therefore, it currently has several different versions.
In this paper, the discussion of the passage is based on several perceptions. First of all, I will read and interpret its New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) independently, formulating my idea of its meaning. Secondly, I will locate and read several scholarly sources that would cover the aspects of the passage concerning which I have questions; and I will present the interpretation provided by the authors. James 1:22-27 is a persuasive message that intends to clarify to the audience what the true meaning of being Christian and provide the necessary instruction as to the ethics which religious individuals ought to adhere.
James 1:22-27 (NRSV) Individual Interpretation
James 1:22-27 is a passage that pursues one clear purpose – to persuade the readers to adjust their perceptions of their religion as a set of instructions and not merely a text on the paper. The passage begins with the following sentence: “But be doers of the word, and not merely hearers who deceive themselves”.1 This remark of James signifies that he is attempting to convince his audience to behave in a certain way.
The further key of the passage remains unchanged – the author persists with his intention to teach the readers to adopt a set of beliefs according to which they would structure their actions. James wants his readers to become the doers of the word and not only the passive hearers. To make his message even more convincing, James employs an allegory and compares the passive hearers with the individuals in front of a mirror “who look at themselves and, on going away, immediately forget what they were like”.2 Using this comparison, James seems to attempt to illustrate how unreasonable such behavior is, and how pointless it is for one to learn something important and then never use it in practice. The next sentence of the passage demonstrates that James is willing to encourage his readers to follow his instructions by telling them that “doers who act—they will be blessed in their doing”.3
The last two sentences of the passage represent a more direct message as James moves on from the analogy to the straightforward teaching. The last two sentences are explanatory. James says, “If any think they are religious, and do not bridle their tongues but deceive their hearts, their religion is worthless”.4
In this sentence instead of using the vague words such as “hearers of the word” and “doers of the word”, James specified that he is talking particularly about the religious teachings and wisdoms and explains that they are to be perceived as the recommendations as to the future actions of the listeners but not as empty words. James informs his readers that those who treat religious teachings as merely words and fail to act on them risk undermining their religiousness as the wisdom of religion is worthless when it does not have a practical reflection. Finally, in the concluding sentence of the passage, James provides a very clear explanation of the requirements of Christianity from its followers saying, “Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to care for orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world”.5
Interpretation of James 1:22-27 Using the Opinions in the Scholarly Articles
In their articles, the scholars notice strong rhetorical skills of James that enhance the effectiveness of the message he is passing to the audience using the use of memorable words and analogies. In his article, Whartenby comments on the last sentence of James 1:22-27 pointing out the fact that James’ perception of God resembled that of Jesus; that author notices that James referred to God as Father, which implies that there are love and care between God and the believers.6
Besides, Whartenby mentions that “James’ thought seems to move forward using catch words rather than strict logic”.7 With this comment, the author shows his admiration of the style which James has chosen to address his audience. In other words, as a speaker and a writer, James possesses some unique and powerful skills that make his rhetoric more persuasive and effective. Also, Whartenby’s comment notes that James must have had quite a deep and knowledge of his audience to be able to use the persuasion techniques that would leave the strongest impression.
Boyce remarks on the analogy employed by James saying that “To make the point, James now resorts to another unique but powerful image, the image of the mirror”.8
The scholar notices the potential of the allegory used by the speaker. Commenting on the passage, Boyce compares its style with that used by Paul in Corinthians 13:12 where the mirror symbolizes a partial reflection of the reality emphasizing the difference between the real world and the dim reflection. Paul’s aptness to use analogies is also noticeable in his Letter to the Galatians when he says, “as long as an heir is underage, he is no different from a slave”9 comparing an heir before and after inheriting his father’s power to a believer before and after accepting and understanding Christianity. Comparing the two styles of James and Paul and their use of analogies, Boyce points out how powerful this technique is in terms of the impact on the audience, and how versatile the use of one symbol or analogy may be depending on the context in which the speaker decides to present it.
Conclusion: Interpretation after Learning the Perspectives of the Scholars
Having read the articles and the views of the scholars concerning the passage, I started to notice an aspect that remained hidden earlier. The uniqueness of James’ analogy is its double meaning and effect. Namely, saying that the listeners and readers should not be the passive hearers but are to act on the word refers both to the teachings of the Bible and to the passage by James. His analogy and his main point are focused on the persuasion of the audience to use whatever they learn from their religion in practice; however, James’ words also qualify as one of the instructions that the listeners are to act on. That way, the analogy obtains circular nature becoming even more effective.
Bibliography
Boyce, James L. “A Mirror of Identity: Implanted Word and Pure Religion in James 1:17-27.” Word & World 35, no. 3 (2015): 213-221.
Whartenby, Tom. “James 1:17-27, Between Text & Sermon.” Interpretation (2009): 176-178.
Footnotes
Jas 1:22.
Jas 1:24.
Jas 1:25.
Jas 1:26.
Jas 1:27.
Tom Whartenby, “James 1:17-27, Between Text & Sermon,” Interpretation (2009): 176
Ibid, 177.
James L. Boyce, “A Mirror of Identity: Implanted Word and Pure Religion in James 1:17-27,” Word & World 35, no. 3 (2015): 217.
Paul was the role model for the Christian community of his time. The way Paul lived pleased God because the apostle followed the divine rules and was active in his missionary work. He used his freedom of will as a faithful Christian to popularize God’s wisdom and did not try to take advantage of it in any way. Converting people to the Christian faith is the basic principle of missionary work, and Paul succeeded in it. When he preached to the Corinthians, he tried to understand their needs and show empathy for their problems, which helped him convert them to the Christian faith. After the Corinthians understood what Paul wanted to tell them, it was easier for them to interact with the apostle, even though they did not convert to Christianity instantly. The freedom of the human will that God gives people requires spiritual guidance that the Christian missionary provides the faithful.
The first observation is that there were various examples of individuals’ use of free will throughout history. For some, freedom of human choice allows them to sin because it is the individual’s decision. Egoistic pursuit of own desires and satisfaction of own needs exemplifies this behavior. Paul told the Corinthians, recently converted to the Christian faith, not to do it and to pursue the example of the pious life. Question: What makes Paul the role model of truthful believers even though he did not tell the Corinthians that he is one? Paul gave them examples from history while illustrating the ways the faithful should follow. For instance, the story of the Israelites he uses in his preaching tells the believers that they should not remain ignorant. It means that people should remember what happened to their forefathers whom God had rescued from their slavery in Egypt, and it should strengthen their faith. Question: Does this translate into learning from history in general? If so, how this recommendation works when considering that the history is often written by the victors?
The second observation is that it is possible to illustrate the claims mentioned above with the lines from 1 Corinthians 10:1-3: “For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud […]. They drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.” [1] These lines describe how God miraculously redeemed Israel after the Egyptians enslaved the entire nation. This historical episode has become a moral lesson for future generations of Christians because it illustrates the omnipotence of God and the salvation people can receive if they follow Jesus. As a result, it is not strange that prophets retold this story numerous times, emphasizing divine justice. The primary point is that Paul purposefully brought up the exodus narrative in his letter, even though he knew other stories and examples that would be useful for the Corinthians. [2] Question: Has the exodus story been retold because it was a remarkable case of God’s power?
The third observation is that God’s generosity saved people from Israel from immense suffering. God intruded into this situation and kept them from the dreadful life of enslaved people in Egypt. The entire nation would never have escaped the horrible existence if it were not for the kindness of God and his one-sided grace to them. This message is central to the Christian doctrine, which explains the reason why the tale is repeated over and over again. Therefore, Paul had a similar motivation when he retold the story about the exodus from Egypt to Christians in Corinth. Paul emphasized the message slightly differently, claiming that the Corinthians were slaves of their passions that made them sin, and Satan tormented them. Similar to the Israelites who were born into slavery to the Egyptians, they were born into slavery to sin. [3] Question: Are there parallels with the Exodus story?
The fourth observation is that even though most individuals are completely unaware of this concept, they live in sin. Nevertheless, this situation does not mean they can save from the eternal punishment they will receive after death. Yet the Corinthians were aware of it because they were Christians. They were aware of it because God, in his kindness, sent Paul to share the Gospel with them; that was the only thing that might free them from the bonds of sin. Paul explained to the Corinthians about the force of sin. He warned them that, as a result of their wrongdoing, they would experience not only suffering in this life but also the second death, when they would stand before God’s judgment. The apostle lets them know how God, in his love, had sent Jesus to save them. God gave knowledge to people that by the blood of Jesus, God had freed the Corinthians from their spiritual enslavement to sin, just as He had freed the Israelites from their physical slavery to sin in Egypt, and they had faith in it.
Question: How can the passage be interpreted for the modern-day manifestation of spiritual enslavement?
Reference
[1] King James Version, 1969/2017, 1 Corinthians 10:1-3.
[2]. Joel B. Green, and Lee Martin McDonald, The World of the New Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013), n.p. Kindle ed.
[3]. Joel B. Green, and Lee Martin McDonald, The World of the New Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013), n.p. Kindle ed.
The Gospel of John has a similar context to the Synoptics, regardless of the distinctions in language, topic, and content. This text allows church leaders to contextualize Jesus’ life based on the descriptions of the historical context and the community he served. John possessed a fresh, appealing vision, two essential characteristics of charismatic leadership, and lived during a radical upheaval in religious life. John described the change Jesus Christ brought to the community’s spiritual life. The passage from John 18:28-40 permits scholars to conduct a detailed socio-rhetorical analysis of the period when Jesus lived.
The first observation is that John used the scene of Jesus’ trial before Pilate to demonstrate the distinction between the divine kingdom and secular rule. Question: Why did he divide it into three different settings, such as the governor’s palace’s entrance, inside the palace, and back at the entrance with Jewish officials?[1] Jesus’ accusers chose to hand the case over to Pilate instead of appearing in court to give their testimony. Pilate asked the audience gathered in the courtyard what their complaint was against the man they saw. As a result, their actions and responses resulted from a conspiracy to convict the most innocent man; there was no actual trial, no accurate accusations, and no real prosecution. Question: Can the increased emphasis on Jewish hostility to Jesus be explained by the fact that the Gospel of John was written after the final break between Christianity and Judaism? Do these details shown in the passage by John emphasize the innocent character of the Son of God?
The second observation is that the opening scene in John 18:28–40 features two essential dialogues in understanding the passage’s context: between the Jewish religious authorities and Pilate and between Jesus and Pilate. Jesus is brought before the Roman ruler by the Jewish religious leaders; John often refers to them as “the Jews.”[2] When the accusers go before Pilate for formal judgment, they have already decided what must happen. Pilate is not as accommodating, and an argument develops between these two sides. John’s ideological objective has based on the conflict between the Jews, the accusers, and Pilate. According to it, Rome will put the Jewish accusers of King Jesus in disgrace[3]. Question: What would be the explanation for the ideological power dynamic considering the passage’s social and cultural contexts?
The text generally connects social and cultural surfaces with anthropological and sociological ideas. Jesus speaks about the judgment of “this world,” presenting His conflict with the Jews as a court by using images and terminology from the legal sphere. This “critique” is the one that takes place “now”; in parallel with human judgment, the inevitable decision of God is being carried out. Question: Does this mean that the death of Jesus will simultaneously become a death sentence for the trial’s initiator?
The third observation is that Jesus and Pilate’s second exchange in the opening scene is found in John 18:33–38. The kingship of Jesus and the essence of Truth are the topics of this conversation. The ruler of the Roman Empire and Israel’s divine king compare their authority. This excerpt shows that Rome is powerless in the face of the Truth, which looks at the faces of the judged from heaven; it is evident that the absolute ruler is God. Christ was cleansed from sin by suffering, the Cross was not an instrument of self-improvement for Him, but people were redeemed by the sufferings of Christ precisely because He, being sinless, voluntarily took upon Himself the punishment for people in the face of Divine Truth. Question: Does this mean that one should seek punishment and suffer for others’ sins?
Jesus’ status as the divine king is highlighted, and John refers to him as either a king or a kingdom six times in seven verses.[4] This phenomenon makes John’s story the source of knowledge about Jesus as a prophet and a king. For instance, Jesus said: “My kingdom is not of this world.”[5] He was undoubtedly a King, but not one that people can establish, but One that grants people a real kingdom found in heaven. Question: Since God has better judgment in establishing kings, does not democracy undermine the rules of heaven?
The last observation is that Jesus’ royal and prophetic status is frequently used in the discussed passage. While the other Evangelists refer to Jesus’ monarchy, John takes it a step further. Christ is not only a Jewish messiah; his roots are from an “alien planet,” and his reign is part of a much larger universe. Therefore, he responds: “But now my kingdom is from another place.”[6] John sets his objectives higher than the synoptic writers, emphasizing Jesus’ fulfillment of messianic anticipation. Question: Does Jesus invite his disciples to join him in another dimension or this world? Jesus refers to the “kingdom” as the realm over which God rules. Instead of threatening Rome, Jesus discreetly extends Pilate’s invitation to come into his kingdom. When Jesus offers Pilate to be part of the Truth, Pilate declines by asking, “What is truth?”[7]
In Acts 9:36-43, Peter performs the miracle of reviving Tabitha (Dorcas) after she had died of sickness. This occurrence demonstrated the power of life over death. Miracles are considered signs of God’s power, and they signify the relationship between a disciple and God. They guide believers toward Him as they are intended to enlighten faith and compel witnesses to believe in a supreme God willing and capable of intervening on their behalf. The citizens of Joppa had great anticipation that Peter could do something to assist Tabitha, which facilitated the miraculous act. Upon Peter’s arrival in Joppa, He was shown all the good deeds that Tabitha had done, so He put his faith in God’s judgment and prayed for her return. Peter’s actions remind the reader that He was not acting on His own accord but by the power of Jesus. Peter turned to the body and commanded Tabitha to get up, which showed His strong faith and close relationship with God that made the people of Joppa believe in the Lord.
The awakening of Tabitha further underpinned how a change in the state of being would alter the lives of many persons. Tabitha’s community adored and valued her, as seen in how they mourned her demise. Although Tabitha might not have been famous, she was paramount to those who knew her, indicating that she was loved. Tabitha was known as a disciple who was faithful and giving. This biblical account showed that God continued to work through His servants to demonstrate His saving power. He bestowed His power on individuals in need, like widows with no one to lean on.
The Principle the Passage Is Teaching
God is merciful and almighty; He shares His power and channels it through His disciples and faithful servants to perform extraordinary miracles. These occurrences show God’s love and mercy for the living, as well as spread the word of His might. The choice of those He saves and those He acts through inspires believers to be kind, generous, and pure of heart.
Support for the Principle the Passage Is Teaching
I believe the passage teaches how God is merciful and almighty, as depicted through the acts of Peter, the servant of God who raises Tabitha from the dead. This principle is supported in A. W. Tozer’s book, Knowledge of the Holy: The Attributes of God. There, Tozer (2018) asserts that mercy is one of the attributes of God, together with grace, wisdom, and omnipotent power. God’s mercy is demonstrated through His decision to spare the woman and the people she helped by bringing her back to life. His wisdom is shown by choosing this particular woman to be a part of the miracle. Throughout her life, Tabitha was devoted to doing good for others around her, clearly displaying an understanding of Christian values and virtues (Tozer, 2018). God’s wisdom was shared with Peter, who, upon receiving news of Tabitha’s demise, set forth to save her. Lastly, God’s power is seen through his ability to bring back life. The news of Tabitha’s resurrection from the dead caused most people to believe in God. This once again exhibits His supreme wisdom, power, and mercy by leading Joppa’s citizens’ souls to the truth and salvation (Tozer, 2018). Therefore, the passage portrayed the principle of God’s mercifulness and almightiness through the resurrection act.
Reference
Tozer, A. W. (2018). Knowledge of the Holy: The Attributes of God. Their Meaning in the Christian life. Lutterworth Press.