Holy Spirit
Free from desire, you realize
the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only
the manifestations.
-Lao-Tzu, Tao Te Ching
Everyone
knows the term "Holy Spirit," but few attempt to define it. Those who
do usually produce a mix of personal opinion and ambiguous, though doctrinally
sanctioned, apologetics. In the minds of most, this "oil and water" theology
fails to gel into a homogeneous reality. The Islamic understanding, on the
other hand, is remarkably concrete, teaching that the "Holy Spirit"
is Gabriel, the angel of revelation. When we come to Ruh-ul-Qudus in
the Holy Our'an (see ayah 2:87), some (like Yusuf Ali) translate "holy
spirit," others (like Muhammad Al-Hilali and Muhammad Khan) translate
"Gabriel" and still others (like Saheeh International) offer both
"holy spirit" and "Gabriel"-reflecting that, in the creed
of the Muslim, the two terms are synonymous.
While
Islam teaches that the Bible is to one degree or anoth corrupted, many Muslims
contend that the truth of Islam can nonetheless be found in the
Bible. And since Muslims frequently argue Islamic ideology on the
basis of biblical teachings, we might ask, "How does Islam explain the use
of 'Holy Spirit' in the Bible?" For "Angel Gabriel cannot be
substituted for "Holy Spirit" without rendering many Bible passages
implausible or nonsensical.
The
challenge, then, is for Muslims to either make sense of this discrepancy, from
a biblical perspective, or to stop arguing Islam on the basis of the
Bible. This would seem an ultimately fair challenge, for otherwise Muslims can
be accused of the same disingenuousness with which they charge
Christians-namely, picking and choosing on
However, at least two points
need to be considered in order to understand the Islamic perspective. The first
concerns the questionable reliability of the Bible, which will be addressed in
later chapters devoted to that subject. The second point, which dovetails with
the first, is that Muslims do not claim the Bible to be unadulterated
revelation from God pointing the way to the Holy Qur'an and Islam. Rather,
Muslims believe the Bible contains both divine truths and human corruptions.
Indeed, biblical corruptions run the gamut from copying errors to doctrinally
motivated additions, deletions, tailored translation and, in some cases, even
forgery.196
The
thrust of Unitarian Christian and Muslim argument, then, focuses not only upon
faithful adherence to revealed truth, but also upon recognition and disavowal
of scriptural corruptions.
Take, for example,
the Greek word pneuma. In the Bible, pneuma is
translated "spirit." However, Kittel and Friedrich's Theological
Dictionary of the New Testament informs us pneuma can
mean a great deal more (as well as a great deal less): wind,
breath, life, soul, transferred (in a metaphorical sense) sense of spirit,
mantic pneuma (the spirit that stirs and
inspires-"mantic" pertaining to prophecy), divine pneuma (about
which the authors comment, "But there is in Greek no sense of a personal
holy spirit"), the pneuma of Stoicism (an ancient Greek
philosophy to which few today subscribe), and non-Greek development of meaning
(which is to say, unauthentic, for even Greek wasn't the language of Jesus).197
In
reading the above, we find Bible translators assumed considerable literary
license, for the correct translation of pneuma is nowhere
"holy spirit." According to the above text (which is widely
considered one of the most scholarly references on this subject worldwide), the
word pneuma bears diverse possibilities in translation. Of
course, "holy wind" or "holy breath" don't support
Trinitarian doctrine as does "holy spirit," but what's a translator
to do? Seek the truth of God's revelation or manipulate translation to support
institutional decree?
Let's
let Jason BeDuhn answer that question. In his landmark work, Truth in
Translation, he wrote:
In our survey of the use of
"spirit" in the New Testament, we have found no translation that
heeds grammar, syntax, literary context, and cultural environment with complete
consistency. The translators of all of the versions we are comparing allowed
theological bias to interfere with their accuracy. At one point or another,
they all imported the "Holy Spirit" into passages where
"spirit" is being used in a different sense .... no translation
emerged with a perfectly consistent and accurate handling of the many uses and
nuances of "spirit" and "holy spirit."198
Then,
there's the startling "coincidence" between the book "John"
being dramatically more poetic than any of the other gospels and "John's"
unique utilization of the mantic pneuma, as described above.
So great is the disparity that expert theologians admit surprise at the
infrequent mention of the Spirit in "Mark" and "Matthew" compared
to "John."199 Couple this with the fact that the doctrines of
the Trinity and the Incarnation stem primarily from strained interpretations of
the poeticisms of "John" with little, if any, scriptural support from
the other gospels, and the weight of these doctrines overstress their shoddy
foundation.
Undeniably,
there is ample room for interpretation of scripture. There are those who read
the Bible and understand "Holy Spirit" to I a somewhat indefinable
third element of divinity, akin to the pneuma of Stoicism or
the unauthentic meaning developed following the period of revelation. Others
understand God to be One, without partner subdivision, and search for what is
rational and justified according to logic. For this latter group, "Holy
Spirit" cannot be understood except in reference to a tangible entity
separate and distinct from God.
An
example of how the Bible suffers in translation, and why conclusions vary as
consequence, is the fact that paraclete (from the Greek parakletos) can
mean "helper, defender, mediator, consoler." Elsewhere it is translated
"advocate, helper."201 Harper's concurs with "advocate.”202
Why is this important? Because "the word Paraclete occurs only five times
in the Bible, and all five occurrences are in the purported writings of St.
John: 1st Epistle of John 2:1; and the Gospel according to John
14:16, 14:26, 15:26, 16:7."203
Should we assume this word slipped
the minds of the other gospel authors? If so, we would suspect it must not have
been very important. On the contrary, these five passages are critical. In
fact, Trinitari
Whatever
the reasons, paraclete is one more word frequently
mistranslated "Holy Spirit" or "Holy Ghost." Even as modern
translation of the Bible tends toward greater academic integrity, paraclete is
still often mistranslated "counselor" or "comforter". The
correct translation as "helper/' "defender," "mediator/'
"consoler," "advocate," or "helper" would imply
an actual physical entity, which would be consistent with the fact that
"some trace the origin of the use of parakletos in the Johannine
works back to the concept of heavenly helpers.''204 And who could be a
greater "heavenly helper" than Gabriel, the angel of revelation
himself?
Similarly,
in its first-century Greek usage, "Parakletos was a legal
term used mainly of advocate, defender, or intercessor. True to its basic
meaning one 'called out to stand beside, defend, advise or intercede,' it was
used of legal counsel and witnesses alike."205
These
quotes help us to understand what paraclete meant in the
period of revelation. But somewhere in the passage of time, select theologians
claimed to know better, and developed a radically different understanding of
the word. Association of parakletos with a physical entity
proved inconvenient to those who sought to bolster the Trinitarian argument,
and appears to have been avoided at all costs.
And so, to review:
1. The definition of "holy
spirit" is elusive in Christianity, but concrete in Islam, being synonymous
with Gabriel, the angel of revelation.
2. There are many definitions
of pneuma, but nowhere is it "holy spirit" in its
original Greek meaning.
3. Only according to the derived
and unauthentic, "non-Greek development of meaning" is pneuma translated
to "holy spirit."
4. Christian theology regarding
the Holy Spirit depends almost exclusively on the Gospel and First Epistle of
"John.
5. The Paraclete is not
mentioned in any of the other books
6. Correct translation of paraclete appears
to imply a material entity, which could be human or angelic.
With these points firmly in
mind, what remains is to trace the meaning of Paraclete in the
five NT verses in which it appears. Taken in order:
1. The
First Epistle of John, 2:1 (I Jn 2:1) identifies Jesus Christ as a
"paraclete" (herein translated "advocate": "And if
anyone sins, we have an advocate [i.e., paraclete] with the Father, Jesus
Christ the righteous.” So whatever a "paraclete" is-advocate, helper,
comforter, whatever- Jesus was one, according to this verse.
2. John
14:16-17 reads, “And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another
helper [i.e.. paraclete], that he may abide with you forever, even the Spirit
of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor know
him; but you know him, for dwells with you and will be in you."
Note the
qualifying adjective "another" in the phrase "another
helper." The Greek word used in this verse is allos, the
meaning which is '''the other,' strictly where there are many, as distinct
from heteros, where there are only two ..."206 The
wording is specific and leave no room for interpretation. In this verse, Jesus
advised his disciples- and, by extension, all humankind-to anticipate another
paraclete (i.e., helper) following his ministry. Not just another helper, but one
characterized by honesty (i.e., "the spirit of truth") and bearing an
eternal (i.e., that he may abide with you forever) message.
Can we
conclude that this "other" (i.e., "'the other,' strictly wh.
there are many") is the final prophet in the long line of prophets, bearing
a final revelation? Is this not a more comfortable conclusion than the strained
claim that Jesus describes some mystical "holy spirit," derived from
an unauthentic, "non-Greek development of meaning?” On the other hand, the
conclusion that Jesus is unique in a "begotten, not made, son of God"
sense if there is another, "strictly where th
Lest
there be any confusion over this point, the New Testament confirms that the
Greek pneuma (translated below as "spirit") is not
restricted to mystical beings but can refer to flesh and blood humans, both
good and bad. For example, the First Epistle of John 4:1-3 states:
Beloved, do not believe every
spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false
prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God:
every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God,
and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh
is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard
was coming, and is now already in the world.
This verse not only clarifies
the human nature of some "spirits" (i.e., pneuma), but
Muslims claim that this verse admits Muhammad into the company of those who are
"of God," for every spirit that "con- fesses
that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God." Muhammad said it, all
Muslims affirm it, the Holy Qur'an documents it, and in the minds of a billion
Muslims, that settles it.
3. & 4. The
third reference to "paraclete" is in John 14:26, which reads,
"But the helper [i.e., Paraclete], the holy spirit, whom the Father will
send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance
all things that I said to you."
The fourth reference, John
15:26, reads much the same. Once again, Trinitarians may justify their
mysticisms with this verse. Others perceive reference to a prophet who will
remind the world of Jesus' true message, as opposed to the misdirection which
developed in the beliefs and doctrines of later generations. Once again,
Muslims suggest Christians should consider Muhammad and the Holy Qur'an. The
union of the comments, "He will bear witness to the truth of what Jesus
did and said and was,"207 and "even though this divine
Advocate is the very 'Spirit of truth' (John 14:16; 15:26; 16:13), the world
will not listen to him
5. The
final mention of paraclete is in John 16:7: "Nevertheles
I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not
go away, the helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send hi
to you."
This last reference to the Paraclete,
like a small but high-veloci
To compound the confusion, Jesus
seems to have contradicted himself. In John 14:17, the Paraclete is
preexistent: "but you know him [i.e., the Paraclete], for he dwells with
you and will be in you," and this makes sense considering that Jesus is
himself identified as Paraclete 1 John 2:1. However, in John 16:7 the Paraclete
is foretold: "If I do not go away, the helper [i.e., the Paraclete] will
not come to you; but if I depart, I will send him to you." The church's
conclusion? "The Paraclete is another Paraclete in whom Jesus comes but
who is not Jesus (14: 16:7)."210 Some accept that explanation.
Others believe Jesus spoke himself in one case and of a prophet to follow in
the other. Billions Muslims have voted Muhammad as the fulfilment of this prophe
No comments :
Post a Comment