God In Islam Research Articles

Concepts of God in Islam

AbstractThis article explores the various ways in which Muslims, in the past and the present, think about God. The article canvasses a range of views on questions and puzzles pertaining to the essence and attributes of God, the basis of God's Justice, the transcendence of God, and our ability to know and understand God. We encounter a diverse, and at times radically divergent range of views on how best to understand divinity within the tradition of Islam. Given the various conceptions of divinity, available within the tradition, I develop an argument for the view that God is best understood as love. The view that God is love, I contend, emerges directly from the Quran, which is a document that sits at the very heart of the Islamic tradition.

Misconceptions About the Caliphate in Islam

AbstractThree common misconceptions about the caliphate in Islam are explored alleging: 1) that there has been only one caliph at a given time governing all Muslims, uninterrupted until the caliphate system was abolished in 1924, 2) that caliphs governed vast territories, 3) that God in Islam mandates a blueprint for governance called the caliphate. This essay begins with the role the caliphate played in agendas of Islamic movements over the last 100 years. Then the historic development of the caliphate is discussed providing the background to explore the first two misconceptions. The third misconception is consequently addressed through a linguistic, Qur'anic, and historical analysis of the word “caliphate.” The fact that neither the Qur'an, nor the Prophet saw himself as a head of state is explored, and the misappropriation of the word “constitution” to replace the word “pact” in “the pact of Medina” is pointed out. A simple classification of three types of “caliphates” is suggested, emphasizing the wide range of connotations it conveys. Finally, counterarguments using the Qur'an and Hadith are addressed. The essay concludes with the idea that what makes a state Islamic are not name nor its structure, but rather its orientation towards Qur'anic ethical values.

Writing about Islam for Youth: A Study of Two Authors and Two World Views

ABSTRACTThis is a study of two authors who wrote about Islam for youth: Florence Mary Fitch and Reza Aslan. Fitch's book, Allah, the God of Islam: Moslem Life and Worship (1950), and Aslan's No God but God: The Origins, Evolution of Islam (2011b) offer both historical and current views of Islam and the Prophet Mohammad. Although they wrote some 61 years apart, a review of their works reveals similar views, especially concerning the need for reform in Islam. This study reveals two different worldviews about the development of Islam. Fitch's views, although generally supportive of Islam, reflect Western society's view of Islam and Mohammad over half a century ago, while Aslan, a Muslim-reformist, emphasizes current democratic and humanitarian aspects of Islam that are well-suited for the modern world. Subjects discussed include Mohammad's revelations from Allah, the conquering of Mecca by Mohammad and the ending of idolatry, the beginning of Islam as a dominant religion, the role of women in Islam, the hijab and its origins and use, the jihad and its various meanings and applications, the Quran and its conflicting interpretations, the development and decline of the Caliphate, and the decentralization of Islam. The discussion ends with this quote from Aslan: “The Islamic Reformation is already here.”

Martyrdom in Modern Islam

Meir Hatina, associate professor of Islamic and Middle Eastern studies anddirector of the Levtzion Center for Islamic studies at the Hebrew Universityof Jerusalem, explores the evolving perceptions of martyrdom in modern timesand their relevance on past legacies in both Sunni and Shi‘i milieus. He alsomakes comparative references to Judaism, Christianity, and other non-Islamiccultures. The book is divided into eight chapters, an introduction, a conclusion,a bibliography, and an index.In the introduction the author discusses the manifestations of martyrdomthroughout history, its definitions, socio-political implications, and importancein various world religions. In order to present this concept’s historical evolutionand notions and how it is an effective tool for forming and reinforcinggroups, Hatina has framed his book in a series of well-arranged chapters.In the first chapter, “Defying the Oppressor: Martyrdom in Judaism andChristianity,” the author traces the historical and theological foundations ofthis phenomenon in both religions. He relates how traditional Jews were readyto sacrifice their life and viewed martyrdom as the highest degree of their lovefor God. However, he argues that with the advent of the Zionist movement,this readiness was replaced “by an activist approach to self-sacrifice for thenational revival.” Christians, on the other hand, considered martyrdom “thekey for salvation.” By quoting the remarks of Quintus Tertullian (d. c. 240),the father of Latin Christianity, namely, “your cruelty is our glory” and “theblood of the martyrs is the seed of the church” (p. 26), Hatina seeks to expressthe early Christians’ readiness to embrace their non-violent and defensivedeaths at the hands of the pagan Romans.In chapter 2, “Dying for God in Islam,” Hatina delineates the evidence ofmartyrdom in Islamic texts and its diverse interpretations by renowned scholars.He mentions the two types of death in this regard – death for the cause of Allahand self-inflicted suicide – and cites the relevant fatwas of both Sunni and Shi‘ischolars. Denouncing any sort of self-inflicted suicide, including murder withreference to shar‘ī texts, he nevertheless appreciates the soldiers’ wish for deathon the battlefield against their enemies. He presents martyrdom in Islamic legalthought as an exalted form of death and argues that theologians stressed that asoldier who desires such a death eventually finds a greater reward ...

The relationship between religion and the state: the institution of ‘Commandment of the Faithful’ in Morocco

The term ‘Amir al-Mou’mineen’ (Commander of the Faithful) and ‘caliph’ were first bestowed on Omar Bin al-Khattab who became the successor of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) two-and-a-half years after he passed away. By virtue of the political and religious connotations of the term, the title conveyed overarching political authority – a kind of absolute power. The notion of Commander of the Faithful facilitated oppression of those who held different views, directly or indirectly, through employing fatawa, that is religious interpretations and edicts, in addition to mobilizing religious followers and devotees. This excess of political power is based on the definition of Imarat al-Mu’mineen (Commandment of the Faithful) or the Caliphate common in religious jurisprudence. This definition was coined by Ibn Khaldoun, and may be translated as: ‘making people abide by the view of Shar (the Law of God in Islam) regarding their temporal and afterlife interests’. Morocco has been no different from the rest of the Islamic world over the centuries, and now two distinct phenomena are apparent. First, the emergence of different groups, each with its own ideology and claims to be defending religion and pursuing its implementation. Such groups consider all other ways of thinking as apostasy that must be eliminated; while juxtaposed to them, there exist intellectual currents calling for the continued separation of religion and the state and its laws. During the past two decades this phenomenon has led to tragic situations in a considerable number of Islamic states, whose prospects now seem very gloomy. Second, a tight regulation of state institutions, together with constitutional guarantees of individual rights and freedoms, can prevent the manipulation of the state in the name of religion, and its use for tyranny and the oppression of individuals and minorities, be it in the name of Commandment of the Faithful or any other term. It seems that Morocco is aware of the power of these two phenomena, especially after it faced social unrest in 1992 and 2001, which almost destroyed its stability.

A living god, a living word: Christian and Muslim revelation in perspective

Recent discussion concerning the relationship between the god of Islam and the god of Christianity prompted this article, which explores that relationship by looking at the nature of revelation in each religion and how that revelation reflects the nature of each god. This exploration indicates that these gods are not one and the same, because while the revelation found in the Qur’an is transcendent and static, revealing a god who is the same, the revelation found in Jesus Christ is both immanent and living, as is Jesus himself. The effect this has on preaching and missions is discussed in the conclusion.

Facts and controversies on female genital mutilation and Islam

ABSTRACTFemale genital mutilation (FGM) is a very ancient traditional and cultural ritual. Strategies and policies have been implemented to abandon this practice. However, despite commendable work, it is still prevalent, mainly in Muslim countries. FGM predates Islam. It is not mentioned in the Qur'an (the verbatim word of God in Islam). Muslim religious authorities agree that all types of mutilation, including FGM, are condemned. ‘Sensitivity’ to cultural traditions that erroneously associate FGM with Islam is misplaced. The principle of ‘do no harm’, endorsed by Islam, supersedes cultural practices, logically eliminating FGM from receiving any Islamic religious endorsement.

The concept of omniscience of Islamic God from the Christian Perspective

The concept of omniscience of Islamic God from the Christian Perspective

4000 Jaar van soeke na God

The 4000-year quest for GodSouth Africans live in a time of growing unease amongst Afrikaansspeaking Christians about the traditional God-image of their childhood. As a con-sequence, churches are losing members – which is of concern to the church’s leaders. By referring to Karen Armstrong’s book, A History of God (1999), this article shows that rethinking the idea of God is not new and that healthy iconoclasm is part and parcel of religions as evolving and changing organisms. Over the past 4000 years, each generation created an image of God that worked for them. The article reflects on the God of Judaism, the Christian God, the God of Islam, the God of the philosophers, the mystics, the reformers and the thinkers of the Enlightenment to the eventual eclipse of God in twentieth-century Europe. The purpose of the exercise is to encourage Christians to engage with the process and create a sense of God for themselves by taking heed of the negative and positive moments in God’s long history.

“Angelicdevilish” combinations

This essay explores Rushdie’s references to Milton’s Paradise Lost, and his Satan in particular. Rushdie’s implicit allusions to Milton’s fallen angel allow him to establish the closeness of angelic and devilish qualities and the solubility of the boundary between good and evil. His explicit quotations from Paradise Lost allow him to diverge from Milton: Satan’s words in the mouth of Rushdie’s Gibreel Farishta insist not on the intransigence of Satan’s evil and punishment (as they do in Paradise Lost), but rather on evil’s amorphous pervasiveness and ubiquity. Rushdie suggests that “good” and “evil” exist simultaneously in everyone. He blurs the line between them, and in so doing also begins to blur the line between British and immigrant “Other”. Milton writes a Christian, canonical and sometimes imperialist text; Rushdie provides an Islamic, postcolonial response. Milton writes to examine the ways of a Christian God; Rushdie uses Milton’s poem as an intertext in investigating the words, acts and writings of an Islamic God’s prophet.

God's Deputy: Materials On Islam's Image of Man

HE anthropological question, What is man s place in the cosmos I and in history?, can be answered in the monotheistic religions only by referring to God. Man is God's creature. This does not mean, however, that he is merely God's object. By revealing himself to man, and by entering into history with him, God lifts man above the rest of his creation. This means for Christian theology that God makes man a person'. For Islamic theology too this statement should be acceptable. Man as an individual is responsible before God for his deeds. History as described by the Koran consists of a series of pacts ('ahd m-idq) between God an mankind which impose duties on mankind, but imply at the same time that God takes mankind as his partners. Certainly, the Koran does not view them as equal partners; but this is also true of the other religions. Can we define more precisely the rank which man occupies vis-'avis God in Islam? It is greatly different from that ascribed to him by Judaism and Christianism. For them the declaration of Genesis 1,26-27 holds good: God created man in his image. For Islam, with its anxiety to avoid anthropomorphism, this is impossible. The phrase was known to the Muslims in the shape of a hadft: God created Adam in his image, his form (cald s uratilih02; but they changed its meaning: according to Ibn Hazm, e.g., it does not say that Adam had been created in God's form, but that God chose for Adam one of the many forms in his possession in order to imprint it on him3. The statement of Koran 42,11 must remain valid: laysa ka-mitlihi s'ay', nothing is like God.

Contemporary Indonesian Buddhism and Monotheism

The philosophical basis of the Indonesian state, first framed in 1945, is the Panca Sila or Five Principles. Since 1985 all political and social organizations including religious ones have had to subscribe to the Panca Sila as their sole philosophical principle (Azas Tunggal). The first of the Five Principles is belief in Tuhan Yang Maha Esa, normally, though not entirely satisfactorily, translated as the One Supreme God. The founders of the state had accepted this principle rather than a more specific statement of belief in the God of Islam, the religion of the majority of the people. Its formulation was clearly a compromise, aimed at stressing the importance of religion in the state, but avoiding declaring Islam as the state religion. As it stood, the principle was generally acceptable to followers of Islam, Christianity and Hinduism, and all religions which did acknowledge the existence of God, in one form or another.