September 26: Hadith on Jesus the mystic / Parables
Assignment
In Tarif Khalidi, The Muslim Jesus, read sayings #79-303 (pp. 95-218). Focus on the sayings themselves, not the references or the translator’s comments.
- What changes do you see in how Jesus is depicted here, compared to the hadith we read for the previous class?
- Which specific sayings do you recognize as reflecting, reinterpreting, or distorting specific sayings of Jesus from the canonical Gospels?
- Can you imagine how the Middle Eastern context in which these sayings circulated might have affected how Jesus was portrayed?
- What might the motivations for this portrait of Jesus be?
- Is this reimagining of Jesus reasonable, given the Muslim authors’ context, assumptions, and motivations? Is it in any way unethical?
- Are this portrayal of Jesus so different from that in the canonical Gospels that it isn’t really talking about the same person, but is just imagining an essentially different Jesus to fit Muslim conceptions?
Then write and post a first draft of your own gospel’s version of a parable, with comments explaining your choices and comparing them to choices made by the Talmud and/or the Muslim authors. You could rework one or more specific parables from the canonical Gospels, or a saying from The Muslim Jesus, or have Jesus employ a different kind of teaching that takes the place of parables. Please take some time to comment on what others have posted as well.
In class today I will also ask everyone about the steps they’ve taken toward figuring out life after college.
Notes from class
We reached some solid conclusions about this collective Muslim portrait of Jesus:
- Unlike the Qur’an, it is not defending Jesus against Jewish accusations or polemicizing against Christians (although it does assume some Qur’anic notions like the virgin birth and Jesus’ humanity).
- Unlike the Qur’an, it is not presenting Jesus as a prophet but as a holy man, a Sufi teacher who lives a life of asceticism and devotional piety and goes about dispensing wisdom and spiritual advice. He isn’t the best holy man, either; he makes mistakes, and John the Baptist and other holy men come off as superior to him.
- It alludes to numerous specific passages from the text of the canonical Gospels, but it does not rewrite them to counter them, as the Talmud did. Instead it just highlights the otherworldly and ascetic dimensions of the Gospels’ portrait of Jesus, and interprets other dimensions of the Gospels to fit that ascetic Sufi teacher portrait. For example, miracles serve as teachable moments rather than as proofs of his prophethood or divine power.
- So the Jesus they present is not a polemical counter-Christian Jesus, but just an alternative Jesus. It is not the same Jesus: although the Gospels do have Jesus say some otherworldly things, we don’t think they present Jesus as advocating a life of “asceticism and pious exertion.”
- So this image of Jesus wasn’t constructed with the goal of understanding or arguing with Christians; it was constructed for strictly internal purposes: Jesus is used to argue against the authors’ Muslim opponents, including especially worldly scholars.
Recent Comments in this Document
December 12, 2017 at 12:47 am
As previously stated, it is an invitation for all, regardless of race, to believe in Jesus as the Savior of all mankind. The reader should see that all those around him/her have that same opportunity as they do to come to the knowledge of Jesus’ divine power to save.
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:45 am
Here, I attempt to show the reader that Thomas is believing because Jesus is present with him. That belief goes away the same time Jesus goes away. Thomas is holding onto this idea that if Jesus goes away, His power and divinity disappear as well.
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:43 am
Traditional site of Thomas’ martyrdom
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:42 am
Robert Frykenberg notes, “What had begun with the Thomas Tradition–belief that the Apostle brought the Gospel to India in AD 52–remains extremely strong, whatever the historicity of this tradition may be. Thomas Christians continue to respond to sceptics that the evidence for Thomas coming to India is as strong as the evidence for Peter coming to Rome. The presence of the Gospel in India, from this perspective, antedates any canon, creed, or council in the West” (Christianity in India: From Beginnings to the Present).
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:37 am
See Matthew 28:19
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:27 am
This is not to be seen as Jesus chastising Thomas. It should be seen as an internal struggle. Thomas is asking himself, “Why did I not believe?” “What is wrong with me?”
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:25 am
As discussed in the opening comments, this is directed towards those who desire tangible evidence of Jesus’ divinity. It brings the concept of faith in the picture. I agree with the definition of faith given in Hebrews 11:1 which reads, “Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:21 am
This final chapter on the resurrection of Jesus is addressed to those who hold atheist or agnostic views. These two traditions are generally thought of wanting tangible evidence or proven by science. Therefore, I felt it was key to use Thomas who lacked faith and wanted tangible evidence that Jesus indeed lived again. It also shows that even the most stubborn of people stuck in their ways can accept Jesus as the Savior of all mankind. With the desire for tangible evidence it also brings in the concept of faith and its importance.
The latter portion of this chapter reiterates the message of the previous chapter. Jesus is the Savior of the world regardless of race. For this purpose it was important to include Thomas’ travels to the subcontinent of India.
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:12 am
Although brief, this verse should give purpose to Jesus’ death. If this had not been included the reader would question why Jesus had died. He had to have a purpose in dying or a reason or it would simply imply the Pharisees finally caught up to Jesus.
See in context
December 12, 2017 at 12:08 am
I speculate that this was done in secret as the Roman soldier is wary of the penalty of such an act. I am not familiar with Roman law but I think the consequences would be heavy should he be caught conversing with the Jews.
See in context