نشریه مطالعات تطبیقی قرآن کریم و متون مقدس
پیاپی 2 (پاییز و زمستان 1397)

Today the inter-religious dialogue has undoubtedly become one of the necessities of our time, and among them, the dialogue between Muslims, Christians and Jews, the children of Abraham, is of paramount importance. Scriptural reasoning which is a newly emerging pattern in the dialogues between Abrahamic religions seeks to replace the salvation-based openness towards the followers of other religions with the hermeneutical openness as the basis of the dialogue (between religions). According to the advocates of the sacred texts of Abrahamic religions, relying on specialism, post-liberal theology, post-secular discourse and post-modern pragmatism are among the most important particularities that distinguish scriptural reasoning from other types of inter-religious dialogues. Using a descriptive-analytic methodology, the present article aims to deal with the nature, method, and characteristics of the newly emerging model of the dialogue of the Abrahamic religions, mainly within the framework of the ideas of Peter Ochs and David Ford who are well-known as the founders of the scriptural reasoning.

Believe in receiving the heavenly words (revelation) by certain people and emphasis on the guiding function of these words for humankind are the common doctrines of the numerous religions including Islam and Hinduism. According to the Hindu teachings, some of the Hindu sacred texts called Śruti and supposed to be taken from inspiration, revelation, and supersensible heavenly words are named as Ākāśavāṇī. In fact, inspiration in these texts does not mean that voices have come down and the selected prophets have heard them; but it is believed that with their spiritual conducts and soul sincerity, the clear-sighted wise and mystics called Ṛṣi could see the heavenly words which is manifested from the divine origin as reflections of the light of the Truth (God) in the mirror of their souls and then they could transfer these words to others through rendering them into divine Sanskrit language. Despite the similarity between the concepts of revelation and Ākāśavāṇī, the latter is closer to mystical intuition (rather than the Semitic revelation), due to lack of the doctrine prophethood and prophecy in Hinduism, as there is in the Semitic religions.

In the Abrahamic religions, Monotheism is not merely a replacement of many gods with one God. The Transformation in theism means the change in the moral system of these religions. Regardless His names and attributes to be imagined for Him, the One God of these religions has certain moral qualities which need to be followed. Moral obligations of these religions are adopted from the same image and qualities of their God, and consequently, the ultimate obligation to them is reaching to the position similar to that of God. The Abrahamic religions remember this position as the explanations or phrases being different in appearance. the Jewish „Shekinah‟, Christian „Living in Christ‟, and Islamic „Khalifat Allahi‟ viz. „vicegerency of God‟ are the termini technici that indicate the deep of the morality based upon the worship of the One God. Each one of these religions stresses on its own particular moral way for reaching this moral goal. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam emphasize on the „Imitation of Deity, Imitation of Christ, and Submission to God‟ respectively.

There is a challenging Quranic verse that speaks of the belief among Christians in the divinity of Mary - something Christianity refuses. In this context, the following questions arise: Which Christians does this verse address? Is there any piece of evidence in Christian history that proves this belief? Which commentaries are presented by exegetes on this verse and which opinions are more realistic? The New Testament introduces Mary (a) as an ordinary person not having anything to do with divinity. In church tradition, however, she is sanctified as the Mother of God and respected as an infallible character, though a controversial subject-matter in the Christian communities. Regarding the commentaries of the Quranic exegetes on this verse, it could be said that the Christians believe in the divinity of Mary via the doctrine „Divinity of Jesus‟ or their some traditions (such as humility viz. humbleness, regarding her independence position, though they deny it in appearance. One cannot, however, easily attribute such a belief to all Christians. Considering the (albeit poor) historical Christian documents, it seems that the verse points to a deviance among some Christians at the time of the revelation of the Holy Quran, particularly among the Maccan Christians whose religious knowledge was inadequate. The verse is also related to the deviation rooted in the exaggeration in the beliefs and in the main figures of the religion. This was certainly about the Christians who considered Mary as the character having an independent role in intercession and forgiving sins.

The Holy Spirit is used in different meanings in the Hebrew Bible, New Testament and the Holy Holy Quran. In the Hebrew Bible, he is represented as the manifestation of divine power, presence and will in the nature as well as in human beings, the cause of the revelation and prophecy. It is he who bestows wisdom and favor to the judges and sages. He is sometimes referred to as an angel. In Jewish tradition, the Holy Spirit is used in the sense of an indeterminate power that safeguards the holiness of the name of YHWH but is not separate from God. In the New Testament, the Holy Spirit is used nearly in the sense of the spirit of YHWH with emphasis on its life-giving, gift-giving, and guidance-providing aspects of the divine spirit. During the period of the church fathers, however, the Holy Spirit was considered as different from God emerging as the third person in the Trinity. In the Holy Holy Quran, the Holy Spirit brings revelation to the prophet and is equal in rank with angels. Called Gabriel, he bestows life and protects viz. seals prophets, saints and pious ones. Study on the various instances of the Holy Spirit in the Jewish, Christian and Islamic Holy Scriptures reveals that they all seemingly are intermediators alluding to the same reality, i.e. the power, presence and will of God, though they may differ from each other in rank.

Gap between the time in which received and compiled the holy words on the one side and the spatio-temporal conditions man faces in his historical development on the other is among the important issues that make the interpretation and comparative studies on the sacred scriptures with each other and those conditions inevitable. Laying stress on Christianity, this article shows that to bridge that gap is a task as complicated as sacred texts themselves. Study on the background of sacred texts and on their compilation is a matter of importance to those who are interested in knowing their meaning. In order to attain a correct understanding and clear explanation of the meaning and purpose of the sacred texts, one needs to study their cultural context in addition to evaluating their material compounds and history; such a background and context that the compiler or transferor of the text is present in it. The only exception to this rule is where one is not after realizing the clear meanings of the phrases and sentences; instead he looks for their paraphrastical and mystical meanings; for an allegorical interpretation does not need a study in the cultural context. With a descriptive-analytical approach, this article collects theoretical findings. The study shows that the impact of culture on the approaches as well as on methods of interpretation of the sacred texts is so important – albeit different - that it has resulted in the creation of three methodologies in the three periods of tradition, modernity and post-modernity.