Should the Pauline Christians be Considered as People of the Book?

I have read your articles regarding the status of Christians from an Islamic perspective. It seems that Christians can qualify for salvation if they fulfill the three positive qualifications listed in 2:62 (on the condition that they are not guilty of any major sins) and that they are neither "kaafir" nor "mushrik" When conveying your opinion to other Muslims, I am sometimes faced with the retort that 2:62 does not apply to all Christians. They say that this verse (along with 5:69) refers to some of the Nazarene Christians of the Prophet's time, who (unlike most of their brethren) were not guilty of "shirk". I have a number of questions:

1. What linguistic clues are there that would show that 2:62 and 5:69 are not referring to just a select few Christians, but to Christians of all times (if that is the case)?
2. I believe – and please correct me if I am wrong – you have stated that "shirk" is tantamount to a rejection of God entirely. Which passages in the Qur'an indicate so?
3. If the above is true, it seems strange that the Qur'an should permit marriage between Muslims and People of the Book but not between Muslims and the polytheists. Was the reason for the prohibition of marriage with polytheists that the latter were guilty of "shirk" (and thus rejection of God)? If so, and if the Christians are also guilty of "shirk" (as my more conservative Muslim brothers insist), why would we be allowed to marry Christians and not polytheists? The answer to me seems obvious: the Christians – whether Nazarene or Pauline – are not guilty of outright "shirk" even though some of their doctrines approach polytheism. They are still monotheists like us.

I would greatly appreciate your thoughts as well as any other compelling evidence in favour of the view that Christians are not guilty of "shirk".

I generally agree with the idea expressed by your Muslim friends that the Qur'an has primarily referred to the particular Christian school, which existed in the Arabian Peninsula during the time of the revelation of the Qur'an - the Nazarene creed. It is also clear that some of the beliefs and many of the practices of the Nazarene creed were different from those of the Pauline Christians. Nevertheless, it is clear from the Qur'an that the Nazarenes, like the Pauline Christians, ascribed to the belief that Jesus (pbuh) was a son of God, rather than His prophet (Al-Maaidah 5: 17) and to the concept of Trinity (Al-Nisaa 4: 171).
Keeping these points in perspective, let us now take a look at your questions:

1. The Pauline Christians are grouped with the Nazarenes mentioned in the Qur'an and directives relating to the Pauline Christians are derived from the directives relating to the Nazarenes, because of the similarity of the beliefs in the two groups. Furthermore, both the groups clearly come under the scope of the term 'People of the Book' (Ahl e Kitaab), as both believe in the Torah and the Gospel as books of God and both these groups are, in their own right and understanding, sincere followers of Jesus Christ - a prophet of God.
2. My referred opinion is not based on a specific verse of the Qur'an, but is actually based on the logical results of polytheism. Polytheism, by its very nature, is to refuse God His rights of pure and unblemished service and worship by diverting these rights to false self-proclaimed deities. That is precisely why I consider polytheism as similar, in effect, to rejection of God, but not rejection of God, in absolute terms.
3. Your answer is quite accurate. The term "Mushrik" in the Qur'an is used only for those, who ascribe to the doctrine of Shirk; those, who consider ascribing partners to God as an acceptable norm. The usage of the term in the Qur'an does not include those in its ambit, who due to a philosophical or theological mistake ascribe to a belief, which, according to the Qur'an, amounts to Shirk.

Add comment

Name (required)

E-mail (required, but will not display)

Notify me of follow-up comments

Refresh

Send

Cancel