بسم الله الرحمن
الرحيم
وصلى الله على
نبينا محمد
وعلى اهل بيته
الطيبين الطاهرين المظلومين
According to trinitarian Christianity, Christ is “begotten” of God “the
Father”, while not having a beginning, being co-eternal with God “the Father”.
Our objection is how can someone be “begotten” while simultaneously eternal
without beginning? It is a contradiction in terms. The Christian New Testament
says about Christ that God addressed him with the words of the Psalm:
בְּנִי אַתָּה--אֲנִי, הַיּוֹם יְלִדְתִּיךָ
“Thou art My son, this day have I begotten thee.”
[Psalm 2:7]
This is affirmed
in Acts 13:33 and Hebrews 1:5; 5:5. These are the claimed proof texts for the
trinitarian doctrine that Jesus is literally “begotten” by God “the Father”,
which they interpret to mean as being of the same substance as God “the Father”.
The Greek word used in the New Testament is gegennēka “have begotten” from the
verb gennaó which means “to beget, to bring forth, procreate a descendant,
produce offspring” and in the passive “to be born”. Now it is impossible for
someone to be eternal who is born or begotten, who was given birth to. An early
Christian doctrine, Arianism, associated with Arius [d. 336 CE], recognized
this difficulty and posited that although Christ was the divine “Son of God”,
sharing divinity with “God the Father”, being of the same substance as him,
since Christ was begotten by the “Father” he was not eternal but had a
beginning. In this way the Arians resolved the contradiction by putting forward
the idea that the second person of the triune “godhead”, though technically God
and of the same substance as God the “Father”, was nevertheless not eternal but
had a beginning. This doctrine was condemned as heresy in the Council of Nicea
in 325 CE. The so-called “orthodox” trinitarian Church believes that Christ is “eternally
begotten” but as I have said, that is illogical, a contradiction in terms, and
meaningless from the perspective of language. One cannot be eternal and
begotten simultaneously, as these are opposites. The Psalm itself states that
the son is begotten “today”, refuting the idea of eternal or timeless
begetting. Interestingly, this absurd doctrine of the “Father” eternally
begetting the “Son” resembles the Ashari doctrine of Allah eternally speaking
the Qur’an, known as Kalam Nafsi. The orthodox Islamic belief is that
events do occur in the Essence of God, meaning He speaks and commits actions
when and as He wills. Influenced by the Platonic idea that stasis is
perfection, the Asharis denied the occurrence of events within God’s Essence,
believing that to be an imperfection based on their Platonic worldview and
false philosophical framework for establishing the existence of God. Hence they
stated that the Qur’an is eternal and does not have a beginning, i.e. Allah has
been speaking the Qur’an eternally. Furthermore, according to the Asharis, this
eternal Qur’an is not the Qur’an we read with its letters and sounds, but is an
ibara or expression of what we have of the Qur’an between our hands
which transcends letters and sounds. For all intents and purposes, the Asharis
actually believe in two Qur’ans, an eternal speech with Allah that is an
expression of meaning, and the concrete Qur’an which we have that consists of
letters and sounds, which the Asharis not only acknowledge as being distinct
from the eternal Qur’an but also a created thing in line with the Mu’tazilite
doctrine.
No comments:
Post a Comment