Pharisees Sadducees Zealots And Essenes Theology Religion Essay

We must first look at the history of Israel to find the emergence of the main religious sects. Israel was sinning against God, not following the laws of Moses, intermarrying with other nations, and worshiping other gods. God sent prophets to speak to the Israelites to bring them back to him, but if they would not listen. The prophets would often prophesize events that would come because of the disobedience, but also restoration also. The events that lead to this split within the Jewish culture happened around the deportation and exile of an unknown number of Jews of the ancient Kingdom of Judah to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar II, starting with the first deportation in 597 BCE (Coogan, 1999, pg 350) and continuing after the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple in 587 BCE (Jer 52,12-13). Fast forward to 539 BC, the Persians had captured Babylon; and Cyrus the great had allowed the Israelites to return back to Israel. Ezra 1:1-2: In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of the LORD spoken by Jeremiah, the LORD moved the heart of Cyrus king of Persia to make a proclamation throughout his realm and also to put it in writing: “This is what Cyrus king of Persia says: “‘The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and he has appointed me to build a temple for him at Jerusalem in Judah. Any of his people among you may go up to Jerusalem in Judah and build the temple of the LORD, the God of Israel, the God who is in Jerusalem, and may their God be with them. And in any locality where survivors may now be living, the people are to provide them with silver and gold, with goods and livestock, and with freewill offerings for the temple of God in Jerusalem.”It was during these times that it is believed the two main sects; the Pharisees and Sadducees emerged. W. D. Morrison puts it: “Long before the names Pharisee and Sadducee appear in the pages of history the divergent tendencies which these two parties represented were in existence within the Jewish community. It has, in fact, been contended that the foundation of their differences goes back into pre-exilian times, and that the priests and prophets of the old Israelitish monarchy are the true precursors of the Sadducees and Pharisees. But the complete transformation which Jewish society underwent after the return from Babylon” (W Morrison, 2007, pg 13). Although it was not until the Maccabean period that these two groups properly emerged as prominent groups within the Jewish culture

Pharisees

The name Pharisee in its Hebrew form means separatists, or the separated ones, The Pharisees were ‘common’ people, which consisted of laymen and scribes. According to Maayan Jaffe “The Pharisees offered answers for how to live in a post-Temple world and for how to engage with the sacred in their daily lives. Likewise, the Pharisees had a commitment to scholarly debate. Their responses and their inclination for argument for the sake of Torah would eventually constitute Rabbinic Judaism. (The rabbis of the Amoraic period, for example, completed redacting the Jerusalem Talmud circa 400 C.E. and the Babylonia one circa 500 C.E.)” (Jaffe pg 14, 2008)”. While Encyclopedia Britannica gives the reader further information on the beliefs of the Pharisees “The Pharisees, on the other hand, believed that the Law that God gave to Moses was twofold, consisting of the Written Law and the Oral Law, i.e. the teachings of the prophets and the oral traditions of the Jewish people” (Encyclopedia Britannica online). The Basic role of The Pharisees was to keep the law. “The Pharisees were very zealous for the Law of Moses, but they also considered themselves the guardians of the oral traditions that scholars developed over generations. The oral traditions interpreted the Law of Moses. For example, the Law said to keep the Sabbath. They were not to work on God’s holy day. Yet, what was work and what was not? The oral traditions filled in the details that Moses left out. For instance, how far could a person walk on the Sabbath without it being work? The interpreters decided that the distance was 2000 cubits which is about 2/3 of a mile. This was known as a Sabbath’s day journey. Where did they get that number? When the Hebrews carried the Ark of the Covenant in the wilderness, God commanded them to walk 2000 cubits behind the ark. They decided that was God’s way of telling them how far one could walk on the Sabbath”

(Doug Reed, pg 1, 2011) The Pharisees also maintained that an afterlife existed and that God punished the wicked and rewarded the righteous in the world to come. They also believed in a messiah who would herald an era of world peace.

Sadducees

The Sadducees, by contrast, were the chief priests and people of the highest social and wealth class of the time, who were installed by the Roman government, primarily for the purpose of ‘keeping the peace’ between Rome and the Jews. They were often wealthy and part of the ruling class in Jesus’ day. Many of them comprised the priesthood, but unlike the Levites, were not from the ancestral line of priests (royal priesthood, descendents of Aaron) that controlled the temple in Jerusalem. “They only recognized the Torah as the inspired word of God. They acknowledged neither the prophets nor the oral traditions that came after the first five books of the Bible. Consequently, they did not believe in the resurrection or any life after death. They were often at odds with the Pharisees over this matter.” (Doug Reed, pg 1, 2011)

Essenes/Qumran

The Essenes were a branch of Pharisees who emphasized a communal life and ritual purity, including full-body immersion for spiritual cleansing. Perhaps the best-known Essene is John the Baptist, “And so John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. The whole Judean countryside and all the people of Jerusalem went out to him. Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River. John wore clothing made of camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist, and he ate locusts and wild honey” (Mark 1:4-6). According to the Jewish Dictionary: “A branch of the Pharisees who conformed to the most rigid rules of Levitical purity while aspiring to the highest degree of holiness. They lived solely by the work of their hands and in a state of communism, devoted their time to study and devotion and to the practice of benevolence, and refrained as far as feasible from conjugal intercourse and sensual pleasures, in order to be initiated into the highest mysteries of heaven and cause the expected Messianic time to come” (Jewish Encyclopedia pg 19-20, 1906), it goes on to say: “that ten thousand of them had been initiated by Moses into the mysteries of the sect, which, consisting of men of advanced years having neither wives nor children, practised the virtues of love and holiness and inhabited many cities and villages of Judea, living in communism as tillers of the soil or as mechanics according to common rules of simplicity and abstinence. In another passage he speaks of only four thousand Essenes, who lived as farmers and artisans apart from the cities and in a perfect state of communism, and who condemned slavery, avoided sacrifice, abstained from swearing, strove for holiness, and were particularly scrupulous regarding the Sabbath, which day was devoted to the reading and allegorical interpretation of the Law.”

Zealots

The Zealots were yet another offshoot of the Pharisees. The Zealots believed that they could bring the beginning of the Messianic era (which included an end to foreign domination of Judea) by starting a rebellion against Rome. The dictionary also refers to Zealots as “a member of a radical, warlike, ardently patriotic group of Jews in Judea, particularly prominent from a.d. 69 to 81, advocating the violent overthrow of Roman rule and vigorously resisting the efforts of the Romans and their supporters to heathenize the Jews.” (Dictionary.com 2008)

The Oxford History of the Biblical World, ed. by Michael D Coogan. Pub. by Oxford University Press, 1999. pg 350

Jews under Roman RulebyW. D. Morrison pg 13 2007

Dictionary.com was launched in 1995, under the name of Lexico Publishing, LLC and was acquired by IAC in 2008. Today, it is the most-visited, most trusted, online dictionary.

1906 Jewish Encyclopedia pg 19-20

Jaffe, Maayan. Baltimore Jewish TimesHYPERLINK “http://search.proquest.com/socialsciences/indexingvolumeissuelinkhandler/25578/Baltimore+Jewish+Times/02008Y01Y04$23Jan+4,+2008$3b++Vol.+300+$281$29/300/1?accountid=44543?300. 1 (Jan 4, 2008): 14.

Encyclop?dia Britannica
Author(s)

As of 2008, 4,411 named contributors

Country

Scotland (1768-1900)

United States (1901-present)

Language

English

Subject(s)

General

Genre(s)

Referenceencyclopaedia

Publisher

Encyclop?dia Britannica, Inc.

Official site

Publication date

1768-2010 (printed version)

Media type

As of 2010, 32 volumes (hardbound)

ISBN

ISBN 1-59339-292-3

OCLC Number

71783328

LC Classification

AE5 .E363 2007

Thorncrownjournal Doug Reed 2011

Personal Values And Beliefs Theology Religion Essay

VALUES: Values describes, important belief in life shared by the member in the same culture about what is good and what is not. Values also create influence on a particular person’s life and acts as a guideline. Compared with the great leaders, I also have some mutual values such as non-violence, truth, do good and helping the poor, fight against violence against women, drugs and others but, I stick to my own culture. It is a different value compared with the two leaders.

BELIEFS: Beliefs are the rules, habit, and truth in our minds which are followed in our life for the survival. People have different beliefs in life that are usually passed by our parents and generations. The information source is the level of belief. It is also marked as assumptions, which made by ourselves. Compared to the great leaders, I added my culture as my belief and I am easy going man and I accept what is given to me by my parents. But, Mother Teresa and Gandhi have different beliefs. But their views are good.

ATTITUDES: Attitudes are the combination of certain subjects from value and beliefs. Each people have different attitudes due to several reasons. Personal attitudes and values are almost similar and attitudes may be either positive or negative. Comparing my attitude with leaders, some of the attitudes are common and some differs.

METAPROGRAMS: Metaprograms are filters to perception. There is several metaprograms. While comparing with the metaprogams of the good leaders mentioned above. My answers are different when comparing all the metaprogram with the Mother Teresa and Gandhi.

TRAITS: Traits means how they interact with the people. It also means qualities or characteristics of a person. There is positive personal traits and negative personal traits also. Good leaders have traits such as honest, forward looking, intelligent and so on. Like that I mentioned some personal traits of the great leaders. While comparing, I have a personal trait that is thinking before doing. Comparing with them the only trait which I have different from them. Well the difference is because of the time this leaders were present that stands as history.

STRATEGIES: Strategies allows us to work on achieving our goals. It is also a plan of action for the desired goals, also could be achievement of goals or solution to a problem. The personal strategy varies according to their nature. Here the two leaders have different strategies and my strategies are also different from them. But, some good leaders have some common personal strategies also.

CONCLUSION:

To conclude, that above I compared my values, beliefs and so on with the leaders. I analyses the each part of both leaders are different according to their personality and those leader have brought about changes in many people’s life and fought for them.

PART B : Personal Development Plan (PDP)
1) What is My Current State
I. What are my strengths that might influence my approach to leadership?

Patience

Hard working

Humanity

I don’t give up

I know my right and will fight for mine and for the people

ii. What are my weaknesses that might influence my approach to leadership?

not well manage

Quick judge

not aggressive

sometimes don’t speak up

soft hearted

iii. What are the common feedbacks (positive or negative) that I receive from others that might influence my approach to leadership?
POSITIVE FEEDBACK:

I socialize and make friends and enjoy

Patience

Willing to work

Kind

NEGATIVE FEEDBACK:

Not well manage

Not aggressive

Lack of skills

Lack of experience

iv. What other performance indicators can I notice that might influence my approach to leadership?

Quantitative indicator

Directional indicator

Financial indicator

v. Conclusion: In conclusion I will say that I have to improve/focus on my leadership skills and personal weaknesses like:

Time management

Emotions control

Internal Communication

Expose myself and speak up more

2) What is my Desired State?

Is to become a successful leader in any field of work either in a business field or political, sporting or any kind of leader, would lead the organization to its goal.

What do I have to improve/achieve?

Improve on my management skills

bring about maturity in the way of thinking for a particular organization

I would like to achieve my desired state by improving my leadership skills

Why do I want to achieve that? What does it give me?

Happiness

Motivation

Good satisfaction

Satisfaction in life

Achievement

iii. What are my short-term outcomes?

My short term outcome its help me in dealing with peoples and also help in work place to communicate and increase my performance and also creates better understanding and builds responsibility.

iv. What are my long-term outcomes?

My long term outcomes are it helps to increase my productivity and improve the standard of life

How Do I Get There- What is needed?

Through hard work and dedication

what must I improve/learn/experience to achieve that desired state?

improve my understanding and socalise

integrate with people to know their needs

participation

ii) What are the possible resources to learn/experience/improve?

Newspapers

Handouts

Internet

4) Timeline?
I) When do I want or need to achieve the desired state?

For short term

12 august to 24 December

For long term

1 august 2012 to 13 December 2016

ii) What is my schedule to work on these focus area?

Everyday life we go through different people and learn from their experiences and we set goals and work on them 2nd feb to 23th of dec spend 4-5 hours a week.

Personality Type Report

Your Personality Preferences

EXTROVERT

You are social and outgoing. You are most comfortable when with other people and experiencing the world first hand. Interaction with others and first hand experiences energize you. It is not unlike you to start conversations with strangers. You have a preference for the outer world: people, activities, and things. Other people provide you with a mirror, sounding board to help you develop ideas and plans. Being alone may sap your energies. Your concept of the world is derived from experiencing it firsthand and then drawing conclusions.

SENSORY / INTUITIVE

You appear to be an equal mix of both sensory and intuitive types. This may cause you some conflict at times. On the other hand the balance of the two may work just fine for you. There is certainly nothing wrong with having a fair share of both types if you are happy. Below you will find descriptions of both types.

SENSORY

You usually gather information with your senses: what you can see, hear, taste, touch and smell in the physical world. The facts gathered from the sensory data you process are the building blocks of your model of our world. You concentrate your energies on what actually exists and do not ponder what might exist too much. You are usually practical and rely on your common sense to guide you through the world. You see things as they are and have little or no need to search for underlying meanings.

INTUITIVE

While you do process information through your senses you add a twist to your processing by relying on intuition and serendipity. You look for undercurrents of meaning and abstractions in what you experience physically. You do not just see things just as they are, but as what they could be. While you may rely on common sense at times, you trust inspiration far more.

PERCEIVING

You like to have as much information as possible before making a decision. Putting off a final decision until the last moment does not make you uncomfortable. Indeed once a decision is made, a course plotted, you may feel a bit uneasy, because you feel bound to a certain course of action. You would much prefer to wait and see what happens. You enjoy the opportunity to improvise. Commitments are not etched in stone to you, and are changeable.

FEELING

You make decisions subjectively based upon your values and what is important to you. How people will be affected by your decisions is important to you. You are likely to make decisions based upon what you feel is acceptable and agreeable rather than what is logical. Your truths are founded in your values and those of the society you live in. It is important to remember that we are discussing how you evaluate data and make decisions, and that you rely on your feelings to do so in no way implies you are overly emotional.

Your Personality Type

Your personality preferences suggest you may be one of two personality types, so both these types are listed below.

Extrovert/Sensing/Feeling/Perceiving

Your caring and generous nature makes helping others a pleasure for you. You are so full of energy, friendly and charming that some might describe you as the life of the party. You are not overly judgmental and accept others as they are. You steer your course through life by relying on your common sense. You are an optimist. New experiences are food for your soul.

In relationships you are the one that can bring light to the gloomiest situation. You are easygoing and very accepting of others. You are full of energy and need to share adventures with your friends and loved ones. You need attention and approval. You may not need a deep emotional bond, but you do need your relationships to be fun. You have a genuine concern for the plight of others. Famous People of Your Type:

St Mark, Dale Evans, Gracie Allen, Bob Hope, Eva Gabor, Willard Scott, Goldie Hawn, Kyle Petty, Arsenio Hall, Mary Lou Retton, Kathy Lee Gifford, Woody Harrelson.

Occupations Suited to Your Type Include:

Animal handler, coach, designer, fitness instructor, flight attendant, fund-raiser, merchandiser, musician, nurse, performer, law officer, athlete, pr specialist, real-estate agent, salesperson, teacher, travel agent, and veterinarian.

Extrovert/Intuitive/Feeling/Perceiving

You are a very creative optimist who never has a shortage of new ideas. You accept others as they are, like to be helpful, and are compassionate. Your freedom and independence are very important to you. Your well-developed insight into others and communication skills allow you to inspire those around you. You have a good sense of humor and love to have fun.

In relationships you may turn intimacy into an all-encompassing pursuit. You are very aware of what those around you are thinking and doing. Your people skills allow you to make friends instantly and make almost anyone comfortable. You tend to idealize your relationships. You like your relationships to be very intense–you want to feel everything. The warmth and affection you give others is very deep and genuine.

Famous People of Your Type:

Franz Joseph Haydn, Samuel Clemens, Will Rogers, Buster Keaton, Theodor “Dr.”Seuss Geisel, Mickey Rooney, Carol Burnett, Paul Harvey, Elizabeth Montgomery, Bill Cosby, Dom Delouise, Dave Thomas, Martin Short, Meg Ryan, Robin Williams, Sandra Bullock, Robert Downey.

Occupations Suited to Your Type Include:

Actor, artist, clergy, consultant, entertainer, entrepreneur, personal service provider, journalist, marketer, media specialist, mediator, recruiter, sales person, business owner, teacher, and writer.

The Enneagram is a personality system which divides the entire human personality into nine behavioral tendencies, this is your score on each…

Type 1

Perfectionism

||||||||||||||

58%

Type 2

Helpfulness

||||||||||||||||

70%

Type 3

Image Focus

||||||||||||||

54%

Type 4

Individualism

||||||||||||||

58%

Type 5

Intellectualism

||||||||||||||||||

74%

Type 6

Security Focus

||||||||||||||||

66%

Type 7

Adventurousness

||||||||||||||||||||

82%

Type 8

Aggressiveness

||||||||||||||||||

74%

Type 9

Calmness

||||||||||||

50%

type

score

type behavior motivation

7

20

I must be fun and entertained to survive.

5

18

I must be knowledgeable to survive.

8

18

I must be strong and in control to survive.

2

17

I must be helpful and caring to survive.

6

16

I must be secure and safe to survive.

1

14

I must be perfect and good to survive.

4

14

I must be unique/different to survive.

3

13

I must be impressive and attractive to survive.

9

12

I must maintain peace/calm to survive.

Your main type is Type 7

Your variant stacking is sx/sp/so

Your level of health is very low, i.e. very unhealthy

Your DISC personality test report

Your specific distribution of scores on the DISC personality test is an indication of your unique personality. You can think of this as your DISC Personality ‘DNA’. In the pie chart below you see your distribution of scores.

The highest percentage is likely to be your most dominant personality factor, the second highest your next most dominant personality factor and so on. As such for you the DISC factors are ordered as: Compliance, Steadiness, Dominance and Influence.

The graph below shows how each team role fits you. After the graph, each team role is explained in detail, in the order of its importance to you.

Personal experience of God

1. Describe your personal experience of God and the understanding of God you derived from biblical, theological, and historical sources.

Throughout history, people developed the idea of a higher being, who is referred to as ‘god’ in general. Some people simply deny the existence of god or any other spiritual being. And other people who accepted the existence of ‘god’ explained the identity of ‘god’ in various ways. Deism sees the cosmos as a closed system with its maker outside it; so denies God’s direct control of events and his miraculous intrusions into this world. Pantheism recognizes no creator-creature distinction, but sees everything, including good and evil, as a direct form of God.

Christianity joins with the Jewish and the Muslim faiths in proclaiming radical monotheism, which states that God is One and that God is the God of all. Distinctive to Christian theism is the belief that the personal creator is as truly three as he is one. God is a single being who exists, simultaneously and eternally, as a communion of three persons: Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The three Godhead are eternal which means they coexist from past through future. In Matthew’s account of Christ’s baptism, as Jesus the Son went up from the water, the Spirit of God descended upon Him as a dove and the Father testified from the heaven of His beloved Son (Mt 3:16-17). This scene clearly portrays the simultaneous existence of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.

The Christian understanding of God is specific in that Christians believe that God has been, and continues to be, historically involved with the people of Israel and has made a new covenant with all people in Jesus Christ. In other words, we believe that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments bear witness to God’s active love for creation as revealed in Jesus of Nazareth.

God revealed himself through various channels including the Scripture, experiences and nature. Although there are many ways in which God reveals God’s self, the best place to find out about God is through the Scripture that God gave us. In the book of Exodus, I personally found God’s character and the qualities that are ascribed to him. Exodus 3:7-8 says that

The LORD said, “I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt. I have heard them crying out because of their slave drivers, and I am concerned about their suffering. So I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land into a good and spacious land, a land flowing with milk and honey–the home of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites. (NIV)

These are the words that God said to Moses from the burning bush. I believe that in this communication with Moses, God revealed who he was. God whom I believe in is the God who has seen the misery of his people, heard them crying out and has been concerned about their suffering. In another translation, it is said that God knew their suffering (NRSV). In the context of this chapter, “my people” indicate Israel people in Egypt. Israel people at that time in Egypt were slaves under the Pharaoh. They were ignored people in bondage to the Egyptians. There must have been other nations considered much higher and nobler than the Israelites but the bible said that God who is the creator of the whole world saw slaves with his own eyes and heard them crying out.

Hebrew word for ‘to know’ in Exodus 3:8 is ‘??? yada` {yaw-dah’}’ and it implies to know by experience (Bible Work 7). In other words, God who created the whole world attentively observed and listened to slaves who were disregarded in this world and he knew of their suffering by experience. The God whom I believe in is not one who just sits on a throne in heaven and is not concerned about what happens in this world. But God in Christianity is the God who knows his people and has a close relationship with them.

Exodus story indicates that God is purposeful, powerful, and sovereign in relation to this world. He has a plan for the history of the universe, which is to save his people from sins, and in executing it he governs and controls all created world. He is all powerful so he cannot be bound by any of the limitations of space or time that apply to us and he is always present everywhere.

Personally, God has been there in many forms for me. All of these attributes can be found in many parts of my personal experience with God. I have experienced God of Immanuel, who has been with me always. Jesus came to this world as Immanuel (Mt. 1:23) and his last words before he ascended into heaven was also Immanuel, “I am with you always, to the very end of the age” (Mt. 28:20). When I decided to go to seminary in Korea to be a pastor, I rejoiced in confidence because God was there with me. When I went to Korean Army, I endured the difficult time because God was there with me. When I came to America alone for further study, I did not fear to live in a strange land because God was there with me always. Throughout my life, the one thing that I am sure is that God has been always with me and loves me, who am the weakest among all.

2. What is your understanding of evil as it exists in the world?

First of all, as Augustine said in his article, ‘On the nature of good‘, I believe that ‘God is good and every creation is good’ (Augustine, Chapter 34). And every creature came to exist by God without exception. Then how do we explain the origin of evil from the perfect good Creator? In regard to the matter of the origin of evil, I am of the same opinion with Augustine.

Evil is lack of some good things. As it throws a shadow over us when we turn against the Sun, evil originate from a lack of goodness of God.

I believe that God is the perfect Creator. One of the perfect things God created was man. Adam and Eve who were the perfect creature of God had a choice to follow God or to go against God. Without free will to choose, neither good nor evil could have been chosen. If man is ever to choose good, he must have the freedom to choose evil as well. Therefore, God did not create evil but perfect freedom to choose and human freely chose evil. After Adam and Eve chose to disobey God, evil became a reality in this world.

In his Book, ‘the City of God‘, Augustine recognized that evil in this world and goodness of God’s Kingdom co-exist on the earth throughout its history. However, Augustine believed that God would finally turn evil in this world into goodness of God’s Kingdom (Augustine, Chapter 13.4). By the original sin, I believe, all of us fell down from the image of God and evil came to prevail in us. However God also prepared the way through which we can be restored to God’s Image and be saved from our sins. The only way of salvation is Jesus Christ.

3. What is your understanding of humanity, and the human need for divine grace?

On the last day of creation, God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Gen. 1:26). The image of God refers to the immaterial part of man. We were created to be set apart for God (Gen 1:28). He enabled us to commune with God. We were created in likeness mentally, morally, and socially. When we were created in God’s image, we were intended to become God’s agent so that we can take care of the world (Gen. 1:26,28).

However, Adam and Eve sinned by disobeying God. And they became alienated from the Creator. That historic event brought all mankind under divine condemnation. Human nature became corrupt, and therefore, totally unable to please God. Before Adam and Eve sinned, they both had direct contact and fellowship with God. But as a result of transgressing against God, Adam and Eve lost it all. They were both banished out of the garden, God pronounced a curse on them and their descendants and on the earth in general. Death entered into the big picture and all of us are born into this world with sinful nature.

In his love and grace, God made a plan to save us. In Ephesians 2:4-7, Apostle Paul tells us that “God made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions“. We cannot overcome our sinful nature and death but, through Jesus Christ, God had already made provision for us to be saved. By faith through grace, we can be saved (Eph. 2:8-9). Jesus Christ is the grace of God who showed us the way of salvation. By dying on the cross, Jesus paid the full and complete price for our sins so that we do not have to pay for it. The only way of salvation is by faith through Jesus Christ. And even the faith we have comes from God. Thus our salvation is entirely the work of God. Whoever believes in Jesus Christ will be saved by the grace of God.

4. How do you interpret the statement “Jesus Christ is Lord”?

Jesus” is our Lord’s human and personal name, meaning savior. “Christ” is our Lord’s official title. It is the Greek synonym for the Hebrew “Messiah,” meaning the Anointed One.

The statement “Jesus Christ is Lord” implies the belief that Jesus who was born of the Virgin Mary is our savior who redeems us from our sins. In other words, to accept Jesus Christ as Lord means to accept two natures in Jesus Christ; the nature of divinity and the nature humanity. Jesus Christ is fully human and fully God at the same time. Existence of these two different natures in Jesus Christ is crucial because that matters to salvation.

The doctrine of the virgin birth is very important (Isaiah 7:14, Matthew 1:23, Luke 1:27, 34). Jesus’ birth was the result of the Holy Spirit working within Mary’s body. Mary was a ‘vessel’ God used to perform the miracle of the Incarnation. Denying a physical connection between Mary and Jesus would imply that Jesus was not truly human. Scripture teaches us that Jesus was fully human with a physical body like ours. Jesus was fully God as well as he is fully human with an eternal and sinless nature (John 1:14, Acts 20:28, Hebrews 2:14-17). Jesus was not born with sinful nature. The virgin birth circumvented the transmission of the sinful nature and allowed the eternal God to become a perfect man.

The deity of Christ is the central belief of Christianity as well as Jesus’ humanity. The bible clearly claimed that Jesus had the right to forgive sins, which is something only God can do (Mark 2:5-7, Acts 5:31, Colossians 3:13). Jesus was also said to be the one who will “judge the living and the dead” (2 Timothy 4:1) as an ultimate judge of this world. Apostle Paul called Jesus “great God and Savior” (Titus 2:13), and pointed out Jesus’ existence in the form of God prior to his incarnation (Philippians 2:5-8). In John 1:1, deity of Christ is clarified as the same God with Father, “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). John here affirms both the deity of Christ and the Trinity. Jesus is God who incarnated in human flesh, the living Word of God.

5. What is your conception of the activity of the Holy Spirit in personal faith, in the community of believers, and in responsible living in the world?

The Holy Spirit is the third person of the triune God. The Holy Spirit is God in the same way that the Father is God and the Son is God. Scripture and the church tradition, including Nicene Creed (“We believe in the Holy Spirit who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified“), indicates that the Holy Spirit, known also as the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Jesus Christ, is of the same essence as the Father and the Son.

The Holy Spirit worked at the beginning of a church. Apostle Paul indicated an organism of a church as the Spirit baptized body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13). And the one who leads us to become a new creation in Christ through worship is the Spirit of God (Eph. 2:18, Phil. 3:3). Each local gathering is a part of this one universal believing community as a body of Christ, and as Christ’s agent the Holy Spirit leads and guide us to grow into Christlike maturity and fulfill God’s mission (Eph. 4:11-16).

The Spirit also works in a life of an individual believer. The Holy Spirit convicts lost people with respect to sin, righteousness, and judgment and by God’s power repentant and believing souls are saved. In sanctification, Holy Spirit indwells the Christian as one grows in the likeness of Christ and in his service. Scriptures tells us the Spirit who works throughout our journey of salvation. The Spirit leads us to repent our sins (John 16:7), makes us born again (John 3:3-5). And the Spirit empowers us to bring holiness in our life and helps us to bear fruits in our life (Galatians 5:22-23).

6. What is your understanding of the kingdom of God; the Resurrection; eternal life?

As the Psalmist confessed, “Your Kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and your dominion endures through all generations‘ (Ps. 145:13), I believe that God is the king of his covenant people. And as Apostles’ Creed (“from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead“) and the Nicene Creed (“He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead“) said, I believe that Christ will be our ultimate judge at the last day and God will reign over the whole world. As the Nicene Creed stated coming of God’s Kingdom (“his kingdom will have no end”), there must be the coming kingdom of God in the future in which God’s reign affects the whole world.

However, the Kingdom of God is more than a vision of coming God’s reign in the future. The kingdom of God speaks of a present reality though not in entirety and a future result where the reign of God over all of creation will be perfected and made whole. In Luke 17:20-21, Jesus responds to a Pharisee who asked when the kingdom of God would come, “The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say here it is or there it is because the kingdom of God is within you.” As well as we experience coming of God’s reign over the world in the future, we will experience the Kingdom of God here and now although it is a foretastes of the fullness of God’s Kingdom.

The resurrection of Christ on the third day after his crucifixion and his ascension to be with God until He comes again for the final time of judgment also marks the path of all those who claim faith in Christ. At the time when the Good News of Jesus Christ spreads to the whole nations, he will surely come to the world again (Mt. 24:14) from the heaven in a cloud with power and glory (1 Thessalonians 4:16). At that time people who accepted Jesus Christ as their savior will be risen from the dead (1 Thessalonians 4:15-16). Christ’s resurrection marked Christ’s victory over sin and death both physically and spiritually, we too as Christians who bear the marks of Christ gain the right to have the same victory both physically and spiritually.

Eternal life is the end product of our resurrected souls. As the Apostles’ Creed (“the life everlasting“) and the Nicene Creed (“the life of the world to come“) insisted, I believe that those who have been saved by Christ will share the joy of eternal fellowship with Christ. Heaven means eternal joy in Christ and those who reject Christ will be judged to the eternal condemnation.

7. Explain the role and significance of baptism in the ministry to which you have been called.

Sacraments are acts instituted by Christ and administered by a church having an outward form and conveying God’s grace. Baptism is one of two United Methodist sacraments the other is the Lord’s Supper. These sacraments are means of grace within the covenant community. They are visible signs and seals of something internal and invisible and the means by which God works in us through the power of the Holy Spirit.

The scriptural mode of baptism is found in the New Testament. It records that Jesus was baptized by John (Mt. 3:13-17), and he commanded his disciples to teach and baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit (Mt. 28:19). Whoever accepts Jesus Christ as their savior is eligible to be baptized. Baptism conveys God’s grace that redeems us from our sins through the atonement of Christ. Therefore, baptizing of a person, whether as an infant or an adult, is a sign of God’s saving grace. In baptism, we witness that God’s grace is poured upon everybody regardless of their condition.

Even though baptism is the special channel through which we experience God’s grace of the atonement of Christ, baptism does not guarantee our salvation. As John Wesley insisted in his sermon, “Scripture Way of Salvation“, salvation is a lifelong process of responding to God’s grace. By being baptized, we become a covenant people of God who have a promise that the Holy Spirit will work in our lives. However, salvation is not automatically obtained by baptism but by accepting Christ as our savior, trust in Christ and grow in holiness to be near unto God.

Baptism represents an act of initiation for Christian believers into the Church. By being baptized, we make a covenant of relationship between God and also between congregations in a church. As baptized Christians, we join the universal church and make a promise our loyalty as the body of Christ.

8. Explain the role and significance of the Lord’s Supper in the ministry to which you have been called.

God provides us various ways in which we can grow in God’s grace. The Lord’s Supper, also known as Communion, or Eucharist, is one of the Christ’s gifts to the church, in which we experience God’s grace. Following Jesus’ example and instruction, when the church celebrates the Lord’s Supper we receive gifts of bread and wine. In this sacrament, we celebrate our fellowship with Christ and with each other.

The invitation to the Table comes from the risen and present Christ. In United Methodist, whoever loves him, repents their sins, and seeks to live as a Christian disciple is invited to participate in the Lord’s Supper. By responding to this invitation we affirm and deepen our relationship with God through Jesus Christ.

It is not easy to understand how bread and wine become Jesus’ body and blood in the Lord’s Supper. So it is mystery. Some churches insist that the Lord’s Supper is merely a memorial of Christ’s sacrifice and a sign of Christian fellowship. Some churches including historic Reformed churches insist that bread and wine in Communion conveys a unique spiritual power although Christ’s body ascended into heaven. Lutheran churches insist that Christ’s actual body is present with the elements of bread and wine. And the Roman Catholic churches insist that even the essence of bread and wine are changed into Christ’s true body and blood, with maintaining their physical reality persisting (transubstantiation). United Methodist believes that the real presence of Christ is communicated to the believers.

To participate in the Lord’s Supper is not merely to recall the event 2000 years ago. But when we receive bread and wine with faith, it becomes dynamic action within us and we experience the grace of body and blood of Christ which is re-presented to us in the Lord’s Supper. The past event of our Lord’s death, resurrection and ascension comes into the present so that its power once again touches us, changes us, and heals us.

We gather at the table with joy. Our eating and drinking is a celebration of our risen Lord. Through the power of the Holy Spirit, Christ is present with us at the table and so we give joyful thanks for what God has done and is doing in our lives and in the world. We come to the table in hope. We look forward with joyful anticipation to the coming reign of God.

9. How do you intend to affirm, teach and apply Part II of the Discipline (Doctrinal Standards and Our Theological Task) in your work in the ministry to which you have been called?

What we believe as Christians matters. What we believe tells us who we are. Part II of the Book of Discipline contains Methodist heritage in faith and theology and heart of Methodist doctrines. In other words, Part II of the Book of Discipline tells us who we are as Christians, particularly Methodists. It is important for Methodists to study this in order for us to have a clear understanding of our heritage, doctrine, and the faith we profess together. Our Christian faith is built on tradition which fathers in faith handed over to us. We will also add our profession of faith upon it and turn it over to the next generation. Therefore, as a pastor, to lead people into right direction to Christian faith by affirming and teaching what we believe and who we are is crucial.

In order to fulfill this mission, I will preach the gospel verified in our tradition and theology. A pastor should not preach the gospel according to his or her own theology but we should profess communal faith built upon tradition. Through preaching and small group study, I will teach Methodist heritage. To learn who our fathers of faith were and what they believed will help us to know our identity and to understand the place where I am now. On the basis of our tradition, we should do our best to leave our footmarks so that our children can see and follow faith of their parents and go in the right direction. To leave footmarks of our faith is to teach our children and show them how to live out what we profess in our lives. I will teach our children the Methodist heritage and doctrine in Sunday School at a level they can understand.

10. The United Methodist Church holds that the living core of the Christian faith was revealed in Scripture, illumined by tradition, vivified in personal experience, and confirmed by reason. What is your understanding of this theological position of the Church?

The scripture is the primary source of Christian faith. It is clear that the Scripture is the primary vehicle by which we grow in faith. The scripture has great authority in teaching and guiding us in faithful living and right understanding as to the nature of God and humanity. All the scripture is God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16). When we read the bible, the Holy Spirit guides us to find the truth which illuminates our life.

Church tradition is an important practice for theological reflection and interpretation of the Scripture. Christian faith has built upon our ancestors’ confessions of faith for a long period of time, and that formed church tradition. Tradition is a source of authority and a lens through which Scripture is interpreted inside it.

Experience is an important practice for Christian faith because the scripture and theology must be understood on the basis of our experiences. Communal experience within a faith community helps us to understand God’s word toward us here and now.

Reason is used to examine authenticity of theological reflection and an interpretation of the scripture. By reason we ask questions of faith and seek to understand God’s action and will. However, reason as a practice for Christian faith does not mean to have a speculative thought but it indicates to conceive under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Wesley’s quadrilateral indicates the importance of checks and balances between four practices. To focus upon one practice brings danger to a church to lose its balance and have a radical view on Christian faith. Thus, to keep the balance between these four practices, with holding primacy of the scripture, is crucial.

11. Describe the nature and mission of the Church. What are its primary tasks today?

In regard to the nature of the church, I agree with the Nicene Creed which describes the church as “one holy catholic and apostolic.” The church, in this case, meaning universal Christian church, is one in Christ. The church is holy so it is called apart from the secular world. Although only the part of holiness is seen at the church in the present time, we will see the fullness of holiness at the time of coming of Christ in the end. The Church is universal for all people. As it is written in 1 Cor. 12:27, Church is likened to the Body of Christ whereby the coming together of the various parts form one perfect and organic body with Christ as the head. This analogy means that the church will embrace both the fullness of Christian teaching and the diversity of people who make up the church and function as the each parts of the body. The church is apostolic so it stands in continuity with the apostolic witness.

I believe that the mission of the church can be found at the Twenty-five Articles of Religion which indicates three necessary elements of the church: faith(“congregation of faithful men“), preaching(“in which the pure Word of God is preached“) and sacrament(“and the Sacrament duly administered“) (13th Article of Religion, 1784). The church is the gathering of people of faith, spreading the Good News of Jesus Christ, and administers sacraments.

The ultimate goal of the church should be to make people disciples of Jesus Christ. Through preaching, teaching, worship, and nurturing, the Church is God’s ordained vehicle whereby others can be disciplined and experience the grace in which we stand as the body of Christ.

The primary task of the Church today is to be a true mission church. As the body of Christ, bound to God and to one another through Christ, church always lives in a community. To lose dynamic organism of a church means to lose its vital power. A part which is not united with the whole is useless. For that reason, a local church should be connected with people and groups around it and be united with the universal church spiritually. If a church is connected and united, it should be transformative. If a church has a vital organic power, it will transform the world in which they live as a living plant bears fruits. God being connected to us came down in the form of flesh to dwell among us. Jesus’ ministry was to preach the Good News and to live out the message of love with people around him. The church that truly impacts people’s life is the church that knows people around her, shares joys and sorrows of the people, and give them hope in Jesus Christ.

12. Describe your understanding of the primary characteristics of United Methodist polity.

First, the system, known as “itinerancy”, is the most distinguishing feature of Methodism. In many polities ministers are “called”, but in Methodist polity they are “sent”. One consequence of this system is that local congregations are generally receptive to whoever minister is sent. This gives ministry an objective quality that is not dependent on the personal characters of individuals or the expectations of parishes. One of the most valuable consequences of this polity is the relative success that United Methodist Church has had in placing women and minorities in parish situation.

Second, United Methodist Church determines church policy in conferences, which function as deliberative bodies. There are several levels of such conferences. The annual conference is the basic corporate body of which the primary function is to connect local churches to one another. All ordinations take place at the annual conference. The highest deliberative body in Methodism is the General Conference. The conference legislates general policy for the church as a whole. The annual conferences are grouped geographically into the jurisdictional conference, of which there are presently five in the US. Central conferences are concerned with the work of the church outside the US. Churches within a specific area of an annual conference may assemble in district conferences. Annual meetings among local congregations or groups of contingent congregations, to which a member of an annual conference is assigned, are known as charge conference.

Third, one of the unique features of Methodist governance is a structure of official leadership through which the supervisory function takes place. The executive function of the bishop includes a number of powers-particularly associated with the appointment of clergy to charges. The bishop works through district superintendents. They act as liaisons between the local parishes and the bishop. The several district superintendents in a conference are called the bishop’s cabinet. The district superintendent presides at the charge conferences.

Fourth, an involvement of lay people in the deliberative and legislative bodies of the church has been important. Governance in contemporary Methodism is a shared responsibility of clergy and lay people. Lay preachers and lay leaders continue to work in local churches.

Overview of 12 Old Testament

ASSIGNMENT 1INTRODUCTION

If we take a look at the Bible, it is interesting to note that 40% of the material in the bible consists of narratives, stories and is actually the most common type of writing. The primary faith confessions of both Christianity and Judaism tell us that God has revealed Himself in extraordinary ways in human history. This special encounter with God is really the crux of Biblical witnesses to God. This is why scripture is the story of God. This simply gives the idea that in interpreting the Bible, we should take seriously this dimension of story.

Summary of Howard

The Old Testament historical narratives are not just interesting stories about people who lived in Old Testament times, but they are also stories filled with hidden meanings, much more important than the plain and outward meanings. These stories do not always teach some clear morale directly, however, narratives are written in story-form. They have a meaningful string of interrelated events involving specified characters and some kind of plot. The ultimate purpose of Old Testament narratives is to inform us about things certain people have done within the larger story of God’s plan. This plan of God is to offer redemption to mankind through a promised Saviour.

The Biblical narratives comes in three distinct levels, much like the subject of God’s will. First it is His will for all of humanity. Secondly His will for His covenant people and thirdly His will for the individual person. The top level of Biblical narrative refers to the big picture which is the universal plan of God for redeeming all mankind through the promised messiah descended through Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and David. In a nutshell, the entire Bible can be understood in three major units.

In Genesis to Malachi we can read that a rescuer is coming, the rescuer is here and it is Jesus. In Acts to Revelation we read that Jesus is coming again. We see that the middle level of Biblical narrative records God’s work through a selected portion of humanity and the nation of Israel and the Church. Also included in here would be stories involving individuals or covenant people that have a major impact on a lot of other people. In Romans 5 we see that Adam’s deeds affected all of humanity. Noah’s faithfulness to God affected all of humanity and everyone that are descendents of Noah. Abraham was the father of many nations and Moses was God’s mediator for the Sinaitic Covenant in Israel. The life of Jesus and the apostles impacted all of humanity and the church is the proof and demonstration of God’s wisdom (Phillipians. 3:10-11).

We can see that the lowest level of narratives are stories that take place at an individual level, describing events in the lives of people that do not have an obvious larger impact, such as Joseph, Judas, Paul and Barnabas (Genesis 37-50). It is not every individual passage that bears witness to Jesus directly (John 5:37-39) but everything does fit in the puzzle somehow to the ultimate level narrative. On the other hand, there are some typology stories that do not make much sense. Try to read Old Testament narratives and always appreciate the individual stories, but be sure to understand the stories as elements in a much larger meta-narrative unfolding bringing God’s Messiah into the world (Howard, 1993).

Summary of Osborne

Preaching from Old Testament narratives resembles playing the saxophone and it is easy to play the saxophone poorly. The one contributing factor is the deficient theology that neglects the Old Testament as a source of Bible exposition. It relegates it merely to illustrative material, but most difficulties stem from a deficient methodology. The other problem pertains to homiletics. A lot of preachers have adopted a style of exposition that is not conducive to preaching Old Testament narratives. The striving for a narrative’s meaning puts the interpreter into the world of literary analysis. The biblical authors are constantly and urgently conscious of telling a story in order to reveal the imperative truth of God’s works in history. It also tells the story of Israel’s hopes and failings. By paying close attention to the literary strategies through which that truth was expressed, may actually help us to understand it better. It will also enable us to see the minute elements of complicating design in the Bible’s sacred history. Osborne came to the following conclusion, “There is no reason why history and literary artistry cannot exist side-by-side”. An Interpreter can notice the literary art of a story because literary artistry is not an end in itself, but a means to understanding the theological point of a narrative. The test is not whether literary analysis contributes to aesthetic appreciation but whether it advances understanding. Is it sharpening the ear and the eye to the author’s intentions?” It is well known that Old Testament narratives do more than make theological points. They attempt to persuade and change the Bible’s main form of exposition. The narrative is most appropriately characterized as primary rhetoric, its primary objective being to persuade its audience. Bible expositors must prepare to interact with the literary features of the text in order to discover a story’s theological point. A preacher’s effectiveness in the pulpit depends on the amount of hours he spends with exegesis and study. The guidelines suggested above can help preachers to do great and reliable exegesis that is sensitive to the literary features of Old Testament narratives. Some sermon preparation still remains incomplete although expositors do thorough exegesis marked by sensitivity to the literary art of a narrative. It is important that the preacher tackle the homiletical side of the task. As Osborne states, great preachers have all worked as hard on presentation as they have on exegesis, yet many expositors stumble. They end up preaching the bare facts of a text instead of the text itself (Osborne, 2006).

Personal lessons

Sermons on biblical narratives succeed or fail with the pastor’s ability to present the scenes of a story in vivid color. In Old Testament narratives other concerns overshadow the need for realistic fullness; but realistic fullness may be one of the greatest concerns of a modern pastor. Pastors need to engage readers in the story with sensory details. Painting scenes like this requires ample historical-cultural research in Bible dictionaries, encyclopedias, atlases and books on archaeology. Such research leads to sharp, accurate images. Imagination can degenerate into fantasy and, in an effort to tell a good story, a pastor can scuttle or trivialize the biblical material. Imagination must be linked to the text just as interpretation must be tied to the text, otherwise the pastor may misrepresent the Scriptures and say in the name of God what God did not say. A careful exegesis of the text will give direction to the imagination and even set the parameters it must not violate. Good images also result from precise vocabulary. Pastors should cultivate a suspicion of adjectives and adverbs and instead use lively verbs and colorful nouns. Should an expositor use colloquial expressions that portray biblical characters as “happy campers” or that describe them “adjusting their sunglasses”? Certainly this can be overdone, but at times, it may prove effective. Reading can stimulate a pastor’s creativity and provide ideas for arranging the details of Old Testament stories to gain the maximum effect. Pastors should at least read sermon manuscripts or listen to sermon tapes by masters of the craft.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we can really the historical instincts of the biblical writers and must assess and use their works positively and constructively.

Bibliography
HOWARD D.M. JR. 1993. An Introduction to the Old Testament Historical Books. Chicago: Moody Press.
OSBORNE G.R. 2006. The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (2nd ed., rev. and exp.). Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press.
ASSIGNMENT 2
INTRODUCTION

The Bible is full of wonderful books to read. The Book of Joshua is one of the Bible’s great books of courage and faith. God told Joshua: “Moses my servant is dead. Now then, you and all these people, get ready to cross the Jordan River into the land I am about to give to them and to the Israelites” (Joshua 1:2). In the Book of Joshua God is encouraging us to be strong and courageous.

Discuss the authorship, date and main divisions of the book of Joshua.

Author: The Book of Joshua does not name its author. They say that Joshua must have written most of the book. The last part of the book was written by another person after the death of Joshua. In the book several sections were edited and compiled before the death of Joshua.

Date of Writing: It is recorded in history that the Book of Joshua was written between 1400 and 1370 B.C.

Main Divisions: The Book of Joshua speaks about the life of the Israelites after the exodus from Egypt. Joshua was a great leader and in the book it shows his 20 years of leadership of the people. During that time he was also anointed by Moses. The twenty-four chapter divisions of the Book of Joshua can be summarized as follows:

The events following Moses’ death, the invasion and capture of the land.
The division of the country and the conduct of the Reubenites, etc.; two farewell addresses by Joshua shortly before his death to the people of Israel.

Key Verses: Joshua 1:6-9 says, “Be strong and courageous, because you will lead these people to inherit the land I swore to their forefathers to give them. Be strong and very courageous…..”. Joshua 24:14-15, “Now fear the LORD and serve Him with all faithfulness. Throw away the gods your forefathers worshiped beyond the River and in Egypt and serve the LORD. But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve……” (Got Questions, 2002).

What major discrepancy (difference, conflict) do some scholars see between Joshua and Judges? As a Bible-believing Christian, how can you account the difference in a way that defends the truthfulness of both books?

The book of Joshua and the book of Judges speak about the story of Israel’s settlement in the land of Canaan and their first couple of centuries in the land. In the first part of the book of Joshua, the book describes the actual entry of the Israelites into the land and the early battles for control of certain very important cities. The second part of the book shows in detail how the land was divided among the tribes of Israel, as well as a covenant ceremony in which the people committed themselves to the worship of God. There were continued struggles in the land as people led isolated campaigns to free the Israelites from oppression at the hands of surrounding people. In the book there is a rise of new leaders coming to the front. When we take a closer look at the two books there is a much more complex situation that begins to stand up both the historical and theological questions. It is not only about the reliability of the accounts as just normal history but also about the nature of Israel’s entry into Palestine.

Because of what I mentioned in the above paragraph, we can look to some of the historical questions raised at the beginning. Why is it that there are still no answers to those specific historical problems? Perhaps it is more obvious now that some of those historical problems are important to us. Maybe it is because we have not heard the biblical text as the faith community of Israel intended it to be heard. We have asked historical questions when the books are not history. The books bear witness to the work of God in the world, both His self-revelation in history and the community’s response to that revelation. These are both positively and negatively. Maybe before we rather ask “what really happened?” a historical question, we should ask “what is the community telling us about God”? This is a confessional and theological question (Bratcher, 2008).

Which of the five settlement theories that Mangano discusses is acceptable to Bible-believing Christians? Why are the other four unacceptable? Hint: we hold one belief that leads us to reject all four: what is it?

The Pan-Canaanite Conquest Model

According to (Kurinsky, nd) the Conquest Model is definitely precisely the same as the biblical narrative. If we look closer the model reveals some discrepancies. The more serious discrepancy is the biblical text presented that the whole land was not conquered at once. In Joshua 13:1-6 the Lord said to Joshua: “You are old and advanced in years and very much of the land still remains to be possessed”. When the Lord said that Joshua was too old suggested that a very long time was necessary for warfare. In later chapters we read that other non-Hebrew groups also continued to stay in the land. Some were Jebusites and other were Canaanites. In the book of Judged a similar picture is shown. Definitely not all the land were taken and not all the people were killed. There are also some historical problems. Some historians dreamed of rebuilding David’s empire. They were hoping that King Josiah would do it for them, however, these lands did not come under Israelite control until years later. Even though some schools of archaeology hold that the Bible has little historical relevance, they must still use the Bible to negate it!

The Peaceful Infiltration based its model on the romanticism of the Bedouin desert tribes. The Peasant Revolt is not describing exactly how and why Yahwism would have come into the mix at all. It must have been the fact that God gave them the Promised land, the divine command to go into the land and the freedom to escape from Egypt. They didn’t know where the idea of Yahweh came from but this new religion gave them freedom. The Symbiotic Theory speaks about the Exodus narrative and its paradigm of God’s deliverance and its repeated reiteration throughout the pages of the Hebrew Bible. The Eclectic Theory is probably the most relevant and blends the four theories in degrees (Kurinsky, nd).

The Book of Joshua continues where Deuteronomy ended. Examine Joshua’s reflection of the concepts listed below. Provide a brief description of each. Relate your discussion of each term to information from the Pentateuch.

Promise of the land

There would never be another leader quite like Moses. He had led the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt to the very borders of the Promised Land of Canaan. Joshua, who had been Moses’ right-hand man, was God’s choice to carry on where Moses left off. As Joshua faced the task God made him a special promise. These were strong words of encouragement and Joshua needed them. Canaan, the land promised by God to Abraham’s descendants, was not lying empty and waiting for the people of Israel. It was occupied by a collection of different tribes settled into city-states, built thick on the plains and along the route from Egypt to Syria and Mesopotamia. If the Israelites were to inhabit the land they must fight for their territory and displace people already there (Kurinsky, nd).

Circumcision

The covenant of circumcision operates on the principle of the spiritual union of the household in its head. The covenant was between God and His people, the Israelites. Abraham, Ishmael and all the men were circumcised with him. Those who thus became members of the covenant were expected to show it outwardly by obedience to God’s law. It is the costly demand which God takes of those whom He calls to Himself and marks with the sign of His covenant (Kurinsky, nd).

Passover

In Christian thought, as in Judaism, the Passover, the Feast of Unleavened Bread and the dedication of the first-born have been traditionally regarded as closely connected events of the historic times. By selecting the Passover lambs (which could vary between twelve and twenty-four months) they had made their first response of faith to God. Passover was the annual festival that celebrated their deliverance by God from slavery in Egypt (Exodus 12:2-3) Kurinsky, nd).

Manna

A substance which was the Israelites’ chief food during their forty years’ journey in the wilderness. When Israel grumbled at the lack of food in the wilderness of sin, God gave them bread from heaven. The manna was used by God to teach lessons for spiritual instruction as well as physical sustenance. Israel was told that with the failure of other food, His provision of manna was to make known that man need not live from bread alone, but by the Word of God. God used the provision of manna on six days and not the seventh to teach Israel obedience and convicted them of disobedience. Jesus Christ uses the manna, the God-given bread from heaven, as a type of Himself, the true bread of life (Kurinsky, nd).

From the Pentateuch

Modern scholars add to the five books of the Pentateuch the book of Joshua, because of the content and still more, the literary structure. The book of Joshua shows that it is intimately connected with the Pentateuch and describes the final stage in the history of the Hebrew nation. It has become customary to speak of the first six books of the Old Testament. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy and Joshua as the Hexateuch, that is, the six-roll book. The justification for this arrangement may be seen, for example, from this very simple consideration that the divine promise that the descendants of Abraham should occupy Canaan, is shown in the book of Joshua. Some would argue the book of Joshua is the final book of a Hexateuch and that we should name it the Hexateuch rather than the Pentateuch. Joshua does record the taking of Canaan which fulfills the promise to Abraham. While Joshua is considered part of the narrative of the Pentateuch, the book was not considered to be part of that part of the instruction. Perhaps the Pentateuch was designed to end without promises having come true so that all people can learn to obey God in faith. God’s commission to Joshua was to lead the people. Joshua is shown to be similar to Moses and God used Joshua to make the promises come true. During their preparation for battle, three events occurred:

The men were circumcised, Israel celebrated the Passover and Joshua encountered the heavenly army of God (Hirsch, 2002).

CONCLUSION

Joshua really wanted to know God and showed an earnest desire to know the will of Christ and a cheerful readiness to do it. We must all fight under Christ’s banner and we will conquer by His presence and assistance.

Bibliography
GOTQUESTIONS.ORG. 2002. Book of Joshua. Viewed 13/03/2010. http://www.gotquestions.org/Book-of-Joshua.html.
BRATCHER D. 2008. History and Theology in Joshua and Judges. Viewed 13/03/2010. http://www.crivoice.org/conquest.html.
KURINSKY S. n.d. The Birth of the Israelite Nation Part I – Settlement in Canaan. Viewed 13/03/2010. http://www.hebrewhistory.info/factpapers/fp039-1_israel.htm.
HIRSCH E.G. 2002. Book of Joshua. Viewed 14/03/2010. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=545&letter=J&search=joshua.
ASSIGNMENT 3
INTRODUCTION

The Israelites began a series of cycles of sinning, worshipping idols, being punished, crying out for help, being rescued by a judge sent from God, obeying God for a while then falling back into idoltary.

Discuss the theological message and aim of the book of Judges, paying special attention to these two key passages:

Judges 2:11-23

Real Heroes are hard to find these days. Modern research and the media have made the weaknesses of our leaders very apparent. The music, movie and sports industries produce a stream of stars who shoot to the top and then quickly fade from view. Judges is a book about heroes, 12 men and women who delivered Israel from its oppressors. These judges were not perfect, in fact, they included an assassin, a sexually man and a person who broke all the laws of hospitality. In spite of all their shortcomings, they were submissive to God and God used them. Baal was the god of the storm and rains and therefore he was thought to control vegetation and agriculture. Ashtoreth was the mother goddess of love, war and fertility. Temple prostitution and child sacrifice were a part of the worship of these Canaanite idols. God was angry with Israel and he allowed them to be punished by their enemies. Anger, in itself, is not sin. God’s anger was the reaction of His holy nature to sin. One side of God’s nature is his anger against sin, the other side is his love and mercy towards sinners. God often saved His hardest criticism and punishment for those who worshipped idols. Why were idols so bad in God’s sight? To worship an idol violated the first two of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:3-6). The Canaanites had gods for almost every season, activity or place. To them, the Lord was just another god to add to their collection of gods. Israel, by contrast, was to worship only the Lord. Despite Israel’s disobedience, God showed His great mercy by raising up judges to save the people from their oppressors. Mercy has been defined as not giving a person what he or she deserves. This is exactly what God did for Israel and what he does for us. Our disobedience demands judgement (Mangano, 2005).

Judges 21:25 (see also 17:6, 18:1, 19:1)

Throughout this period of history Israel went through seven cycles of:

Rebelling against God.
Being overrun by enemy nations.
Being delivered by a God-fearing judge.
Remaining loyal to God under that judge.
Forgetting God when the judge died.

In our lives we tend to follow the same cycle, remaining loyal to God as long as we are near those who are devoted to Him. When we are on our own, the pressure to be drawn away from God increases. Determine to be faithful to God despite the difficult situations you encounter. Why would the people of Israel turn away so quickly from their faith in God? Simply, the Canaanite religion appeared more attractive to the sensual nature and offered more short-range benefits. One of its most attractive features was that people could remain selfish and yet fulfill their religious requirements. They could do almost anything they wished and still be obeying at least one of the many Canaanite gods. Today, as in Micah’s day, everyone seems to put his or her own interests first. The people of Micah’s time replaced the true worship of God with a homemade version of worship. The Danites had been assigned enough land to meet their needs. However, because they failed to trust God to help them conquest their territory, the Amorites forced them into the mountains and wouldn’t let them settle in the plains. Rather than to fight for their territory, they preferred to look for new land in the north.

Having concubines was an accepted part of Israelite society, although this is not what God intended. A concubine had most of the duties but also some of the priviledges of a wife. Although she was legally attached to one man, she and her children usually did not have the inheritance rights of a legal wife and legitimate children (Mangano, 2005).

CONCLUSION

During the time of the judges, the people of Israel experienced trouble because everyone became his own authority and acted on his own opinions of right and wrong. Let us submit all our plans, goals and desires to God.

Bibliography
MANGANO M. 2005. Old Testament Introduction. College Press NIV Commentary, Joplin: College Press.
ASSIGNMENT 4
INTRODUCTION

The religious truths found in the book of Ruth relate more to practical life than to abstract theology. In this book there is a need to be loyal, loving and have kindness to see the value of persons and the need to understand one another. The book of Ruth tells us that no matter how bad things are, goodness can really exist if we are willing to make the effort.

Explain the following concepts from Ruth’s theological standpoint. Refer to other passages of Scripture as well.

Lovingkindness

“Lovingkindness”, a translation of the Hebrew word, is an expression which denotes in a deep and profound way a loyal relationship and a desire to do good for the other person, comes into view quite early in Ruth. It is the Hebrew word used in Ruth 1:8 to express the true, caring concern that Ruth and her sister-in-law Orpah had for their husbands. Naomi’s wish is that the Lord might show similar kindness to them, even if she herself, because of the situation in which she has found herself, is unable to be good toward them as they deserve. Ruth’s genuine and deep love for Naomi is also expressed in the oath that she makes to Naomi, sealing it by calling upon the Lord’s name. As the story continues, Boaz describes Ruth’s deeds as “goodness” and “lovingkindness”. The question of reward may be raised here and it is important to note that the Book of Ruth pictures Ruth as acting from a pure lovingkindness toward Naomi, for there was definitely no reward in sight (a very significant theme since the narrative time is within the time of the “judges”). However, in the progress of the Narrative, the author does make it clear that the kind deeds of human beings form the basis of their supplication to the Lord to bestow His blessings. The ultimate in “lovingkindness” is the lovingkindness of the Lord Himself. As the story builds toward its chiastic apex, we find that Ruth “happens” to glean in the fields of Boaz; and when receiving this news, Naomi, in her expression of praise to God, declares, “Blessed be he of the Lord, who has not left off His lovingkindness to the living and to the dead” Very closely related to the “lovingkindness” of the Lord is His manifest providence for the family of Elimelech, Naomi and Ruth is the concept of redemption (In the Beginning, nd).

Kinsman redeemer

The book of Ruth shows that the custom extended farther than the husband’s brother. Here an unnamed kinsman has the primary duty and only when he refuses does Boaz marry Ruth. Israel was originally tribal in nature and the idea was never entirely lost. Many of her family relationships are to be understood in terms of tribal customs known all over the world. Kinship consisted basically in the possession of a common blood and was strongest nearest to its origin in the father’s house, but it was not lost in the further reaches of family relationship. At the head of the family stood the father and the father founded a father’s house, which was the smallest unit of a tribe. The strong cohesion of the family extended upwards from the father to the sons and daughters. Hence the term family could mean a father’s house. Sometimes the whole of Israel was called a family. The word brother also connected various things. In its simplest meaning it referred to those who had common parents. In polygamous Israel there were many brothers who had only a common father. These too were brothers, though the brotherhood was not the same as that of men who had a common mother. Wherever there was a family, there were brothers, for all were bearers of kinship. There were limits to the closeness of relationship permitted when a man came to seek a wife. She had to be someone of the same flesh and blood. She could not be of such close relationship as a sister, mother or child’s daughter. The forbidden areas were there. There were significant obligations laid on kinsmen. Since a woman, married to a man, would normally have the priviledge of bearing his son and heir, in the case of the untimely death of the husband without a son, the law of levirate marriage came into force. Then in the matter of inheritance, a man’s property was normally passed on to his son or sons. Failing these, it went to his daughters and then in order to his brethren, to his father’s brethren and finally to his kinsman who was nearest to him (Pounds, 2008).

Foreigner

The story of Ruth and Naomi is the story of all generations. As a Jewish woman, Naomi enjoyed many blessings because she was familiar with the Law and with some prophecies. She had heard about salvation and about the dealings of God with her fathers. In time of suffering, she fled from Judea, as though fleeing from Christ (who came from the tribe of Judah) to live an easy life in Moab. This is similar to a soul that tests the grace of God but denies Him in time of trial and runs back to the world seeking satisfaction. Just as there is a Naomi in every generation, there is also a Ruth. Ruth grew up in Moab (the house of her pagan father), but has heard of the Living God. She went out by faith to Bethlehem to meet the Incarnate Word of God and to find in Him her rest and satisfaction. The Lord Jesus Christ came “for the fall and rising of many” (Luke 4:34). Naomi fell because she scorned the grace of God while Ruth, the Moabitess, rose by her living faith in Him. The genealogy of Christ mentions her name (Matt 1:5) which reveals to us that, although she was a gentile, her blood ran in the veins of the Saviour of the world. As for Ruth, she fled from Moab to Canaan worshiping the true God and granting all believers the beginning of the royal lineage. Ruth, the foreigner, took permission from her mother-in-law to go and gather the fallen heads of grain after the reapers. She was serious about that, not taking much rest. Ruth representing the Gentiles and she went out to gather the grain heads that the farmers had laboured on. As Ruth went to Boaz’s field, he had a conversation with her that entailed:

Calling the foreigner his daughter and enjoying son ship (adoption to God).
Asking her to stay close to his maidens, to stay with Christ and His saints.
To keep her eyes on the field like it was her own.
To drink from the vessels with the young men as to drink from the springs of the Holy Spirit through the Church (Saint-Mary, nd).
Compare the attitude towards foreigners in the book of Ruth to that of either Judges or Joshua.

After the death of Joshua there followed the period of disorganisation, tribal discord and defeat, which is described in the book of Judges. The people cried out to the Lord and He raised up Judges who saved them. It is clear that this imparts a new meaning into the word “judge”, namely that of a leader in battle and a ruler in peace. We may see in them a type of a Christ, who came to be our Saviour. For a few years the tribes of Judah and Simeon advanced devotedly south to the conquest of Bezek, Jerusalem and Hebron. The Joseph tribes likewise captured Bethel, but then came failure. Israel ceased to eradicate the Canaanites, no more cities were taken and the tribe of Dan actually suffered eviction from its teritory. Such tolerance of evil started the extended period of chastening that followed. The people of Israel suffered under constant temptation to adopt the fertility rites of their Canaanite neighbours. Yahweh had indeed helped them in the wilderness, but Baal seemed better able to make the crops grow. Even foreign oppression served as a medium of divine grace for Israel’s edification. The people were more corrupt than their father’s.

In stark contrast to Judges, the book of Ruth shows a family tree for the greatest of the kings of Hebrew history, David, because this was omitted from the books of Samuel. It was a political pamphlet,

Outline On Galileo Galilei

Thesis statement main argument The astronomer Galileo Galilei contributed to the field of astronomy majorly by observing the sky with a telescope he had built, observations which resulted in his discovery of many astronomical phenomena further proving that the Earth was not the center of the solar system.

Statement of purpose (scope of the essay): Following a brief biography of Galileo Galilei, this paper will determine the state of the scientific knowledge prior to Galileo’s astronomical discoveries, explain what Galileo’s contribution to astronomy was, and discuss how his findings subsequently changed humanity’s conception of the universe.

Body

Topic sentence of paragraph 1: Besides being known as a very influential astronomer, Galileo Galilei was also known for being an Italian scientist and philosopher.

Birth date: February 15, 1564; Place of birth: Pisa, Italy. (“Galileo Biography,” 2013)

Death date: January 8, 1642; Place of death: Arcetri, Italy. When he died, he was blind and very ill, and was under house arrest for heresy. (“Galileo Biography,” 2013)

Galileo first started in a monastery school because he wanted to become a monk, but he eventually left the monastery and attended the University of Pisa to study medicine, like his father wished. However, he never completed his medicine degree and instead found an interest in mathematics and philosophy. (Bellis, 2013; “Galileo Galilei,” 2013)

Galileo taught for three years at the University of Pisa, but transferred to the University of Padua when his three-year contract at Pisa ended. (Bellis, 2013)

In 1609, Galileo heard rumours of a spyglass having been created by a Dutch spectacle-maker. Galilei decided to create his own spyglass, later renamed a telescope, and eventually made it more powerful than the Dutch spyglass. One night, he pointed his telescope towards the sky and his astronomical discoveries began then. (Bellis, 2013)

Topic sentence of paragraph 2: Prior to Galileo’s astronomical contribution, the Catholic Church and the Bible were the principal sources of explanation for most of the phenomena that occurred on Earth and in space.

In that time period, the geocentric model, suggested by Claudius Ptolemy at the beginning of the 2nd century A.D., argued that the Earth was in the center of the solar system and that the other planets and the Sun revolved around it. This model was widely accepted and encouraged by the Catholic Church. (Moche, 2009; Redd, 2013)

However, a more recent model had been brought forward by Nicholaus Copernicus, in 1543. This model was called the heliocentric model and declared that the Earth was not in the center of the solar system, but rather that this place was occupied by the Sun and that all the planets, including the Earth, rotated around the Sun. (Moche, 2009; Redd, 2013)

Galileo Galilei supported the Copernican theory (“Galileo Biography,” 2013), but this theory was considered against the teachings of the Church. As a result, Copernicus’ writings were banned by the Church. (Machamer, 2009; Moche, 2009)

Topic sentence for paragraph 3: Galileo Galilei made more than one contribution to the field of astronomy by observing the sky with his telescope, but his major discoveries were the first moons of Jupiter and the phases of Venus.

His two major discoveries provided proof that the heliocentric model, introduced by Copernicus, was truly the one that was representative of the solar system. (Moche, 2009; Weisstein, 2007)

The moons of Jupiter (*the names of those moons will be included in the final essay*) that Galileo observed rejected the geocentric model’s argument against the Copernican theory. This argument stated that if the Sun was the center of the solar system, Earth would lose its moon because it circulated around the Sun; Earth could only keep its moon if it was in the center. However, with the moons of Jupiter (later named the Galilean moons in honour of Galileo) rotating around Jupiter, the scientist community could only face the fact that a planet could keep moons, even though it was not in the center of the solar system. (Moche, 2009; “Galileo Biography,” 2013)

The phases of Venus further encouraged the heliocentric model. The phases of Venus indicated that Venus must circle the Sun for its phases to be visible from Earth, just like the phases of the moon were. In the geocentric model, Venus would show no phases and would always be a crescent shape because the Sun would not be in the center of its orbit. (Moche, 2009; “Galileo Biography,” 2013)

Topic sentence of paragraph 4: Although Galileo’s observations and discoveries were not first accepted by the religious community, evidence of Galileo’s findings started to circulate and the Church was eventually forced to admit that Galileo had been right. (“Galileo Biography,” 2013; Bellis, 2013)

Galileo had already published multiple books (*the names and dates will be included in the final essay*) prior to being charged of heresy by the Church and placed under house arrest. (“Galileo Biography,” 2013; Bellis, 2013)

While being under house arrest, Galileo continued to write and publish books (“Galileo Biography, 2013; Bellis, 2013), although he was becoming blind from having stared too much at the Sun with his telescope for another of his astronomical discoveries. (“Our solar system,” 2011)

In 1758, the Church was forced to face the truth and lifted the ban on most of the books that supported the Copernican theory and the heliocentric model. In 1835, it abandoned its opposition against this model completely. (“Galileo Biography, 2013)

In the 20th century, some popes acknowledged the revolutionary work done by Galileo. In 1992, Pope John Paul II publicly apologized and showed regret on how the case of Galileo had been delt with. (“Galileo Biography,” 2013; Bellis, 2013)

Conclusion

Restatement of thesis statement: Galileo Galilei significantly contributed to astronomy primarily by observing the sky with a telescope, which resulted in his discovery of many astronomical phenomena proving that the Earth was not the center of the solar system.

Summary of main points: Prior to Galileo’s findings, the Church believed in the geocentric model, introduced by Claudius Ptolemy. However, Galileo’s discovery of the moons of Jupiter and the phases of Venus instead supported the heliocentric model, suggested by Nicolaus Copernicus. Galileo’s contribution took a long time to be recognized, but it allowed for a better understanding of the way the solar system functions.

Other discoveries based on the astronomer’s contribution: Galileo’s use of a telescope to observe the sky also allowed him to observe the Sun’s dark patches known as sunspots, part of the star cloud of the Milky Way, the rings of Saturn that he identified as “ears,” and the Moon’s crater-covered surface. (Moche, 2009) There is also recent evidence that Galileo may have discovered Neptune nearly two centuries before it was official found by satellites and modern telescopes. (Redd, 2013)

APA References

Bellis, M. (2013). Galileo Galilei. About.com Inventors. Retrieved April 13, 2013, from http://inventors.about.com/od/gstartinventors/a/Galileo_Galilei.htm

Famous Astronomers and Astrophysicists (2012). Retrieved April 13, 2013, from http://cnr2.kent.edu/~manley/astronomers.html

“Galileo Biography.” (2013). Biography.com. Retrieved April 13, 2013, from http://www.biography.com/people/galileo-9305220

“Galileo Galilei (1564-1642).” (2013). BBC History. Retrieved April 13, 2013, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/galilei_galileo.shtml

Machamer, P. (2009). Galileo Galilei. Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Retrieved April 13, 2013, from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/galileo/

Moche, D. L. (2009). Astronomy: A self-teaching guide (7th edition). [ebrary version]. Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com/lib/champlaincollege/docDetail.action?docID=10342867

“Our solar system: Galileo’s observations of the Moon, Jupiter, Venus and the Sun.” (2011, February 10). Solar System Exploration – NASA. Retrieved April 13, 2013, from http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/scitech/display.cfm?ST_ID=2259

Redd, N. T. (2013). Galileo Galilei: Biography, inventions & other facts. Space.com. Retrieved April 13, 2013, from http://www.space.com/15589-galileo-galilei.html

Weisstein, E. W. (2007). Galileo Galilei (1564-1642). Scienceworld.wolfram.com. Retrieved April 13, 2013, from http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Galileo.html

*** Most of these sources are preliminary sources (i.e.: websites). For the final essay, I will find books or other academic sources to replace them, particularly for Galileo’s biography.***

Our Religion Does Not Define Us Theology Religion Essay

Our religion does not define who we are regardless to popular belief. Our religion is only a part of who we are if we let it. Not everyone that practices a religion knows everything about it or even accepts it. Some people have a religion just because everyone else has one, and most people have a religion because they were brought up in it.

The human mind is easily convinced to do and believe things when it is young and fragile. As a child, you listen to your parents, obey them and learn from most things they do “we stand on the shoulders of others to get to the next level” (Fraklin). Most people choose their religion based on the religion their parents practiced. Our religion could affects many aspects of our lives depending on how deeply we believe in it; this includes the way we see others, the way we act, and the way we influence those around us. Our faith in our religion can always be seen in the way we live our lives, nevertheless it does not define who we are. As humans, we learn everyday of our lives, introducing us to new things which indirectly change our point of view on certain things in our lives; we begin to see things in different ways and accept something’s we thought was wrong but some people still somehow let their religion come in the way of how they see these things, even though they have a different opinion on some matters they feel like they are obligated to believe whatever their religion asks of them. For those who accept this changes, it could bring about a big difference in their life. I believe no one can tell what religion is right or wrong because no one knows everything. Most people like to be right in most situations, so whenever they are asked what religion is right, it is quite normal for them to say theirs’ is right. Not everyone tries to realize that the same way they think their religion is right could be the way another person sees his as the right one “The easy confidence with which I know another man’s religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also” (Mark Twain). With what we know, religion might not even exist, which is why I believe that everyone should respect each other’s point of view on any situation “God has no religion” (Mahatma Gandhi), personally I think all that matters to God, if there is one, is the good and bad that people do. It is easy to think someone is wrong, when you think you are right even though you might be wrong. An example is the apology of Socrates. Socrates was a simple minded person who never thought himself to be more than he was. The fact that he acknowledge his ignorance makes him a wise person (Plato), most believers are ignorant of other religions, yet they believe their religion is the right one while others are not even though they do not know much of the one they criticize.

Children learn most things from their parents and those around them. Growing up, children are taught what is right and wrong by their parent or guardian, and that helps them in deciding for themselves when they are adults. It is very common for a parent to take their children to where they worship, and as they grows they learn from their parent’s faith, making them believe in their religion. The reason why people rarely change their religion is because they grow in it and that makes it more of a lifestyle to them rather than something they learned. Most religions like Christianity has been made in a way that you are not allowed to question some of the things you might not agree with. Some of the stories and rules we learn from our religious books sometimes seem wrong and sometimes we might find some not quite sensible, but we have also learned that we have no right to question the things that happened in them, we just have accept it. The story of Job is one that should bring every Christian to question their God as to why he made a man go through so much, just to test his fate. Job was a faithful

Christian, but he was tested by Satan with the permission of God; he lost everything he had and was terribly ill, with no help from anyone (The story of Job). Everything that happened to him is something no Christian would accept from any other person, it would not matter what reason they might have to do that, it will be considered bad, but when it is God that did this to a man just to test his faith, they are not allowed to question him. Even though Job went through a lot of things, he never questioned God. When believers feel angry towards God, most of them think it is a wrong feeling and they are not able to express themselves to other believers because they feel judged, guilty, and ashamed (julie and joshua).

Every religious belief has its good and bad parts, some that we agree on and others that we don’t, but the fear that has been put into us from when we were young is what makes us accept it even though we have other opinions. The fear of a god could make anyone do anything. The story of how Abraham is a great example. Abraham was willing to kill his only child because God asked him to do so, even though that was his only child and he knew he will never have any other child, he was still willing to kill his child “And it happened after these things that God tested Abraham. And He said to him, Abraham! and he said, here I am. And he said, take, pray, your son, your only one, whom you love, Isaac, and go forth to the land of Moriah and offer him up as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I shall say to you” (Abraham and Isaac). Despite how deep our faith might be and how well we understand a religion, we still put in our own interpretation to it just to make it suit us. Lailak asked “are we supposed to interpret the Bible in our own way?. Lone77star answered that we all have our own path to choose, he explained by saying he had his own interpretation and would not want anyone to follow it blindly” (hubpages). Not every Christian that reads the Bible understands it, and not every Muslim that reads the Quran understands it. This is the reason there are pastors and Islamic leaders teaching their religion. Even though this people are seen as ‘the holy ones’, they also interpret the religion in a way they see fit. Religion is not just one thing, it is a way of life in which people design for themselves; everyone has their own unique religion because we all see and interpret things in different ways. Some people believe they are Christians because they go to the church. This is simply their interpretation of being a Christian “Anyone who thinks sitting in a church can make you a Christian must also think sitting in a garage can make you a car (Garrison. goodread)”, it does not matter how much a person attends a church or pray, it is their heart towards things that defines them. The actions they take and how they deal with things. The most annoying people are those who try to get people into their religion; this is basically asking others to think like they do and see things from their own perspective.

Christians believe that God created humans ” And God created the human in his image, in the image of God He created him, male and female He created them” (Genesis). Christians accept and believe this theory. In some way this affects their way of living because they think they owe their existence to someone. They live most of their life trying to please someone they have never seen “Religion has convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky. Who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn’t want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer, and suffer, and burn, and scream, until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you. He loves you and he needs money” (George Carlin).

The misinterpretation of religion could lead to disagreement, conflicts and even death. When people have different interpretation of what their religion says, it is very easy for them to disagree on most things. Some Muslims have been killing for years, and they believe what they are doing is right. They believe they can do anything as long as they ask for forgiveness. Religion has caused most of the wars the world has ever known. God says we should love our neighbors has we love ourselves. Anyone could interpret this the way they want, some would say it means to love your family, and others might think it means to love everyone “love your fellow as yourself” (livneh). Some people believe in God just so they have someone to blame when they are in trouble “When people experience traumatic or highly stressful events, a common response is to blame God” (Julie and Joshua), to these people God is just a figure they run to whenever they are in trouble or need someone to blame for their own faults and weaknesses. They do not fully understand the concept of God, but they feel that they need him.

Our religion does not define who we are, what makes us who we are is what we accept our religion to be, our interpretation of it, and the choices we make through them. The Bible teaches about loving one another “love your fellow as yourself” (livneh), this is hard sometimes because some people are just hard to love. No matter how you try to get close to them, they still somehow do not accept you. Some Christians are this way, even though the bible says they should love one another. The bible also mentions not having hate towards a fellow human “you shall not hate your kinsman in your heart” (livneh), yet there are several Christians who have hate in their heart towards someone in their family, and people in the church. Even though the law of the bible ask them to love and never hate, this does not define them.

Theology Essays | Old Testament

Did the prophets of the Old Testament predict the future, or did they speak to change to way people were behaving? In essence, were they “foretellers” or “forthtellers”?

Introduction
The Hebrew Bible, or Old Testament recounts the history, and specifically the religious history of Israel, from the creation to a few hundred years before the birth of Christ. The Old Testament tells the story of the people of Israel and their relationship with God or Yaweh. It tells how Israel sinned against the God who had given her all that she had because the people were unable to keep to their covenant with God (Lemche, 1995). Within the Old Testament the Prophetic writings either address the specific historical conditions in Israel or they refer to social conditions. This paper will examine the books of the Prophet Amos and of the Prophet Isaiah to assess whether the prophets were foretellers or forthtellers. The paper will begin with a brief sketch of the historical background followed by an explanation of terms with reference to Amos and Isaiah.

Prophets, Foretellers and Forthtellers.
The writings attributed to the prophets Amos and Isaiah date from around the eighth and seventh centuries BCE. They are two of the later prophets and they spoke against the backdrop of the changing political scene which resulted in the exile of Israel, the northern kingdom, after the capture of Samaria in 721 BCE and then to the exile of Judah after the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BCE (Clines, 1990). The central message of these prophets is to do with the exile, either warning of its coming or reflecting on its meaning and calling for the people to repent in order that God might change his mind. Scholars are of the opinion that the books have been subject to later editing, what is known as redaction, the imposition of something that happened in a different context. It is for this reason that the texts, while having a historical backdrop, and giving some historical facts, should not be regarded as a straightforward historical record. Rather they are a record of God’s dealing with his people.

Unlike earlier prophets, these writings say far less about the prophets and more about the words of God that they give and receive (Whybray, 1993). The word prophet is generally accepted to have come from the Hebrew word ‘nabi’ which means to speak or to utter words. The biblical usage of the word has meant that it has come to be associated with someone who is the interpreter and mouthpiece of God.This is made clear in the opening verses of the Book of Amos, a shepherd of Tekoa.

The Lord roars from Zion, and utters his voice from Jerusalem; the pastures of the shepherds wither, and the top of Carmel dries up (Amos. 1:2 NRSV).

In the above verse Amos describes the way in which the Lord speaks through him and verse three then begins with Thus says the Lord. First Isaiah begins in much the same way:

Hear o heavens, and listen, o earth; for the Lord has spoken: I reared children and brought them up, but they have rebelled against me (Isaiah, 1:2 NRSV).

Here Isaiah is literally proclaiming himself as the mouth piece of the Lord. The word ‘nabi’ expresses a function, it is what the prophet does, other words are used to denote what the prophet is, an oracle or a man of vision. Isaiah is known as a major prophhet because of the length of the book and Amos a minor prophet because his writings are much shorter. The prophets then, were divine messengers who addressed the people of God. In most cases the messages were not asked for Amos chapter seven tells how God put Amos where he was:

..and the Lord took me from following the flock, and the Lord said to me, “Go, prophesy to my people Israel (Amos, 7:15).

The book of Amos begins by introducing the prophet as a shepherd and then goes straight into the message from God as in verse two. Isaiah also begins by introducing the prophet and then proceeds to God’s word to the people. Some prophets were sons of prophets and some belonged to a community of prophets under a leader, some were solitary like Amos who did not really count himself a prophet,

Then Amos answered Amaziah, “I am no prophet, nor a prophet’s son…and the Lord took me from following the flock, and the Lord said to me, “Go, prophesy to my people Israel (Amos, 7:14-15).

Both Amos and Isaiah spoke out against social injustice and the ways in which the rich people cheated those who were poor. The prophet Amos spoke out against the idolatry of the people, who still strayed after the golden calf idol which had been set up by King Jeroboam the first when the nation was first split into two kingdoms. Amos spoke in the time of Jeroboam the second when Israel was enjoying a time of prosperity (Clines, 1990). Amos spoke out against the religious and social corruption that he saw around him. He spoke of Israel’s guilt and of their forthcoming punishment in chapter three:

Hear this that the Lord has spoken against you, O people of Israel against the whole family that I brought up out of the land of Egypt: You only have I known, of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities (Amos 3:1-2).

Isaiah wrote in the eighth century BCE, almost two hundred years before the fall of Jerusalem to Babylon (Clines, 1990). He spoke to the people of Judah, and warned them of God’s displeasure. They had become complacent and tolerated all kinds of social injustice. When Isaiah wrote the people were reaching the point of no return because of their rejection of God and their constant refusal to give up their corrupt religious practices and their oppression of the poor. Thus, in the opening chapter Isaiah tells the people:

When you stretch out your hands, I will turn my eyes from you; even though you make many prayers I shall not listen; your hands are full of blood. Learn to do good; seek justice, rescue the oppressed, defend the orphan, plead for the widow (Isaiah, 1:15 and 17).

The words of the prophets can be read at a number of levels. They were forthtellers in that they spoke out against injustice and called the people back to God. They were foretellers in that they warned of the judgement and punishment to come if the people continued in their idolatry and their unjust practices. The most famous verse of this nature is to be found in the book of the prophet Amos chapter five:

Take away from me the noise of your songs; I will not listen to the melody of your harps. But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream (Amos 5:23-24).

Amos is speaking out against the social injustices of his time and saying that God’s command was for the people to be just and righteous. It was a verse used by Martin Luther King when he spoke out against the racial injustices in America and headed Black people’s struggle for civil rights in the 1960s. Isaiah also spoke out against injustice and makes use of the image of a vineyard where grapes are pressed, the injustices committed against the people, are, in God’s eyes, akin to pressing their faces in the same way that grapes are pressed. Isaiah says in chapter 5:

But the Lord of Hosts is exalted by justice, and the holy God shows himself holy by righteiousness (Isaiah, 5:16)

In this way the prophets were forthtellers because the word means to speak forth, or speak out against the wrong that people were doing and to tell them that what God required of them was to act justly and in this way they could achieve righteousness. The people had forsaken God’s Holy Law which had been given to them by Moses and the prophets were called by God to draw the people back. When they were not being idolatrous the people were indulging in empty religious ritual. Amos tells the people how displeased God is with their religious ‘nodding’:

I hate, I despise your festivals, and I taken no delight in your solemn assemblies. Even though you offer me your burnt offerings and grain offerings, I will not accept them (Amos, 5:21-22).

Amos speaks out against the people’s religious practices and tells them it is not religion that God wants from them, but justice. Whenever the prophet speaks forth and tells of God’s displeasure he also later reminds them of God’s loving and forgiving nature. Although the prophets forthtell God’s judgement on an unrepentant people, they also fortell, or speak of God’s future blessings if the people mend their ways. Even though God has spoken to the noble women, calling them the cows of Bashan (Amos, 4:1) he provides a way of escape in chapter five.

Seek the Lord and live, or he will break out against the house of Joseph like fire, and it will devour Bethel, with no-one to quench it (Amos, 5:6).

This is very similar to the message in the first chapter of Isaiah where God speaks against the people. Isaiah forthtells God’s displeasure but then says that if they seek God and do justice then God will repent himself of the punishment he is calling down. Clines (1990) maintains that the major job of the prophets was to call the people back to obedience. To do this they spoke out against injustice and corrupt or empty religious practice and warned of the judgement of God if they continued living life that way. Amos particularly has often been called the prophet of doom because of his warnings about the destruction of the way of life of the people and yet he also gives a message of hope. The prophets therefore forthtell in that they speak directly to the situation as they believe God has revealed to them, but they also foretell in that they speak of impending judgement if the people do not return to obedience. The prophets felt that God alone directed the course of history, and that God would punish the people who did not worship him in the right way. Worship applied to all areas of life, from formal worship to social justice and right relationships. The prophets called the people to repentance. Lemche (1995) maintains that the prophets observe what is going on, that society no longer adhered to the laws underlying the world God created. They then forthtell what is wrong and outline what the consequences will be if they continue.

It is not easy to date exactly when or how the prophetic writings were put together, scholars are generally agreed that the book of Amos is the work of one person, either Amos himself or his scribe. The book of Isaiah on the other hand presents more problems, some scholars accept that it is the work of one person, others state that parts of the book describe events that happened long after the prophet’s death and must therefore have been written by a second and even third authors. By and large however these scholars reject the religious belief that God alone directed the course of history and this was perhaps why Isaiah could have been cognisant of future events. Certainly Isaiah lived in turbulent times, Jerusalem was under siege from the Assyrian Sennacherib and Isaiah forthtold God’s wrath over the sins of the people. Assyrian will be the means of God punishing the people, in chapter 10 God speaks of Assyria as:

the rod of my anger-the club in their hands is my fury! Against a godless nation I send him and against the people of my wrath I command him to take spoil, and seize plunder, and to tread them down like the mire of the streets (Isaiah, 10:5-6).

Conclusion
The prophets Amos and Isaiah, forthtold or spoke against the injustices that they saw. They warned the people that if they did not return to the correct form of worship laid out by Moses and reiterated in the book of the prophet Hosea: that knowledge of God was achieved through doing justice and by pleading the cause of the oppressed. The prophets may have foretold some events but what is most important about the prophetic writings is their forthtelling. The prophets spoke out against the social conditions that they observed and the ways in which people dealt with each other. When they dealt unjustly then God did not want their worship because it was empty. Religion only meant something if its effects could be seen in the pursuit of justice and of just dealings with others. The prophets warned the people that God would punish them if they did not heed his call to repent. They did not just foretell doom, God loved the people, he would forgive them if they returned to him, but if they did not then the prophets warned that only a remnant would be saved.

It is not easy always to separate where the prophets may be speaking of future events or whether this has been altered when the books were edited. What is clear is that the prophets were forthtellers in that from their observation of the social conditions they spoke forth what they believed was God’s word to the people.

Bibliography

Clines, D. Fowl, S. and Porter, S eds. 1990 The Bible in Three Dimensions: Essays in Celebration of Forty Years of Biblical Studies in the University of Sheffield Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press
Lemche, N 1995 Ancient Israel: A New History of Israelite Society Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press
Holy Bible 1995 New Revised Standard Version Michigan, Zondervan Publishing House
Whybray, N 1987 The Making of the Pentateuch (JSOT, 53: Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press)
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12477a.htm

Muslim Women Living In A Westernized Society Theology Religion Essay

The following research report was requested and granted by Philip Broster, The Business Communication lecturer at the Tertiary School in Business Administration, for 8 October 2012.

Permission was granted by Philip Broster to conduct research on the debate regarding the wearing of hijab and the western pressures of this felt by Muslim women who study at TSiBA Education.

His specific instructions were to:

Compile a research report based on the previous research proposal to research the debate regarding the hijab and the pressures felt by Muslim women at TSiBA.

Present a literature review as well as findings in a written document and to conclude by identifying a relationship, if any , between the literature and the findings of the research.

The report is to be submitted on the 8 October 2012.

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
Subject of the research

The Debate Regarding the Hijab, Investigating the Pressures Felt by Muslim women living in a Westernized Country: A TSiBA case-study.

Background to the research

Literature on this topic is abundant as research has been conducted globally on the topic of the hijab as to the reasons why women should and should not wear the hijab. The research conducted was made possible through the use of surveys, interviews, questionnaires and observations. Katherine Bullock in particular, a Canadian community activist, author and lecturer did extensive research on the topic of the hijab and published her findings in the form of a book called Rethinking Muslim Women and the Veil which challenges “Historical and Modern Stereotypes”. She has also published articles on Muslim women and the media, and Islam and political theory.

Purposes of the research

The objectives of the study are to examine if the dominant negative Western perception affects the reasons why the Muslim community is divided on the subject of hijab.

This research addresses the concern for a dialogue that could inform westernised societies about the personal reasons why some female Muslim students wear hijab and why others do not. I want my research to be meaningful, relevant to local communities and to open my mind and that of others by being taught through research and personal interviews about the subject.

Scope and limitations

This study was conducted in a very short period of time with a very small sample group as the pool of participants was limited to the Muslim students at TSiBA Education. The data set is meaningful, but not representative of the vast range of Muslims in different contexts. It will however show a diversity of views within a common theology and faith. A more sizable sample within the target group would have provided a larger and more conclusive amount of data. This can have a bias that favours the educated and the youth of Cape Town. Another limitation of my study was that all of the participants belonged to one ethnic group being from the race regarded in South Africa as Coloured. This was due to the fact TSiBA Education is a relatively small university whose Muslim female population is a fraction of the total students of which there were no Muslim women from a different race or culture. The research conducted could have benefitted from a more diverse pool of applicants.

Plan of development

This research report was compiled in the following manner. Firstly I provide my literature review which I put together for the purpose of exploring what has previously been written on the topic so that you and I may learn from it and be aware of it as we go about this research. Secondly I made a survey form of 3 pages long that contained relevant questions which I derived from the process of compiling the literature review. Thirdly, At random I selected 10 Muslim women studying at TSiBA to be my participants and followed through by conducting my survey about each one of them. Lastly, I analyzed the data obtained from the surveys and make this information available to you while also comparing my research findings to the findings derived from my literature review.

METHODOLOGY
Literature review

The first piece of work I did was conducting research on the topic of the hijab in order to compile a literature review. My literature review took a significant amount of time in relation to how long the actual research demanded. Information was abundant regarding the topic of hijab, modernization, the dominant Western perception and the media’s role in the portrayal of Muslim women that I found it particularly challenging to sift out important points from the all information available. My literature review saw two sessions of editing with my Communications lecturer who helped me construct and organized the important information once I identified it.

Participation

The target group for the research was initially 20 South African Muslim women between the ages of 18 and 40. This age group was the target of this study because they were the current generation of TSiBA students and were experiencing modern South Africa in a time when it seemed there was an ever increasing influx of Western culture after Apartheid. The age group is also likely to include married women who might be inclined to think differently about the hijab as their marriage might have changed the way each looks at the hijab. The participants of my research were all female as I had hoped, but unfortunately all of them belonged to one ethnic group being from the race regarded in South Africa as Coloured. There were 2 married women, and 8 unmarried women. 5 of them wore hijab and 5 of them were women who choose not to.

Method of data collection

One method of obtaining data was employed. The research draws on qualitative data from comprehensive surveys conducted on 10 Muslim students regarding hijab. The survey was constructed in a manner that it took students approximately 5 minutes to complete.

After many different drafts of the survey I went to the Tertiary School in Business Administration (TSiBA) Education to distribute the final version. My survey included the opinions of both young women who wear the hijab and those that do not. I did not ask for names in any section of the survey to ensure the anonymity of all my human subjects. In the end I collected 10 surveys in total which was a smaller sample group than I had initially hoped. After gathering the surveys, I analyzed the results manually.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction

The debate regarding the wearing of religious garb in public, specifically coverings worn by Muslim women has increased over the past few years resulting in a lot of controversy among those who agree with the practice and those who do not (iqraonline.net). Hijab is seen all over the world, especially in places with a high concentration of practicing Muslims. The hijab has resulted in severe media disputes and now denotes the difference of cultures. The French, along with the west expected that the hijab would pass away into history as westernization and secularization took root. However, in the Muslim world, especially among the younger generation, a great wave of returning to hijab was spreading through various countries. This current resurgence is an expression of Islamic revival (Nakata, 1994).

The Topic of Hijab External to South Africa
The views of feminists

The Western media and feminists often portray the hijab as a symbol of oppression and slavery of women (www.al-islam.org). A theory of Orientalism has been in existence since 1978 which argues that the Muslim population is deemed backward, uncivilized beings who are outcasts in Western society (Said, 1978). Many feminists, both Western and Islamic argue that the hijab is a symbol of gender oppression and that the Islamic veiling of women is an oppressive practice. Fadel Amara, an Islamic feminist and Muslim female member of French government describes the burqa as a prison and a straightjacket which is not religious but is the symbol of a tyrannical political project for sexual inequality (King, 299.).

Feminists argue that public presence and visibility is important to Western women. This overlaps sexism and racism as well as there are two arguments made by feminists who are divided on the topic of the hijab.

a) The argument of oppression

One argument is for hijab to be banned in public as they encourage the harassment of women who are unveiled and because public presence and visibility represents their struggle for economic independence, sexual agency and political participation. In the Western culture, celebrities are regarded as trend-setters defining what is acceptable. The hijab is therefore also seen as a problem because it poses challenge to the view of unconventional visibility and freedom of self-expression. (www.theage.com). Although it is true that many women do choose to wear the hijab, it is not the case for all women. In many Middle Eastern and North African countries women are forced, persecuted and abused for noncompliance with the hijab. This was demonstrated in Pakistan where an extremist killed a women’s activist and government minister because she refused to wear the hijab. King states, “From Afghanistan to Algeria to Sudan, Pakistan and Iran- women are systematically brutalized and caught in a deadly crossfire between the secular and fundamentalist forces.”

Some Islamic feminists argue that although the statement in the Quran about women covering themselves was not meant to oppress women, the interpretation of those verses by Islamic societies does in fact oppress women. Although it can be argued that the hijab is a symbol of the oppression that occurs against women in Islam, many Islamic women don’t agree. It is true that under some Islamist rule, specifically in some North African countries, Afghanistan, Iran, and Saudi Arabia women are oppressed and forced to wear the hijab, but in an international context, this is the exception to the rule regarding women’s practices of wearing the veil.

Salma Yaqoob, a Muslim woman who chooses to wear the hijab explains the veil is not only an oppressing force in Islamic countries that require the veil, but also in Western countries that ban the veil. Yaqoob adamantly contends that by infringing laws that restricts women’s choice on whether or not to wear the veil, they are also being oppressed. “I am opposed to the Saudi and Iranian governments’ imposition of the veil and that of the Taliban previously. But this is also why I oppose the ban on wearing the hijab. In both cases the woman herself is no longer free to make a choice. In both cases her dignity is violated.” Yaqoob explains that more women are currently banned from wearing the hijab, than are required to wear it.

b) The argument of liberation

It can be argued that rather than oppressing, the hijab is liberating. The second argument made by feminists supports the argument of fundamentalist Islamic leaders who argue that Muslim women have the right to choose to wear or not to wear a hijab as it is part of a Muslim woman’s duty to wear a hijab. These feminists demand that the French ban be withdrawn because they believe the oppressing force behind the veil is when authority figures, both Islamic and Western, take away a woman’s right to choose. They defend the veil as a mark of agency, cultural membership, and defiance. Tayyab Bashart, a feminist scholar and Muslim who teaches in France explains her beliefs “A woman in hijab, who is a functioning member of society, symbolizes an empowered, independent woman, rather than someone who lacks self-determination and is a puppet of society” (Basharat, 2006). The veil itself is just a piece of cloth. Human beings interpret the hijab according to social and religious constructions. Through the Western discussion and banning of the hijab in public schools, the Muslim school girls of France lose their freedom to express their spirituality. The desired effect of the 2004 law is to fight gender oppression and inequality in the public school system, but as a residual effect, it actually diminishes women’s freedoms rather than enhancing them. The ‘law on the headscarf’ supports the oppressing Western discourses about veiled women and attempts to Westernize French Muslim schoolgirls.

Western Governments

In Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Iran, the full covering, more commonly known as the burqa, has been made compulsory upon female citizens. In contrast to this, the unwillingness to understand the religion and culture of Muslims has resulted in traditional clothing such as the burqa and the hijab being banned with the hope of Westernised societies achieving secularism in Islamic countries. Katherine Bullock shines light on the differences in judgment over hijab by having identified themes from her research on women and the religion of Islam. She divides these themes into the descriptions of those who are for and those who are against the hijab. According to Bullock, critics of the veil rely on secular liberal assumptions about society and human nature and therefore the veil is supposed to be and described as a symbol of oppression because it:

Covers up (hides), in the sense of smothering, femininity

Is apparently linked to the essentialized male and female difference (which is taken to mean that by nature, male is superior, female is inferior);

Is linked to a particular view of woman’s place (subjugated in the home);

Is linked to an oppressive (patriarchal) notion of morality and female purity (because of Islam’s

Emphasis on chastity, marriage, and condemnation of pre- and extra-marital sexual relations);

Can be imposed; and

Is linked to a package of oppressions women in Islam face, such as seclusion, polygamy, easy male divorce, unequal inheritance rights.

Western countries has developed this view and disregarded other views of what public visibility may be to different women with differing beliefs. (www.theage.com).An example of this is that France has decided upon the banning of the hijab to be worn in schools. France’s 2004 law, popularly referred to as the ‘law on the headscarf’, reveals the difficulty of respecting conflicting ideas between diverse communities, especially when one community, in this case the Muslims of France, is a minority. According to this law, female students are banned from wearing the hijab as well as all other openly religious symbols in public schools. France bans women from wearing the hijab in public schools because many feminists and lawmakers argue that veiling women serves as an oppressing force, a force that silences women. Alia Al- Sari states in her article “The Racialization of Muslim Veils: A Philosophical Analysis” many feminists see the headscarf “As a symbol of Islamic gender oppression that aˆ¦should be banned from public schools, a space where gender equality is presumed (or desired).” Supporters of the law believe it fights gender oppression and gives equality to women in the school system.

Media attitudes in reporting Islam and hijab

While the media cannot be the only party held accountable or blamed for societal attitudes towards smaller cultures and religions, theses media moguls create “the lens through which reality is perceived” (Bullock & Jafri, 2000). Western media sees itself as a democratic powerhouse and therefore is frequently answerable for legitimising and distributing racism and bias against religious communities such as Muslims (Bullock & Jafri, 2000). The media in Westernised societies portrays Muslims as “tricky, sleazy, sexual and untrustworthy”, as uniformly violent, as oppressors of women, and as members of a global conspiracy (Bullock & Jafri, 2000).

For example, in 1998 a shift was noted regarding the European media’s depiction of women who wear the hijab. Veiled women were no longer portrayed as exotic but instead as a threat to society (Macmaster & Lewis, 1998,). This highlights the contrasting representations of Muslim women as concurrently being oppressed and threatening.

In 2005 Begum argues that these images of Islamic dress were increasingly used in the media as visual shorthand for treacherous extremism, and that Muslims living in Europe were suffering from the consequences of these associations (Begum, 2005). The increase of these media portrayals and political deliberation has segregated the Muslim community and had a further disruptive effect on society and feminism at large. (Begum, 2005)

Since then, the media in France reported on a women who was suspended for wearing a hijab under her hat while working as a meter reader, a fashion show of veiled women that was banned, the hindrance of hijab-wearing mothers from volunteering in schools, the refusal of cafeteria service to a student wearing a hijab and the banning of a witness to a civil service wedding from signing the documentation based on the argument that hijab prevented her from proper identification.

Many authors on this topic dispute that because of the media’s cultural fascination with Muslim women’s dress as symbols of oppression, Muslim women often have to resort to focusing on that facet of their identity as well, even if they would rather discuss something else. These authors state that even cases of responsible journalism have a propensity to devalue Muslim women. This is because Muslim women are primarily depicted as ‘exotic’, victimised, or threatening outcasts rather than your ordinary peaceful next door neighbours. (www.reportingdiversity.org.)

It is evident that the hijab remains a hot topic in Western countries and that the wellbeing and identities of Muslim women in Westernised societies are related to the wearing of the headscarf as a consequence.

Hijab within the Muslim Community

The opinions of Muslim women vary in their decision about whether or not to wear the hijab. The hijab, according to many Muslims, has multiple uses and meanings. The hijab is a symbolic of modesty and morality. According to Islam, the hijab functions as a shield for a woman against the lustful gaze of men. The hijab also serves as a cover to preserve the modesty and piety of the woman, as that is her main role as stated in the Qur’an.

The most basic debate over the hijab is over the requirement of the hijab. This is an issue that is debated by many Muslim scholars. First in order to understand why there is an issue it is important to understand the power of the Quran. The Quran is the word of God brought to humanity by his last messenger the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him). Islam is the religion of total submission to Allah (God the Father) and obedience to Allah. As the Quran is God’s word then it also means total submission and obedience to Quran. The first issue with the requirement of the hijab comes from whether the hijab is in the Quran or not. There are two sides to this argument; there are those who say that the hijab is a requirement because it is in the Quran and those who say that it is not because it is not part of the Quran

Reasons why Muslim Women wear the hijab
The laws of the Qur’an

Amr Khaled’s, a popular Islamic scholar, layman, and highly influential Muslim speaker, represents the school of thought that considers the hijab to be directly in the Quran and thus a requirement for Muslim women. He quotes these Qur’anic verses that make the hijab obligatory to Muslim women. “O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies. That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And – ALLAH – is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (Surah 33: verse 59)”. In this verse women are told to cover their bodies so that they should be known as modest women and are not harassed. According to Amr Khalad’s lecture “Al-Hijab,” the hijab also serves the purpose of forcing men to not sexually objectify women but to see her as a vessel of intelligence and high moral values. Khalad says that the hijab reinforces the fact that Islam has placed the beauty of a female on a higher value in the eyes of men by providing protection of her beauty from uncontrolled lusts and desires, and instead ordering men to respect greater the inner beauty of her soul. Thus, the real value of women is associated with the degree of her modesty and her abidance by it (Khaled “Al-Hijab”). Yaqoob states her personal reasons why she wears the veil, “For me, the wearing of the hijab denotes that as a woman I expect to be treated as an equal in terms of my intellect and personality and my appearance is relevant only to the degree that I want it to be, when I want it to be.”. This is the traditional Islamic rational for the hijab and why it is important in Islam (Khalad “AlHijab”).

A symbol of resistance

A study about hijab in the West also provides another theory that I believe can also be applied in South Africa because it is a country heavily influenced by the West. The idea of the hijab as a symbol of resistance is explored by Tarik Kulenovic but not necessarily one that is strictly political. Tarik Kulenovic’s theory suggests that the hijab in the West is a matter of identity, a physical symbol of a woman’s Muslim identity. This symbol also carries a message of religiosity in a modernizing society which encourages a secular life style and scorns tradition. Kulenovic asserts that “the modern identity of Muslim women, which includes the wearing of the veil, is primarily the identity of resistance to the values that individuals find foreign to them and as such imposed on them” (Kulenovic, page 717). Thus, in modern society, the hijab can be thought of as a means of retaining a religious life style while assimilating to the demands of the modern world. Another reason women choose to wear the hijab is that they find that the hijab serves as an empowering factor.

The Interpretation of the hijab by those who wear it

Katherine Bullock, through her research, provides some reasons why women wear the hijab. The hijab to these wearers:

1. Does not smother femininity;

2. Brings to mind the ‘different-but-equal’ school of thought, but does not put forward essentalized male-female difference;

3. Is linked to a view that does not limit women to the home, but neither does it consider the role of stay-at-home-mother and homemaker oppressive;

4. Is linked to a view of morality that is oppressive only if one considers the prohibition of sexual relations outside marriage wrong;

5. Is part of Islamic law, though a law that ought to be implemented in a very wise and women-friendly manner, and

6. Can and should be treated separately from other issues of women’s rights in Islam.

Spirituality

Some women have a deep spiritual and religious connection to the veil and firmly disagree with the view of it as a sign of oppression. Many Muslim women feel uncomfortable without wearing it because the hijab is deeply-rooted in their personal values and religious tradition. A main reason women choose to wear the hijab, is as expression of spirituality. Bashart states in his book that “Muslim women carry with them their sacred private space into the public space by use of the Hijab”. In this view of the hijab, the veil is not simply an article of clothing; or a symbol of oppression it is a tool of spirituality for women.

Fadwa El Guindi, author of The Veil: Modesty, Privacy and Resistance, says “veiling patterns and veiling behaviour are…. about sacred privacy, sanctity and the rhythmic interweaving of patterns of worldly and sacred life, linking women as the guardians of family sanctuaries and the realm of the sacred in this world”.

Reasons why Muslim Women do not wear the hijab

In the Qur’anic this verse although it says to draw the cloak all over their bodies, it does not specifically say the hair. In addition, it does not specify in what way, to what extent, and in what manner women should cover themselves. There are many modern alternative views to this idea that the hijab is compulsory because it is in the Quran. For example, Dr.Reza Alsan, an internationally acclaimed writer and scholar of religions, the founder of AslanMedia.com and also one of the leading scholars in the alternative view, considers the hijab not an obligatory aspect of being a Muslim woman. Aslan claims that the hijab is shockingly not compulsory upon Muslim women anywhere in the Quran. Instead he claims that the veil was an Arab culture before the arrival of Islam, through contact with Syria and Iran, where the veil was the sign of the upper class women. According to Lelia Ahmed and those who fall in the second school of thought like Aslan, the only places that the hijab is applied to women is when it is addressing the wives of Prophet Muhammad. Thus the veil was only associated with the prophets wives and his daughters not all women of Islam. This school of thought does not deny that modesty was expected of all believers. Believing women are instructed to “‘guard their private parts… and drape a cover over their breasts”‘ when in the presence of strange men (Surah 24:31-32)” as quoted by Aslan. Here specific parts of the body are named that women should guard and cover including the private parts and the breast but the hair is not mentioned. Thus those in this school of thought like Leila Ahmed and Reza Alsan do not believe that the hijab is mandatory for Muslim women because it is not mentioned in the Quran.

Conclusion of Literature review

This research investigates the reasons why the Muslim community is divided on the subject of the veil and if the dominant negative perception of hijab (as the hijab being oppressive) has affected, if at all, the wearing of hijab in TSiBA Education. In the attempt to answer this question, the research has presented two hypotheses:

(1) Living in South Africa, a country with great Western influence, causes some Muslim women to fear wearing the hijab and to abandon it all together

(2) Muslim women choose to wear the hijab for spirituality reasons despite constant the pressures of the West

5. RESULTS OF OBSERVATIONS

While analyzing the results, I was interested to see if there would be a correlation between the findings in my literature review and the results of my research.

My data collection was a result of 10 surveys this research revealed that my two hypotheses were in agreement with a majority of this small sample of subjects. The data collected represents the opinions and beliefs of a total of 10 human participants which is 50% of the total intended target group. Thus, the data collected must only be interpreted as speculative and cannot be assumed applicable to all Muslim women or all Muslim female students.

The results were as follows:

5 of the 10 participants wore the hijab. 3 of those 5 said that they strongly agree to wearing the hijab for religious reasons while 2 participants said they agree that they wear it for religious reasons but that religion is not the main reason why they wear the hijab.

3 out of the 5 Muslim wear the hijab even though the hijab makes them feel like they don’t fit in with their peers.

1 person however does feel that she fits in with her peers and in her community because she wears the hijab.

The hijab makes all five participants who wear the hijab feel protected and safe in public. 3 of them strongly agreed while 2 agreed.

5 participants said that all Muslim women should wear hijab when asked if they believe all Muslim women should wear the hijab, the opinions were 50/50. Interestingly, Out of the 5 participants that wear the hijab, 1 person said that she does not believe all Muslim women should wear hijab; 1 woman who does not wear the hijab said that even though she doesn’t wear the hijab yet, she believes all Muslim women should wear the hijab.

When asked if women who do not wear the hijab can be good Muslims: 8 women agreed that Muslim women can be good Muslims if they do not wear the hijab, 1 participant had no opinion saying “one shouldn’t judge, if you judge, what kind of Muslim does that make you?”, 1 said Muslim women cannot be good if they do not practice the hijab.

When asked for their definition of hijab, 60% defined it as covering with loose fitting clothes, 20% said all forms acceptable and 20% just covering your hair.

The rating (1= no influence, 5= influenced but not explicitly forced,10 = I had no choice) of influence of family on participants choice to wear or not to wear hijab:

From the 5 participants who wear hijab, 1 rated a 5, 1 rated a 6, 1 rated an 8 elaborating that her parents are religiously strict, 1 rated a 2, and 1 rated a 7 saying that the sudden death of her aunt influenced her choices in life and her consideration of the hijab.

From the 5 participants who do not wear the hijab, 2 participants rated 5; 2 rated the influence of their family as a 1 and 1 participant rated 9 saying that her family allows her choice not to wear the hijab.

The limitations section showed that all participants felt free to drive a car, study at a university, find a job, travel freely outside of Cape Town, own a computer and have access to the internet.

5 participants felt that they were not hired for a job because they wear the hijab while 1 participant said that she is new to wearing the hijab so the question is not applicable to her

No participants felt that they were not hired because of NOT wearing the hijab

TSIBA Women’s view on the issue/view of hijab in the West

9 participants agree that the West (Europe and America) has a dominantly negative view on hijab. 1 participant had no opinion

When asked their opinion of the Western perception and the West should continue not to encourage women to wear the hijab. 4 participants strongly disagree, 3 disagree, 3 had no opinion and 1 participant said she strongly agrees.

When asked if they thought the West is ill-informed and should make more of an effort to understand the hijab and why Muslim women wear it: 6 participants said they strongly agree , 3 agreed and 1 participants said she had no opinion.

6 participants have friends from the West while the remaining 4 do not.

DISCUSSION

This research investigates the debate regarding the reasons why some Muslim women wear hypotheses were confirmed in a majority of this small sample group. In the attempt to answer these questions, the research has presented two hypotheses suggesting that:

(1) Living in South Africa, a country with great Western influence, causes some Muslim women to fear wearing the hijab and to abandon it all together.

(2)The main reason Muslim women choose to wear the hijab is for spirituality reasons despite the constant the pressures of the dominant Western perception.

Defining the hijab

The point of view unknown to me before starting my research was that there are Muslim women who did not know that there were differing interpretations about what the hijab is tangibly. In fact, from the surveys it is evident that amongst Muslims there is a concept of a correct hijab and an incorrect hijab. Before my research commenced, the purpose of the research was not intended to identify whether my target population was aware that many Muslims have differing beliefs the hijab.

My research revealed that within the Muslim community there exist different interpretations of what the hijab is tangibly. 60% of participants claimed that the “correct” physical hijab is a head scarf and long loose fitting clothing that conceals the shape

Muslim Women: Wearing The Hijab

Literature on this topic is abundant as research has been conducted globally on the topic of the hijab as to the reasons why women should and should not wear the hijab. The research conducted was made possible through the use of surveys, interviews, questionnaires and observations. Katherine Bullock in particular, a Canadian community activist, author and lecturer did extensive research on the topic of the hijab and published her findings in the form of a book called Rethinking Muslim Women and the Veil which challenges “Historical and Modern Stereotypes” . She has also published articles on Muslim women and the media, and Islam and political theory.

Purposes of the research

The objectives of the study are to examine if the dominant negative Western perception affects the reasons why the Muslim community is divided on the subject of hijab.

This research addresses the concern for a dialogue that could inform westernised societies about the personal reasons why some female Muslim students wear hijab and why others do not. I want my research to be meaningful, relevant to local communities and to open my mind and that of others by being taught through research and personal interviews about the subject.

Scope and limitations

The pool of participants is limited to the Muslim students at TSiBA Education. The data set is meaningful, but not representative of the vast range of Muslims in different contexts. It will however show a diversity of views within a common theology and faith.

Plan of development
METHODOLOGY
2.1 Participation

The target group for the research is 20 South African Muslim women between the ages of 18 and 40. This age group is the target of this study because they are the current generation of TSiBA students and are experiencing modern South Africa in a time when it seems there is an ever increasing influx of Western culture. The age group is also likely to include married women who might be inclined to think differently about the hijab as their marriage might have changed the way each looks at the hijab.

2.2 Methods of data collection

Two sets of data will be employed: 1) open-ended e-mail questionnaires with 20 Muslim students about the hijab 2) Conduct interviews and observations on the candidates if further data is required. The first data collection method I chose was a simple questionnaire. The research draws on qualitative data from questionnaires and interviews with 20 Muslim female students of varying ages within the TSiBA community.

After many different drafts of the questionnaire I went to the Tertiary School in Business Administration (TSiBA) Education to distribute the final version. My questionnaire included the opinions of both young women who wear the hijab and those that do not. I did not ask for names in any section of the survey to ensure the anonymity of all my human subjects. In the end I collected 20 surveys in total. After gathering the questionnaire, I analyzed the results manually.

As my second method of data collection, I conducted interviews, each having an approximate duration of between 30 minutes. I used a recording device on all my interviews.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction

Keywords: Islam, Muslim, hijab, veil, female, students, TSIBA Education, reasons, dominiant negative Western perception.

The debate regarding the wearing of religious garb in public, specifically coverings worn by Muslim women has increased over the past few years resulting in a lot of controversy among those who agree with the practice and those who do not (iqraonline.net). The French, along with the west expected that the hijab would pass away into history as westernization and secularization took root. However, in the Muslim world, especially among the younger generation, a great wave of returning to hijab was spreading through various countries. This current resurgence is an expression of Islamic revival (Khaula Nakata, A View Through Hijab, 1994, pg 2).

Hijab is seen all over the world, especially in places with a high concentration of practicing Muslims. The hijab has been the focus of often fierce media debates and has come to symbolise the clash of cultures supported by links between Islamic “extremism” and 21st century terrorism. While in several Islamic states such as Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Iran, the full covering, known as the burqa, has been compulsory. A hostile response against Muslim culture has seen such traditional clothing banned, along with the much more common hijab, in the interests of secularism. In this context, Muslim women are portrayed by the Western media either as veiled victims in need of liberation because of a lack of free choice in foreign lands, or a threat to the Western societies in which they reside because of their choice to adopt the hijab which is a traditional Islamic dress.

Muslim women are almost consistently portrayed as oppressed and veiled, a terrorist threat or exotic, sexualised beings. This is in line with Said’s theory of Orientalism (Said, 1978), which argues that the Muslim world and its inhabitants are considered backward, barbaric and outsiders to Western society. This portrayal of Muslims is notable in the media in terms of the coverage of Muslim women. Most representations of Muslim women involve them wearing traditional Islamic clothing such as the hijab, and their role in the media is generally limited to commentary on issues such as the veil.

Western Influences

Dominant negative Western perception

The Western media and feminists often portray the hijab as a symbol of oppression and slavery of women. (http://www.al-islam.org). Many feminists, both Western and Islamic argue that the hijab is a symbol of gender oppression and that the Islamic veiling of women is an oppressive practice. Fadel Amara, an Islamic feminist and a Muslim female member of French government says “The burqa is a prison, a straightjacket. It is not religious. It is the insignia of a totalitarian Political project for sexual inequality.” (King,”Islam, Women and Terrorism,” 299.)

Feminists argue that public presence and visibility is important to Western women. It represents their struggle for economic independence, sexual agency and political participation. In the West, celebrity is the peak of cultural legitimacy. The hijab is a challenge to the view of liberated visibility and freedom of self-expression unfettered by “the male gaze”.( www.theage.com)

After a century of struggle for freedom of expression that included discarding the bra, some Western countries have called for banning the hijab in schools. They have developed, it would seem, a rather limited view of what public visibility might mean to different women. France’s 2004 law, known popularly as the ‘law on the headscarf’, reveals the difficulty of respecting conflicting ideas between diverse communities, especially when one community, in this case the Muslims of France, is a minority. According to this law, female students are banned from wearing the hijab as well as all other openly religious symbols in public schools. France bans women from wearing the hijab in public schools because many feminists and lawmakers argue that veiling women serves as an oppressing force, a force that silences women. Alia Al- Saji states in her article “The Racialization of Muslim Veils: A Philosophical Analysis” many feminists see the headscarf “As a symbol of Islamic gender oppression that aˆ¦should be banned from public schools, a space where gender equality is presumed (or desired).” Supporters of the law believe it fights gender oppression and gives equality to women in the school system.

Katherine Bullock sheds light on the differences in judgment over hijab by having identified themes from her research on the women and Islam field. She divides these themes into the descriptions of those who are for and those who are against the hijab.

According to Katherine Bullock, critics of the veil rely on secular liberal assumptions about society and human nature and therefore the veil is supposed to be and described as a symbol of oppression because it:

Covers up (hides), in the sense of smothering, femininity

Is apparently linked to the essentialized male and female difference (which is taken to mean that by nature, male is superior, female is inferior);

Is linked to a particular view of woman’s place (subjugated in the home);

Is linked to an oppressive (patriarchal) notion of morality and female purity (because of Islam’s

Emphasis on chastity, marriage, and condemnation of pre- and extra-marital sexual relations);

Can be imposed; and

Is linked to a package of oppressions women in Islam face, such as seclusion, polygamy, easy male divorce, unequal inheritance rights.

3.2.2 Media attitudes to reporting Islam and hijab

While the media cannot be held solely responsible for the construction of national identity nor blamed for societal attitudes towards minority cultures and religions, they play a significant role by providing “the lens through which reality is perceived” (Bullock & Jafri, 2000). While the Western media sees itself as a democratic institution, it is often held accountable for legitimising and spreading racism and bias against religious communities such as Muslims (Bullock & Jafri, 2000). The media portrays Muslims as “tricky, sleazy, sexual and untrustworthy”, as uniformly violent, as oppressors of women, and as members of a global conspiracy (Bullock & Jafri, 2000).

Macmaster and Lewis identify the shift in the European media’s portrayal of veiled women from exotic to a danger to society (Macmaster & Lewis, 1998, p. 121). They point out the juxtaposition of representations of Muslim women as concurrently oppressed and threatening, while Kolhatkar highlights the depiction of Muslim women as “shapeless blue-clad forms of Afghan women” (Kolhatkar, 2002, p. 34).

The identification of Muslim women in the media by the use of traditional Islamic dress has been noted by Begum, who argues that “images of Islamic dress are increasingly used in the media as a visual shorthand for dangerous extremism, and aˆ¦ Muslims all over Europe are suffering from the consequences of such associations” (Begum, 2005, p. 1). In France, a breeding ground of media and political debate about the hijab, has had a polarising affect on the Muslim community and a divisive impact on society and feminism. (Begum, 2005, p. 1)

The media’s portrayal of these women went from sinister symbols of Islamic extremism to brave heroines of the republic overnight (Ezekiel, 2005). But since then, the French media have reported on the suspension of a Muslim meter reader who wore a hijab under her hat, the banning of a fashion show of veiled women, the prevention of hijab-wearing mothers from volunteering in schools; the refusal of service to a student wearing a hijab by a university cafeteria and the banning of a witness to a civil service wedding from signing the documentation because her hijab prevented her from being formally identified

According to Ezekiel, sexism and racism intersect in this debate. On one side of the feminist debate about the hijab, there are those who demand veils be banned from French streets as they encourage the harassment of unveiled women. But at the other end of the spectrum, feminists advocating a Muslim woman’s right to choose to wear or not to wear a hijab have aligned themselves with fundamentalist Islamic leaders, arguing that it’s a Muslim woman’s obligation to wear a hijab and demanding the ban be overturned.

The authors argue that because of the media’s cultural fixation on Muslim women’s dress as a symbol of oppression, Muslim women often have to focus on that aspect of their identity as well, even if they would rather discuss something else. They suggest that even responsible journalism about Muslim women tends to demote them to the role of a reactionary source in the hijab debate. “In sum, it is clear that Muslim women are predominantly presented to the Canadian public as foreign, ‘exotic’, oppressed, or threatening ‘others’ rather than as one’s ‘unexotic’, unthreatening next door neighbours.” (www.reportingdiversity.org.)

Clearly, the hijab story remains newsworthy in Western countries, and Muslim women’s identities are inextricably linked to the headscarf as a result.

3.2.2.1 The argument of oppression

Although it is true that many women do choose to wear the Hijab, it is not the case for all women. In many Middle Eastern and North African countries women are forced and are persecuted and abused for noncompliance with the hijab. This Hirshmann, “Western Feminism, Eastern Veiling, and a Question of Free Agency,” was recently demonstrated in Pakistan, where an extremist killed a women’s activist and government minister, because she refused to wear the Hijab. King states, “From Afghanistan to Algeria to Sudan, Pakistan and Iran- women are systematically brutalized and caught in a deadly crossfire between the secular and fundamentalist forces.”

Some Islamic feminists argue that although the statement in the Quran about women covering themselves was not meant to oppress women, the interpretation of those verses by Islamic societies does in fact oppress women. Although it can be argued that the hijab is a symbol of the oppression that occurs against women in Islam, many Islamic women don’t agree. It is true that under some Islamist rule, specifically in some North African countries, Afghanistan, Iran, and Saudi Arabia women are oppressed and forced to wear the hijab, but in an international context, this is the exception to the rule regarding women’s practices of wearing the veil11.

Salma Yaqoob, a Muslim woman who chooses to wear the hijab explains the veil is not only an oppressing force in Islamic countries that require the veil, but also in Western countries that ban the veil. Yaqoob adamantly contends that by infringing laws that restricts women’s choice on whether or not to wear the veil, they are also being oppressed. “I am opposed to the Saudi and Iranian governments’ imposition of the veil and that of the Taliban previously. But this is also why I oppose the ban on wearing the hijab. In both cases the woman herself is no longer free to make a choice. In both cases her dignity is violated.”. Yaqoob explains that more women are currently banned from wearing the hijab, than are required to wear it.

The argument of liberation

It can be argued that rather than oppressing, the hijab is liberating. The oppressing force behind the veil is when members of the authority, both Islamic and Western, take away a woman’s right to choose. The veil itself is just a piece of cloth. We interpret the hijab according to our social and religious constructions. Through the Western discussion and banning of the hijab in public schools, the Muslim school girls of France lose their freedom to express their spirituality. This view on the veil serves to continually disable and oppress women by terminating their freedom of spiritual expression.

France’s 2004 law on the headscarf disables Islamic females from wearing the veil in places of education. The desired effect of the 2004 law is to fight gender oppression and inequality in the public school system, but as a residual effect, it actually diminishes women’s freedoms rather than enhancing them. The ‘law on the headscarf’ supports the oppressing Western discourses about veiled women and attempts to Westernize French Muslim schoolgirls.

Internal debate: Reasons for wearing and not wearing the hijab

The opinions of Islamic women vary in their decision whether or not to wear the veil. Some feminists, both Muslim and non-Muslim, defend the veil as a mark of agency, cultural membership, and defiance. Tayyab Bashart, a feminist scholar and Muslim who teaches in France, explains her beliefs, “A woman in hijab, who is a functioning member of society, symbolizes an empowered, independent woman, rather than someone who lacks self-determination and is a puppet of society” (Tayyab, Basharat.”Hijab as an instrument of Taking Women off the Sex Economy.”). Muslim women see bans on the veil as creating or perpetuating stereotypes that are becoming harder to fight. Hirshmann states that “Western society tends to oversimplify these cultural stereotypes without looking into the women whom they think are being degraded.”

Reasons for wearing the hijab in Islamic Tradition

The most basic debate over the hijab is over the requirement of the hijab. This is an issue that is debated by many Muslim scholars. First in order to understand why there is an issue it is important to understand the power of the Quran. The Quran is the word of God brought by his last messenger the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him). Islam is the total submission to Allah (God the Father) and obedience to Allah, as the Quran is God’s word then it also means total submission and obedience to Quran. The first issue with the requirement of the hijab comes from whether the hijab is in the Quran or not. There are two sides to this argument; there are those who say that the hijab is a requirement because it is in the Quran and those who say that it is not because it is not part of the Quran. Amr Khaled’s lectures have greatly influenced the Muslim youth, especially Muslim female youth on the topic of the hijab. He represents the school of thought that considers the hijab to be directly in the Quran and thus a requirement for Muslim women. In one of his lectures about the hijab he says “Some people argue that this hijab is not obligatory and that it was not mentioned in the Quran.” These are the Qur’an’s verses that make the Hijab obligatory to Muslim women.

“O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies. That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And – ALLAH – is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (33:59)” ( Amr Khaled). Here in this verse women are told to cover their bodies so that they should be known as modest women and are not harassed.

The hijab, according to many Muslims, has multiple uses and meanings. The hijab’s symbolism is one of modesty and morality. According to Islam, the hijab functions as a shield for a woman against the lustful gaze of men. The hijab also serves as a cover to preserve the modesty and piety of the woman, as that is her main role as stated in the Qur’an. Not only is this her role in her faith, but in society as well. The Qur’an also states that the woman is the family’s main preserver of honour, piety, and modesty. Thus, the hijab is an aid in which the woman can successfully carry out this function as demanded by Allah through the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) (Kulenovic 714-715). Amr Khalad, a popular Islamic scholar, layman, and highly influential Muslim speaker, has had a strong influence on Muslim youth in on the issue of the hijab, especially in Jordan (Stratton 98). According to Amr Khalad’s lecture “Al-Hijab,” the hijab also serves the purpose of forcing men to not sexually objectify women but to see her as a vessel of intelligence and high moral values. Khalad says that the hijab reinforces the fact that “Islamaˆ¦ made the beauty of women of a higher value in men’s eyes by providing protection [in the form of hijab] to that beauty from uncontrolled lusts and desires, and instead ordering men to respect greater the inner beauty of her soul. Thus, the real value of women is associated with the degree of her bashfulness and her abidance by it” (Khalad “Al-Hijab). This is the tradition Islamic rational for the hijab and why it is important in Islam (Khalad “AlHijab”).

A study about hijab in the West also provides another theory that I believe can also be applied in South Africa because it is a country heavily influenced by the West. The idea of the hijab as a symbol of resistance is explored by Tarik Kulenovic but not necessarily one that is strictly political. Tarik Kulenovic’s theory suggests that the hijab in the West is a matter of identity, a physical symbol of a woman’s Muslim identity. This symbol also carries a message of religiosity in a modernizing society which encourages a secular life style and scorns tradition. Kulenovic asserts that “the modern identity of Muslim women, which includes the wearing of the veil, is primarily the identity of resistance to the values than individuals find foreign to them and as such imposed on them” (Kulenovic, page 717). Thus, in modern society, the hijab can be thought of as a means of retaining a religious life style while assimilating to the demands of the modern world. Another reason women choose to wear the hijab is that they find that the hijab serves as an empowering factor. Yaqoob states her personal reasons why she wears the veil, “For me, the wearing of the hijab denotes that as a woman I expect to be treated as an equal in terms of my intellect and personality and my appearance is relevant only to the degree that I want it to be, when I want it to be.”

Katherine Bullock addresses dominant western assumptions by proving through her research that the reasons some women wear the hijab are that the hijab:

1. Does not smother femininity;

2. Brings to mind the ‘different-but-equal’ school of thought, but does not put forward essentalized male-female difference;

3. Is linked to a view that does not limit women to the home, but neither does it consider the role of stay-at-home-mother and homemaker oppressive;

4. Is linked to a view of morality that is oppressive only if one considers the prohibition of sexual relations outside marriage wrong;

5. Is part of Islamic law, though a law that ought to be implemented in a very wise and women-friendly manner, and

6. Can and should be treated separately from other issues of women’s rights in Islam.

4.2 Reasons for not wearing the hijab in the Islamic Tradition

In the Qur’anic this verse although it says to draw the cloak all over their bodies, it does not specifically say the hair. In addition, it does not specify in what way, to what extent, and in what manner women should cover themselves. There are many modern alternative views to this idea that the hijab is compulsory because it is in the Quran. For example, Dr.Reza Alsan, an internationally acclaimed writer and scholar of religions,the founder of AslanMedia.com and also one of the leading scholars in the alternative view, considers the hijab not an obligatory aspect of being a Muslim woman. Reza claims, “Although long seen as the most distinctive emblem of Islam, the veil is, surprisingly, not enjoined upon Muslim women anywhere in the Quran” (Alsan). Instead he claims that the veil was in Arab culture before the arrival of Islam, through contact with Syria and Iran, where the veil was the sign of the upper class women. According to Lelia Ahmed and those who fall in the second school of thought like Reza, the only places that the hijab is applied to women is when it is addressing the wives of Prophet Muhammad. Thus the veil was only associated with the prophets wives and his daughters not all women of Islam. This school of thought does not deny that modesty was expected of all believers. Women should “‘guard their private parts… and drape a cover over their breasts”‘ when in the presence of strange men (Surah 24:31-32)” (Aslan). Here specific parts of the body are named that women should guard and cover including the private parts and the breast but the hair is not mentioned. Thus those in this school of thought like Leila Ahmed and Reza Alsan do not believe that the hijab is mandatory for Muslim women because it is not mentioned in the Quran.

According to Bullock, critics of the veil rely on secular liberal assumptions about society and human nature and therefore the veil is supposed to be and described as a symbol of oppression because it:

Covers up (hides), in the sense of smothering, femininity

Is apparently linked to essentialized male-female difference (which is taken to mean that by nature, male is superior, female is inferior);

Is linked to a particular view of woman’s place (subjugated in the home);

Is linked to an oppressive (patriarchal) notion of morality and female purity (because of Islam’s

Emphasis on chastity, marriage, and condemnation of pre- and extra-marital sexual relations);

Can be imposed; and

Is linked to a package of oppressions women in Islam face, such as seclusion, polygamy, easy male divorce, unequal inheritance rights, and so on.

4.3 Spirituality

Some women have a deep spiritual and religious connection to the veil and firmly disagree with the view of it as a sign of oppression. Many Muslim women feel uncomfortable without wearing it because the hijab is deeply-rooted in their personal values and religious tradition. A main reason women choose to wear the hijab, is as expression of spirituality. Bashart states in his book that “Muslim women carry with them their sacred private space into the public space by use of the Hijab.” (Basharat, “Hijab as an Instrument of Taking Women off the Sex Economy”). In this view of the hijab, the veil is not simply an article of clothing; or a symbol of oppression it is a tool of spirituality for women.

Fadwa El Guindi, author of The Veil: Modesty, Privacy and Resistance, says “veiling patterns and veiling behaviour are…. about sacred privacy, sanctity and the rhythmic interweaving of patterns of worldly and sacred life, linking women as the guardians of family sanctuaries and the realm of the sacred in this world”

Conclusion

This research investigates the reasons why the Muslim community is divided on the subject of the veil and if the dominant negative perception of hijab (as the hijab being oppressive) has affected, if at all, the wearing of hijab in TSiBA Education. In the attempt to answer this question, the research has presented two hypotheses.

Firstly, the divide on the practice of the hijab exists within the Muslim community because there are different interpretations of the verses of the Qur’an where Allah commands females to over their hair.

Secondly, that the dominant negative Western perception causes some Muslim women to fear wearing the hijab and to abandon it all together as wearing the hijab could result in more oppression to females- as portrayed in Western media.

Thirdly, Some Muslim women choose to wear the hijab for spirituality reasons despite constant the pressures of the West.

Muslim Ummah At Crossroads Theology Religion Essay

All praise is due to Allah, Lord of all the worlds. May peace and blessings of Allah, be upon the Messenger, his households and Companions. Fellow Muslims! Mankind is now living in a world full dissentions and wars. Our present world is one that is at a critical historical crossroad in which all relationships are kept away from the path of Allah and the authentic divine teachings are consigned into oblivion. The present world is one in which mundane interests are the criteria for everything.

Our contemporary world is one, in which power and arrogance prevail over peace, mercy and kindness. Ours is a world in which evils are promoted in sweet and deceiving terms and in which rights are violated through false slogans. Allah says,

“And of mankind there is he, whose speech may please you in this worldly life, and he calls Allah to witness as to that which is in his heart, yet he is the most quarrelsome of the opponents. And when he turns away, his effort in the land is to make mischief therein and to destroy the crops and the cattle, and Allaah likes not mischief.”
(Al-Baqarah 2:204-205)

In the dawning age of the third millennium, countries and communities all over the world are moving towards political and cultural progressivism. It is an age which in keeping with the overall trend of globalization is witnessing the elimination or blurring of political, social and cultural frontiers.

Indian Muslims:

In such an age it is painful to see that India’s Muslims comprising about 130 million out of a total population of over a billion plus wrapped in a time wrapor an attitudinal freezein more reminiscent of the medieval age. It is in marked contrast to “the other 900 million Indians” of India who despite the imperfections of Indians political and economic structure have moved ahead.

Indians Muslims have not moved ahead not because of any discrimination by the Indian Constitution oThese distinguished members of Indians Muslims besides a large galaxy of many others in various fields, rose to prominence and eminence not because of any system of political reservations or political favors but they rose to distinguished heights because of their personal merit, breaking the traditional binds that shackle Indians Muslims and also because the Indian state provides equal opportunities to all its citizens.

It can be fairly said that a vast majority of Indian Muslims do wish to move forward and share IndiaA???s emerging economic prosperity but are being held back by traditional forces and the leadership which lacks vision.

Muslims relation with West:

The US never identified the 9/11 perpetrators as being Afghans or Pakistanis – the inherent lies in the US policy on the current revamped war on terror. It further signals intellectual bankruptcy amongst the US policy makers. The aggressive military nuisance must be stopped. American and British have no purpose to be fighting inAfghanistan or Pakistan. The Bush led War on Terrorism was bogus and it destroyed America not just its history and values but as superpower to be credible in global governance. The people of Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan never threatened nor posed any threats to the security of the United States. To pursue the Bush war on Muslims, American policy makers searched for moderate Muslims and invested almost 10 billions to keep afloat most corrupt authoritarians like the former General Musharaf and Karazai. It was not time and money well spent but to rekindle the anti- American reactions in view of the massive warmongerings in Iraq and killings of almost 2.5 millions civilians for no other reason except to satisfy the insanity of the few actively waging bogus war on Islam. Political irony overwhelmed the American expectations that General Musharaf could deliver tangible goodies to Bush and the neoconservatives.Corruption knows no other motives except to institutionalize itself.

The Muslim Brethren:

Brethren in faith! Our Ummah is now undergoing indescribably difficult situations. Tragedies that Muslims are subjected to in Palestine and Iraq are beyond the wildest imaginations. Every Muslims is saddened by the daily suffering of innocent peoples of these lands who are made to taste the punishment of the sins they never committed. Lives of many of these brethren have been unnecessarily and wantonly wasted and a great portion of their properties was wickedly destroyed.

Brethren in Islam! When Al-Mansoor[1] built the city of Baghdad, he named it ‘Madeenatus-Salaam’ (City of Peace) and he wrote in its plan, “In the Name of Allah. All praise is due to Allah. Surely, the land belongs to Allah. He gives it as inheritance to whomsoever He wills and the good ending is for the pious.”

Present situation of Ummah:

Dear Muslims! The present situation of the Ummah that is full of massacres and pains is known to all. The Muslims must therefore know that, among the lessons of the trials is the need to do self-examination and make necessary reforms. It is incumbent on the Ummah to take a serious look at the causes of these crises. Allah says,

“Verily, those who are pious, when an evil thought comes to them from Satan, they remember (Allaah), and (indeed) they then see (aright).”
(Al-A’raaf 7:201)

We must also strike a balance between the religious and worldly factors while facing the challenges and crises. The Ummah must try to amend its defects in the light of Islamic principles, as it should correct its erroneous direction in the light of its fundamentals, history and civilization. The Muslims’ first priority should be a realization of their dire need to turn back to Allah. That is the only light that guards against error and confusion.

Rulers of the Muslims countries are also urged to fear Allah and endeavour to reform the conditions of their peoples in the light of Islamic injunctions. They should know that they are responsible before Allah. They should also work towards starting a new stage in their relationships that will be based on clarity, reality and reasonableness. They should try to strengthen individual capabilities while maintaining the foundations of Islamic brotherhood, and they should cooperate to defend Islam first and foremost and then their countries in accordance with the injunction of Allah,

“Help you one another in righteousness and piety; but do not help one another in sin and transgression.”
(Al-Maaidah 5:2)

The Messenger of Allah said, “Preserve (the obligations of) Allah, Allah will protect you. Preserve (the obligations of) Allah, you will find Him in front of you. Whenever you ask, ask from Allah and whenever you seek for assistance, seek it from Allah. Know that if all the people are to unanimously agree to do you a benefit, they cannot do you any benefit except a benefit that Allah has already written down for you. And if they are to unanimously agree to do you harm, they cannot do you any harm, except that which Allah has already written down for you. Pens have been raised and the paper is dried.” (At-Tirmidhee)

In another narration, the Messenger of Allah said, “Preserve (the obligations of) Allah, you will find Him in front of you. Know Allah while in you are in bliss, He will know when you are in difficulty. Know also that victory comes with perseverance, relief comes with hardship and that there is ease with difficulty.”

Brethren in faith! There is no glory or power for this Ummah except through adhering to the religion of Allah, His injunctions and the Sunnah of the Prophet.

Guidance for errors and refuses:

Brethren in Islam! The way of Allah is that, any nation that exchanges guidance for error and refuses to take practical steps towards reform, such a nation shall continue to live in backwardness, degeneration and in moral, ideological and military weakness. We should therefore make a sincere return to the path of truth and reclaim our position of leadership. Concerted efforts should be made to educate our young generations to be proud of their religion and always show its greatness.

The Ummah must programme its life in accordance with Islam and its teachings. We must do away with all useless ideologies. It must be well established in our minds that Islam is the religion of this Ummah and its law in all aspects of its life.

Fellow Muslims! The whole world have seen and heard the anarchy that happened in Muslim Iraq as a result of aggression and lack of a just world order. This incidence should open the eyes of the Muslims to one fact: It is only the great Islamic system that can guarantee public and individual interests and that; it is the only order that can prevent harms and corruptions. Ibn Taymiyyah said, “It must be known that being in the position of authority is one of the greatest responsibilities of Islam. No matter of religion and worldly life can stand without it. For the interests of humans cannot be actualized except through intermingling because of their mutual need for one another. Therefore, they should have a leader. He further said, “The ruler is the shade of Allah on the earth.”

Ibn Taymiyyah also said, “Sixty years of an unjust ruler is better than a single night without a ruler.” The reality testifies to this. He also said, “If the authority is separated from religion and religion from authority people become corrupted.” Let the Muslims know that there is no good in overthrowing governments or causing disturbances in the communities. For that has brought nothing but destructions and corruption.

Political Choas and killings:

After the American bloodbath in Iraq and extended war to Afghanistan, Pakistan was next to be crippled with political chaos and killings of the civilians, enabling Zardari and the Generals to profit from the daily bloodbath of the innocent civilians. The on-going war seems to have undermined the very integrity of the Pakistani nation. Islam does not preach extremism but peace and harmony for a balanced life. The radicalization of Islam stems from ignorance and arrogance. Islam is peace and peace represents logic of reason and understanding of normal human values and respect for life. Those who call themselves Taliban must learn that Islam does not allow public scolding and beating of the females/males as a staged show and part of the law and justice system approach but instead focuses on education and reformation of the individual and collective well being of the Muslim society to be obedient to God. If they resort to force as means to introduce “shariah”, it is ignorance (jahalliya) not Islamic ways of life.Though emotions appear to override the people’s reaction in the tribal belts ofAfghanistan -Pakistan against the brutal military action, and that is not the solution but a reason for new emerging problems which Pakistani army is not equipped to deal with.

Drone Attacks:

Yet, those alleged are forced to react to American predator drone attacks and troops engagements being used against the people who had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack in the US. Imagine if there was just one company or a battalion of Afghan Mujahideen or Iraqi soldiers stationed in Washington or New York, would their presence comfortthe American people to get peaceful sleep or go to normal daily activities? When we think comparatively, we seem to get more rational answers. American politicians would never think in such realistic terms. The policy makers pretend to help the victims of the so called Islamic extremism or Taliban but do not understand that they are part of the problem, not a solution. So far, for the last eight years according to reliable sources, American ledWar on Terror has killed 2.5 millions people in Iraq and destroyed countless human habitats under the false pretext of terrorism and insurgency. Simply put, you went there to kill people and in return the Iraqis are defending their lives and property, they are not the insurgents but defenders of their lives, homes and honor and certainly not the extremists. You are the aggressors, and they are the victims of your atrocities in plaiN English language,

The consequences of injustice are disastrous. The Prophet said, “Allaah gives respite to a wrongdoer, whenever He seizes him, he never releases him.”

He then recited the verse:

“Such is the Seizure of your Lord when He seizes the (population of) the towns while they are doing wrong. Verily, His Seizure is painful, (and) severe.”
(Hood 11:102)
(Al-Bukhaaree and Muslim)
How long the sufferings will continue ?

How many are the curses, evils and woes that the systems and political parties that are anti-Islam have brought upon the Muslims? The Muslims will continue to suffer under these man-made systems until they purify their hearts with real emaan, adhere to the teachings of Islam and spread the implementation of the law of Allah to every path of the Muslim world.

Brethren in faith! The nation of Islam is the best of all nations. It is Allah’s beloved nation. The crises and tribulations that the Ummah is facing now is just another way by which Allah puts His beloved to test. It is incumbent on all Muslims to listen to the voice of Islam and wisdom. They shouldendeavour to protect the lands of Islam and promote unite in the light of Islamic Monotheism and under the banner of the Prophet. Let us take the Messenger of Allah as the model to be followed in all affairs of our lives. The Messenger of Allah said,

“Every treacherous person will be given a banner on the Day of Resurrection.”

BY: AGHA.M.SHOAIB