Published by

Recommendations

Info

Bundahishn, which is a Ninth Century AD writing. 22 So the end result is that we know very little concerning Zoroaster’s theology except through very late sources not written by him. 23 There is certainly no rival here to Jesus’ teaching on his deity. The Qur'an definitely does not elevate Muhammad to the place of Allah (Surahs 14:11; 40:78) or worship Muhammad (Surahs 21:25-26; 23:32; 41:14). So while Muhammad is Allah's chief prophet and messenger (Surahs 4:13-14; 16:43-44; 33:6, 33), there is no attempt to make him deity. To the contrary, Allah has no partners (Surahs 4:48, 171; 5:72, 117). Thus, Muhammad does not make claims such as those made by Jesus in the Gospels. As Muslim scholar Anderson notes, for Islam, “the one unforgiveable sin is that of shirk, or associating anyone or anything with the Almighty. The very idea of an incarnation of the deity is therefore anathema, or simple blasphemy.” 24 Neither does the Old Testament place any prophet or leader on God's level. Arguably the most sacred text in the Old Testament, the Shema (Deut. 6:4) left no room for prophets or other human beings to co-occupy God’s place or throne. Rather, we are told that God will not share his glory with anyone else (Isa. 48:11). So neither are Abraham, David, Isaiah, Daniel, or anyone else candidates for godhood, and again, no claims are made for them such as Jesus makes in the Gospels. In sum, none of these chief founders of the major world religions viewed so far claimed to be deity. Whenever their later followers may have drifted in such a direction, it was not because they were following their founder’s original teachings or directions. Further, such later 22 Yamauchi, “Life, Death, and the Afterlife in the Ancient Near East,” 48; Negosian, World Religions, 221-222. 23 As in the example from Yamauchi, “Life, Death, and the Afterlife in the Ancient Near East,” 49; cf. Corduan, A Tapestry of Faiths, 63. 24 J.N.D. Anderson, Christianity and Comparative Religion (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1970), 47 (Anderson’s emphasis). 18
notions exhibit two additionally significant problems. These later world religious concepts carry largely different meanings than the Christian sense, meaning that they were not in fact saying the same thing anyway. Further, the books in which these teachings are reported are far too late to track these different teachings to the original founders, both their original time of writing as well as their earliest extant copies. The Case of Krishna Representing Hinduism, perhaps Krishna comes the closest to being understood as God, according to their own texts. The most important manifestation of Vishnu, Krishna is referred to in the lofty terms of deity in the Bhagavad-Gita and even worshipped (for example, 4:13, 15; 9:18-20, 23; 18:65). The Bhagavad-Gita is a part of the larger text, the Mahābhārata. Yet, there are several serious problems here. Initially, in what sense does Hindu teaching consider this notion of deity? Is it a reference to deity in the full theistic sense, or is it conceived some other way? To be God in the normal Hindu sense would be quite distinct from the views of the Jewish, Christian, or Muslim traditions. 25 In the monotheistic religions, God is by nature totally separate from his creation. Further, human beings do not become God. In Christianity, there is only one such Incarnation of God, Jesus Christ. In the Bhagavad-Gita, however, the 25 An exceptional example of this difference in outlooks between Christian and Hindu believers is an older volume by Swami Akhilananda. He argues clearly that Jesus was actually an incarnation of God (37-39, 50, 55) and additionally agrees “in regarding Christ as unique” (56). Incredibly, he even quotes Swami Vivekananda as saying, “If I, as an Oriental, have to worship Jesus of Nazareth, there is only one way left to me, that is, to worship Him as God and nothing else.” (55)! But as to the meaning of these comments, Akhilananda is also exceptionally clear that there are major differences with the Christian view, for Hindus hold that there are many such incarnations of God (38-56, especially 44, 49, 51, 55-56). Swami Akhilananda, Hindu View of Christ (New York: Philosophical Library, 1949). The page numbers in this footnote are taken from an essay drawn from this book, Akhilananda’s “Hindu View of Christ” in Christianity: Some Non-Christian Appraisals, ed. by David W. McKain (New York: McGraw- Hill, 1964), 34-56. 19
Page 1 and 2: 1
Page 3 and 4: 3
Page 5 and 6: 2. Jesus Himself as the Path to Sal
Page 7 and 8: Others, of course, take contrary vi
Page 9 and 10: would be the bottom line—but not
Page 11 and 12: the resurrection in this same conte
Page 13 and 14: theme from this point onwards is th
Page 15 and 16: figures and heroic saints.” 13 Bu
Page 17: Geographically, they would congrega
Page 21 and 22: eturn every 8,600,000 years? We are
Page 23 and 24: somewhat different, but severe hist
Page 25 and 26: the Son of Man, Jesus forgave sins
Page 27 and 28: fact, this phenomenon was “more l
Page 29 and 30: (usually the factual essence of the
Page 31 and 32: 2. Jesus Himself as the Path to Sal
Page 33 and 34: Perhaps surprisingly, critical scho
Page 35 and 36: ones we have, but we can never real
Page 37 and 38: Summarizing the results of his over
Page 39 and 40: Jesus taught that his death would s
Page 41 and 42: In other words, Christianity may be
Page 43 and 44: differences with the general Christ
Page 45 and 46: case is built on what is known to b
Page 47 and 48: still a very distinctive angle on t
Page 49 and 50: this central nature, if these six i

Published by

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?