Author: Andre Coleman

CHAPTER TWOA THEOLOGICAL REFLECTION ON UNITY AND UNIQUENESS
Biblical and Theological Basis

Unity and uniqueness are integral and consistent to the composition of the universe. The world around and the skies above reveal the Creator’s work, a tapestry of creation that abounds with harmony and diversity. The world He fashioned overflows with originality and there are distinct markings of diversity, yet all of the differences are held together in consistent unity. Christian theology accounts for both the coherence of the universe and the distinctiveness of its parts. This is the core of the Apostle Paul’s confession; “all things were created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities-all things were created through Him and for Him. He (Jesus Christ) is before all things, and in Him all things hold together” (Colossians 1:16). The created order of things in the world is not static; it is utterly dynamic. The cosmos is loaded with dynamic diversity that is simultaneously being held together in unity, in Christ.

Both the Old and New Testaments support the theme of uniqueness and unity. In this theological reflection the researcher will examine the idea of unity and uniqueness as revealed in Scripture. The theological basis for this project is that the theme of unity and uniqueness is one of God’s overarching principles conveyed in the revelation of the Godhead, the composition of the Canon, and in the design of the institutions of marriage and Church. In this paper, the researcher will give greater attention to the study of the Trinity because, “all the crucial elements in ecclesiology and entire theology are rooted in the doctrine of the Trinity.”

Unity and Uniqueness in the Godhead

The theme of uniqueness and unity exists in creation is an echo of the presence of uniqueness and unity in God. One of the most basic Christian beliefs is that God is “one God in three persons.” This doctrine is recognized in the historic Christian faith as the doctrine of the Trinity. While the word “trinity” does not occur in the Bible, nor is the theological concept fully described in the Text, the idea is rooted in the scriptures. Since there is no overt reference to God as Triune in the Bible, Emil Brunner, the Swiss Protestant theologian gives an insightful perspective: “The ecclesiastical doctrine of the Trinity, established by the dogma of the ancient Church, is not Biblical kerygma, therefore it is not the kerygma of the Church, but is a theological doctrine which defends the central faith of the Bible and of the Church.”

Early church theologians developed the term Trinity as a way to communicate the three distinctive persons of God that constitute one divine being. They developed this doctrine in resistance against dangerous heresies, in which Christ with God was called into question, either on God’s behalf or on Christ’s. Jurgen Moltmann, an influential thinker on modern Trinitarian theology, writes, “It was only in these controversies that Trinitarian dogma grew up, and with the dogma grew its formulation, as philosophical terminology was given a new theological mould.” This new doctrine would be derived from the Latin word trinitas, meaning “threeness,” referring to the Tri-unity of God.

This doctrine conveys that the eternal Godhead exists as three distinct Persons. All three—the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit -are distinct yet interconnected. The early church explored the revelation of God’s three-in-oneness and the conclusions of these explorations were expressed in the Athanasian Creed, “We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons: nor dividing the substance.” This theme of Trinity can be summed up in this concise way: “The Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God; yet, there are not three gods, but one God.”

Man did not invent this doctrine of Trinity; this doctrinal position was established in creed to articulate the concept of a triune God based on the revelation through Scripture of three manifestations of the Godhead. In the first century church arguments were intense regarding what precisely was “three” about God, what was a divine person, what was “one” about God, what this meant for now, and how the nature and identity of Jesus should be understood. The early church discussions did not remove the mystery; rather the creed they established on the doctrine of the Trinity merely gives clarity within the mystery, providing reassurance by wrapping words around an imagination expanding reality.

The creeds are nothing more than a well-ordered arrangement of the facts of Scripture which concern the doctrine of the Trinity. Hodge writes that, “They assert the distinct personality of the Father, Son and Spirit; their mutual relation as expressed by those terms; their absolute unity as to substance or essence, and their consequent perfect equality; and the subordination of the Son to the Father, and of the Spirit to the Father and the Son, as the mode of subsistence and operation. These are Scriptural facts, to which the creeds in question add nothing; and it is in this sense they have been accepted by the Church universal.”

While the creed gives clarity to the mystery, it in now way contains an explanation for the God who created the heavens and the earth. God’s nature and essence cannot be completely understood by the human mind. Finite minds cannot comprehend an infinite God. The fullness of the nature of God remains outside of our experience and knowledge. God is transcendent and the uniqueness and unity within the Godhead is described in complex terms. The church did not invent the doctrine of the trinity; it just accepted it from what God revealed about Himself through the Bible.

The doctrine of the Trinity gives us a key to understanding unity in diversity. Inside this dogma is an implicit uniqueness within the distinctive persons of the Godhead that does not diminish the unified essence. Trinity reveals much about the nature of God and the values of the universe. The actual content of the doctrine of the Trinity may be summarized with four statements: “God is one, God is three, God is a diversity, and God is a unity.” These four simple statements come together in a doctrine that is complex and paradox; it is a beautiful mystery that is biblically justified. Though we may never fully comprehend the mystery of the Trinity, we can reach for higher understanding while standing firm on the concrete form of biblical revelation. The researcher will point to passages that communicate and illustrate the reality of trinity. There is much to work with, according to the Princeton theologian B.B. Warfield, “the doctrine of the Trinity is rather everywhere presupposed in the Bible.”

The Unity of God: There is Only One True God

The Bible does not teach tritheism or polytheism; Scripture teaches that there is only one true eternal God. The unity of God is rooted in the Jewish faith anchored in the Torah. The Hebrew people were monotheistic, which in the ancient world positioned them in stark contrast with their surrounding nations who worshiped “many gods.” Even to this day, as an act of worship the Jews regularly proclaim their blessing, or creed, called the Shema: “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.” (Deut. 6:4-5). This statement clarifies their belief in the Oneness of God. The doctrine of the Trinity affirms the Hebrew understanding of God, but differs in that the LORD is understood to be one not in “a solitary unity but a composite unity.”

As Christians we believe that the God of the Trinity is the one whom the Old Testament worshippers knew as Elohim or Yahweh. In their worship of Yahweh there was temptation to take up the many gods of their pluralistic neighbors. While other nations were embracing polytheism, the prophet Isaiah reminds Israel, “This is what the LORD says, ‘I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.” (Isaiah 44:6). The Apostle Paul carries this teaching of the Oneness of God into the New Testament, three times he instructs the church, “there is no God but one” (1 Cor. 8:4, 1 Cor. 8:6, 1 Timothy 2:5).

The Uniqueness of God: Three Distinct Persons

Plurality through Pronouns and Names. There are traces of Trinity in the Old Testament, most of them are found in God’s revelation of himself through names and pronouns. The name Yahweh may be the first name God chooses to introduce himself with in a conversation, but the first name used for God is the Hebrew word Elohim. “In the beginning God [Elohim] created…” (Genesis1:1). After only four words into the Biblical story, God introduces himself as Elohim, which is a plural form, and though no clear statement of trinity is contained, a plurality of persons could be implied. Another early allusion to divine plurality is found later in the chapter, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness.” (Gen 1:26). He says again, “The man has now become like one of us…” (Gen 3:22). And a third time he says, “Come, let us go down and confuse their language” (Gen. 11:7). Contemplating these passages, a Roman Catholic theologian, Bertrand de Magerie asks: “Does this Divine “we” evoke a polytheistic age anterior to the Bible? Or a deliberation of God with his angelic court? Or does it not rather indicate the interior richness of the divinity? How does it happen that only in these four passages the plural form of the name Elohim used here has influenced the verb, which is plural only here? And what is more extrodinary is that these plural forms are introduced by formulas in the singular: ‘Elohim says’. ” These questions are presented in an attempt to help the reader engage with the plurality of God. They look to compel the reader from dismissing plurality in the Torah as a highly intriguing to realizing it’s high importance as an insinuation for the Trinitarian idea.

Distinctive Plurality through Unique Activity. Evidence for the concept of plurality in the Godhead exists beyond pronouns and names; it is also found in the distinguishing activity of God in Genesis. Within the creation account there is an explosion of activity where each person acts uniquely with his own actions.

In Genesis 1:1 God the Father is revealed existing as the originator of the created world. He is presented as the mastermind behind creation and the one who generates the universe ex nihilo. He

In Genesis 1:2, the Bible introduces God as the Spirit who watches over the works of creation, hovering as the waters. He is the active agent in creation. He is the one who “hovers” over creation, keeping things in tact, preserving, protecting, and unifying what the Father brings into being. The Spirit brings order out of chaos and confusion. As one theologian writes, “it is because of Him that we have cosmos instead of chaos.”

In Genesis 1:3 we are introduced to the “Word” of God through whose work the will of God becomes initiated. God speaks and the Word brings it into reality. John writes in the fourth Gospel, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made” (John 1:1-3).

While the doctrine of the Trinity was not clearly enunciated in the Old Testament , the theologian Gerald O’Collins, has stated, “The vivid personification of Father (Wisdom), Son (Word), and Spirit, in as much as they were both identified with God and the divine activity and distinguished from God, opened up the way toward recognizing God to be tripersonal.”

Distinctive Plurality through Unique Personhood. These Old Testament account only gives an allusion of Trinity; the Trinitarian doctrine receives much fuller treatment in the rest of the Bible as God manifests himself and further reveals himself to humanity. The Trinitarian concept’s chief development is anchored in the New Testament, the Gospels present the revelation of Jesus Christ the Son, and in the book of Acts, describes the sending of the Holy Spirit on the Church.

In several New Testament passages Christ is clearly called God (Heb 1:9-9, John 1:1, John 20:28) In The latter passage, John 20:28, one of the apostles, Thomas, confronts the resurrected Jesus and proclaims, “My Lord and my God.” From this verse, the Scholar D. Moody Smith, contends,

Thomas’ response is exactly appropriate, as he utters the confession of Jesus as Lord (kyrios) and God (theos). This confession is typical of early Christian theology and language as far as Lord (kyrios) is concerned, but uniquely Johannine in its ascription of the name of God (theos) to Jesus as well. In 1:1 the preexistent word (logos) is called God (theos) and at the end of the prologue this most exalted title is repeated, after the incarnation of the Word in Jesus has been confessed. For the most part John withholds the designation theos from Jesus, but in the course of the narrative makes clear that this ascription of deity to Jesus is indeed correct and unavoidable (5:18; cf. 5:19-24; 10:30; 14:8-11). While Thomas may have once doubted, he has now made the confession that is essential and true. Jesus is Lord and God.

The description of Christ as God was an important explanation that integrated New Covenant theology with the monotheistic Hebraic covenant of the Old Testament. The confession of Thomas and the other passages in the New Testament help construct the Christian understanding of Christ as God.

The concept of the Spirit of God in the Old Testament is carried over into the New Testament. The same person of God that “hovers” over his creation and the Holy Spirit fills Mary and descends on Jesus at his baptism. As Jesus was being baptized, the Trinity became expressive to human senses. John the Baptist and others who witnessed the baptism, audibly heard the voice of the Father affirm Jesus as his Son, and visibly saw the Holy Spirit descend on Jesus in the likeness of a dove. The Spirit is revealed in the likeness of tongues of fire when he empowers the disciples on the day of Pentecost. This is in fulfillment of Jesus’ promise to his disciples that “the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you” (John 14:6).

Jesus words at the end of Matthew’s Gospel are known as the “Great Commission,” but one mustn’t overlook the “great expression” of Trinity. Jesus sends out his disciples to baptize with the “Trinitarian formula”, “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19). Christ’s words reveal Trinity.

Later in the New Testament, in the Epistles, the Apostle Paul gives description of the Spirit’s nature and activity. To the church at Corinth he explains, “We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us”(1 Cor. 2:12). Paul gives other direct references to the Spirit that are unmistakable Trinitarian references. In another letter to the church at Corinth offers a benediction, “May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all” (2 Cor. 13:14).

Conclusion

In this section, the researcher has presented key passages that reference the triune God, demonstrating that the Bible reveals God existing as three unique persons yet in unity as One, which is the doctrine of the Trinity. There is complexity within the specific functions of the Godhead yet a unity in their purpose and three Persons. Each of the three Persons performs specific functions and are involved in everything together. This doctrine is fundamental to understanding the theme of unity and uniqueness in the universe, because whenever we see it in our world it exists as an expression or echo of it’s source in the Godhead.

The Trinity holds a central place in this project going forward because all crucial elements in theology, ecclesiology, and sociology, are rooted in the doctrine of the Trinity. This section has demonstrated that the doctrine of the Trinity has roots in Scripture. But when looking at the themes of unity and uniqueness we see that even the Bible itself, it bears the mark of unity and uniqueness in its composition. The work is a reflection Trinitarian essence of the divine author.

Uniqueness and Unity in the Cannon

Though ‘Bible’ is a singular term, the Bible is not one book, but a library of diverse writings concerning God and his relationship with the world. While the theme of uniqueness and unity is present in the revelation of God’s Word, it is also evident in the composition of the Bible. The Bible is a diverse collection of books that present one over arching unified theme. “Neo-Orthodox” theologians in the past century worked to revive an emphasis of study in the unity of the Bible. Professor C.H. Dodd called for greater study in this area; “Biblical scholars have long worked on separate sections in what might be called the centrifugal movement, but now the centripetal movement is needed; a study of the unity of the parts, an attempt to find the deeper meanings of the dominant theme present within the diversity of writings. This section will examine the uniqueness in the composition and the unifying theme of the text.

The Uniqueness of the Books within the Cannon.

The Bible is a diverse collection of books that were writing over a period of 1,500 years by many authors from a wide range of experiences and walks of life. These 66 unique were written in a variety of historical and cultural contexts. The 40 authors wrote in a wide array of literary forms. The diversity of the writings may be described as the humanity of the Bible, since it extends over a vast range of human experiences and perspectives. This diversity is expressed well by author Terry Hall: “It had to be one of the strangest publishing projects of all time: no editor or publishing house was responsible to oversee 40 independent authors representing 20 occupations, living in 10 countries, during a 1,500 year span, working in 3 languages, with a cast of 2,930 characters in 1,551 places, together they produced 66 books, containing 1,189 chapters, over 31,000 verses, 7 hundred 74 thousand words and over 3.5 million letters. This massive volume covers every conceivable subject expressed in literary forms poetry, prose, romance, biography, science, and history, to tell one story with internal consistency.”

To appreciate the difficulties the unity of the Scriptures, we only need imagine the complexity in turning this diverse collection into a unified work. The complex reality of the unity in composition despite broad sweeping diversity reveals evidence for divine authorship. The evidence is from the reality that despite the many differences there is one overarching meta-narrative. The internal consistency could be described as the divinity of the Bible. God chose to use distinctive, unique personalities to reveal his unified infallible, inerrant word. God weaves together the diversity and uniqueness to form one story, the story of redemption.

The Unity of the Cannon.

God’s Word is always united to this theme of redemption and tied in with history. G. Ernest Wright regards this unity as “the confessional recital of God’s saving and redemptive acts.” If one follows the meta-narrative, the story line leads from creation, to the fall of man, to the need for redemption, to the sacrificial system, to the person of Jesus who fulfills prophecy and brings redemption through his sacrifice, from the garden to the great city of God, the consistent unifying theme within the Book is Jesus and the work of redemption.

A tradition in the British Navy illustrates this unifying theme; there was a practice in the Royal Navy that every rope they used would have a scarlet cord woven into it. The cord would run from end to end, that way whether lost at sea or stolen in the harbor, no matter where the rope was cut, every inch was marked and it was evidenced that it was possession of the crown. And so it is with the Bible, in the united message within the diversity of the Text. The Scriptures are comprised of 66 books and regardless where one cuts in on the story, there is one unified theme, the redemption of mankind through the work Jesus the Messiah.

Karl Barth called this the “Christological concentration.” He stated this central emphasis on Christ this way; “in the Bible only one central figure as such has begun to occupy me – or each and everything else only in the light and under the sing of this central figure.” Jesus Christ is the scarlet thread that runs throughout the Bible. Bible contains unique books with unity in their composition and theme.

Conclusion

The diversity and unity of the Bible is supernatural, the evidence supports its claim to be the revealed Word of God. There is a striking a unity out of diversity, a harmonious and continuous message from beginning to end, a self-consistent whole, where the main theme is the person and work of Jesus Christ. God intended for the diverse books of scripture to fit together as a unified whole, the various books coming together as a beautiful and cohesive whole is just another revelation of this universal theme of unity among unique parts. The divine author has designed this into the created order of the Cannon and integrated unity and uniqueness in the created order of humanity and the architecture of the institution of marriage.

Unity and Uniqueness in Marriage

God is Trinity, which means that in God there is a unity, a perfect consistency of essence. Since this is within his being, God finds delight in uniqueness within unity. God makes his pleasure known by weaving this theme into the cosmos, into the cannon, and into the crown or apex of his creation, humanity. The essential unity of God finds expression in the creation of mankind and the institution of marriage. Humans have been stamped with unity and uniqueness, since God created man in “[His] image, in [His] likeness” (Genesis 1:26).

The process of being created in God’s image has important implications for human relationships, as Stanley Grenz explains: “The image of God is primarily a relational concept. Ultimately we reflect God’s image in relationship. Thus the imago Dei is not primarily an individual possession but a corporate or social reality, present among humans-in-relationship.”When God created humans, “He constructed into creatures and relationships a unity-in-diversity that characterize the eternal divine reality.”This creative act of unity and uniqueness is evident in the creativity of the male and female design: “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). The male and female distinction within humanity mysteriously reflects the image of God. This is revealed in the marriage mandate and the divine institution of marriage.

The Marriage Mandate

The marriage relationship has been deigned and instituted by God. In fact, marriage is the very first institution that God creates. In the created order, marriage is formed before civil government and the local church. Marriage is the primary institution and is the preeminent building block of societal vitality.

God sets forth his design for marriage in the marriage mandate, “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). The Hebrew word for one in one flesh, is the same Hebrew word used in the Shema, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is One” (Deut. 6:4-5). This word one references the unity of the Godhead made up by three unique persons with three distinct roles. In the case of marriage, it is not tri-unity as with God, rather it is unity of two persons, male and female – one flesh. This oneness, or unity, is the marking reflection of God’s essence on the marriage covenant.

Uniqueness in Marriage

The oneness of marriage does not mean that the marriage mandate reduces or eliminates individuality. Just as the distinct persons and different roles in the Trinity are unified in purpose and mission as one, male and female in the marriage covenant come together as one. Both persons bring their distinctive personalities and giftedness, unique passions and abilities together, not to exist merely as two individuals but to become united together. The Bible teaches that marriage is the complimentary functioning of two unique persons in their roles to reflect the image of God.

It is important to note that distinct persons and different roles does not indicate different value. Just as the three persons of the Trinity are equal in their value and in their personhood, also women and men have been created equal in their worth. Neither male nor female are “better” or “worse” than the other. In God’s economy, both male and female are equal before him. As the apostle Paul writes in the letter to the Galatians, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28). Scripture affirms absolute equality of personhood. But equality of value and importance is different than equality of role and responsibility. Males and females have been assigned unique roles according to the created order. Pastor and Theologian John Piper writes: “In the Bible, differentiated roles for men and women are never traced back to the fall of man and woman into sin. Rather, the foundation of this differentiation is traced back to the way things were in Eden before sin warped our relationships. Differentiated roles were corrupted, not created, by the fall. They were created by God.”

Although man and woman are equal, Scriptures teach that there are proper roles within the marriage mandate. The Apostle Paul defines these roles in this letter to the Ephesians. He writes, “Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her” (Eph. 5:22-26).

The husband is called to serve and sacrifice for his wife as an expression of his love for her. Likewise, the wife is called to submit and respect her husband as an expression of her love for him. In this way they complement each other. God has given the husband the role of loving servant-leadership, with a responsibility to lead, protect, and provide for the wife. In the same way, a woman’s responsibility is to affirm and support his leadership, as a helpmate. The complementing distinctions create a mutually supportive home that affirms each others calling in Christ. These two complementary halves unite – physically, spiritually, mentally, emotionally and physiologically and the unity of the uniqueness reveals the image of God in marriage.

Unity in Marriage

The Bible uses the phrase “one flesh” to describe the mysterious and miraculous unity that is present in marriage. This description distinguishes the union of marriage from any other human connection, differentiating the marriage relationship from any other social institution. Marriage is not the product of social evolution or a cultural invention; rather it is a pre-fall created relationship that began with the primal event in the Garden of Eden. Within marriage there is this sacred mystery of unity and uniqueness held together in one entity.

In the New Testament, Jesus affirms the marriage mandate and profound significance thereof: “Have you not read, that he who created them from the beginning, made them male and female. And said for this reason a man shall leave his Father and Mother and shall cleave to his wife and they shall become one flesh? Consequently they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together let no man separate” (Matthew 19:4-6) Christ presents the profound significance of the ordained demarcation, as the man and woman leave their father and mother, and unite as they cleave to one another in the sight of God and become “one flesh.”

Cleaving together and becoming “one flesh” as husband and wife is symbolized and sealed by sexual union, but the “one flesh” relationship entails more than sex. It is the mysterious fusion of two lives into one, where life is shared together, by the mutual consent and covenant of marriage in a mysterious union. By God’s architecture in humanity, male and female are made anatomically, emotionally and spiritually for one another, for oneness. Through divine intention, by joining together, the husband and wife represent the full spectrum of the God’s image. As God’s unity is everlasting, the marriage unity is designed to be reflective of his everlasting nature, by two people giving themselves over into a permanent circle of shared companionship.

In the context of the letter to the Ephesians it appears that marriage is set within the meta-narrative of God’s restoration of all things under the headship of Christ. This includes all of humanity who believes, Jews and Gentiles, the body of Christ, the church. Paul sets forth God’s purpose of humanity “to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head even Christ” (Eph. 1:10). The authority of Christ is supreme, he is the head of all things, and all things are subjected to him. This overarching sovereign work of God becomes the central purpose for a unified marriage. Unity in marriage is developed from sharing this God-given mission and purpose.

Conclusion

The longest statement in the New Testament on the unity of marriage and the relationship between husbands and wives is found in Ephesians 5:21-33. In this passage Paul conveys the distinctive roles for wives and husbands and at the same time reveals the way it corresponds to the relationship between Christ and his church. In this way, marriage serves as a metaphor of deeper spiritual realities. The truth marriage mirrors is that the unity of husbands loving their wives to become one flesh/body is a dimension of the great mystery of the unity of all believers into the one “body” of the church through the self-sacrificial love of its head, Christ (Eph 5:2, 23-30, 32). Marital unity in love adds to the great cosmic mystery of unity causing the growth of all things to Christ, so that all might be united under him.

This theme of unity among uniqueness is present all throughout the cosmos and creation. Flowing from the Trinity, the theological underpinning of the essence of unity and uniqueness has wide-ranging implications for the study of Scripture, the function of marriage, and ecclesiology. Basically, this doctrine is the foundation of practical Christian reflection of the diversity and unity within the Godhead. The human family is not the only way God has ordained to reflect his unity to the world. Within the church we have “many members” and yet “one body” that display his glory (1 Cor. 12:12).

Unity and Uniqueness in the Church

The unity of the Church is a theme that carries throughout the New Testament. There is not a clear, concise, summarizing definition of the church put fort

The resurrection and ascension of Jesus has remained a mystery to my belief. There has never been a reoccurrence in my life time and throughout history. People tend to wonder how a man who was really dead and was buried can come back to life. The burials that take place in our communities result in the decomposition of the body. In areas, like Malawi villages, where technology is not advanced burials are immediate. A delay in burial for about two to three days in a village set up without the cooling system makes the body starts to decay. Therefore, it is a hard thing to believe that a person came back to life on a third day. The idea is even complicated when it is said that the resurrected person went up to heaven. In secondary school we learn the laws of gravity. If you throw something up it falls back. It is a fact that people do not fly because they have no wings. This paper wishes to establish why Christians believe in the physical resurrection and ascension of Jesus. Establishing the reality of resurrection and ascension of Jesus will strength believe and resolve the mystery.

Summary of Grudem’s Views

Grudem (2000) asserted that when Jesus came back to life from the dead his body was in physical form. He stated that Jesus’ experience was different from that of Lazarus as it is recorded in the book of John. He affirmed that Lazarus’ resurrection was subject of physical developments which lead to aging and death. According to him Jesus’ resurrection is not subject of biological development, (Grudem, 2000).

Contrary to Harris’ views (as cited by Grudem 2000) Grudem (2000) refuted the fact that Jesus’ resurrected body had spiritual aspects which enabled him not to observe physical laws. Harris argued that Jesus’ spiritual body enabled him to pass through the wall and perform instant appearances and disappearances. Grudem affirmed that the New Testament does not seem to assert that. He argued that when Jesus resurrected his body was physical because he could eat, prepare breakfast and be seen. He quoted Jesus himself in Luke 24:39 confirming his physical being by telling his disciples, “see my hands and my feet that it is I myself; handle me and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see I have,”(Grudem, 2000, p. 613).

Grudem (2000) insisted that Jesus could not have deceived the disciples. He stated that if Jesus had wanted to prove that he had a spiritual body he could have clearly demonstrated it to his followers. In line with this, he stated that the disciples could have clearly recorded it to give evidence for his spiritual body. He also argued that when Jesus ascended to heaven the angels confirmed about his physical state by telling those who witnessed his departure that he will come back in the same physical state he went to heaven. He stated that Jesus’ resurrected body set precedence to the kind of state which people would acquire in the next life, (Grudem, 2000).

Grudem (2000) stated that the resurrection empowered the believers of Jesus. He pointed out that Jesus promised his followers the power of the Holy Spirit only after the resurrection. He argued that the believers were given the ability to overcome sin in their lives and effectively serve him. He made reference to Paul’s message that God made us right with him through the resurrection, (2000).

In regard to the ascension of Jesus Grudem (2000) affirmed that it is an indication that he went somewhere to a place. He argued that there should be a place called heaven where Jesus went in his physical body. He stated that even though we do not see where he went it does not nullify the fact that there is heaven. He said that just as angels are invisible although they are around us so too is heaven. He cites an example of Elisha as recorded in the Old Testament that when God sent him the chariots of soldiers his servant could not see them. He said that our eyes cannot locate heaven but Jesus went up and Elijah too went there. He considers Jesus’ ascension vital because it is a sign that we too shall ascend to heaven. He confirmed this with Jesus’s promise that there is a lot of place in heaven and we too shall go where he has gone, (Grudem, 2000).

Leading Views

In his book The Case for Christ: A Journalist’s Personal Investigation of the Evidence to Jesus, Strobel (1998) supported the reality of Jesus death and resurrection based on interviews with experts in medicine and history. He established that Jesus really died according to the doctor. The doctor said that Jesus could not have survived the trauma and the harsh treatment. He argued that the high degree of stress that Jesus experienced made his body tender. He added that in this state when he was subjected to severe Roman whipping his body had severe tears and loss of blood. He stated that this disapproved those who claim that the resurrection was just resuscitation. In his interview the historian argued that there was no way the soldiers could have walked free without punishment. He argued that considering the kind of punishment which was in practice for such an office what the high priests and the Roman officials did revealed a foul play. He confirmed it with reliable documentary that Jesus resurrected. He stated that Jesus showed himself too at different times to many people and the largest group was 5000 people, (Strobel, 1998).

Mcdowell (1981) and Lutzer (1994) supported the historical resurrection of Jesus. They argued that historical evidence like the Dead Sea scrolls and history from historians like Josephus proved that Jesus really resurrected. They said these validate the historical reliability of the New Testament which also has the shortest gap between its copies and the originals. They highlighted the reluctance showed by the high priests and the Roman officials to punish the tomb guards. They said that the guards’ action to have supposedly allowed the escape of criminal or robbery of the body was a serious case punishable by death. (Mcdowell, 1981 and Lutzer, 1994).

Interestingly enough, Mcdowell (1981) in agreement with Grudem, reported that Jesus’ resurrection was physical not spiritual. He refuted the claim that Jesus’ body decayed and came back to life a spiritual being. He argued that Jesus physically appeared before many people both hostile and friendly. He affirmed that these could have refuted the reports as they were written while most of them were still alive. He stated that both hostile and supporting community validated the accuracy of the New Testament report, (Mcdowell, 1981).

Alternative Views

Humel (1975) and Kaufman (1968) argued that Jesus did not resurrect but the disciples had visions and hallucinations. Hemel stated that the disciples experienced the aftermaths of the dilemma of losing Jesus. He argued that they resolved the dilemma by the imagination of a ghost so they hallucinated due to their memories of Jesus. While Kaufman argued that the disciples experienced public visions about Jesus in his Jesus came back to life in a spiritual body. They both argued that the resurrection was the explanation of the believers’ experiences not the reality of events, (Humel, 1975 and Kaufman, 1968).

Harris (1990) partially agreed with them as he argued that Jesus rose into a spiritual body that could materialize for some time to be seen. He stated that Jesus’ body did not observe the physical barriers like walls for a building. He concluded that the fact that Jesus could be found standing instantly amidst the people it indicated that he was a spirit (Harris, 1990).

Crossam (as recorded by Boyd, 1984) asserted that as Jesus was killed like a criminal he was buried in a shallow mass grave according to the custom of the day. He argued that wild dogs usually ate the bodies so Jesus’ body was also eaten. He stated that Jesus’ followers had no idea where he was buried and what came of his body. He concluded that since Jesus was their hero they decided to portray a victorious end of his life by inventing characters life Joseph of Arimathea and the resurrection, (Boyd, 1984).

Personal Views

Jesus really resurrected into a physical body as verified by scriptures. I agree with the views of physical resurrection because of the reliability of scripture. The scripture recorded Jesus himself in Luke 24:39 saying “see my hands and my feet that it is I myself; handle me and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see I have.” Therefore, if Jesus himself confirmed his physical resurrection and the scripture recorded it then it is historically validated that he had physical resurrection.

The fact that Jesus appeared to a large numbers of people verifies his physical body. I disagree with Humel (1975) and Kaufman (1968) who argues that the followers of Jesus either saw visions or hallucinated respectively. It is difficult to believe if visions or hallucinations can be experienced by a group at the same time about the same thing. This is impossible. Spiritual experiences are personal. As a result there was no way for instance, the 11 disciples or the 5000 people could see the vision or hallucinate about Jesus at the same time.

The gospels recorded that the ascension took place in the presence of his disciples and other people. In line with this, it can be argued that Jesus was physically present with them on the day of the ascension. Acts 1:11recorded the two angels’ message to those who witnessed the ascension. They said that Jesus will come back from heaven the way he has gone.

I agree with Strobel (1998) who is a journalist by profession. His interview with the medical personnel revealed how impossible it was for Jesus to fake his death as some claim. The spear through his heart could definitely finish him if he had faked it or just fainted. Strobel gives us a scientific explanation of the reality about the death of Jesus. For those who rely on history he also verified Jesus death, resurrection and ascension based on the historical events. Therefore, even if one does not believe in the bible he can base his trust on the evidence of the medical and historical information available. These experts help us to clear the doubt whether Jesus died and resurrected or he just fainted and was resuscitated.

It has to be noted that the community in which Jesus lived not everyone agreed or supported him. There were other people who wanted his down fall. These people could have really tried to refute the substantial claims made by his followers. The silence of the then hostile community reveals the validity of the claims of the believers.

In support of Mcdowell’s (1981) and Lutzer’s (1994) suspicion I agree with them. If a very serious crime is committed no one is willing to cover it unless there is some benefit in doing so. Therefore, it puzzles me too to hear that in such a serious and sensitive mistake made by the guards the high priests who were the interested party never reacted. The Roman officials too decided to overlook their laws. It is surprising that somebody would chose to cover up an enemy. This clearly shows that Jesus was raised. They could not disprove it by producing a body. I understand that they could afford to fabricate a lie.

Conclusion

The resurrection of Jesus is the essence of the Christian faith while ascension gives us hope. If there would have been no resurrection there would have been no basis for Christianity. In line with this those who are hostile to Christianity will always try to find something to fault Christianity. Opposition will always be there but a Christian should have a reason for his or her belief. If someone tells you that Jesus’ body was rotten or eaten by wild dogs there should be an explanation to your stand. As our teacher Professor Stauffcher always say that we should have a reason why we believe what we believe so that we can answer when critics confront us. Ascension gives us hope for the promised heaven. In John 14:1-4 Jesus said that there are many rooms in heaven. He tells us that if there was no place he would not have bothered to tell us. Therefore, ascension gives us hope that one day we will also ascend to heaven and be with Jesus and the Father.

SYPNOSIS

Arius and Athanasius were archrivals of the Arian controversy. Arius was the leading father in Arianism whilst Athanasius was the defender of the Nicene Theology for orthodox Christianity against Arianism. As Arianism rejects the divinity of Christ, salvation to mankind was at stake. Athanasius advocates the consubstantiality of the three persons of the trinity which was crucial argument to defend the divinity of Christ. Consequently Athanasius had built the ground of the Trinitarian and Christological doctrine which together with the humanity of Christ represents the complete Trinitarian theology.

I. INTRODUCTION

The fourth century church experienced a major crisis in understanding God’s divine nature, characteristics and relationship with members of the Godhead. This Arian controversy centred upon two archrival theologians, Arius and Athanasius.1 The controversy represented a new phase of doctrinal development of the Godhead and led to the Council of Nicaea in 325 and the Church’s first ecumenical statement of the Trinity. 2 Athanasius was the champion of Nicene Theology, who greatly defended the traditional Christianity against the Arian heresy.3 Section II of this essay will briefly discuss the background of Arius, and summarize his basic theology. Section III will provide an overview about Athanasius’s life, Athanasius’ theology in conjunction with his defence against the Arians’ heretic claims. Finally, the conclusion will be drawn in Section IV.

II. THE ARIAN CONTROVERSY

The ‘Arian controversy’ ignited in 318, when Arius openly taught his heretic teachings that denied the full divinity of the Son. Consequently, Arius challenged his bishop (Alexander of Alexandria) and teachers of Alexandria to an Christological conflict.4 The controversy lasted for nearly half a century and became the confrontation between the two archrivals, the ‘Nicene party’ and Origenists.5 Athanasius coined the names ‘Arian’ and ‘Arians’ as pejorative political and theological slurs against Arius and his opponents, who disagreed with him on the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father, and those meant the Son as a creature or held fast to Arius’ basic position. Cf. Thomas G. Weinandy, Athanasius: a Theological Introduction (Hampshire, England: Ashgate Publishing, 2007), 51-52. Donald K. McKim, Theological Turning Points: Major Issues in Christian Thought (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1988), 14.

Justo L. Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity: The Early Church to the Dawn of The Reformation (3 vols.,

New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1984, Vol. 1), 173. Johannes Quasten, Pathology: The Golden Age of

Greek Patristic Literature. From the Council of Nicaea to the council of Chalcedon (Utrecht, Netherlands:

Spectrum Publishers, 1963, Vol. III), 66.

Bruce L. Shelly, Church History in Plain Language (2nd Ed., Dallas, Texas: Word Publishing, 1995), 100.

Everett Ferguson (ed.), Encyclopaedia of Early Christianity (New York: Garland Publishing Inc., 1990), 8485, 92.

The controversy roots lay deep in “the differences of the ante-Nicene doctrine of the

Logos,” especially in the two contradictory half truths of Origen’s Christology, which was

claimed by both archrivals ? the full divinity of Christ and his eternal distinctness from

the Father.6 Conclusively, the Arians were the catalysts, rather than the main participants.7

II.1. ARIUS AND HIS DOCTRINE

Trained in the Lucian School, Arius was called one of the heretical fathers of Arianism.8 Arianism was a heretical doctrine of theological rationalism, based on the teachings of Lucian of Antioch, Paul of Samosata, and Neoplatonic theory of subordinationism.9 Arius wrote very little and only a few fragments survived. Thalia was his only own writing which Athanasius recited.10 Most information about Arius’ life and his doctrine came from Athanasius’ writings.11

Influenced by Origen, Arius rejected the term ????????? (consubstantial) and insisted the concrete and distinct three persons (???????) of the Godhead, a separate essence and the subordination of the Son to Father.12 Nicene split the church into two major groups: 1) The ‘Nicene party’? consisted of the West, the school of Antioch and other in the East like Athanasius. They affirmed the full deity of Jesus Christ, but were less clear on the eternal threeness of the Godhead. They did not deny the distinction between Father, Son and Holy Spirit (i.e. they were not Monarchians), but they did not state it as forcefully as the Origenists wanted and so appeared to them to be Monarchian. (2) The Origenists ? were strong on the threeness of the Godhead, but less clear on the deity of Jesus Christ. They were not Arians (i.e. they did not see Jesus Christ as a creature made out of nothing), but they held him to be inferior to the Father and so appeared Arian to the Nicene party. Cf. Tony Lane, A Concise History of Christian Thought (Rev. ed., London: T&T Clark, 2006), 30. Philip Schaff, ‘Arianism’ in A Religious Encyclopaedia or Dictionary of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal, and Practical Theology (3rd ed.; Toronto, New York & London: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1894, Vol. 1) 134137. Cf. http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/arianism-schaff.html (29 April 2010).

Tony Lane, A Concise History of Christian Thought, 30-31. Philip Schaff, ‘Arianism’ in A Religious

Encyclopaedia or Dictionary of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal, and Practical Theology, 134-137. Cf.

http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/arianism-schaff.html (29 April 2010).

Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 7.

Ephiphanius, Panarion 69,4. Theodoret, Historia ecclesiastica, 1,4. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 15.

Note: Scholars still debate over the ideological forerunner of Arius’ doctrine, whether it was derived from the

theories of Origen, or of Paul of Samosata, or of Lucian of Antioch. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 2, 6-8.

Athanasius, Orationes contra Arianos, I.5,6; Athanasius, De Synodis, 15. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for

Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381 (Edinburgh: T & T Clark Ltd., 1988), 11.

And a few sources from the church historians of the fourth and fifth centuries, and from the letters of St.

Basil and of Epiphanius of Salamis. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 10-13.

Philip Schaff, ‘Arianism’ in A Religious Encyclopaedia or Dictionary of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal,

and Practical Theology, 134-137. John Behr, The Way to Nicaea: The Formation of Christian Theology (3

vols.; Crestwood, New York: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001, Vol. 1), 200-201.

Arius denied all internal divine relations existing between the Father and the Son ? the

eternal deity of Christ and his equality with the Father (????????).13

II.2. A SUMMARY OF ARIUS’ THEOLOGY

Arius’ basic doctrine:14 (1) Godhead is uncreated, unbegotten (???????), without beginning;15 (2) The Son of God cannot be truly God. The Son is the first of God’s creatures, a secondary God, “god by participation.” Like the other creations, “the Son is not unbegotten (???????),” “he is one of the things fashioned and made,” 16 brought out ex nihilo (? ?? ????). “There was a time when the Son of God was not (? ?? ?? ?).”17 “Neither does the Son indeed know his own substance as it is,” “he was created for our sake, rather than we for his.” “He is the Son of God not in the metaphysical, but in the moral sense of the word.”18 By the will of God, the Son has “his statute and character (?????? ??? ???).” “The Son is by his nature; changeable, mutable, equally with other

rational beings.” The Father is ‘ineffable to the Son; for neither does the Word (Logos)

perfectly and accurately know the Father, neither can he perfectly see Him (the Father).”19

(3) “The title of God is improper for the Son of God, since the only true God adopted him

as Son in prevision of his merits.” This sonship by adoption insists “no real participation

in the divinity and no true likeness to it;” Thus, the absolute and eternal divinity of Christ

13

Epiphanius, Panarion 69.6.1ff. Theodoret of Cyrus, Haereticarum fabularum compendium (History of

Heresies) I.5. Cf. Philip Schaff, ‘Arius’ in A Religious Encyclopaedia or Dictionary of Biblical, Historical,

Doctrinal, and Practical Theology,139. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 7-8.

14

Epiphanius, Panarion 69,6. Theodoret, Historia ecclesiastica, 1,5,1-4. Athanasius, De Synodis 15.

Socrates, Historia ecclesiastica, 1,6. Gelasius of Cyzicus, Historia conc. Nic. 2,3. Cf. Johannes Quasten,

Pathology, 8, 14, 15-16.Cf. Athanasius, Epistula encyclical ad episcopos Aegypti et Libyae, 12. Athanasius,

NPNG2-04. Athanasius: Select Work and Letters (Philip Schaff ed.; Grand Rapids, Mi: Christian Classics

Ethereal Library, 1892), 229. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204/Page_229.html (25 April 2011).

15

Theodoret, Historia ecclesiastica, 1.4.1. See also the conclusion in Arius’ first Letter to Eusebius of

Nicomedia. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 10.

16

Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 16.

17

See the Arius’ conclusion in his first Letter to Eusebius of Nicomedia. Athanius, De Synodis, II.26. Cf.

Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 10. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian

Controversy 318-381, 8.

18

Athanasius, Ad Episcopos Aegypti 12. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 16. Maurice F. Wiles, Archetypal

heresy: Arianism through the centuries, 8.

19

Italic words are mine. Athanasius, De Synodis 15. Cf. Maurice F. Wiles, Archetypal heresy: Arianism

through the centuries, 7. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy

318-381, 15.

3

is to be denied.20 (4) The Logos is created by God as the instrument of creation. The Logos

holds a middle place between God and the world is made flesh by the will of the Father and

fulfilled in Jesus Christ the function of a soul, “though divine, was less than fully divine.” 21

(5) The Holy Spirit is the first creature of the Logos, and is still less God than the Word.

III. ATHANASIUS AND HIS THEOLOGY

Though Athanasius was not a systematic theologian, his greatest dedication in life was the fierce defence of orthodox Christianity against the Arian heresy. 22 He was “so identified with the cause that the successive history of the Arian controversy is best told by following Athanasius’ life.”23 The three discourses of Athanasius, Orationes contra Arianos, were his main dogmatic writings targeted against Arianism.24 The first discourse contained the definition of the Nicene Council ? there is a unity of divine essence between the Father and the Son, and the Son is eternal, increated (???????) and unchangeable.25

III.1. ATHANASIUS

Athanasius, De Synodis, 15. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 8. Cf. the following citation: “The leaders in the Arian movement (Arius himself, Eusebius of Nicomedia, Maris and Theognis) received their training under Lucian and always venerated him as their master and the founder of their system. Later critics of Lucian, including Alexander of Alexandria, during the Council of Nicaea in 325, associated his school with Arius’s rejection of the absolute divinity of Christ. No one before Lucian of Antioch and Arius had taught that the Logos is categorically different from God.” of ‘Lucian of Antioch’ in New Word Encyclopedia. http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Lucian_of_Antioch (10 April 2011).

Cf. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381, 100-101.

Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 67-68.

Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 66.

Justo L. Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity, 166.

Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 26.

Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 26.

The systematic and reliable ancient account of Athanasius could be found in the

framework, such as Historia acephala and Festal Index.26

Ordained as deacon to his bishop Alexander in Alexandria, Athanasius accompanied

Alexander to the Council at Nicaea (325). Later he succeeded Alexander and became the

bishop of Alexandria (328-373).27 Athanasius, as a leading Christian writer of NeoAlexandrine School, adopted the historic-grammatical interpretation of Scripture (which

the School of Antioch advocated) in all polemical and theological controversy with the

Arians.28

The Arians enlisted the support of secular power and corrupt church authority to silence and destroy Athanasius. When Athanasius refused Constantine’s order to readmit Arius to communion, his opponents launched all kind of allegations, causing calumnies further to increase.29 For instance, under the influence of Eusebius of Nicomedia, the bishops of the Tyrian Synod condemned Athanasius with charges which he could not escape. They exiled Athanasius to Trier and restored Arius to church communion and reinstate him into the rank of the clergy.30

The history about Athanasius’ life is also found in his own writings and the Syriac introduction to his Festal Letters, also in Historia acephala or called Historia Athanasii, Gregory Nazianzen’s Oration 21, and some fragments of a Coptic eulogy. Cf. Timothy D. Barnes, Athanasius and Constantius: Theology and Politics in the Constantinian Empire (2nd Printing 1994; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993), 5. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 20.

‘Athanasius’ in Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t100.e116 (18 March 2011). Cf. David Hugh Farmer, ‘Athanasius’ in The Oxford Dictionary of Saints (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2003). Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 2, 20. Timothy D. Barnes, Athanasius and Constantius: Theology and Politics in the Constantinian Empire, 1.

Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 2, 20.

Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 20-21.

Athanasius was firstly charged with murder (sorcery and murder of Arsenius, a Meletian bishop in the Thebaid). His second charge was a political kind (he had threatened to stop the Alexandrian corn-ships).His third charge was his order to assault the presbyter Ischyras. Cf. ‘St. Athanasius – (ca. 297 – 373), Patriarch of Alexandria’ in Christian Classic Ethereal Library. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/athanasius (18 March 2011). Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 9. Archibald Robertson, Select Writings and Letters of Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria: Edited, with Prolegomena, Indices, and Titles (Ann Arbor, Michigan: Cushing-Malloy Inc., 1978), lxxxvi. John Behr, The Nicene Faith Part1, 165-166. For the letter, see H.I. Bell, Jesus and Christians in Egypt (London: 1924), 53-71.

Because of Arian controversy, Athanasius spent seventeen of his forty-five years as bishop in five different exiles.31 This situation happened, probably “because his Defence against the Arians gave so full an account.”32 Athanasius was likened to “a modern gangster,” “an unscrupulous politician,”33 because of “his oppressive and violent authoritative nature.”34 However he had never been formally charged with heresy,35 and some mentioned that he was the “pillar of the church;”36 And the Roman Church hailed him among the four great

Fathers of the East.37

III.2. ATHANASIUS’ THEOLOGY

Alexander and his successor Athanasius laid emphasis on Origen’s insistence on the Son’s eternal divinity related to the existence of God as Father rather than creator, which had led to the Nicene doctrine of the identity of substance (????????). Athanasius prioritized faith over reason, contrary to Arians’ rationalistic tendency.38 Athanasius’ theological approach was centred on Soteriology.39 He was committed to monotheism.40 But Arius’ account of God was incoherent since on one interpretation it was similar to the radical Judaic monotheism, and the other interpretation of it (one that emphasized “the Son is god in some secondary sense”) was equivalent to a kind of polytheism ? two gods, namely one God who is ingenerate and 31 Tony Lane, A Concise History of Christian Thought, . Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 20. ‘St. Athanasius – (ca. 297 – 373), Patriarch of Alexandria’ in Christian Classic Ethereal Library. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/athanasius (18 March, 2011). See also, Timothy D. Barnes, Athanasius and

Constantius: Theology and Politics in the Constantinian Empire, 20. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381, 239-273, 422. Cf. David M. Gwynn, The Eusebians: The Polemic of Athanasius of Alexandria and the Construction of the ‘Arian Controversy’ (Oxford Theological Monographs; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 2. Maurice F. Wiles, Archetypal heresy: Arianism through the centuries, 6. John Behr, The Nicene Faith Part 1, 167. Cf. Adolf Harnack, History of Dogma, (6 vols; trans. Neil Buchanan; New York: Dover Publications,1961, Vol. 4), 62. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/harnack/dogma4.ii.ii.i.i.iii.html (25 April 2011).

Gregory of Nazianzus, The Orations 21, 26. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 20. The four great Fathers of the Eastern Church ? John Chrysostom, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Athanasius of Alexandria ? were recognized in 1568 by Pope St. Pius V. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 20. ‘Church Fathers’ in Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_the_Church (6 April 2011).

Athanasius, In Illud ‘Omnia mihi tradita sunt’, 6. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 66. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God, 423. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God, 425.

one who is generated. This resulted in two incongruous accusations against the Arians that

they were no better than Jews and that they were identical with pagans. 41

Unlike the Arians, who needed the Son as a lower god to reconcile an incomparable and

impassable God with the Scriptural message that God suffered for humankind’s salvation,

Athanasius dealt with the self-revelation of God who had come into the closest contact

with His creation (Jn 14:9).42

Athanasius endeavoured to substantiate “the very tradition, teaching, and faith of the

Catholic Church from the beginning, which the Lord gave, the Apostles preached, and the

Fathers kept.” Athanasius maintained, “I have delivered the tradition, without inventing

anything extraneous to it.” The tradition was that the one God is a Triad.43

Trinity

At the heart of Athanasius’s theology of Incarnation lay his doctrine of Trinity,44 summed up as follows: There is a Trinity, holy and complete, consistent, eternal and indivisible in nature, not composed of one that creates and one that originated, but all creative, called to be God in Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Father does all things “through the Word (the Son) in the Holy Spirit”. Their activity is one, and their unity is preserved. The Trinity is Athanasius, Orationes contra Arianos III.67, I.17, 18, III.16. Maurice F. Wiles, Archetypal heresy: Arianism through the centuries, 8. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381, 424-425.

R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God, 426.

Athanasius, Epistulae IV ad Serapionem episcopum Thmuitanum, I, 28-33. Cf. Johannes Quasten,

Pathology, 66. Brian LePort, An Introduction to the Letters of Serapion on the Holy Spirit by Athanasius of

Alexandria, 18.

http://westernseminary.academia.edu/BrianLePort/Papers/172851/An_Introduction_to_the_Letters_of_Serapi

on_on_the_Holy_Spirit_by_Athanasius_of_Alexandria. (21 April 2011).

Athanasius, Orationes contra Arianos III.15; Athanasius, NPNG2-04. Athanasius: Select Work and Letters, 402. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204/Page_402.html (20 April 2011). R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381, 424-425.

“not only in name and form of speech but in truth and actuality.” Thus one God, “who is overall (Eph. 4:6), and through all and in all.”45 Athanasius constantly defended the ontological unity of the Father and the Son through his Scriptural argument. He proved the divinity of Christ and of Holy Spirit,46 because “if we participate in Christ, we must then participate in God, if our redemption is to be assured.” 47 Athanasius refuted Arius’ claims that the Son was a creature and had come into being from ‘non-existence’, and that “there was a time when He was not.” Athanasius argued that there can be only one Son ? the eternal Word and Wisdom of the substance of God the Father, and that the Word is always coexistent with the Father, who is the creator and Lord of all, to whom all things owed their existence.48 Athanasius rejected the Arian position that the very name ‘Son’ presumes His being generated, and that the Son (the Word) is a work of the will of God for the creation of the world. Athanasius argued that to be begotten implies to be “an offspring of the Father’s essence, not of His will,” since “begetting in God differs from human begetting” because of God’s indivisibility.

Because the Son is in the Father and proper to Him, as the radiance in the light and stream from fountain, Athanasius asserted that the Son’s eternal relation to the Father is essential Italic words are mine. Athanasius, Epistulae IV ad Serapionem episcopum Thmuitanum, I, 2, 12, 14, 16, 19-20, 25, 27, 31; III, 15. Athanasius, Orationes contra Arianos II.24, 25. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 66-67. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381, 427. Athanasius, De incarnation et contra Arianos, 13-19. Cf. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381, 422. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 29. Kurt Aland, A History of Christianity: From the Beginnings to the Threshold of the Reformation (Trans. James L. Schaaf, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980, Vol. 1), 191. Athanasius, Vita antonii, 69. Athanasius, Depositio Arii, 2, 3. Athanasius, Epistula de decretis Nicaenae synodi, 11. Athanasius, “On Luke X.22 (Matt. XI.27)” in In Illud ‘Omnia mihi tradita sunt’, 4. Athanasius, Orationes contra Arianos, III.4; Cf. Athanasius, NPNG2-04. Athanasius: Select Work and Letters, 214. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204/Page_214.html (15 April 2011). Athanasius, NPNG2-04. Athanasius: Select Work and Letters, 70. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204/Page_70.html (15 April 2011). Athanasius, NPNG2-04. Athanasius: Select Work and Letters, 89. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204/Page_89.html (18 April 2011). Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 69. and not merely moral as Arius viewed.49 Also, Athanasius refuted the Docetic views of the

Arians and Apollonarians on the relationship of the historical Christ to the eternal Son. 50 Arius maintained, based on Proverbs 8:22ff, that the Son’s mediatory ontological status between God and creation was necessary, because “the Father was too high and mighty, or too proud to carry out the work of creation himself,” and “therefore begot the Son” as “the minister of the intentions of the Father.”51 However, Athanasius argued that the terms applied to the Incarnate and not the pre-existent Christ; Thus, Athanasius implied that the mediating activity of the Son is not in his position within the Godhead, but in his becoming Incarnate.

So, Athanasius placed the Son (Logos) on the side of God, opposite Arius’ placement of the Son on the side of the creatures.52 Athanasius insisted that “the Son has in common with the Father the fullness of the Father’s Godhead” and “the Son is entirely God.”53 Against Arius’ subordination of the Son, Athanasius argued that if the Son says, “The Father is greater than I,” He means that, “The Father is the origin, the Son the derivation.”54 “Eternally begotten, the Son is the Father’s substance, He is consubstantial to the Father, He is ?????????.”55 Athanasius also rejected the term ????? as unacceptable. So, Athanasius defended the term ????????? against the Arians and Semi-Arians.56 Consequently, Athanasius disapproved what the Arians’ claim ? a ‘proceeding origin’ for the Father and the Son.57 Athanasius, Epistula ad Afros episcopos, 3-6. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 56, 67-68. Athanasius, Epistula ad Epictetum episcopum Corinthi, 9. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 59. Athanasius, Orationes contra Arianos II.24-25. Cf. Maurice F. Wiles, Archetypal heresy: Arianism through the centuries, 8. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381, 101.

Athanasius, Orationes contra Arianos, II.25; I.16; III.3, 6; II.41; III.3,4. Athanasius, Epistula ad Afros episcopos, 3-6. Cf. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318381, 424. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 67. Athanasius, Oratinones contra Arianos I.16; III.6. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 68. Athanasius, Oratinones contra Arianos III, 3; Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 69. Athanasius, De Synodis 41. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 69. Athanasius, De Synodis 41. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 69-70. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God, 434.

Logos and Redemption

Athanasius’ theology of the Logos centred upon the concept of redemption.58 For Athanasius, the redeeming will of God necessitated the incarnation of Christ and his death. If God Himself had not become man, and if Christ were not God, there would not have been redemption for mankind.59 This can only required that Christ was God by nature, not by participation, because the latter could never have formed the likeness of God in anyone. Thus, Athanasius refuted the Arian concept of the Son as “god by participation”.60

Christology

Athanasius’ theology upheld the real distinction between the divinity and humanity after the Incarnation, yet emphasized the personal unity of Christ. Consequently, whatever the Lord did as God and as human being belongs to the same person.61 Athanasius refuted the Arian charge of creature-worship directed against the Nicene Christology with the argument, that Catholics do not worship the humanity of Christ, but the Lord of creation, the Word Incarnate.62

Holy Spirit

By maintaining that the Spirit “is no creature, but is one with the Son as the Son is one with the Father, [the Spirit] is glorified with the Father and the Son, and confessed as God with the Word,” Athanasius rejected the idea of the Holy Spirit being one of the Athanasius, De incarnatione et contra Arianos, 9, 54. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 70-71. Athanasius, De incarnatione et contra Arianos, 8. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 71. Athanasius, De Synodis 51. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 71-72. Athanasius, De Sententia Dionysii 9. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology,72. Athanasius, Epistula ad Adelphium et confessorem, 3. Athanasius, “Letter LX. ? To Adelphius, Bishop and Confessor: against the Arians” in NPNG2-04. Athanasius: Select Work and Letters, 575. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204/Page_575.html (20 April 2011). Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, ministering spiritual creatures, and insisted the Godhead of the Holy Spirit according to the Nicene Creed.63 Athanasius defended the non-scriptural Nicene term ????????? (consubstantial) and ? ?? ???? (of the essence). He claimed that these terms were to be found in the Scripture, and they had already been used by the Church Fathers, including Tertullian, Origen, Dionysius of Rome, Dionysius of Alexandria and Theognostus.64 Against the claims of the heretic Arians and Tropicists, Athanasius gave the reasons for adopting the word ????????? (consubstantial) for both the Son and the Spirit in relation to the Father, and proved that the Nicaea’s Trinitarian formula was in accordance with Scripture.65 Athanasius accused the Arians of teaching that God was not always a Trinity since the Son has not always existed, and also of dividing the Trinity because they attributed different natures to the Father and the Son.66

Arianism attacks the very nature of Christianity because it denotes “a God who was not a true God at all”, who was “in no position to communicate salvation” to humans, and therefore “incapable for redeeming mankind”.67 The Arian doctrine, which formed a canon Athanasius, Epistulae IV ad Serapionem episcopum Thmuitanum, I, 1, 15-21, 27, 31; III.1. Athanasius, Oratinones contra Arianos II, 25, 26, 73, 74. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 56, 67. For a discussion of Athanasius’s use of homoousious of the Spirit, see Kilian McDonald, The other hand of God: the Holy Spirit as the Universal Touch and Goal (Collegeville, Minnesota, USA: Liturgical Press, 2003), 18, 74, 126. Athanasius, Epistula de decretis Nicaenae synodi, 18. Athanasius, NPNG2-04. Athanasius: Select Work and Letters, 163. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204/Page_163.html (20 April 2011). Cf. Johannes

Quasten, Pathology, 61.

Epistula de decretis Nicaenae synodi (Letter Concerning the Decrees of the Council of Nicaea) was written about 350/351 and addressed by Athanasius to one of his friends, to whom the Arian claim had caused confusion. Whereas and Epistulae IV ad Serapionem episcopum Thmuitanum (the four letters concerning the Holy Spirit) was written by Athanasius around 359/360 and addressed to Serapion to refute the heretic tropicists, who opposed the divinity of the Holy Spirit. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 57, 61. Kilian McDonald, The other hand of God: the Holy Spirit as the Universal Touch and Goal, 18. R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for Christian Doctrine of God: The Arian Controversy 318-381, 424. Athanasius, De synodis 51. Cf. Johannes Quasten, Pathology, 8. Maurice F. Wiles, Archetypal heresy: Arianism through the centuries, 7.

of scriptural misinterpretation, was a slander against the Fathers. 68 The worship which the Arians offered to God was a blasphemous idolatry. 69 Athanasius defended the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father, successfully explained the nature and generation of the Logos, built the ground of the Trinitarian and Christological doctrine of the Church, and thus established the theological foundation for centuries to come.70

Athanasius’ Christological weakness

In his Christology, Athanasius did not assign any important role to the human soul of Christ. In fact, When the Arians objected the divinity of Christ by referring to the Scriptural passages which mention the inner suffering, fear and affliction of the Logos, Athanasius never made use the opportunity and never attacked the Arians in this error, because it dealt with the human soul of Christ. 71 Christ’s death is to Athanasius is a separation of Logos and body.72 Athanasius’ theology was based on Logos-Sarx theology. In relation to Orationes contra Arianos (III.35-37) its weakness was revealed when Athanasius could not comment to the Arians in: (1) the connecting link between the Logos and his flesh; (2) the existence of a human soul in Christ.73

Athanasius, De Sententia Dionysii 1. Cf. Maurice F. Wiles, Archetypal heresy: Arianism through the

centuries, 8.

Athanasius, Orationes contra Arianos I.8, II.43, III.16. Athanasius, Ad Episcopos Aegypti 13. Cf. Maurice

F. Wiles, Archetypal heresy: Ari

As the topic “ARE WE CIVILIZED” goes towards the long discussion but here I give my outline on every point related to this topic firstly as Pakistan is the country which carry large population including all age group, many areas of Pakistan are uneducated and uncivilized due to many factors, as we talk about the major cities of Pakistan like Karachi, Islamabad and Lahore in these cities we might be say that the people are educated and civilized as compare to the remote areas of Pakistan.

Technology development leads towards the civilized nation but technology doesn’t means civilization, although technology leads our life towards easeness,facility and shrink our working time but still technology failed to happy human being. As compare to the old life of human which is very tough and very hacted but human was happy and peaceful but now a days every thing is available every facility is providable but still human are not happy, there is no serenity in the society. Providing facilities and growing technology don’t lead the nation towards civilization. Technology don’t put smile on our faces.

Civilization it self means the phenomenon of human to live together in a peaceful and happy environment with respect of each other in the society. To implement this thing we should individually think and concentrate on our own activity and behavior, we should

Concentrate on our own personality this is the great and practical words for the whole society if everyone will engaged to improve their selves all the problems will solve and in this sense we would be say that we are civilized nation. if we want to live in a calmful environment we should avoid our bad behaviors, cruel nature and injustice with the weaker of the society or any company and live together in a friendly atmosphere we all should improve our moral values and think same for our brother now the point is are we civilized yes we are civilized but on a very few average scale which is negligible there is still need to become more and more civilized. This is misfortune for us that we live in that society where many people even don’t understand the word civilization.

Education itself play a very vital role in the development of the society, it is the most powerful weapon throughout all the weapon, with the help of this weapon we can win any war, many people of Pakistan are uneducated, due to many factors including some remote areas of Pakistan there is less source to get the even basic education and only fewer or minor will reach towards the higher education. They have no guidance, less sources and less opportunity to learn and to show their skills and talent. It is the part of civilization if people are educated they are aware and they have ability to see the difference between true and false, also they have the clean view about the real things upon fake things. In this manner they have the power to make right decision at the right time. Without any hesitation but with full confidence. Also they understand the power of education and they will precede this education in their offspring as well. And it will become the chain of education.

Poverty is also major factor of our country that restricts the parents to send their children to public or private schools. They have less source of income So they prefer to send their children towards QURANIC education and its all, but both education is essential either its Islamic education or either its worldly education, both has its own importance and its own value there is no comparison between them. Both are compulsory The worst effected are girl children because parents stop them from going to school and hand over trifling jobs at home, girls and boys both have equal right to get the education and take the decision with efficiency, there is a large gender discrimination in our country. It is very big issue in our country many areas of Pakistan is filled with the thought that education is not necessary for woman, they just stay in home, they don’t courage them and don’t provide the opportunity to the woman to get education and shine in any field of education, this is misfortune with them.

I think programs, seminars and different workshops will take place in that areas of Pakistan in which the uneducated people encourage to move forward and learn the things and implement in their practical life. Specially women are encourage to educate their self to grow the coming generation because if they are educated then their generation will also educated also they have the sense of class, grouping and team work and management.

Above all I discussed the current situation and strategies about the topic now I write my own opinion so in my opinion , I totally against and I don’t support it the situation of our country we are totally uncivilized nation. The very first worst part is there countless target killing everyday we hear the news of deaths. We are the nation who burn tires, buses and block the road. Protest on very little things. There is countless bombast in which countless people lost their lives and no one is here to stop this evil deeds and activities, many people injured due to this reason, is this nation is civilized where people don’t know about that either they reach at their home safely or not, where people are always facing problems including electricity, transport, water and gas etc.we named as uncivilized nation in the whole world due to our this situation of the country. Although ALLAH gives us everything in wide variety. HE gives us relation, families also provide all the nature goodness our country is included in the list of fruitful country. We have power to win the world. But we waste our time in the wrong activities, we don’t put up our moral values, we just waste our time in protest also we point out each other instead to concentrate our own personality, we are selfish nation we are liars we are not sincere with each other we are not sincere with our profession with our team. We don’t have ability to ignore each other; we don’t have polite nature and don’t show any positive attitude towards the elders and young. We don’t have respect of the elders. We lacking the moral values and don’t care the emotions of others. I must say we should learn ignorance, peace and prosperity. We learn how to put smile on the faces of others, learn how to make life easy and calm, we learn to live in peaceful environment where everyone respect each other and also give facility to the human beings and make life easy through the behavior and positive attitude.

I recently discussed the situation, I was standing in row to submit the bill suddenly I feel great mass of people push at my back and my leg slip and I drop my position of row and all the people who are following my back position move forward, when I stand to maintain my row position no one give me that position and then I stand in the last position of the row and submit the bill in the last I was very surprised and angry about this unexplainable behavior of people. Regarding this incident I must say that time is important to everyone and everyone should go to their work but we should understand and respect each other, always find and search the way in which you give easiness to the people do not show your wild attitude and behavior. Always think the same way to others as you choice for you.

We should lives our life according to the rule of Islam, and this is very simple if everyone start with their own family and every single person concentrate on their own, think about small points and do practically correct those wrong habits and activity. Make rules in home and follow the rules of your home and also outside the home, think positive, do positive, live positive, speak in the way that people love to listen you and listen in the way that the people want to speak with you. Life is easy for you and for others.

Now I finishing my essay through this lines after all that situation I must say that still we have bad habits, still we are ill mannered still we are uneducated but I don’t stop my words to write these lines about our nation is that only need is to proper guidance we will prove our self as highly civilized nation INSHAHALLAH We proudly stand among the bravest nations as we live in conditions no other nation could not even think to live. We have the strength and the power and above all, we have faith in ourselves. We are very forgiving nation. We always forgave the bad and ill of others, we only remember the good part. We are an optimistic nation and we prove it many times.

The Archangel Uriel is one of the four archangels that rule over the four corners of the Earth. The other three are Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael. Uriel is the least mentioned of these four archangels, if he is mentioned at all. According to some traditions, there are seven archangels. But even in these accounts, these four are the most prominent. There are scant references to Uriel in scripture. Jewish scripture does not mention the archangels by name. In Christianity, Uriel appears in the Gnostic version of the Bible where we learn his name means “The Light Of God”.

Uriel is also known as the angel of Wisdom. His realm is in the mental plane where thoughts, ideas, and creativity reside. As “The Light of God”, the Archangel Uriel shines the light of truth and wisdom where there is darkness, deception, and confusion. Uriel also helps people to control their emotions, guiding them to release anger and overcome anxiety, both of which are obstacles to gaining wisdom. The archangel provides guidance in recognizing and avoiding dangerous situations.

The Archangel of Salvation, Uriel shows people how to heal and brings forgiveness t those who ask. Tradition teaches that Uriel stands before the gates of Heaven and denies entrance to all who have failed to love God. Uriel also offers unconditional forgiveness and holds the keys that unlock the gates.

Uriel is mentioned often in apocryphal scripture and other early religious writings that did not make it into what we now know as The Bible. The archangel is credited with rescuing John the Baptist from the Massacre of the Innocents the king ordered upon hearing about the birth of Jesus. Jewish tradition holds that Uriel checked the doors for lamb’s blood during the Egyptian plagues. Uriel is also one of the select few angels who are allowed to enter the immediate presence of God. During medieval times, Uriel was considered the holy source of heat in the winter.

In Catholic tradition, Uriel is the patron saint of the arts. He is also the patron saint of science, because of the archangel’s association with wisdom, and of those seeking the sacrament of Confirmation. The Coptic Christians venerate Uriel. To many other Christians, however, Uriel remains unknown. There is no mention of Uriel in canonical scripture. In 745 AD, Pope St Zachary condemned the church’s obsession with angels, saying that it bordered on angel worship which is forbidden by the Ten Commandments. He did, however, approve the reverence of certain named angels. Uriel was one of many angels that were left off of this list.

Despite the efforts of Pope St. Zachary, many people still venerate Uriel, especially among Kabbalists and Eastern Orthodox Christians. Uriel’s Feast Day is July 28th as the archangel’s influence is deemed to peak in the middle of the summer. Uriel stands guard over the summer, guiding the ripening of the grain harvest and the blossoming of a multitude of flowers.

Making A Connection With Uriel

Connecting with Uriel is becoming increasingly common among people in the New Age movement and Christians exploring their own deeper spirituality. There is no one correct way to make a connection with the Archangel Uriel. What is important is that you find a method that is comfortable for you. Prayer is obviously the most common method for connecting with Uriel. However, the influence of New Age mysticism has caused a growth in the popularity of meditation as a means of venerating the archangels. Because archangels are ever-present spiritual beings, you can connect with them whenever and wherever you are. Archangels have a historic tendency to appear to humanity in dreams and visions. This is particularly true of Uriel, who operates primarily in the realm between the physical and the spiritual.

Through Prayer

People most often pray to Uriel to grant them wisdom. Unsolicited contact with Uriel is rare and is generally associated with someone becoming a scholar or a prophet of God. Uriel also guides us on our spiritual journey as we transform from our mere physical and carnal nature to one that is more holy and of God. The archangel teaches is the path of wisdom and righteousness, leading us to our destiny of being united with God in Heaven after our death.

Uriel is also the angel of music, the arts, science, and prophecy. People who are actively interested in each or all of these areas are encouraged to reach out to Uriel to intercede on their behalf with God. The archangel helps us to overcome stress in our life, soothing our minds and allowing us to find inner peace. Whenever life becomes seemingly unbearable, Uriel is the archangel who keeps us grounded in our faith and leads us through troubling and turbulent times

The primary method people use to reach out to Uriel is through prayer. The act of praying allows us to communicate openly with God and His angels. Prayer is usually a one-way communication from us to the divine as we seek to have our voices heard. Occasionally, people will receive a directly communicated answer during their prayers. Most often, however, the answers to our prayer occur over time.

As one of the angel who is allowed to be present with God, Uriel is a powerful ally in your prayer life. God listens to His angels and grants them leeway to act on His behalf. Uriel’s assignment is to give people wisdom in all things. The archangel guides our decision making and relieves our anxiety. He allows us to think and perceive the world with a clear mind and stable emotions so that we can make the right choices that ultimately bring us closer to God. As such, Uriel helps us navigate the spiritual realm and makes our entry into Heaven possible.

For those who are new to the act of prayer, formal prayers are extremely useful. God and His angels know what we are thinking and what we are going to say before we say it. Still, God wants us to reach out to Him so that we can use our own freewill to choose to follow and love Him, thus growing in His spirit. If you have not prayed before, formal traditional prayers can help to loosen your tongue and open your heart to a prayerful life. Here is an example of prayer you can use as you begin your quest to crate a connection with Uriel, the Angel of Wisdom.

A Prayer For Wisdom

St. Uriel the Archangel

You are the Light of God

The Angel of Wisdom

Please pray for me

Grant me wisdom

So that I might understand the will of God

Release me from anxiety

Soothe my soul

Open my heart

And guide me along the path of righteousness

So that I might join you

In the presence of the Lord

Amen

A Prayer Of Thanksgiving

St. Uriel, I thank God for the gift of your guidance

And I thank you for the gift of your wisdom

Archangel Uriel, you guide my decisions and keep me on the righteous path

You soothe my mind and bring harmony to my soul

You ease my troubled heart and release me from anxiety

For all of these things I thank you and give you praise

In the holy name of God our Father

Archangels often answer prayers in ways that are not immediately clear to. Praying everyday helps to prepare you to understand the answers. Through experience, you will gain the ability to discern the answers to your prayers from mere happenstance. God and His angels are ever present which means they see your life in its entirety while you experience it one moment at a time. Answers to prayer come in God’s time, not man’s. Through faith you will understand the answers to your prayers and how they affect your life.

Prayer can take place wherever you happen to be. Sacred places like shrines and churches offer quiet and holy places where we can connect with the divine, but you do not have to go to those places in order to pray. All you need is your soul, and open heart, and humility. The words will come when you are ready.

There are two basic forms of prayer – formal and informal. Formal prayers are the prayers that are passed down through church tradition or newer prayers that follow the same form. They generally start by acknowledging who is being prayed to and honoring or venerating them, The person praying then humbles themselves and makes their prayer request. Informal prayers do not follow a traditional form. While their tone is more reverent than casual speaking, the words themselves are generally improvised on the spot or are words that are personally relevant to the one who is praying.

Connecting With Archangel Uriel Through Traditional Formal Prayer

Formal prayer helps us to speak with God and his angels when our own words fail us. When the crowd asked Jesus Christ how they should pray to God, he gave them The Lord’s Prayer. Clearly, any form of prayer will work if it is humble and honest. The use of traditional formal prayers makes the act easier. During stressful situations, we can struggle to find the right words to say. Formal prayer gives us those words as a starting point from which we can add our own words later is we wish.

Using a formal prayer also teaches us how to pray on our own. Traditional prayers follow classical structures that, once learned, can be used to craft something more personal. For centuries, people were persecuted and sometimes executed for reciting these prayers. Knowing this makes reciting these prayers today a powerful and humbling experience.

Saying The Rosary

The Rosary is probably the most well known type of formal prayer. Using a chain of beads, a person recites a series of traditional prayers venerating the Virgin Mare or reflecting on either moments in their life, lost loved ones, or the Passion of Christ.

Rosaries can be used in other ways as well. They can be used for connecting with the archangels by substituting prayers of veneration for the archangel for the Hail Mary prayer used to venerate the Mother of God. A prayer for the veneration of the Archangel Uriel would go like this:

Hail Archangel Uriel, Angel of Wisdom

You are ever present with the Father

And are Blessed in the eyes of the Lord

Bring me comfort, for I am troubled

So that I might become closer to God

Holy Uriel, the Light of God

Guide me on the path of righteousness

Protect me from evil

And pray for me, a sinner

To the Lord our God

Saying the rosary is a prayerful and meditative discipline. Making the rosary a habit will comfort your soul.

Chaplets

Chaplets are similar to rosaries, but smaller and quicker to use. They are also available specifically for different saints and the archangels. The Chaplet of The Archangel Uriel consists of the Medal of Uriel, three beads representing the Holy Trinity, and nine beads that represent the nine choirs of angels. The chaplet can be used in the following manner.

The medal – Holding the medal between your finger and thumb, recite the Hail Archangel Uriel from above.

The first three beads – Begin each bead with the words “Archangel Uriel, intercede for me so that might become closer to God” With the first bead, follow this with the Lord’s Prayer. Using the next beads, follow the words with the Hail Mary and then the Glory Be.

The nine beads – Say these beads in honor of the nine Angelic Choirs, or just use them as a novena. Say the following prayer with each bead.

Holy Lord, God of power and might

Heaven and Earth are filled with your Glory

Hosanna in the highest

Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord

Hosanna in the highest.

Closing prayer – Upon completion, say the following formal prayer to Uriel

Archangel Uriel, Fire of God

With your fiery sword of God

Protect me from evil

Bring me to the throne of God

On the day of my reckoning

Show mercy on my soul

And intercede with me

To the Lord God Almighty

Chaplets are more convenient that rosaries as they are easier to carry with you and can be said relatively quickly.

Novenas

A novena is a series of prayers said for nine days in a row. They can be the same prayer, or a different one each day. The nine days of prayer remind us of the nine days the apostles spent in prayer between the Ascension and Pentecost. The days between Ascension Thursday and Pentecost Sunday are the most popular time for saying novenas, but they can be used at any time. Saying a novena to Uriel is often done around the archangel’s Feast Day of July 25th or the Feast Day shared with the other archangels, September 29th.

Novenas can be said with prayers from prayer books, with chaplets, or y praying the rosary. They can also be used in conjunction with meditative rituals. The Archangel is traditionally associated with the number “9”, making novenas a particularly appropriate way to seek your connection with him.

Connecting Through Meditation

Meditating is different from praying and is an important addition to your spiritual growth. During prayer you are seeking an audience with the divine. You want to be heard, whether you are offering praise, asking forgiveness, or seeking guidance. Prayer is essentially an act of active communication with God and His angels.

During meditation, you are seeking to listen more than to hear. There is a place for communicating while meditation, but the act is more importantly an opportunity to be still in body and mind so that you can receive messages from heaven. Through meditation, you enter a trance-like state where you are better able to listen to communication from the angels of the Lord. Mediation can be accomplished anywhere. Using a meditative ritual can be a wonderfully holy and cathartic experience. The process of the meditative ritual brings the body, mind, and soul in to a restful and peaceful state. This opens your awareness to the presence of the divine.

To begin meditating, you first need to find a quiet and secluded place. The church is an excellent place for meditative purposes. Most churches are open between services, allowing people to enter and meditate on the word of God. In Catholic churches, the inner room where the Eucharist is displayed is the quietest area is perfect for reaching a meditative state. Meditating in the presence of the Body of

Christ is a deeply religious experience. Secluded gardens that are off the beaten path are also wonderful places for meditation. If you do not have access to a place like this, however, you can easily create a meditative space within your own home by setting up a shrine using little more than a table, table cloth, candles, and incense.

Once you have found a proper place to meditate, make yourself comfortable and close your eyes. Make yourself become aware of every breath you take, breathing in and out slowly and deeply. As you inhale, feel yourself breathing in the spirit of the Archangel Uriel. As you exhale, allow yourself to release you anxiety and fear. By releasing your anxiety, you make room in your mind and soul for the wisdom which Uriel wants to bestow on you. Meditating is also an excellent way to start your day with energy and focus, or to end your day in a peaceful and reflective state.

Visualization during meditation keeps you focused on your objective and helps you to avoid becoming distracted. This is where icons, statues, and images of the Archangel Uriel can be used effectively. These items do nothing of themselves other than to help you remain focused. Do not mistake the images fr the actual presence of the Archangel Uriel, as that would amount to idol worship. Merely let the images help you to create a vision in your own mind that the archangel can fill with his own presence.

As you go deeper into your meditation with Uriel, you will see a ray of light. The light will either be white, yellow, or gold, as these are the colors associated with Uriel. Uriel is known as “The Fire Of God”, so do not be surprised if you see flames in your vision. The visions of fire or light will join with your actual vision of the Archangel Uriel. This way, you will understand with whom you are present.

While meditating, you must remain passive. Do not try to manipulate or actively understand the messages you are receiving. This can lead to your ego altering the messages in a way that is easier for you to handle. But, this will result in you losing the message from the archangel. You ego is a powerful tool of Satan. To meditate on the message of the archangel, you need to subjugate you ego completely so that you can fully receive the Uriel’s message. There will be ample time to make sense of that message once the meditation is complete.

Connecting With Uriel Through Simply Speaking

Informal conversations with God are becoming common place. Humanity is developing in its collective relationship with God. Where once we could only speak with the Lord in a formal manner, we have learned to converse with God and His angels whenever we feel the need and in whichever way is most expedient and effective. Developing a habit of casually speaking with the divine is more convenient than making time for formal or ritualized prayer, and makes it easier to stay connected with the divine throughout the day.

Formal and informal prayers serve the purpose of teaching us how to pray. From these prayers, we learn to offer praise, remain humble, seek forgiveness of our sins, and accept the will of God. Of these things, remaining humble is vital. To receive the blessing of the Archangel Uriel, we must acknowledge that we are not deserving and ask for these blessings along with his mercy. Pride is another tool of Satan. Thus, we must eliminate our pride to ensure out connection with the archangel.

Simply speaking to Archangel Uriel is particularly appropriate during emergencies. When we are suffering, God doesn’t expect us to just stop what we are doing, grab our rosary, and find a church. He wants to hear from us immediately, just as Christ called out to Him on the cross. Jesus Christ showed us that we can speak to God just as effectively whether we are in a peaceful garden or under extreme physical and spiritual anguish. Having a chaplet, medal, or charm handy can give you something to hold on to and focus on, and also serves to help you to relax. However, they do nothing more than that. The items are not magical on their own.

The Use Of Writing To Connect With Uriel

Communicating with Archangel Uriel through writing is very effective. Not only does it help those who write better than they speak to make a connection, it creates a journal of that communication that can be referenced later. Sometimes the messages we receive from angels are difficult to decipher immediately but become more clear with the passage of time. Creating a written journal of these messages allows you to review them as time goes by. The journal can also help you to give advice to others who are in your same circumstance, or can persuade people to write to angels on their own.

Angelic writing takes two forms – automatic dictation and automatic writing. They are similar in that you need to put yourself into a meditative state to begin, as you will be allowing Uriel to use your hands to deliver his message. With both forms, you also need to receive the message without judgment, allowing it to flow directly from the angel to the paper. Modern technology can be used as well by simply replacing your writing instrument with a keyboard.

When using automatic dictation to connect with Uriel, you will listening to the message the archangel gives you and writing it down. You will start the process yourself through prayer and meditation so that you can become aware of the presence of Uriel. Nest, write down you question or request for the archangel on a piece of paper. Now, stay ready to write and listen for the archangel’s response. It is vital that you write down whatever message you receive, even if it doesn’t seem to make sense. The process of interpreting the communication while writing puts the ego in the way of the communication, rendering it invalid. Continue to write whatever you receive until the message stops. Once the communication is over you can then go back and try to understand what you received.

Understand also that the answer you receive might not be the answer you want. The Archangel Uriel is wise and knows what is best for us. Often, what is best for us seems confusing or comfortable at first. You must trust these messages through your faith. Also, if the message is confusing, don’t try to force meaning into it. Allow time to pass and revisit the message from time to time. Eventually, life experiences and the passage of time will help you to understand what the archangel was telling you.

Automatic writing is a little bit different. After asking your question of the archangel, sit completely still and let your pen hover over the paper. When you start to receive the message, the pen will start to move over the paper on its own. Do not try to influence the motion of the pen. Keeping your eyes closed is a good idea, because you might be tempted to finish a word that you think you recognize when the angel is trying to communicate something else. Keep in mind that the communication might be a picture instead of words. Trying to influence the outcome will result in a communication that is inaccurate and makes no sense.

Both forms of angelic writing require you to free your mind completely of all preconceptions and allow the communication to flow freely. Do not allow yourself to edit, correct, or judge the communication. Simply accept what is given to you. If it doesn’t make sense, save it and come back to it later. Angelic messages come to us with an understanding of a future that we have yet to experience. Given time, the message and guidance you receive will make perfect sense to you.

Connecting With Uriel In Your Dreams

Archangels are quite fond of communicating with us through our dreams. When Uriel appears in dreams and visions, the encounter is very intense and intimidating. Archangels are no-nonsense, straight to the point communicators. There is no small talk, they are strictly about their business.

Unsolicited interactions with Uriel are extremely rare because so few people can handle the gifts of wisdom and prophecy that Uriel bestows. Should you be visited by Uriel in your dreams, count yourself most fortunate. Uriel only visits those who the archangel believes can handle the intensity of the connection. And, the gift of prophecy he endows people with comes with great responsibility. Uriel is a teacher, and the lessons can be difficult ones. Always remember that, no matter how uncomfortable the message or lesson is, it is being bestowed upon you with love and grace.

Reaching out to Uriel in your dreams is not dangerous, nor is it for the faint of heart. You must prepare yourself for the encounter by praying to Uriel to deliver you from fear. The powerful presence of the archangel is known to cause immense fear. This is due to the archangel’s God-like power, and not from any intent from the archangel to cause you to feel afraid. Believe that the archangel will not allow harm to come to you, and you should be able to relax and allow yourself to receive his presence.

If you want Uriel to appear to you in your dreams, set yourself up before going to bed. Start with several prayers to the archangel. Rosaries and chaplets are perfect for this purpose. Then, as you drift of to sleep, repeat the words “Archangel Uriel, allow me into your presence.” As you fall asleep, your resting souls will enter the spiritual realm where the archangels reside. There, you will meet Uriel and receive your message.

Recognizing The Presence Of The Archangel Uriel

Making a connection with an archangel is a deeply religious and overwhelmingly emotional experience. These are the angels who will defeat Satan during the end times, who announced the birth of Jesus Christ to the world, and who deliver God’s messages to humanity. But just because a spiritual experience is immensely powerful does not necessarily mean that an archangel is present.

Here are some clues to help you recognize when the Archangel Uriel is present.

1) You gain new insights and wisdom – The Archangel Uriel is assigned to give people divine wisdom. If after your attempts to connect with the archangel you find yourself with a new understanding of your situation, you have likely been in contact with Uriel. Connecting with Uriel will cause your focus to move off of your worldly problems and on to God. You will become conscious of the everlasting presence of God and His angels. You might also find that you have received the gift prophecy. With this gift, you will not necessarily be able to foresee the future, but you will clearly see the consequences of your actions as well as the actions of others, and you will be able to guide people along the path of righteousness.

2) You suddenly grow in confidence – Your new found wisdom will boost your confidence. You will feel empowered as you set wisely set yourself on the path to God’s glory. This confidence will not resemble cockiness. Rather, you will hold yourself and act in a way that reveals your understanding of God’s will in your life and the life of others. Many will be drawn to you for this, while others will shun you due to their lack of faith in God.

3) You will be motivated to help and serve others – God and His angels grant these gifts to humanity not to be hidden but to be used to help others. A true connection with Uriel will be a life change in experience. You will feel obligated to use your new wisdom for the good of others, not for your own selfish gain. Interactions with the archangels spur us into action for the glory of God. This motivation to help others will also come with the ability to make positive changes in the lives of others. You will have the Archangel Uriel with you always to help you help others.

4) You will see or feel light, fire, and/or electricity – Uriel is the Fire of God, and is associates with brightness, heat, and energy. People who have connected with Uriel report feeling an electric charge flow through their body. Some have also seen a flame or fire that burns hot and bright yet destroys nothing. Although nothing seems to be destroyed by the fire, it burns so hot and bright that you can smell the heat

5) The sights, smells, and sounds of Uriel – Besides light and fire, Uriel is associated with the colors white, gold, red, yellow, and orange. When the archangel is present, you will smell the pungent and spicy aromas of sandalwood, cinnamon, and nutmeg. You might even have a vision of a beautiful angel dressed in leather and armor and holding a sword of fire, or riding in a chariot holding a bow and arrow. For more casual encounters, Uriel will appear dressed in a red tunic with leather sandals or boots. Uriel is also the Angel of Music and the Angel of Poetry. The patron saint of artists and musicians, Uriel’s presence is always accompanied by the beautiful and poetic music of the Angelic Choir.

When you receive a message from Uriel, you will no it to be authentic if you are compelled to act on the message right away. Your new wisdom will excite you and guide you in the right direction. Archangel encounters are highly motivating and life changing. One cannot help but change they way they see and approach the world after such an encounter.

Connections with archangels can also be terrifying. These are powerful spiritual beings that are closely related to God the Father. The Bible states that no one can set eyes on the Lord and survive. While the same is not true of the archangels, the encounter is indeed similar. Feeling afraid during an encounter with an archangel is entirely natural. If you ask the archangel to remove your fear, you will immediately be out at peace.

Asking Uriel’s Help With Life’s Struggles

The Archangel Uriel is adept at helping us with our daily struggles. From Uriel we can the wisdom and insight we need to make the right choices on a daily basis. God has assigned Uriel the ask of granting us wisdom in order to bring us closer to Him. This is his greatest gift. Uriel will clear your mind of anxiety and dread, and fill it with holy wisdom. When Uriel presents you with his wisdom, he will change the way you perceive the world, the spiritual realm, and your place in each. You will no longer wee yourself as a mere mortal being. You will understand you place in God eternal plan for the universe. This wisdom will rule your every though and action. You will no longer feel lost. Rather, the way of the righteous will become clear to you and you will follow that path with a content and sacred heart.

Also known as the Archangel of Salvation, Uriel helps us with every aspect of our lives. He grants us the power of unconditional forgiveness. He shows us how to turn disappointment and failure into victory for the glory of God. And, he will be waiting for us at the end of our days here on Earth to grant us access to the Kingdom of Heaven.

Archangel Uriel will intercede with God on the behalf of anyone who asks with a humble heart. Our mortal experience is rough, but necessary to prepare our souls for the paradise that awaits us in Heaven. The wisdom Uriel grants us gives us the ability to navigate our way through out most troubling times without straying from our path or losing our faith in the Almighty.

Anytime you feel overwhelmed in your life, you should seek guidance from the Archangel Uriel. As the Angel of Music, Uriel can bring all aspects of our life into harmony. If you are not getting along with coworkers, Uriel can bring peace. If you are struggling with problems that you have caused for yourself, Uriel will help you to forgive yourself and find your way out of you self-imposed predicament in ways you did not see before making your connection.

Asking Uriel For Help With Health Problems

The Angel of Music wants our entire life to be in harmony. This includes our spiritual, mental, emotional, and physical health. The archangel understands that our physical well-being takes a toll on our spiritual health and can erode our faith in God. Along with spiritual wisdom, Archangel Uriel gives us the wisdom to make the right choices in regards to our health so that we can take better care of our bodies and treat them as a temple to God.

Uriel is also ever-present with God, which makes him a great intercessor whenever we need healing. Asking Uriel to intercede on your behalf when you are ill or injured will bring a multitude of blessings. First, it will open your heart and soul to receive the healing power of God. Second, it strengthens your mind and spirit, which in turn helps you to endure the healing process. Also, Uriel will give you wisdom so that you will be able to take the proper steps to let our body heal. He will bring all the systems of your body in to harmony, so that they can work as one to heal your body on the inside.

Uriel is also a worthy ally to have when we find ourselves to be terminally ill. All of us end our lives in the same way. We all must die. When your God appointed time has come, Uriel will be there to protect you and to welcome you at the

Introduction

The Arab World contains many traditions that features its societies. Woman role was and is still in many Arab countries limited to being a mother and a household. For many decades, early marriage was the main feature of Arab society due to the long cultural roots and habits that consider the honor of the woman is to be a mother . Family is considered the holy principle for Arab societies whatever their religion .

In the recent years , the Arab world has been passed through many challenges and external pressures represented in globalization ,international and economic changes , opening to world cultures , decrease of welfare and decline of economic performance in many Arab countries which resulted in increase of unemployment, inflation and increase of poverty among most of Arab people.

In the past and near present , early marriage was considered an easy solution especially among poor people to face their hard life . Today , especially after increase of human rights concerns including more freedom and rights for woman , the early marriage started to decrease . however , the problem now is not only the early marriage in some Arab countries but the the main problem is the increase of married women that exceeded thirty years and sometimes they die before they marry .

The majority of the Arab populations live in cities working in industrial or service sectors. Today, Arab women are more educated and more likely to work outside their homes for personal and financial independence. These changes create a new image of woman and change her past traditional role as a mother and household.

The objective of this research is the studying of marriage issue in the Arab world because marriage is one of the key important factors that determine the social and economic present and future in the Arab countries. Both problems of early marriage and increase of average age of marriage of marriage are explained. Finally, a recommended solutions and actions are proposed in order to naturalize the two problems for decreasing the negative impacts and creation of better Arab societies.

Importance of Marriage in Arab Society

Family is the main concern in Arab societies. Family is considered the main social security system for young and elder people in Arab countries. Family and marriage are at the core of interest in majority of Arab communities because they are the legal and accepted way to make man and woman can live together , having relations and kids in legal and religious way which is accepted by their society.

Early marriage in Arab World

Early marriage is any form of marriage that takes place at age of 18 years. Early marriages are often associated with enforcement. Forced marriage is the marriage conducted without full consent of both parties and sometimes with a threat [1].From human rights point of view, early marriage is considered a violation of human rights conventions. In Arab societies- especially developing countries- early marriage, is considered a means of securing young girls’ future and protecting them. Wars and social problems may leads also to early marriage as in Palestine, where the intifada has led to earlier marriage.

Many countries in the world have declared 18 as the minimum legal age of marriage. However, more than millions of young girls are expected to marry in the next decade according to the international statistics. [1].

Early marriage has decreased in many world countries in the last decades. However, it is still common in rural areas and among poor people. Poor parents believe that early marriage will protect their daughters and save their future. Young girls are forced into marriage by their families while they are still children because they think that marriage benefits them and secure their financial and social future.

Early marriage violates children rights because it decreases their human development, leaving them socially isolated with little education, skills and opportunities for employment and self-realization. These conditions ultimately make married girls vulnerable to poverty .Early marriage is a health and human rights violation because it takes place within the context of poverty and gender inequality with social, cultural and economic dimensions [2].

Reasons of early marriage in Arab World

There different reasons of early marriage in Arab countries, some of these reasons are referred to cultural reasons , others are referred to economic reasons . Some of theses reasons are :High poverty rates, birth rates and death rates, greater incidence of conflict and civil wars, lower levels of overall development, including schooling, employment, health care and believes that early marriage is a means of securing young girls’ future and protecting them [3].

Effects of early marriage

In many Arab countries the problem of early marriage still exists. It’s important to understand that early marriage has serious health, economic and sychological effects that may lead to society failure and destruction of the main family role in the society .

When a young girls become wives they are required to do a many hard domestic duties, including new roles and responsibilities as wives and mothers. The young bride’s status in the family is dependent on her demonstrating her fertility within the first year of marriage when she is not physiologically and emotionally prepared [5].

Young wives are forced to be responsible for the care and welfare of their families and future generations while they are still children themselves. They have no decision making powers, restricted mobility and limited economic resources. Early marriage is a direct cause of woman poverty and wide age gaps between younger married girls and their spouses create unequal power relations between the young bride and her older and more experienced husband, resulting in husbands having total control over sexual relations and decision-making [4].

Young wives are often unable to make wise plans for their families and may be forced to select between one of two hard choices: either to tolerate husbands’ violence or to make crimes (killing them). AIDS epidemic increases in young women due to the combination socioeconomic, cultural and political factors that put young women at greater risk of HIV infection due to the lack of sexual knowledge and limited access to information and resources. Younger women may face unsuccessful marriages and divorce could happen as a result of lack of maturity, incomplete independence, limited time to get prepared for marriage and having kids, dealing with education/career building and family formation at the same time.

Feature of marriage in Arab society

There are some significant features of marriage in Arab countries . Those features are relatives marriage, urfi marriage , mutaa and messyar marriages . Urfi marriage is the most unaccepted marriage in many Arab countries because it dosen’t secures wives rights in case fo divorce or deny of their husbands of the marriage itself. Realatives marriage is the most common and liked in many Arab countries for keeping the families wealth (in case of rich family), or for familiarity and strong relations among poor families. Mutaa marriage is significant in north Asian Arab countries . on ther hand messyar marriage is significant in Persian countries .

In Egypt , marriage became a problem due to economic problems associated with high costs of marriage including dowry, homes, furniture and even foods. It is impossible for a young graduated youth to save the money for marriage without their families support or other sources. The impacts of marriage difficulties in Egypt has reflected seriously on the society and created new phenomena such as violence against women such as rape and dely of marriage age after 30s and sometime no marriage.

Women’s rights regarding marriage

According to the international human rights conventions, woman has the rights when entering, during and at the end of the marriage. When entering marriage, woman has the same right as a man to enter marriage only with full consent. A woman married under minimum age shouldn’t be considered legally married. Marriage must be registered in an official registry. If a woman marries someone with another nationality, she will not have her nationality automatically changed to that of her husband unless she chooses that [6].

During marriage, woman has the same rights and responsibilities as man. She has the right to equal access to health services, the right of protection from violence within the family. She also has the same rights as a man to decide freely about the number and spacing of children and to have access to information, education and means to exercise these rights [6].

Woman has the same rights and responsibilities as her husband towards children regardless of her marital status and family benefits. Change in woman’s husband nationality during marriage doesn’t imply that her nationality must be change. If woman is employed she must not be discriminated against on the grounds of marriage and maternity.

At the end of marriage, woman has the same rights as man when a marriage ends. Neither woman nationality nor that of her children shall automatically be affected by the ending of a marriage. Woman has the same rights and responsibilities as a man towards her children regardless of her marital status [6].

How to solve the problem?

The recommended solutions for improving marriage situation in Arab World are:

Using International pressure specially regarding woman rights stated in human rights conventions on Arab countries to follow the Women’s Conventions.
Following poverty reduction strategies
Making the required reforms of marriage and family laws to meet the human rights standards and monitoring the impacts of these laws on Arab societies.
Providing safety employment opportunities for youth specially girls and women affected or at risk of early marriage.
Ensuring the right to education and information for girls, including married girls.
Providing incentives to encourage families to educate their children.
Encouraging activities that change the attitudes and behavior of community and religious leaders – especially regarding early marriage, girls’ education and employment.
Developing rules that redefine acceptable ages of marriage and offer social and economic supports that allow parents and girls to delay marriage until suitable age.
Raising consciousness about child marriage consequences and impacts of increase of average age of marriage as well.
Promoting legal, and chosen forms of marriage
Supporting married young girls
Work cited
Stephen H. , “Early Marriage – Child Spouses “, Innocenti Digest no. 7, UNICEF , March 2007.
UNIFEM, “Forced and Early Marriage”, “URL:http://www.stopvaw.org/Forced_and_Early_Marriage.htmlMinnesota”, Advocates for Human Rights, August 2007.
Forum on Marriage and the Rights of Women and Girls, “Early Marriage and Poverty Exploring links for policy and program development” ,2003.
UNFPA, “The Promise of Inequality: Gender Inequality and Reproductive Health”, “URL:http://www.unfpa.org/swp/2003/english/ch2/index.htm”, 2005.
United Kingdom Foreign and Commonwealth Office, ” A Choice by Right: Working Group on Forced Marriages Child Marriage Fact Sheet, 2000.
The International Women’s Tribune Centre Rights of Women, “A Guide to the Most Important United Nations Treaties on Women’s Human Rights”, New York 1998.

The present-day emphasis on religious pluralism has made more pressing than ever the call and need for a genuine interreligious dialogue. However, experience has shown that a genuine interreligious dialogue is always difficult if not impossible to come by not only in Nigeria but in other parts of the world as well. The reason for this is not farfetched. For me the most notable reason among others is the claim of superiority by some religions over others. This claim suffocates any efforts to any interreligious dialogue that is based on mutual and equal footing. Whether this claim will ever cease to be made is difficult to ascertain. Yet different religions in Nigeria as well as in other parts of the world need a platform with a value capable of generating a genuine interreligious dialogue. This paper argues that applying the value of African communalism into the Religious Ecumenical Bodies in Africa will help to achieve a genuine interreligious dialogue in this part of the world. This is true since according to Chukwuemeka Nze “The spirit of oneness predominant in African communalism precludes domination and impositionaˆ¦” [1] which is mainly what interreligious dialogue needs to be genuine. To flesh out this paper, I will first explore the concept of African communalism. Then, I will argue for its application into the Religious Ecumenical Bodies in Africa for a genuine interreligious dialogue.

The Concept of African Communalism

In Africa, members of the community to which an individual belongs, comprises not just the living but also the living-dead or the ancestors, and the unborn or the “yet-to-be-born”. [2] In this community, the guiding principle is the spirit of African communalism rooted in the realization of the fact that one needs the other members of the community for one to exist and have meaning in life. Hence, communalism is one of Africa’s greatest values, which emphasizes communal existence or living over and above individualistic mode of existence. It is an African cultural value or worldview where “the individual is a part of the community which is an organism.” [3] It is a concept that portrays African community spirit. For Simeon Eboh, “the traditional African communalism considers the individual and the community as a whole. One lives from birth to the grave, in an unbroken inter-dependence. Life is essentially cooperation and mutual co-existence. Every member of the community feels secure and fulfilled.” [4] Nze defines it as “the social life of the African which is founded on the African belief that all human beings are members of one family of mankind.” [5] Trying to portray this concept of African communalism, Bede Ukwuije argues for the importance of community and the place of individuals in African traditions. He says: “The community is very important in African traditions. Africans live in community. The individual person is a network of relationships.” [6]

The concept of African communalism can be seen in its South African expression -ubuntu, which basic norm “is that human existence is interconnected and communal.” [7] Like ubuntu, African communalism is expressed in this South African aphorism, “Motho ke motho ka batho”, which quoting Ramose, Heinz Kimmerle interprets as meaning: “to be human is to affirm one’s humanity by recognising the humanity of others and, on this basis, establish respectful human relations with them.” [8] This is to say that the human interconnectedness that is expressed in African communalism necessitates an interrelationship that is based on “mutual recognition and respect.” [9] The concept of African communalism can also be deduced from Innocent Asouzu’s complementary ontology of ibuanyindanda, which “seeks to grasp the idea of being as being from the preceding conditions of its complementary comprehensive interrelatedness.” [10] It is an ontology that creates “conditions that make for understanding among diverse peoples”, the lack of which makes any “meaningful discourse” or dialogue very difficult to come by. [11] This kind of worldview is not without its implications.

The Implications of African Communalism

One of the implications of African communalism is the fact that a person can only be a person because he or she lives and acts in a community. [12] In other words, it is a community that gives a person his or her identity. The “complementary” interrelatedness that is characteristic of African communalism makes it obvious that one is seen in others and others in one. Based on this interrelatedness, John Mbiti describes the relationship between an individual and his or her community. He says:

Only in terms of other people does the individual become conscious of his own being, his own duties his privileges and responsibilities towards himself and towards other people. When he suffers, he does not suffer alone but with the corporate group; when he rejoices, he rejoices not alone but with his kinsmen, his neighbours and his relatives, whether dead or living. When he gets married, he is not alone, neither does his wife ‘belong’ to him alone. So also the children belong to the corporate body of kinsmen, even if they bear only their father’s name. whatever happens to the individual happens to the whole group, and whatever happens to the whole group happens to the individual. The individual can only say: I am, because we are, and since we are, therefore I am. [13]

Worthy of note is the fact that as far as African communalism is concerned, no individual suffers or rejoices alone, but with the entire community. This is important because it will necessarily play out well when I will be arguing for the application of African communalism into the Religious Ecumenical Bodies in Africa for a genuine interreligious dialogue. Still following this outlook of African communalism and the human interconnectedness it characterizes, Stan Chukwube says, “One’s action is considered moral or immoral depending on how that very action enhances or impedes the welfare of others and the smooth functioning of the community. The concern of Ndigbo (Africa) is not how good or bad an act appears to the individual but how the community evaluates it.” [14] This could be seen in Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart where Okonkwo violated the “Week of Peace” by beating Ojiugo his wife; an act that was seen as an abomination that “can ruin the whole clan”. He was made to pay a fine that was used to pacify Ani the “earth goddess” consequently reconciling him with his wife, with the whole community, and with Ani. [15]

The interconnectedness that is seen in African communalism implies that no individual person can make it or survive all alone. His or her survival depends on the survival of the community from which he or she draws his or her vital force. Kofi Asare Opoku seems to agree with this when he says: “The concept of communalism implies that the well-being of all is that which determines the good of each individual in the community, for the welfare of each cannot be considered without reference to the welfare of all.” [16] He illustrates this with the Akan art of a crocodile with two heads and two tails but with a common stomach. Though the crocodiles are inseparable from each other, the heads remain distinct. What each of the heads eats, enters into the common stomach, for the personal and collective good of the crocodiles. [17] Consequently, the preservation of the community is a sine qua non and an onus of every member of the community. V. Mulago, commenting on the relationship between the individual and the community and the responsibility of the individual members of the community in African communities says:

the family, clan or tribe is a whole, of which each member is only a part. The same blood, the same life which is shared by all, which all receive from the first ancestor, the founder of the clan, runs through the [veins] of all. Every effort must be directed to the preservation, maintenance, growth and perpetuation of this common treasure. The pitiless elimination of everything which hinders this end, and the encouragement at all costs of everything which furthers it: this is the last word in [Africa] Bantu customs and institutions, wisdom and philosophy. [18]

Owing to the interrelatedness, which is the underpinning principle of African communalism, every member of the community has the obligation to share with the others. Laurenti Magesa says: “Reluctance or utter refusal to share “with God, one’s ancestors, other persons in the community, and the community itselfaˆ¦destroys the ‘communitarian’ purpose of the universe and is immoral.” [19] Just as a fish cannot live outside water, an individual in African worldview knows that he or she has no meaning and no existence, once he or she is alienated from the community. His or her life can only be “grasped as it is shared.” [20] H. Sindima puts it this way: “We cannot understand persons, indeed we cannot have personal identity without reference to other personsaˆ¦. The notion of being-together is intended to emphasize that life is the actuality of living in the present together with people, other creatures, and the earth.” [21] The understanding that “all realities are in mutual complementary relationship with each other and can be so grasped as serving each other” [22] implies that an individual does not live solely for himself or herself. His or her existence must complement the existence of others in the community just as theirs complements his or her own. In fact, African communalism implies that the individual’s due and rights are respected; that he or she is mutually supported and encouraged in the spirit of “live and let live,” to fully, develop himself or herself. [23] Since no individual is considered superior to the other, everybody is carried along in communal decision-making. [24] The fact that the individual in African communal life is mutually encouraged and supported to fully develop himself or herself shows that African communalism encourages and supports, not uniformity, but unity in diversity. One could rightly say then, that in African communalism, the joy of living can only be realized when living denotes a life that is lived in mutual relationship. Asouzu articulates it this way:

The joy of being that is characteristic of being, in its deepest complementary ramifications, is not complete unless this joy is a shared act in the mutual transcendent experience of complementary unity of consciousness, which turns out to be the highest form of communal experience (onye aghala nwanneya) in its universal dimension. [25]

The complementary interrelatedness that is seen in African communalism implies that no individual member of the community is complete all by himself or herself. He or she is lacking something that needs to be supplied by the other. Asouzu refers to this lack in an individual as a “missing link” that requires “other missing links” for the realization of its being. He says, referring to the implications of the complementary ontology in African communalism:

The implications of this are that no missing link can uphold its being solely on its own. It can do this only with reference to the whole and in complementary harmony with other missing links whose legitimacy and determination are necessarily dependent on the type of union that guarantees their being. It is for this reason that one can say that to be is not to be alone (ka so mu adina). [26]

He goes on to add that “all missing links attain full authentication and meaning when considered within the framework of complementing units that serve each other mutually and necessarily.” [27] Indeed, in the spirit of African communalism, no individual would like to be alone, knowing that he or she would not succeed. The importance of complementary interconnectedness in African communalism is commonly expressed in many folk tales, adages, and proverbs in Africa. For example, the Igbos commonly say that when a thing stands, other thing will stand beside it (Ihe kwuru ihe akwudebe ya). If a person buries himself or herself, one of his or her hands will be out [28] (onye lie onwe ya out aka ya aputa n’elu ala). That is to say, a corpse cannot bury itself. P. Bock, quoting K. A. Opoku says: “Life is when you are together, alone you are an animal.” [29] Within the context of African communalism,

the relationship between the subject and the centre of its harmony turns out to be one that is complementary and not one that is fragmented, polarised and exclusivist. It is a framework where units do not relate to each other as discrete quantities oblivious of others. Here, to be is not to be alone (ka so mu di) but to be in mutual relationship of service in complementarity. [30]

The above citation implies that an individual can hold a different view or idea contrary to another member of the community, but he or she does not for that matter stop being in mutual relationship with the other. He or she knows that there is something lacking in him or her, “a missing link” in the words of Asouzu, which can only be complemented in a complementary interconnected relationship with the other. This why the ontology of ibuanyindanda or the complementary interrelatedness which is embedded in African communalism, “has the capacity to reach out to all possible relations most especially when the interests of stakeholders seem to vary because of their idea about the world and reality in general.” [31] Thus, African communalism rules out claims of any possession of absolute truth or knowledge of any type by an individual. In other words, no individual has an absolute possession of anything as to be independent of the other. This can be seen in an Igbo African adage which says: “If the right hand washes the left hand, the left hand will wash the right in turn” (Aka nri kwoo aka ikpa, aka ikpa akwoo aka nri).

The philosophy of African communalism implies that African Religion is communal in nature. It is a religion that is human-centered, rather than Theo-centric. It is overtly utilitarian not in the individualistic, but communal sense. [32] No individual is exclusively guaranteed life beyond. For a guarantee of life beyond depends on how well an individual lives here on earth in relationship with the other. In which case, life beyond is guaranteed not just to the individual alone, but the individual and the community. [33] For though, the individual is distinct, he or she is inseparable from the community. In African communalism and by extension African Religion, therefore, one could rightly affirm that to be is to be in relationship with the other. “This mode of mutual complementary relationship” according to Asouzu, “becomes most actual in day to day encounter with the opposite other. It is a form of relationship carried out in mutual dependence and inter-dependence, as service in complementarity, outside of which no human existence in its insufficiency is thinkable.” [34]

Scholars, especially African theologians, differ in their views as to whether one could talk of African Traditional Religion or Religions. Mbiti for example, is of the opinion that one can talk of African Religions in the plural due to the fact of the many African tribes with their distinct religious systems. [35] Bola Idowu, on his own part, argues for African Religion in the singular, owing to the fact that God is the true factor of religion and this factor is identical in all the religious systems in Africa. [36] Aylward Shorter avers that we should refer to African Traditional Religion in the singular, claiming that different African religious systems interact and influence one another to various degrees, while maintaining their distinctness. [37] Emefie Ikenga-Metuh doesn’t seem to take a side; rather, he offers a caveat not to lose sight of the similarities and dissimilarities in African Religion, in whichever side one decides to take. [38] What may seem to be a problem for some of these great scholars is indeed, an implication of African communalism. Just as the individual in African communalism is distinct but inseparable from the community, so are these various African Traditional Religions distinct but inseparable from the one and only African Traditional Religion of the African ancestor. The way the individual in African communalism lives in a mutual relationship with the other, although, he or she maintains his or her distinctness, so does each of these distinct African religions live in a complementary relationship with one another. Shorter is right then, in maintaining that these different African religions interact and influence one another to different degrees, in spite of their distinctness as noted above.

The philosophy of African communalism, therefore, rules out any claim of exclusivism in African Traditional Religion. For none of the distinct African Traditional Religions can exist exclusively of the others. In the spirit of African communalism and for the fact that African Traditional Religion is communal in nature, all the various African Traditional Religions enrich and complement one another. Even when adherents of one of these distinct African Traditional Religions are integrated into another community, for example, through capture in war, they are allowed to continue with their distinct religious practices. [39] In other words, the adherents of these Religions do not search for converts. However, if one prefers one religious beliefs and practices to one’s own beliefs and practices, one is free to willingly and without compulsion, convert to this Religion.

Based on African anthropology and its worldview, I think one can claim without fear of contradiction that Africans have a common ancestor. If this is true, then, one can also aver without contradiction that all the distinct African Traditional Religions have a common link to the African Traditional Religion of the first African ancestor. With their common link to the religion of the first African ancestor and owing to the fact that these distinct African Traditional Religions are communal in nature based on African communalism, African Traditional Religion is inclusive in nature. Since these different African Traditional Religions are distinct religions, though, they are inseparable from the others, one can rightly argue that in the spirit of African communalism, African Traditional Religion is as well, pluralistic in nature. When the above claims are tied together, one comes up with the affirmation that African Traditional Religion, due to the African communalistic worldview, is inclusively pluralistic.

The fact that in African communalism, the individual is identical with the community does not mean that the individual does not have his or her freedom. Harmony is the bedrock of African communalism. The same harmony according to Magesa, “is [the] agent of freedom and is meant to enhance it.” [40] Within the context of African communalism, good acts resulting from individual choices are rewarded just as bad acts are punished. [41] This shows that the individual, in spite of the emphasis on communal life, has his or her freedom. However, freedom, as far as African worldview and by extension, African Religion is concerned, is not a license or liberty for one to do whatever one wants. Rather, it is “what enables a person to be fully who he or she is.” [42] It is a freedom or autonomy that is exercised within a communal context.

Since African communalism is rooted in complementary interrelationships and mutual harmony, it provides a basis for true interreligious dialogue.

Applying African Communalism into the Religious Ecumenical Bodies in Africa for a Genuine Interreligious Dialogue

Ecumenical movement in Africa started precisely in Johannesburg in South Africa in 1904 with the Protestant churches that realized how much divided they were and started searching for a way to unify themselves. [43] Later on, some other Christian churches, like, Catholic and Anglican, joined. [44] The expansion continues today to embrace other religions other than Christianity. Most countries in Africa have now their own Ecumenical Bodies. But the result has not been great. As Zziwa says, “When one listen[s] to the contemptuous labels that several Catholic priests (let alone laity ! ) still use about their counterparts in Protestant Churches (and it’s probably mutual!), and when one sees the general indifference about ecumenism, then an ecumenist of feeble courage would easily give up his struggle.” [45]

One of the greatest problems Religious Ecumenical Bodies in Africa and indeed worldwide is encountering, which is hindering true religious dialogue is the claim of absolutism and exclusivism, which some Religions are making with regard to their religious beliefs and their efficacy in leading to salvation respectively. [46] For example, Pope Boniface VIII reaffirmed the claim of the Catholic Church of no salvation outside the church when he says: “We are required by faith to believe and hold that there is one holy, catholic and apostolic Church; we firmly believe it and unreservedly profess it; outside it there is neither salvation nor remission of sins.” [47] Even though the Catholic Church has dropped this idea since the Vatican Council II, there are still many clergy and Laity as Zziwa showed above who still cling to such mentality. The Protestant church through Martin Luther claims that “those who remain outside Christianity, be they heathen, Turks, Jews, or false Christians (Catholics) although they believe in only one true God, yet remain in eternal wrath and perdition.” [48] Some Muslims on their own side, based on some Qur’anic verses, claim that Islam is the only true Religion of God and refuse to tolerate anyone who professes other faith than Islam. [49]

These obstacles to true interreligious dialogue, which Religious Ecumenical Bodies in Africa encounter, will give way if the principle of African communalism is applied into these Bodies. In the first place, each of these Religious Ecumenical Bodies should be seen as the community where the individual Religions and Denominations belong. Just as in African communalism, the individual is distinct but inseparable from the community, so are these Religions and Denominations, distinct but inseparable from the Religious Ecumenical Bodies they belong to.

The philosophy of African communalism teaches the individual that there is a missing link, something lacking in him or her, which the other will complement. In the same way, applying African communalism into the Religious Ecumenical Bodies in Africa, will teach each individual Religions and Denominations that there is indeed a missing link, something lacking in her, which can only be complemented by the others. This realization will kill pride and set the platform for a genuine dialogue on equal and mutual relationship.

African communalism makes it obvious that one is seen in others and others in one; that what affects the individual affects the community and vice versa. In other words, African communalism makes it clear that no individual suffers or rejoices alone but with the community. Applying this into the Religious Ecumenical Bodies in Africa implies that each individual Religion or Denomination is seen in other Religions or Denominations; and that what affects each Religion or Denomination affects the others. No Religion or Denomination suffers or rejoices alone, but with the others. What this means is that Catholics for example, cannot see members of other Christian Denominations or the adherents of African Traditional Religion , Islam, Judaism, Buddhism and so on, as people who are condemned to damnation. Neither, can these, see Catholics as condemned people. To do this, would mean to see oneself, as doomed since the “self” is seen in the others and the others in the “self”. When members of each Religion or Denomination that constitutes the Religious Ecumenical Bodies in Africa begin to see things in this way, then, the foundation for true religious dialogue is laid.

The philosophy of African communalism as we saw earlier, teaches that the moral rightness or wrongness of the action of an individual, does not depend on how good or bad that very action appears to the individual, but on far it “enhances or impedes the welfare of others and the smooth functioning of the community.” [50] In which case, it is the community that determines whether an action of an individual is moral or immoral. Applying this into the Religious Ecumenical Bodies in Africa implies that the moral rightness or wrongness of an action of a particular Religion or Denomination does not depend on how good or bad that action appears to the particular Religion or Denomination, but on how far the action “enhances or impedes” the well-being “of others and the smooth functioning of the community”. In other words, the destruction of lives and properties of Christians, by Islamic fundamentalists, is morally wrong, as long as it impedes the welfare of these Christians and the smooth functioning of the society or community. In the same vein, the destruction of shrines and traditional customs of African Traditional Religionists by Christian fundamentalists is immoral, as far as it impedes the well-being of these African Traditional Religionists and disrupts the smooth running of the community. On the contrary, the participation of Christians and Muslims for example, in the traditional festivals of African Traditional Religionists is considered morally right, in so far as it enhances the welfare of these African Traditional Religionists and promotes the smooth functioning of their community. If this kind of mindset that is embedded in African communalism is inculcated into the members of Religious Ecumenical Bodies in Africa, it will definitely enhance genuine interreligious dialogue in Africa.

The exploration of African communalism and its implications done above revealed that every member of the community is obliged to share with the other members of the community. His or her life is meaningful and understood in so far as it is shared. The refusal to share, not only disrupts the smooth running of the community, but also impoverishes both the individual member and the community, which is considered immoral. The application of this perspective into the Religious Ecumenical Bodies in Africa implies that every in

The Bible is full of inspirational concepts and full of revelatory truth. While the Old Testament points to Jesus of New Testament, it also contains basic doctrines that are established in the New Testament. Hence, words like kindness, faithfulness and mercy have their root in the Hebrew Bible. Hesed is “an interesting and fascinating Hebrew word that has a wide range of meaning.” The desire to study it makes one to learn a great deal about the characters and attributes of God as it relates to His kindness, faithfulness, goodness, mercy and steadfast love. Hesed was explicitly expressed in the Bible, most especially in the Old Testament. God revealed Himself to His chosen nation (Israel) through His personal attributes and characters (Jenkins,2011:1).

No discussion of hesed would be complete without mentioning its role in the interactions of Naomi, her Moabite daughter-in-law Ruth, and the redeemer Boaz. It is on this fact that this paper answers the following questions: What does the concept of hesed entails? What is the general overview of the Book of Ruth? How is hesed described in the book of Ruth? And what implications do hesed present to the Nigerian Christians? This paper therefore intends to discuss how hesed was embraced and expressed in the Book of Ruth.

THE CONCEPTS OF HESED

There is a beautiful and rich word in the Hebrew language that powerfully describes the faithfulness, mercy, steadfastness and loving-kindness of the Lord. This Hebrew word is transliterated into English as hesed (Maxey, 2012:1). Hesed (pronounced khesed) is not just a Hebrew word to be translated by exegete as simply “loving-kindness” or “mercy “, it is in fact an attribute of God. The hesed of God is a divine characteristic and is at the center of why God acts as He does in real space and time. (Belnap,2009,1)

Hesed as Jenkins(2011) asserted can be divided into the following three categories: family relationships, relational and religious (1). He went further to describe its occurrences in the Bible in the following words:

Hesed occurs in the family relationships categories seven times in the Old Testament, six times in Genesis, once in 1samuel and once in Ruth. Hesed occurs in nine times in a relational way in the Old Testament- once in Ruth, once in Psalms, once in Esther, once in Daniel, twice in Ezra, once in Job, once Psalms and once Zechariah. Hesed used in a religious category involves forty times in the Old Testament- four timed in Genesis, once in Exodus and Deuteronomy two times in 2nd Samuel, fifteen times in Psalms. Once in 1Kings, once in 2nd Chronicles, once in Job, three times in Isaiah, once in Jeremiah, and once in Ruth. (2)

The Bible also reveals that hesed is an attribute that children of God possess and they are commanded by God to emulate and develop it. Being made in God image, God’s people can emulate the divine attribute of hesed. While the idea of loving-kindness and mercy may seem to be only that of positive emotion, it will be demonstrated that Gods loving-kindness is a two-edged sword. Hesed can also mean a mechanism of judgment and accountability before God. People can be described as having the gift of hesed or having “no hesed,” or no loving-kindness. Hesed is both a Hebrew word and more importantly a Jewish theological concept. Hesed is found approximate 250 times in the Hebrew Bible, with about125 appearances in the Psalms alone. And while the word is not identified specifically as hesed in the Greek New Testament, the Old Testament concept of loving-kindness, mercy and selfless giving can be said to be the very heart of the New Testamnt Gospel. “For God so loved the world that He gaveaˆ¦” (Jn 3:16) (Emilio, 2012:4).

AN OVERVIEW OF THE BOOK OF RUTH

The Book of Ruth is named after one of the main characters in the story. There are two books in the Bible that bear the name of a woman. These books are: Ruth and Esther. While Ruth was Moabites, Esther on the other hand was a Jewess. The Book of Ruth has the records of a Gentile woman who came to live among the people of Israel and became the great-grandmother of David, Isreal’ greatest king; while in the Book of Esther an Israelite woman was taking into the court of the Gentile king and became a queen who secured deliverance for her people (Cowle, 2008; 22). Also, Tiessen in his write up portrays the book of Ruth as “one of the most well-crafted pieces of literature in the Old Testament”. He submits that:

Despite its lesser status within the Jewish canon and the Christian Bible, the narrative of Ruth is well known. This popular familiarity is largely due to the engaging and challenging story the book offers: The tale of two women who overcome several formidable obstacles and succeed in preserving themselves and the family line, which eventually leads to the great King David (Tiessen,2010:1)

The name of Ruth is mentioned twelve times in this book which bears her name (Heijkoop, 1989:7). The meaning of this name is friendship. This meaning according to Harlow (1987) reflected in the relationship of Ruth with her mother in-law (Naomi), and other people that came along her way. Even though she was a stranger in a strange land she blended well with the people because being friendly was part of her (5).

This book of Ruth is in connection with the geneology of Jesus Christ as recorded in (Matt 1.5). Heijkoop (1989) also asserted that, “The book itself beautifully illustrates how the Holy Spirit gathers up family circumstances in a manner which quite naturally directs the mind and thoughts to a very important truth”(7). This special story in the Book of Ruth draws one’s attention to the most precious titles of the Lord Jesus Christ. The word “kinsman” as used here could be translated as “Redeemer” or “Avenger”. This little book of only four chapters has drawn tributes from very many, and it has even been described as ‘the Perfect Story.’ It is told simply and directly. Cundall and Morris (1968) in their own assertions described this book in the following words:

The book is a book about friendship. The devotion that Ruth shows to Naomi and the care that Naomi exercises towards Ruth run through the book. It is simple a tale of friendship. The three principal characters of the book are depicted as being mindful of their obligations to the family. Ruth does not forget her duty to Naomi, and consequently to Elimelech, Naomi seeks out a marriage that will preserve the name of her deceased husband while Boaz marries the Moabites to raise up the name of the dead (241).

It is better to see the book as a tale told because it is true and because it shows something of the relationship between God and man. The book of Ruth raises the question of whether or not Yahweh can be trusted. The incident suggests to Naomi that God had abandoned her or He is no more reliable. The author of the is unknown, but the last verse of chapter 4 points to the fact that it was written during the time of king David because the is where the list of Ruth’ descendants ends. (Harlow,1987; 6). The story according to Reid (2000), is told from a female point of view and certainly seems to commend Naomi and Ruth to believers (25).

HESED IN THE BOOK OF RUTH

The book of Ruth revolves around the concept of hesed. Hesed is an active concept and it is considered as an essential part of the nature of God. The word is frequently used to describe the gracious and merciful practices of God (Farmer, 1991: 96). Human beings, as said earlier are also expected to show hesed to one another. The Book of Ruth is about a stranger who had probably not encountered God personally but might have been hearing her mother in-law talked about that God. This gentile woman acted as an agent of God’s hesed when she showed hesed to Naomi. When Naomi thought that every hope was gone, this non- Israelite woman that brought hope by showing kindness to her mother in-law. In accordance with this, Farmer asserted:

Ruth’s speech in 1:16-17constitutes an act of hesed. By committing herself and her future to the Lord, Ruth becomes the means through which God will transform Naomi’s emptiness into fulfillment. The Lord will be able to work through the loving-kindness of Ruth to change a crises situation into an occasion for hope.

The Book of Ruth is a special book Christians should study and ponder well upon. It has an unhappy beginning, an uncertain middle and a happy ending. The tragedy that befell Naomi made her to forget that YHWH is still in control and that He can still bring redemption. This reflected in her statement:

8 Then Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law, “Go back, each of you, to your mother’s home. May the Lord show kindness to you, as you have shown to your dead and to me. 9 May the Lord grant that each of you will find rest in the home of another husband.” Then she kissed them and they wept aloud 10 and said to her, “We will go back with you to your people.” But Naomi said, “Return home, my daughters. Why would you come with me? Am I going to have any more sons, who could become your husbands? 12 Return home, my daughters; I am too old to have another husband. Even if I thought there was still hope for me – even if I had a husband tonight and then gave birth to sons- 13 would you wait until they grew up? Would you remain unmarried for them? No, my daughters. It is more bitter for me than for you, because the Lord’s hand has gone out against me!” 14 At this they wept again. Then Orpah kissed her mother-in-law good-by, but Ruth clung to her. 15 “Look,” said Naomi, “your sister-in-law is going back to her people and her gods. Go back with her.” ( Ruth:8-15) NIV

Naomi tried to convince the women to go back home She even reminded them of their mother’s house. She knew the weak spot of Moabite’s female. The existence of Moab was the result of willfulness of the part of Moab’s first mother, who at all costs had to have a relationship with a man and have children. (Gen 19:30-38) And the daughters of Moab had manifested the same willfulness (Heijkoop 31-33). Naomi directly blames YHWH for the tragic circumstances of her life. Believing that everything came from God. Her situation can be related to that of Job. Job accepted the misfortune that came upon him is from God. He said: “Have pity on me, my friends, have pity, for the hand of God has struck me. Why do you pursue me as God does? Will you never get enough of my flesh?” (Job 19:21-22). NIV

Bruggeman, quoted by Tiessen explained the thoughts of job in relation to that of Naomi in these words:

“Job asks: Is God reliable? And Job, in his rage, entertains the option that Yahweh is not.” Naomi, like Job, is in the throes of tragedy and likewise expresses and entertains the option that Yahweh is not reliable. Notice that in 1:13b Naomi asserts that the hand of Yahweh is against her, and thus she excludes her daughters-in-law who also have experienced profound loss through the deaths of their husbands (4).

Naomi also pointed to her lonely position. A life without a husband and no children who would give her hope. All was God’s fault. Not only did Naomi try to keep her daughters-in-laws from joining her by depriving them of any hope of help, but she had also given them a total false picture of God, who actually is the husband to the widows and helper to the strangers. She indicated that God was responsible for all her misfortune, instead of admitting that she had brought those things upon herself by leaving God and His appointed place where they would have blessings (Heijkoop,36). She and her entire family chose to go to Moab neglected the place where they would have had the experience of God’s hesed as the Psalmist expressed: “Behold, the Lord’s eye is upon those who fear Him who revere and worship Him with awe, who wait for Him and hope in His mercy and loving-kindness, To deliver them from death and keep them alive in famine” (Ps 33:18-19).

Naomi’s great effort to dissuade her daughters-in-law from accompany her seems strange, especially in view of her desire that they become true children of the Lord God of Israel. However, it seemed to be the only course she could take in view of her dire circumstances (Parker, 1980:144). While Orpah yielded to the advice of her mother in-law, went back to her own people and gods. Ruth clave to her, “And Ruth said, Urge me not to leave you or to turn back from following you; for where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. The Lord do so to me, and more also, if anything but death parts me from you (1:16-17).

The strong desire of Ruth to go with Naomi symbolized her commitment to her and her God. Ruth was neither obliged for expected to become her mother-in-law’s source of support. But once they were back in Bethlehem she was the one who went into the fields to glean the bits of grain that the harvests missed. Ruth indeed was a good daughter in-law. Her kindness was a total self sacrifice. She took the initiative in providing for their needs by suggesting that Naomi let her glean ear of corn. Gleaning, according to Parker (147) was a “special provision of God written into the law to provide for the poor, especially for strangers, widows, and orphans” (Lev. 19:9-10; 23:22; Deut.24:19). The practice required that owners should leave at harvest the corners of their fields and the droppings of the harvesters to care for the unfortunate groups of people.

The attitude of Ruth towards Naomi by volunteering herself to take care of her is an expression of hesed which actually belongs to YHWH. One would wonder how a gentile could display the attributes that God’s children should possess. Emilio responded in the following words:

How then did Ruth, a Moabitess, come by this divine trait which was originally given by God to the descendents of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob? The answer to this mystery is not found in the Holy Bible. However the Talmudic explanation is of value and interest because it helps clarify the theology of hesed which is found in both the OT and NT. Simply put, the Sages held that Ruth was a direct descendent of Abraham by way of Lot. They teach that Ruth was the daughter of Eglon and the granddaughter of Balak who were direct descendents of Moab – the son of Lot and nephew of Abraham. Thus Ruth was an inheritor of the seed of lovingkindness which Abraham planted in Lot (Emilio, 2012)

The hesed that Ruth showed to Naomi made it possible for her to meet her “redeemer”. Ruth met Boaz and received unexpected praise and favour.

11 And Boaz said to her, I have been made fully aware of all you have done for your mother-in-law since the death of your husband, and how you have left your father and mother and the land of your birth and have come to a people unknown to you before. 12 The Lord recompense you for what you have done, and a full reward be given you by the Lord, the God of Israel, under Whose wings you have come to take refuge! 13 Then she said, Let me find favor in your sight, my lord. For you have comforted me and have spoken to the heart of your maidservant, though I am not as one of your maidservants. 14 And at mealtime Boaz said to her, Come here and eat of the bread and dip your morsel in the sour wine [mixed with oil]. And she sat beside the reapers; and he passed her some parched grain, and she ate until she was satisfied and she had some left [for Naomi]. 15 And when she got up to glean, Boaz ordered his young men, Let her glean even among the sheaves, and do not reproach her. Ruth 2:11-15

The writer of this paper has discovered that Ruth and Boaz are like-minded people. The similarities between them are emphasized. Reid (2000), enumerates their similarities as follows: Boaz praised Ruth for her kindness to Naomi (Ruth 2:11-12) and Ruth praised Boaz for his generous kindness to her (Verses 10, 13). As Boaz enters the field, he pronounced a kindly phrase, “The Lord be with you!”(verse 4). This suggests that Boaz is such a leader who values and respected his employees. The workers’ respond, “The Lord bless you!” Boaz is clearly a good, kind man; who is suitable for good, kind Ruth (41).

Studying this Book one will discover that God is at work even in the lives of his people. Ruth’s story reveals loud and clear that through the ordinary and unpredictable aspects of everyday life, one experience the reality of God’s care (Reid, 2000:25-28).

IMPLICATIONS OF HESED FOR NIGERIAN CHRISTIANS

Hesed in the book of Ruth is significant to the Nigerian Christians. It expresses how good and faithful YHWH is to His promises. He “remembered Naomi in her low estate” (Psalm 136: 23), even though she and her family brought the tragedy upon themselves. Many Nigerians’ Christians today run to Oversee countries because of the economical situation of their father land. Some of them are lost not remembering home again. The writer of this paper is of the opinion that there is still hope for Nigeria. The situation can still be better than what it is, if only Nigerian Christians can hope in God and trust Him absolutely.

Similarly, hesed in the Book of Ruth stresses both family and community loyalty. Naomi thought first of the welfare of her daughters-in-law. She always acted with their best interest in mind. Boaz was noble. Ruth was loyal. Kent, (1980) submits that the simple narrative also amply illustrates the Lord’s providential care. God is clearly at work in the lives of those open to Him (143). Nigerian Christians are to commit to one another so as to be of help to one another in terms of needs; an adage says “a friend in need is a friend indeed”

Also, as God expressed hesed (mercy) to His people, He expects them to reciprocate. God was ever faithful and devoted to His people (Israel) in the ancient time and He is still the same God of the contemporary times. In like manner does He expect faithfulness, total dedication and devotional life from the Nigerian Christians. The Christian leaders are expected to be faithful and dedicated to the position they are holding. They should be mindful of the welfare of their followers. As God is good and loyal to His promises, Boaz was good and kind to his followers so the Nigerian Christians should be good and loyal to one another. Also, Nigerian Christians should see God as a God of love and should demonstrate that love into their personal lives and ministries towards others. By doing this, Christians will be able to demonstrate to the world in words and deeds that their lives are grounded in the character of God who loves and desires to redeem the world through the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Furthermore, it is worth noting that God can use anybody, no matter how rough the background may be. Willingness and readiness is what He desires. In like manner, Christians should pay sacrifice of taking other people’s problem upon themselves. They should be mindful of poor and the needy around them.

CONCLUSION

Hesed, is indeed a word denoting emotion but it is more a word of action. On the other hand, hesed is a gift from God, that is to say, God imparts a measure of His loving kindness to His children. And He expects all His children to express it to one another. Hesed, as used in this paper reveals the characters of three major people, Naomi, Ruth and Boaz. Many in this world have experienced the tragedy of Naomi and long for God to be present and active amidst situations where He does not always act in the way human beings expect. But absolute trust in Him will end in a happy way.

Management has become a part and parcel of everyday life, be it at home, in the office or factory and in government. In all organizations, where group of human beings assemble for a common purpose, management principles come into play through the management of resources, finance and planning, priorities, policies and practice. Management is a systematic way of carrying out activities in any field of human effort (Bhattathiri, 2001). Efficacious and effective management is not possible without in-depth knowledge of the organisation which is being managed. Organisational knowledge is absolutely critical to building, preserving and leveraging institutional excellence. It is like the air you breathe-you cannot measure it, touch it, or see it but you cannot survive without it (Prasad, 2004)).

The basic elements of management are always there whether we manage our lives or our business. In fact, management is used knowingly or unknowingly by everybody born as human being on this earth. We are all managers of our own life and the practice of management is found in every facet of human activity: schools, business, government, unions, armed forces, families and religious places. Thus, management has become an exciting and entertaining subject because it deals with setting, seeking and achieving objectives. It makes human efforts more productive. It brings order and effectiveness to the efforts of the people. It brings better equipment, plants, offices, products, services and human relations to our society. There is no substitute for good management and good management consists of showing average people how to do the work of superior people.

Society is a collection of individuals and individuals constitute society. Every individual has several needs and wants but it is impossible for him to satisfy all his desires and wants with his own efforts alone. Thus, he joins hands with others and works in organised groups to achieve what he cannot achieve singlehandedly. Today, the society has large and complex institutions with many people working together. In other words, when a number of persons join together for the attainment of some common objectives, organisation comes into being. Whatever may be the nature and kind of the organisation, it cannot run successfully unless there is someone to manage its affairs. Management is an essential part of any group activity. It is the management which plans, organises, co-ordinates and controls the affairs of the organisation. It brings the human and physical resources together and motivates the people at work in order to create a cordial, congenial and harmonious environment in the organisation. To sum up, it can be said that an organisation is like an orchestra team. It is for the management to make music or a noise out of it. If there is an effective and efficient management, the result is sweet and melodious music; otherwise the result is chaotic and awful noise.

CONCEPT OF MANAGEMENT:

The concept of management is as old as the human race itself. It is a universal phenomenon. It is not merely the monopoly of business houses. It is a part and parcel of every kind of decision making. It is the marshalling of manpower resources and strategy for getting a job done. Management is multifunctional in nature. It is a set of techniques and functional processes employed to maximize productive utilization of human, physical and natural resources for the benefit of all in a healthy physical and conceptual environment. Men, material, money, machinery and methods constitute human and physical resources. The physical environment consists of temperature; noise, light, ventilation; the tools which are employed; the methods of work; the material employed; the sequence in which the work is performed and other physical aspects. The conceptual, or mental, environment is concerned with the attitude or frame of mind of individual worker in the given environment. The manager has to provide a positive and conducive environment where the worker gives his best to the institution.

Management is the process of designing and maintaining an environment in which individuals, working together in groups, efficiently accomplish selected aims (Koontz & Weihrich, 1998). It involves coordinating and overseeing the work activities of others so that their activities are undertaken efficiently and effectively. Management puts ideas into action through and with people. Efficient management leads to productivity with peace, growth with harmony and brings out the best potential in people. Management creates harmony in working together, equilibrium in thought and action, goals and achievements, plan and performance, produce and market (Bhattathiri, 2001).

When people are motivated and inspired, they run their organisations efficiently and profitably, produce quality goods and services and keep customers and clients satisfied (Bodhananda, 2007). Lack of management can create chaos and cause mayhem, perplexity, wastage, delay, obliteration, losses and low sense of worth. Management is about managing self, people and situations. Manager has to show the path on which his workforce can excel and stay focused. Management’s task is to make people capable of joint performances and make their strength effective and make their weaknesses irrelevant (Drucker, 1998). It is the capability and capacity of the manager that can transform the situations to the best for all the stakeholders. If he is bestowed with the quality to judge the people and their talents then he can take them to the zenith of their performance. Management is helping ordinary people to produce extraordinary results (Someswarananda, 2005).

Management, today, goes beyond giving just direction or getting work done by people. Manager has to think beyond results; he has also to create and sustain performers by inspiring them. Manager’s job is two-fold (1) To translate the dream in terms of project; and (2) To produce performers. Workman’s job is to produce results – from planning to execution. And supervisor’s duty is to solve the problems of workmen (Someswarananda, 2005).

1.2 MANAGEMENT PERSPECTIVES:

The word perspective has been derived from the Medieval Latin word perpectiva (ars) ‘science of optics’, from the verb perspicere which means ‘to look through’ (Oxford Dictionary). It implies a view or vista or a mental view or outlook of a person or an organisation. It also means the ability to perceive things in their actual interrelations or comparative importance (thefreedictionary.com). Management Perspectives provide an overview of the principles, skills, challenges and the other factors which the managers have to face today. These include the theoretical framework, ideas and techniques which can be applied to day-to-day work of an organization like planning, decision making, leadership, motivation, communication, human resource management, corporate social responsibility, change management and managerial skills and mantras required for effective and efficient working of the organization.

It is a proved fact that management is not an action in isolation; it is rather the impact of total environment in which the organization exists. Starting from the management in antiquity to the management in modern times, the different perspectives of management at different points of time can be summed up briefly as under in an integrative manner:

An Integrative Framework of Management Perspectives
(Source: www.cab.edu.np)
1.3 HISTORY OF MANAGEMENT THOUGHT:

Management has always been a part of the nature of man. In its crude form, it has been there from nomads to rulers of various kingdoms. Management as a field of study may be just 125 years old, but management ideas and practices have actually been used from the earliest times of recorded history. For example, 2,500 years before management researchers called it job enrichment, the Greeks learned that they could improve the productivity of boring repetitious tasks by performing them to music. The basic idea was to use a flute, drum, or sing lyrics to pace people to work in unison, using the same efficient motions, to stimulate them to work faster and longer, and to make even a boring work or job interesting and entertaining. While we can find the seeds of many of today’s management ideas throughout history, not until the last two centuries, however, did systematic changes in the nature of work and organizations create a compelling need for managers. Examples of management thought and practice can be found all through the history (Williams, 2009). This has been shown in the table below.

Table-1.1
Management Ideas and Practice throughout History
Time
Group
Contribution to Management Thought and Practice
5000 B.C.
Sumerians
Record keeping
4000 B.C.
Egyptians
Recognized the need for planning, organizing, and controlling
2000 B.C.
Egyptians
Requests submitted in writing. Decisions made after consulting staff for advice
1800 B.C.
Hammurabi
Established controls by using writing to document transactions and by using witnesses to vouch for what was said or done
600 B.C.
Nebucha
Production control and wage incentives
500 B.C.
Sun Tzu
Strategy; identifying and attacking opponent’s weaknesses
400 B.C.
Xenophon
Management recognized as a separate art
400 B.C.
Cyrus
Human relations and motion study
175
Cato
Job descriptions
284
Diocletian
Delegation of Authority
900
Alfarabi
Listed leadership traits
1100
Ghazali
Listed managerial traits
1418
Barbarigo
Different organizational forms/structures
1436
Venetians
Numbering, standardization, and interchangeability of parts
1500
Sir Thomas
Critical of poor management More and leadership
1525
Machiavelli
Cohesiveness, power, and leadership in organizations
(Source: C. S. George, Jr., The History of Management Thought, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1972)

Concept of management has undergone a sea change since its inception, as a formal subject, in the early 1900’s. From the set of principles evolved the scientific management theory of F. W. Taylor and it played a role as a prominent theory till 1950’s. Focus of management then shifted to decision theory. In 1960’s, systems orientation emerged. Change and contingency management of 1970’s was followed by new approaches to human relations and production quality in the 1980’s and archetype management in 1990’s. Journey of management thought is depicted briefly in the table below-

Table-1.2
Major Classification of Management Approaches and their Contributors
Pre-classical Contributors to Management Thought
Name
Contribution

Robert Owen

Proposed legislative reforms to improve working conditions of labour

Charles Babbage

Advocated the concept of ‘division of labour’; devised a profit-sharing plan which led to the modern-day Scanlon Plan

Andrew Ure and Charles Dupin

Advocated the study of management

Henry R. Towne

Emphasized the need to consider management as a separate field of study and the importance of business skills for running a business.

Major Classification of Management Approaches
Major Contributors

Classical approach

Scientific management

Frederick W. Taylor, Frank and Lillian Gilbreth and Henry Gantt

Bureaucratic management

Max Weber

Administrative management

Henri Fayol

Behavioral approach

Group influences

Mary Parker Follet

Hawthorne studies

Elton Mayo

Maslow’s needs theory

Abraham Maslow

Theory X and Theory Y

Douglas McGregor

Model I versus Model II values

Chris Argyris

Quantitative approach

Management science

–

Operations management

–

Management information system

–

Modern approaches

The Systems Theory

–

Contingency Theory

–

Emerging approaches: Theory Z and Quality management

William Ouchi

(Source-https://sites.google.com/site/early-approaches-to-management)

Under various approaches, management was described from different points of view largely depending on the perspective and background of the management thinker. Koontz identifies eleven approaches to the management concept, which are as follows:

The empirical approach states that we can understand what management is by determining what contributed to success or failure in specific cases.

The interpersonal behaviour approach is based on getting things done through people and therefore, management is centered in understanding relationships (psychology).

The group behaviour approach emphasizes the behaviour of people within groups and thus tends to rely on sociology, anthropology, and social psychology. Often this interest in-group behaviour patterns is named ‘organizational behaviour’.

The cooperative social system approach (organizational theory) combines elements of the interpersonal and group behaviour approaches into a system called the organization where the primary purpose is co-operation.

The socio-technical system approach adds to the previous approach the dimension of technical systems. It is believed that the machines and methods have a strong influence on the social system and that the task of the manager is to ensure harmony between the social and technical systems.

The decision theory approach believes that management is characterized by decision making and therefore a systematic approach to decision-making essentially outlines management.

The systems approach to management, like biological systems, views management’s role within an assemblage of subsystems, inputs, and processes within an environment, all of which are interconnected and/or interdependent. This may not be a different approach but is a holistic view of management, providing place for elements of the other approaches to be incorporated.

The management ‘science’ approach believes that problems can be described within a mathematical model – basic relationships – in such a way that the goal may be optimized.

The situational approach states that, management action depends on the situation taking into account the influence of given actions on the behaviour patterns of individuals and the organization. This is a practical approach, which hints at the art (viz, science) of management.

The managerial roles approach is based on research by Mintzberg as to the roles (functions) managers fill.

The operational approach is an attempt to combine elements of all of the above-mentioned approaches, taking what is applicable, discarding that which is not, and developing an approach to management that indicates the complexity and variedness of what is expected of the manager (Koontz, 1980).

However, all these approaches are lacking in one aspect or the other. Concept of management has evolved over the years and is an ongoing process; it changes and improves as the environment changes. The discipline of ‘management’ is just 100 years old. By and large, it is a product of industrial revolution. Hence, its intellectual traditions are rooted in engineering and economics. Later it was influenced by psychology, sociology and other related disciplines. During recent years, yoga, meditation and spirituality have also started influencing the field of management (Sharma, 2006). During the 1990’s, the evolution of spirituality and management theories converged and triggered a bold interest in formulating spirituality based theories and research within the academic management domain, resulting in the formulation of a new discipline (Rojas, 2005).

In the present epoch, internationally operated organisations are stirring towards holistic approach to management. Holistic approach takes under its ambit the whole organisation, systems, people and culture. Holistic approach can bring better results for modern organisations to deal with complex issues in global environment, because according to Aristotle, whole is more than the sum of its parts (Abbasi, Rehman and Bibi, 2010)

1.4 MANAGEMENT TODAY:

People who are making judicious use of available resources and effectively managing to earn high profits and returns are not sure if it’s worth it. They feel defeated in spite of being successful. The reason is that money is being minted through unethical and immoral means. Industrialists today are doing the right things for their ventures but not necessarily doing things the right way. Indian companies are in a state of flux, more bewilderment, conflict and tension persists in its working and less emphasis is on the issues of productivity, motivation, principles, morals, ideals and ethics. The reason for this state of affairs is too much dependence on western models of management. The management philosophy emanating from the west is based on the lure of materialism and on a perennial thirst for profits, irrespective of the quality of the means adopted to achieve that goal (Bhattathiri, 2001).

There is a spurt in corporate scandals since the focus of most business houses is to earn more and more money. Almost every year, it seems, some scandal envelops a Fortune 500 company and causes a new spasm of public distrust of big corporations. This year’s occurrence probably should not be surprising; in the competitive marketplace, the temptation to cut ethical corners can be hard to resist (Zipkin, 2000). Corporate, do not stop to think and contemplate the effect of their greed on the stakeholders. There is insatiable hunger for success at any cost. In their unquenchable desire for number one position, corporate are becoming ruthless, forgetting their duties towards the society at large. The world today is so corruptible, gullible and materialistic that many corporations and nations operate without a soul conscience. The capitalistic bottom-line of maximizing profits has become the benchmark for purported success, pervading international, regional, national and organizational levels (Noor, 2004). Management has been reduced to a handmaid of profiteering. The maximizing of profits becomes the ultimate goal, to the exclusion of all other considerations (Gupta, 2000). We are aware that with its axis on privatization and liberalization, national and world economic order is gradually becoming market oriented and globalised. Capital is today’s integrating factor. Those who have or can access to resource stand to benefit from this economy while others are being marginalized (Xavier, 1999).

Corporate houses that are becoming aware of their ethical and social responsibilities towards the society are only following the mandatory responsibilities. Contemporary research has found that while around three quarters of major Australian companies believe it is the responsibility of their boards to set an appropriate ‘tone from the top’ and monitor organizational performance against a formal code of conduct, 84 percent of the companies that has promulgated a code of ethics reported that they did not actually monitor compliance with it (International Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2005, KPMG, Australia). This is also the case of companies in many developed as well as developing economies. There is awakening of moral and ethical responsibilities but much more needs to be done at the local and global level. Lately, however, corporate America seems to be doing more than just paying lip service to standards of management behaviour. For all the controversy surrounding the Firestone/Ford tyre recall, and the questions it raises about the potential for corporate wrongdoing, a growing number of big companies are enacting strict ethical guidelines and backing them up with internal mechanisms to enforce them. While some consider the changes little more than window dressing, there is no doubt that change is afoot (Zipkin, 2000).

In the present era, corporate sector desires to own workers not humans. Materialism has crept into the roots of the corporate world. Materialistic management has done more harm than good. The capitalist has grown richer, man has been reduced to a hired wage-earner and the consumer has been placed at the mercy of the materialistic manager. There is no sense of belonging, no harmony, no co-operative organisation, no fellow-feeling and the least common approach and perspective (Gupta, 2000).

1.5 NEED TO RECONNECT TO THE ROOTS:

There is more to management than just earning profits and more to the role of a manager than achieving the organisational objectives. He has to become the watch dog to see that nothing detrimental is done by the company at the cost of the stakeholders. He has to stay connected to the roots of his religion and culture while performing his job. Sharma (2001) argues that for a management system, to be effective, it has to be rooted in the cultural soil of the country, where it is practiced. Many communities and countries in the world are now trying to discover and explore their own system of management, which includes accounting and financial management, human resource management, corporate governance, and also CSR (Muniapan, 2008).

Not only eastern world but the western world of business is also realizing the need to reconnect to the roots of their religion and culture and to infuse their working with morals and ethics. Management thinkers, all over the world, are developing models of management by imbibing insight into their scriptures. These models are becoming powerful catalysts for transformation. A leadership and management paradigm that transcends narrows chauvinism, neo-conservation and jingoism, with a universal, egalitarian and magnanimous approach, is needed (Noor, 2004). Also models are being framed on world leaders with a semblance of altruistic inclinations. To really understand leadership, we need to put our ear to the ground of history and listen carefully to the ragas of human hopes, desires, and aspirations, and the follies, disappointments, and triumphs of those who led and those who followed them. As per the Confucius proverb, a man who reviews the old so as to find out the new is qualified to teach others.

Management needs to be sprinkled with ideals of religion. For the sustainable development of the enterprise the need is to look for long term benefits of all stakeholders, not base decisions for short term benefits to the individuals. The best way out in the situation, is to take shelter under the teaching of the scriptures. In our faith based vision we see God at work in the world and in all creation moving mankind towards a world of justice, peace and love. This is social humanism. Management being a worldly enterprise and part of creation has to position itself in alignment with this divine purpose, our policies and mega plans are to be attuned to this divine plan over percent and active in creation (Xavier, 1999). Various studies have been carried out to study the effect of interplay between management and religion and results depict positive outcome. In a study conducted at the European University Viadrina, Frankfurt by Tan and Vogel (2005), it was noted that trustworthiness increases with religiosity and people with higher level of religiosity, are more likely to trust and be trusted in their relationships. In a doctoral study conducted by Werner (2006) found that religious beliefs (Christianity) play an important role in SME business behaviour in both the UK and Germany (Uygur, 2009).

Since management is primarily concerned with managing people, managers needs to take guidance of specific magnitude of man-management such as believing and being open to people and their ideas, acknowledging them in various roles of life, serving and loving them. Need of the hour is to develop managers with focus on human excellence comprising competence, conscience and compassionate concern along with academic and technical competencies. The prevalent limited view of education with an exclusive focus on academic excellence and technical competence is fraught with dangers as we can produce people who are advanced intellectually or competent technically but in the meantime remain emotionally underdeveloped and morally and spiritually immature (Xavier, 1999).

Ryuzaburo Kaku, Chairman, Canon Inc. in 1988 envisaged the corporate philosophy to begin a new phase in the 50 year old company’s evolution. He expressed this philosophy as “the achievement of corporate growth and development, with the aim of contributing to global prosperity and the well-being of humankind.” This is the idea behind kyosei. According to the concept of kyosei, a corporate should make every effort to create wealth by fair means and, in terms of the distribution of profits; it should play a very active role as a company that assumes global social responsibilities. The view, that kyosei limits competition is way off the mark. Although it is crucial to eliminate unfair competition, kyosei can be seen as being a prerequisite to fair competition between independent corporations. The idea of kyosei was also adopted by the Caux Round Table (CRT), founded in 1986 and named after the Swiss town of Caux where it began meeting. It is an informal group of business leaders from Europe, U.S. and Japan who had the converging experience that corporate business can, without losing performance, act as a tool to provide a better service to society when the goal of serving the common good is not forgotten, let alone rejected. The group wrote its own guidelines for corporate ethical standards based on the Japanese concept of kyosei, which Mr. Ryuzaburu Kaku, chairman of Canon Inc. and most prominent participant in the CRT, translated as “living and working together for the common good.” The other key word was “human dignity,” without which the “common good” can disintegrate into despotism. In fact, both keywords, “common good/kyosei” and “human dignity”, could be found in the document of the MCCR (Minnesota Center for Corporate Responsibility).

Peter Drucker also stressed that religion can have a positive influence on the world of work and, indeed, on the world at large. “Society needs to return to spiritual values-not to offset the material but to make it fully productive,” he asserts that we need to reconnect to religion to imbibe compassion and empathy in corporate relationships. Drucker continues, “It needs the deep experience that the Thou and the I are one, which all higher religions share.” The concept of “whole self” is catching up with the corporate world. Religion is considered by many to be a constituent component of human anthropology. The change in orientation by executives and consultants fit well with the present experience economy paradigm, which demands distinctive personal experience for the customers based on endemic human qualities such as human values. Ideally, then, organizational models which allow the whole person to come to work are sought as a means to empower employees and possibly in turn for those employees to meet unique and personal demands of the customers. For example, Mitroff and Denton (1999) held that companies that have a spiritual dimension and allow the whole person to come to work have employees with higher loyalty, lower absenteeism, and greater creativity (Miller and Ewest, 2010).

People working in the corporate sector all over the globe do not want to segregate their life but wish to live a holistic life and bring their whole self to work, including their faith. This concept has been termed as the ‘Faith at Work Movement or Spirituality and Work Movement’ by David Miller. The worldwide economic crisis elicited in 2008 has strengthened this concept.

Religion is present in the workplace as per the researchers and academicians. The need is that they provide the business professionals with a set of universal religious manifestations to allow business professionals to understand, measure, and as appropriate adjust the policies pertaining to the spiritual environment of and impacts on their organization.

Max Weber was one of the first thinkers in the modern times to depict the interconnection of religion and management in 1905 but his observations of the affect of religious values on marketplace activity were suppressed due to organizational and economic structures and normative practices but now his ideas have resurfaced. The business world is recognizing the need to integrate faith with work because it encompasses issues such as ethics, leadership, diversity, human rights, and globalism and managers and employees can benefit both corporately as well as personally.

1.6 MANAGEMENT AND OTHER RELIGIONS:

The concept of modernization without westernization is catching up with management thinkers, especially in the eastern world. Need is to act globally while staying rooted to the local values, norms and culture. Corporate world in the eastern region is going under the safe haven of religion. All the religions encourage serving the society, promoting the people’s well being and safeguarding the natural resources. Buddhism lays emphasis on ethics, virtuous behaviour, morality and precept. It advocates purity of thought, word, and deed. Christianity is centered on the life and teachings of Jesus from the New Testament. Its teachings call for ethical, spiritual, and just behaviour. Taoism advocates imbibing of three gems of Tao i.e. compassion, moderation, and humility. Islam believes that followers should strive to attain religious and moral perfection. Confucianism focuses on human morality and right action. It is a system of moral, social, political, philosophical, and quasi-religious thought. Hinduism preaches: have no personal interest in the event but carry out the duty as the duty of the lord and do not be affected by the results.

1.6.1 Management and Hinduism:

Indian economy is today the cynosure of the whole world because of its consistent growth which is leading to augmentation of interest in India, and its culture. As Western world attempts to better understand Indian culture, they may as well unearth that India’s ancient scriptures present insight into cultural customs and values and develop lessons for the corporate world to effectively use in and outside India. It has been reported that many of the top business schools in the United States have introduced “self-mastery classes” using Indian philosophy to help students improve their leadership skills. One of the more popular and useful of the ancient texts is the Bhagavad Gita. Using contextual analysis, this paper explores the leadership implications found in this classic text, and offers present day managers useful advice, regardless of their cultural orientation (Rarick and Nickerson, 2009).

It was felt by the Indian Management thinkers that the western models needed certain modifications for implementation in the Indian Environment. Western model advocated the concept of knowledge worker whereas Indian model calls for the concept of wisdom worker. Depending completely on the western model might lead to success with stress and tension while in Indian model of management, success is accompanied with harmon

The general definition of education is the transmission and learning of cultural technique by a group of individuals that is able to satisfy its general needs, to protect each other against the hostility of physical and biological environment, and to work and live together peacefully. These all techniques are usually called culture, and a human society could not survive without its background of custom and culture. This concept can be applied in civil and primitive society; the primitive society is characterized by the role of education finalized to guarantee the immutability of the cultural techniques. On the other hand, in a civil society the education gives the opportunity to face new and mutable situations. At this point we can define two different forms of education: the one, which simply transmits the technique of work and behavior to maintain the natural immutability of human beings, and this concept is related to moral and religious education. The second form interests the role of education into a civic society. Its aim is to forge the individuals’ personalities by giving them the capacity to correct and improve their own education. This civic form of education analyzes the human being’s process of forming his own culture, and even the education becomes the aim and the goal of the entire process. For this reason, education has always been an important theme in political and social background. Since ancient age philosophers and scholars wrote about the main principles and general foundations of public and private education in a state. Famous emperors such as Charles the Great who attributed importance to the role of education into his empire, even if he was not a cultured king, considered education a relevant instrument for creating an homogeneous ruling class loyal to the empire and capable to create a unity for the formation of cultural traditions and customs. Therefore, education is a natural part of human beings’ development; it allows individuals to acquire some basic and relevant skills in attitude and mental thought that staying in animal stage they are not able to learn. The aim of this essay is to define the right definition of education in political theory field through the main and significant works of Plato and Rousseau, and to analyze its importance in the social and political common good.

As it is mentioned before, both Plato and Rousseau have elaborated different ideas regarding the same topic of the role of education, the pedagogy, the formation of perfect philosopher-king and good social figure in their own conception of society. This essay wants to begin an analysis by comparing and contrasting the political and philosophical theories of there two thinkers.

First of all, Plato’s Republic has defined more as an educational treatise rather than a political book (Rousseau 57); in fact, Plato’s philosophy is concentrated on ethics, he is interested in what and “how is the best to live” (Meckenzie 88). According to Plato, education is the base of the philosophical education of guardians and future citizens of the ideal city of the Politeia. Plato elaborates a new kind of education in line with the Socratic philosophy; in fact, the main speaker of dialogues in the Republic is Socrates himself, who embodies the philosophical soul and figure of which should be the skills and characteristics of the perfect philosopher-king. The conception of education in the Republic is explained through the philosophical concept of the Myth of the Cave; it is not a case that Plato decided to present education in the way of the myth. In ancient cultures, in particular in Greek culture, the myth indeed had been considered a kid of tale with a underlying meaning that through the heroic deeds of gods and semi-gods should have convey a specific learning for human beings. According to Arthur A. Krentz of Luther College in his Play and Education in Plato’s states: “The Myth of the Cave is presented as a metaphor of education (paideia, 7.514a) but it may also serve as a model of the role of an educational mentor, such as Socrates. Thus we can compare Socrates to the free, philosophical wise man who reenters the nether-world of the dark caveaˆ¦ in order to attempt to rescue those who live in this shadowy worldaˆ¦” With this quotation, we can understand that Plato-Socrates wants to outline a fixed model of elite education regarding to those people who are by natural inclinations more talented to cover the role of the guardian. In the Encyclopedia of Children and Childhood in History and Society, in the paragraph of The State as an Education Entity is expressed how Plato considers Education the core of his Republic alike the research of the meaning of justice. In fact, Plato is firmly persuaded that if guardian and future children are educated through Socratic philosophical ideas, the pursuit of the Public Good becomes the principle at the base of the just City-State. Therefore, the passage that the other spokesmen have to understand before starting the investigation of justice is “what is the best education for philosopher-kings and in what does consist it?” In the opinion of Ariel Dillon “the ability to know is always within a man-faltering, but useful only depending on whether it is focused on the truth (518e)aˆ¦ anyone could be a philosopher with the right trainingaˆ¦the purpose of the philosopher-kings’ education is eventually teach children how to distinguish right from wrong showing them the whole truth”. The knowledge and development process that philosophers undertake from the cave to the new world is long and difficult, but they are motivated by the inner truth that they own to achieve the common good for a just state. After the release from the cave where human beings are imprisoned and forced to see projected figures on the wall, philosophers start they path out of the cave; they will encounter the powerful light of the Sun and they are blinded by it, but afterwards a period of familiarization with the external world they acquire the truth and the capacity to become the real philosopher king and guardian. According to Arthur A. Krentz “the aim of the educational process is the fostering of the growth and development of the learner toward the ultimate objective of the individual’s contribution to a good society and the vision of the Good itself.” Plato has a altruistic vision of education in fact as Ariel Dillon states in her article Education in Plato’s Republic: ” [the philosophers] must escape the cave, be educated in the good through philosophy (512c), and then return to the cave to rile and enlighten others (519d).

Moreover, in the VII book of Republic Plato begins a long digression about what consists the philosophers’ education “the child belongs to the state and its education is the responsibility of the state” (Republic, 2, 376). Children have to be trained to become good philosophers through a complex and completed process of formation. This education consists in different disciplines, which the philosophers have to acquire to become good governor of this ideal state. Philosophers have to practice music, gymnastic, mathematic, geometry, astronomy and in particular the technique of philosophical dialectic. Plato acknowledges that the discipline of the philosophical dialect if the only one, which convey the philosopher the instrument to deeply know the real truth and the capacity to convey it toward other people. This type of education can be considered the previous idea of pedagogy, which will be in the 18th and 19th century elaborated by Rousseau as new psychological and philosophical discipline. Socrates, indeed, elaborates an innovating pedagogical technique called maieutics method of teaching, which consists in helping the child to formulate his own thoughts by aid of the teacher through a methodological process of dialectic dialogue. In the Republic Plato-Socrates presents a theory that education and play should be strictly connected; in fact, Socrates affirms that philosophers-kings should be perform their training without any kind of forcing, but instead with playing. In fact, as Ariel Dillon writes: ” Socrates says that the best education should be more like play than work (536d)aˆ¦students should come to the truth on their own rather than by force (536e)” As with the maieutics technique, Plato-Socrates wants to explain that the philosopher has to achieve the last and high meaning of the truth by a complex formation. In fact, during the entire dialogue, but in particular in the one with Glaucon and Adeimantus he applies this dialectics to lead them to the final meaning of justice and consequently truth.

As it has been analyzes before, Plato compares the conception of justice and truth with the theory of philosophers’ education in order to create the ideal city-state. Therefore, the education and political theory are two parts of the same project, and there are connected and dependent each other. In fact, Plato-Socrates considers education as a fundamental formation of learning without which the city-state could not own a group of governors interested in the common good rather than in their own private needs.

Therefore, education in politics and political theory has a necessary role. However, the idea of education elaborated by Plato in the middle of 4th century BC was subjected to changes and development, even because of the historical, political and social transformations. In the 18th – 19th century, Rousseau was one of the main philosophers and thinkers who paid attention to the education problems, elaborating a modern view of pedagogy in his famous book Emile. The Rousseau’s Emile is a brief treatise, which deals with the pedagogical problem; in this book Rousseau’s aim is to recreate the human beings’ spontaneous nature, which they had as quality during their primordial and primitive existence (State of Nature), into the society. Rousseau wants to give back a human measure to society and culture. Emile is an educational formation in which the final goal is to achieve a free and happy development of human nature. Rousseau’s philosophy is made by important concepts such as the feeling of pity and the amour the soi, and around these ideas is elaborated the pedagogical formation of human beings. The entire book is a detailed analysis of individual’s formation from the birth to the entrance in the civil society. Rousseau argues the behaviors and feelings for each ages of the man, giving an explanation and presenting the right model to follow in order to acquire the best education; he is interested in the pedagogical formation and development of the child who is embodied by the figure of Emile. Rousseau starts his first book with the phrase: “God makes all things good; man meddles with them and they become evil.” With this phrase Rousseau points out his negativity toward the civic society made by human beings, underlining the goodness of the Nature and God’s things. He continues: “We are born weak, we need strength; helpless, we need aid; foolish, we need reason. All that we lack at the birth, all that we need when we come to man’s estate, is the gift of education” (52) In the third section of the book I, Rousseau expresses the impossibility to a public education, mentioning briefly that the public institute does not and cannot exist because there is no more the concept of country and patriot; these words should be deleted from the modern vocabulary. (57) He quotes the Plato’s Republic as an example of public education: “If you wish to know what is meant by public education, read Plato’s Republic. Those who merely judge books by their titles take this for a treatise on politics, but it is the finest treatise on education ever written. In popular estimation the Platonic Institute stands for all that is fanciful and unrealaˆ¦Plato only sought to purge man’s heart.” (57) Rousseau is more interested in the natural education and formation of individual than his acquisition of education in society and civil context; for this reasons, he states: “the natural man lives for himself, he is the unit, the whole, dependent only on himself and on his like” (56) in contrast with the idea that he elaborates regarding the citizen: “The citizen is the numerator of a fraction, whose value depends on its denominator” and this denominator are “the social institutions, those best fitted to make man unnatural.” (56) Rousseau in the first book of his treatise deals with Emile’s first age and his childhood; in the second book the second age of the childhood and the feel and awareness of the suffering, he continues analyzing the adulthood and the first contact with the society, in the fifth book are described the relations with the other sex and the conclusion of the treaties.

Rousseau defines the tree types of education: natural pedagogy, the pedagogy of things and the men’s pedagogy, and he declares that only the harmonic relation amongst them could make the individual “well-educated”. Rousseau affirms that the first kind of education that the child should learn is the negative education: “therefore, the education of the earliest years should be merely negative. It consists, not in teaching virtue or truth, but in preserving the heart from vice and from the spirit of error.” (107) Rousseau states: “the law of necessity soon teaches a man to do what he does not like, so as to avert evils which he would dislike still more.” (152) The fourth book is the most significant for the explanation of the main concepts of Rousseau’ s philosophy such as the amour de soi and the compassion. Rousseau explains that our passions are the main principles of our self-preservation; it is a ridiculous and absurd destroying these passions because are given by God so humans should not contradict the His will. (176) According to Rousseau our natural passions are very limited, but they are the instruments of our freedom and they maintain us; he writes: “the only passion which is born with man, which never leaves him as long as he lives is self-love; this passion is primitive, instinctive, it precedes all the restaˆ¦self-love is always good, always in accordance with the order of nature.” (178) The self-preservation elaborated by Rousseau consists in the total and absolute self-love of human beings above everything, and this love is the one feeling, which can preserve individuals. (179) To this concept depends the idea of compassion; in fact, Rousseau argues that during the adolescence the individual is weaker and closer to the emotions and passions of fellows. This weakness makes man sociable with other people. The adolescent feels the need to share his condition of suffering and to support others; this pity is the first emotion of relation that human being’s heart feels.

In conclusion, by the analysis of the main conceptions of Plato’s and Rousseau’s philosophical theory about education we can assume that both had considered education and the pedagogical formation as an important part of the developing process for human beings; Rousseau in particular reclaims the Plato’s ideology of educational treatise, but he does not present the education strictly connected with the political and social estate of society. Rousseau is more interested in how the humans lost their natural qualities as amour de soi and compassion, which he had in the State of Nature rather than underlining the type of best education that the group of governors have to pursue and achieve in order to reach the Common Good as Plato elaborates in the Republic. Therefore, the role education in the civil and political society can be considered relevant for citizens and governors? At this question we could answer that both governors and citizens should be trained to acquire a pedagogical process of formation in order to realize together the common good without any personal interests as Plato argues in his treatise. On the other hand, it is true that the education of human beings should be more comply with their natural and sensitive feelings, but people should be accustomed to live in contact with other fellows and conformed to the right education for a civil society in which they have to belong.

Work Cited

Plato, Republic. Penguin Classics.2007. Print

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile. GLF Editori Laterza, 1953. Print

Meckenzie, Mary Margaret. Plato’s Moral Theory. Journal of Medical Ethics,1985, 11, 88-91. JSTOR

Krentz, Arthur A. Play and Eucation in Plato’s Republic. Luther College. Paideia: Philosophy of Education. Web. http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Educ/EducKren.htm

Encyclopedia of Children and Childhood in History and Society, Plato: The State as an Educational Entity. Web. http://www.faqs.org/childhood/Pa-Re/Plato-427-348-B-C.html

Dillon, Ariel. Education in Plato’s Republic. Santa Clara University Student Ethics Research

Conference May 26, 2004.Web

http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/submitted/dillon/education_plato_republic.html