Hussein Abdulwaheed Amin, Ex-Catholic, Ireland (part 1 to 4)
EsinIslam
Heralding New Muslims:
A Personal Account
Of Revert Muslim:
And Irish Catholic who has loved in
some Muslim countries decides to research Islam due to
a relationship with a Muslim woman and discusses what
he finds.
By Hussein Abdulwaheed Amin
Hussein
Abdulwaheed Amin, Ex-Catholic, Ireland (part 1 of 4):
Introduction and Personal Background
Introduction
I have written
my story of conversion to Islam mainly for the benefit
of other (would-be) western converts, especially those
who, like myself, come from a genuinely religious
Christian background. Whilst Christianity and Islam
have much in common, there remain fundamental
differences about which no compromise is possible,
principally concerning the Christian doctrine of
Trinity and the belief that Jesus is divine. Moving
from being a practicing, sincere, if somewhat
intellectually dissatisfied Christian to embracing
Islam is therefore in some respects a major
theological journey. As someone who has already
undertaken that journey, I hope that my travelogue may
in some way help smooth the path of those who follow.
The following hadeeth (saying of Prophet Mohammed)
comes to mind:
"Once a man, who
was passing through a road, found a branch of a tree
with thorns obstructing it. The man removed the
thorns from the way. God thanked him and forgave his
sins." (Saheeh Al-Bukhari)
Through
detailing my own experiences for the benefit of others
of a similar background, I would like to think of
myself as removing some of the figurative thorns which
obstruct the road from Christianity to Islam.
I converted to
Islam before I became Internet-aware and had to do all
the research for myself. It was essential to me that
my investigation of Islam result in intellectual and
theological satisfaction. I trust that others from a
similar background to mine will find that some of my
experiences along the path from Christianity to Islam
serve as useful pointers and starting points for
investigation in their own spiritual quest.
My Personal
Background
I converted to
Islam in October 1998 when aged 31. I am originally
from Ireland where I was born into a practicing
Catholic family, but I have spent nearly all my adult
life abroad. In the mid to late 1990's I was in love
with a Muslim lady whom I had met whilst in an Islamic
country. I knew that if I were interested in marrying
her, I would have to convert to Islam, as Muslim women
are prohibited from marrying outside their faith. I
did not at all welcome the prospect of having to
become a Muslim. In fact, although I knew very little
about Islam the religion, a particularly negative
experience I had just had of working in a different
Muslim country had, if anything, rather soured my
opinion of things to do with Islam and reinforced
whatever general western disinclinations I may already
have felt. Nevertheless back in Europe during the
spring and summer of 1998, I read all the text books I
could find in college and public libraries about Islam
(factual accounts, textbooks, mainly by non-Muslims)
and discovered, somewhat to my surprise, that I could
agree with 90% of the religion without any
difficulty. I actually became rather enthusiastic. I
realized that I had been making the mistake of judging
Islam by the behavior of some of its more unsavory
nominal adherents rather than by the theological and
moral teachings of the religion itself.
Jesus - Son
of God?
Where I did have
a real problem, though, was with the role of Jesus. I
had been brought up a Catholic Christian, believing in
the Holy Trinity of God the Father, Jesus the Son plus
the Holy Spirit - three persons in one god. Islam
rejects this and teaches the absolute oneness of God (Tawheed)
and specifically that Jesus, though a great prophet,
was only human and not divine.
"O People of the
Book [Christians and Jews]! Commit no excesses in your
religion: Nor say of God aught but the truth. Christ
Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger
of God, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a
spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in God and His
messengers. Say not "Trinity": desist: it will be
better for you: for God is one God: Glory be to Him:
(far exalted is He) above having a son." (Quran 4:171)
"Christ the son
of Mary was no more than a messenger; many were the
messengers that passed away before him. His mother was
a woman of truth. They had both to eat their (daily)
food." (Quran 5:75)
"[Jesus] said:
Surely I am a servant of God; He has given me the Book
and made me a prophet." (Quran 19:30)
"In blasphemy
indeed are those that say that God is Christ the son
of Mary." (Quran 5:17)
"They do
blaspheme who say: ‘God is Christ the son of Mary."
But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! worship God,
my Lord and your Lord.'" (Quran 5:72)
"And behold! God
will say: ‘O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say
unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in
derogation of God?' He will say: ‘Glory to Thee!
Never could I say what I had no right (to say).'" (Quran
5:116)
Islam preaches
pure monotheism. The absolute fundamental of Islam is
that God alone (what Christians refer to as God the
Father) is the sole deity. Surah 112 of the Quran is
quite explicit about this:
1. Say (O
Muhammad): "He is Allah, (the) One.
2. "The
Self-Sufficient Master.
3. "He begets
not, nor was He begotten;
4. "And there
is none co-equal or comparable unto Him."
What was I to
do? This was so alien to me. I certainly could not
betray Jesus.
In terms of
religious belief and practice, my own personal
situation was that I had mainly ceased going to Sunday
Mass for some years, in large part due to annoyance at
the political, non-religious content of many Sunday
sermons. (I much preferred the short, non-obligatory,
weekday Masses where I could concentrate without
distraction or annoyance on feeling close to God, as
no sermon is preached.) Yet on a theological level I
remained a committed Catholic (as opposed to
Protestant) within the context of Christianity. For
example, within the ring fence of Christianity, based
on my study of the Gospels, I believed in the
doctrines of transubstantiation and apostolic
succession. However, I had serious doubts about the
validity of Christianity per se, specifically with the
doctrine of Original Sin and the consequential need
for the blood sacrifice of Jesus, Son of God, as a
spiritual redeemer of souls in atonement. Both these
concepts are unknown and alien to the Judaism from
which Christianity is supposed to be derived.
Nevertheless the notion of Jesus as Son of God, had
been so deeply ingrained in me that it was extremely
difficult for me to countenance any other
interpretation.
Hussein
Abdulwaheed Amin, Ex-Catholic, Ireland (part 2 of 4):
Investigating the Christian Resources
Saint Paul
and the early Christian Church
Having gone as
far as I could at that time with my research of Islam,
I next set about a serious study of the historical
Jesus and the early Christian church. I was
astonished at what I learned - things I had never even
heard about in my fourteen years of Religious
Education at Catholic schools. As my knowledge
increased, I came to reject what I now regarded as the
doctrinal innovations of the foremost evangelist of
the early church, Paul of Tarsus, usually referred to
as Saint Paul the Apostle. Paul was not an Apostle at
all. In fact, he personally never even met Jesus, yet
claimed to receive visions of Jesus which overrode the
first-hand historical and theological knowledge of
those who had known and followed Jesus during his
actual ministry. Paul's abrogation of the Law of
Moses was decried by the Jerusalem church, led by
Peter, and comprised of the original Jewish disciples
of Jesus. They saw themselves as a movement within
Judaism and would not accept gentiles unless they
converted to Judaism, for example, through
circumcision and acceptance of Jewish dietary law.
For the original Jewish disciples of Jesus, the notion
of a literal and physical Son of God would have been
blasphemous and in direct contravention of the First
Commandment. In Exodus 20:2-5 we read:
"I am the Lord
your God...Worship no god but me...I tolerate no
rivals."
And Deuteronomy
6:4 is variously rendered as:
"Hear O Israel,
the LORD - and the LORD alone - is our
God." Or
"The LORD, our
God, is the only God."
Or
"The LORD our
God is one."
There seems no
scope for a "Son of God" or Trinity based on those
readings, only for God "the Father" in Christian
parlance or Allah as He is known to Muslims. [Allah is
simply the Arabic word for the God (capital G). He is
not some other deity, as some people in the West
mistakenly think. Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians
use the word "Allah" too and "Allah" appears
throughout the Arabic Bible.]
This
understanding that a literal, physical Son of God
would have been (and still is) blasphemous to Jews was
subsequently confirmed to me in private correspondence
with a Jewish university professor of religion.
Speaking of the Jewish understanding of the Messiah,
he stated: "The figure described here is clearly a
human being, not a divinity or son of God".
Saint Paul's
missionary work was overwhelmingly directed at
polytheist pagans in the northern Mediterranean. In
Corinth he gave up in exasperation on the Jews who
stayed faithful to the worship of God alone and to the
oneness of God. In Acts 17: 6 Paul declares to the
Jews:
"If you are
lost, you yourselves must take the blame for it. I am
not responsible. From now on I will go to the
gentiles."
The notion of
gods having children would have been very familiar to
gentiles such as the Greeks. I suspect that Paul
distorted the message of Jesus to make it more
acceptable to this audience and thereby gain as many
converts as possible as quickly as possible. We see
evidence in Acts 17: 22-23 of how Paul in Athens draws
explicitly on the existing religion of the Greeks to
introduce his corrupted version of Christianity to
them. There is also evidence that Paul made things up
as he went along and conjured up doctrine on the hoof
without reference to Jewish scripture, the teachings
of Jesus or even one of his own famed visions. For
example, in 1 Corinthians 7: 25 in reply to a query
about unmarried people, Paul admits that "I do not
have a command from the Lord", yet nevertheless
proceeds to offer his own private opinion in his
self-proclaimed capacity as "one who by the Lord's
mercy is worthy of trust".
The
Questionable Validity of the New Testament
Growing up in a
Catholic home and attending Catholic schools, I had
always unquestioningly regarded the Bible as the Word
of God. As a result of my private study in adulthood
of the history of the writing and compilation of the
Bible, I now came to view the New Testament in
particular as deeply suspect. Paul or his followers
wrote most of it. Note, for example, that from
chapter 16 onwards, the Acts of the Apostles follows
the career of Paul, not his co-missionary Barnabas, an
original disciple of Jesus. Barnabas was acknowledged
as the founder of the Christian Church in Cyprus and
was the author of a Gospel which was accepted by the
earliest Christians. But his Gospel was arbitrarily
excluded from the Bible when the New Testament was
officially compiled for the first time at the behest
of the pagan Roman Emperor Constantine three centuries
after Christ. Barnabas had originally vouched for
Paul when the Jerusalem disciples of Jesus wanted
nothing to do with him, but then parted company with
Paul after a bitter argument (Acts 15: 36-40).
As for the four
Gospels now accepted as canonical by Christendom (and
only since as late as the Council of Nicaea in 325
C.E.!), these were compiled from unreliable third and
fourth-hand accounts long after Jesus' lifetime.
Mark 65-75 C.E.
Luke 80-85 C.E.
Matthew 85-90
C.E.
John 95-140 C.E.
Source:
University of Calgary, Department of Religious
Studies[1]
How can the true
Word of God contain two glaringly different
genealogies of Jesus (Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke
3:23-37)? And why include human genealogies at all if
Jesus were truly the literal or physical "Son of
God"? How many thousands did Jesus really feed with
loaves and fish? Two different gospels give two
different figures. The actual numbers are a
relatively trivial detail, but these examples
highlight an important point - the unreliability of
the Gospels concerning the life and teachings of Jesus
and therefore their unsuitability as a basis for
doctrine.
Moreover, in
general, it is particularly important to consider that
not only are the Gospels not contemporary accounts,
they were actually written retrospectively in a
climate of disassociation from Judaism and
ingratiation with pagan Rome during or following the
failed Jewish anti-Roman uprising of 66-74 AD. In
contrast, the earlier and more authentic gospel
written by Barnabas was excluded from the official
Bible and suppressed by the Pauline-dominated Church
establishment from the 4th century onward.
In addition, it
seems silly to have to point it out, but Jesus, his
apostles and disciples were Jews whose scriptures were
in Hebrew. However, the New Testament was written in
Greek. And an appendix to the Good News Bible
authorized by the Catholic Church lists 85 instances
including 15 in the Gospels where New Testament
writers have Jesus and the other central characters of
early Christianity quoting from, paraphrasing or
alluding to texts not from the original Old Testament
in Hebrew but the from Septuagint version, a Greek
translation made in Egypt around 200 BC. The appendix
states:
In a number of
instances this version differs significantly in
meaning from the Masoretic Hebrew text.
It is not
credible that the Jesus and his followers would be
quoting from a foreign language translation containing
significant differences rather than from the Hebrew
original of their Jewish scriptures. This casts
further doubt on the accuracy of the New Testament and
again undermines its validity as a basis for doctrine.
Hussein
Abdulwaheed Amin, Ex-Catholic, Ireland (part 3 of 4):
From Trinitarianism to Unitarianism
The Quran -
perfectly preserved and unaltered
I would like to
mention in passing that in contrast to the compilation
of the New Testament and specifically the Gospels of
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the Quran, which is one
book, was revealed in its entirety to one prophet,
Mohammed. It was memorized by many of his followers
as it was received over a period of 23 years and was
also written down during Mohammed's lifetime. It was
definitively transcribed within two decades of
Mohammed's death and verified by his closest surviving
companions. Two of the four copies of the original
Quran made at that time are still in existence - one
in Istanbul in Turkey, the other in Tashkent in
Uzbekistan in former Soviet central Asia. Every
Arabic Qur'an in the world today is, letter for
letter, identical to this ancient script.
Indeed, in the
19th century, an institute of Munich University in
Germany collected a staggering forty-two thousand
different copies of the Quran including manuscripts
and printed texts produced in various parts of the
Islamic world over a period spanning thirteen hundred
years. Research work was carried out on these texts
for half a century, at the end of which the
researchers concluded that apart from copying
mistakes, there was no discrepancy in the text of
these forty-two thousand copies, even though they were
produced at different times between the first and
fourteenth Islamic centuries and had been procured
from all parts of the world. Unfortunately this
institute and its priceless treasure of Quranic
manuscripts were destroyed in an Allied bombing attack
on Germany during World War II, but the findings of
its research project survived.
In short, the
Quran stands or falls as one. The integrity of the
text itself is above reproach. There remains only a
personal decision whether to accept it or not as the
word of God.
In addition to
the Quran, the ahadeeth, or sayings of Prophet
Mohammed, which form the secondary strand of Islamic
scripture, were meticulously collected and
authenticated by the second Islamic century by Muslim
scholars who only accepted a given saying as genuine
if it had a proven chain of trustworthy transmitters
stretching back to one or more original companion of
the Prophet. Many thousands of plausible sayings
were rejected if they did not meet these strict
criteria.
Doubts about
Jesus's divinity even within the Gospels
Even within the
four canonical Gospels there are numerous passages
which cast doubt on the divinity of Jesus and
therefore on the concept of Trinity which presupposes
it. There are at least twenty instances where Jesus
prays. See Matthew 14:23, 19:13, 26:39, 27:46,
26:42-44; Mark 1:35, 6:46, 14:35-36; Luke 3:21, 5:16,
6:12, 9:18, 9:28, 11:1-4, 22:41; John 14:16, 17:1,
17:9, 17:11, 17:15. If Jesus were himself divine,
i.e. God, to whom is he praying and why?
Consider also
these passages:
Matthew 26:39
Jesus and God
had different wills.
Matthew
19:16-17, Mark 10:17-18 and Luke 18:18-19.
Jesus denied
divinity by distinguishing between himself and God.
Luke 7:16,
13:33, 24:19; John 4:19
Jesus was
regarded by his disciples and other contemporaries as
a prophet. They do not acclaim him as an incarnation
of God or the Son of God.
My Journey
from Catholic Christian to Arian Unitarian to Muslim
As a result of
my studies and after much soul-searching, I came to
reject Pauline church doctrinal innovations such as
the Trinity, a concept unknown to Jesus' disciples and
not definitively established as official church
doctrine until as late as 381A.D. I found myself in
sympathy with the more purely monotheist beliefs of
the late third and early fourth century priest Arius
of Alexandria and others such as Bishop Eusebius of
Nicomedia (later Patriarch of Constantinople), their
teacher, the respected priest and martyr Lucian of
Antioch and, in later decades, Roman Emperor
Constantius II. The Catholic Encyclopaedia defines
Arianism as:
"a heresy which
arose in the fourth century, and denied the divinity
of Jesus Christ,... not a modern form of unbelief, and
[it] therefore will appear strange in modern eyes."
What the
encyclopaedia fails to mention is that what they are
describing as heresy was, in fact, official church
doctrine in the middle of the fourth century. For
example, after the Council of Ariminum (present-day
Rimini in Italy) in 359A.D. St. Jerome wrote, "the
whole world groaned and marvelled to find itself
Arian". This prevailed until after the death of
Constantius II and his fellow Arian successors when a
changing political climate within the Roman Empire
resulted in the persecution of Arian Christians and
the conclusive imposition of Trinitarianism as
official church doctrine at the Second General Council
in 381A.D.
When I too came
to the conclusion that Jesus was not divine, I had
crossed an essential hurdle in terms of mindset and
beliefs. Whether or not Jesus is divine is the
absolute crux of the matter as far as any believing,
theologically aware Christian is concerned. Once I
had come to this new understanding of Jesus, it was
but a small step for me to be able to accept a later
prophet and embrace Islam, just as the North African
and Iberian Arian Christians, denounced by the Church
but physically safe outside the shrinking borders of
the Roman Empire, had done en masse when Islam was
introduced to them in the decades after the death of
Mohammed. Because of my Christian upbringing, I was
used to the concept of God sending prophets
periodically throughout history at times when mankind
had fallen away from His teachings. Islam recognizes
the Old Testament prophets I was familiar with plus
John the Baptist and Jesus. Given that, by the
seventh century, Arabia had lapsed into polytheism and
much of the Christian world was Trinitarian, it made
sense to me that God should send a new prophet,
Mohammed, to call mankind back to the correct worship
of Himself, the one true god.
There are 25
prophets recognized by name in the Quran. All but
three of them are also mentioned in Jewish or
Christian scripture:
1) Adam
2) Idrís
(Idrees)
3) Núh (Noah)
4) Húd
5) Sálih
6) Ibráhím
(Abraham)
7) Ismá'íl
(Ishmael)
8) Isháq
(Isaac)
9) Lút (Lot)
10) Ya'qúb
(Jacob)
11) Yúsuf
(Joseph)
12) Shu'aib
13) Ayúb (Job)
14) Músa
(Moses)
15) Hárún
(Aaron)
16) Dhu l-kifl
(Ezzekiel)
17) Dawúd
(David)
18) Sulaimán
19) Ilyás
(Elijah)
20) al-Yasa'
(Elisha)
21) Yúnus
(Jonas)
22) Zakaríya
(Zakariyah)
23) Yahyá (John
the Baptist)
24) ‘Ísa
(Jesus)
25) Muhammad
I had now
reached the point where I genuinely wanted to be a
Muslim in my own right, whether my interest in the
Muslim lady mentioned previously led to marriage or
not. (In fact the relationship in question eventually
did not work out.) For I see my conversion to Islam
not as a rejection of what I regard as true
Christianity, simply as a rejection of the tangent or
erroneous path along which Paul and his followers led
astray the new, gentile, former polytheistic
Christians of the Greco-Roman world. Sadly, all major
forms of modern Christianity - Roman Catholicism,
Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism - stem from Paul.
The Catholic
Encyclopaedia states that Arianism has never been
revived (although it concedes that such eminent
figures as Sir Isaac Newton and Milton displayed Arian
sympathies). What it fails to acknowledge is that
Arianism has, for the last fourteen hundred years,
been incorporated within Islam. There is no one left
within Catholicism, Protestantism or Orthodoxy to
espouse the oneness of God. The reason why
Trinitarianism now rules unfettered within the greatly
reduced geographical boundaries of old world
Christendom is that the peoples of all the southern
Mediterranean formerly Arian Christian strongholds are
now overwhelmingly Muslim!
Hussein
Abdulwaheed Amin, Ex-Catholic, Ireland (part 4 of 4):
Statement of Theological Beliefs
With a clear
conscience and with none of the mental torment on this
issue that I had to face when I first started studying
Islam, I can now state that I believe Jesus to have
been an entirely human prophet of God, one of the
greatest prophets of God and worthy of the utmost
respect, but that he was neither an incarnation of God
nor the Son of God. I believe that Jesus, a pious,
monotheistic Jew, would be absolutely horrified by
what Trinitarian Christians have made him out to be.
Previously I feared that I would be betraying Jesus if
I became a Muslim. Now I realised that I had been, in
effect, inadvertently blaspheming and saying what I
had no right to say about him.
I believe
Mohammed to have been a later (the last) prophet of
God. And just as the true Christianity of Jesus'
genuine apostles in Jerusalem is the successor to
Judaism, so is Islam, the final revelation of God's
word, the legitimate successor to and fulfilment of
original Jerusalem-Jewish Christianity.
I would like to
make absolutely clear that I did not convert to Islam
because of a romantic relationship. The possibility
of marriage to a Muslim woman was the spur, the
catalyst, which sparked my initial investigation of
Islam. For the record, the relationship in question
later broke down in 2001, but I still remain a Muslim.
My conversion to
Islam, when it came, was a sincere one, not one of
convenience. It had to be sincere. I could not in
good conscience have undergone a fraudulent one.
Religion, God, is too important to be trifled with.
One's soul is at stake.
I rejected
Christianity as it is known to us today because I no
longer believed in the doctrine of Trinity and the
claim that Jesus is God. I came to believe
wholeheartedly in the oneness of God. And I judge
this belief to have found its best expression in the
religion of Islam. Whatever the future may hold in
terms of personal relationships, I will continue to
hold these beliefs.
At times I can't
help but seriously wonder whether vast swathes of the
religious community I have joined have forgotten the
theological core of Islam and buried it with cranky
behavioural regulations which they seek to impose on
others, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, although God
clearly states in the Quran that there is "no
compulsion". I admit at times to feeling rather
disillusioned at certain interpretations I have
encountered among Muslims of what constitutes
legitimate Islamic practice and behaviour. I assure
you that people with a Taliban mindset are not
confined to Afghanistan.
And I am
sickened by the politicized hate-filled philosophy,
which passes itself off as Islam when in fact not only
does it violate the most basic Islamic rules of
warfare, it is often indicative of a complete lack of
trust in God's promise that no one will have to suffer
more than they can endure. These extremists have set
the cause of the spread of Islam back decades. At
times I can't help but echo the lament of British
convert, Michael A. Malik[1]: "Islam is wonderful,
but I can't stand the Muslims!"
But in spite of
my frequent disillusionment with the behaviour and
attitudes of many of those who call themselves Muslim,
in terms of beliefs about the nature of God, I will
remain a believer in the oneness of God - for life.
Some time ago an
American Protestant friend brought a wonderful
quotation of Martin Luther's to my attention:
Everyone must
do his own believing, as he will have to do his own
dying.
I am completely
at peace with myself about my new, pure monotheistic
theological beliefs exemplified by Islam. And this is
my statement of belief:
He is God,
the only One,
Qul Huwa Allāhu ‘Aĥad
God the
Everlasting. Allāhu Aş-Şamad
He did not
beget and is not begotten,
Lam Yalid Wa Lam Yūlad
And none is
His equal. (Quran - Surah 112)
Walam Yakun Lahu Kufūan ‘Aĥad.
I bear
witness that there is no god but the God
Ashadu an la illaha ill allah
and I bear
witness that Mohammed is a prophet of God. Wa ashadu anna Mohammadan rasool Ullah.
Thanks to
Parents
Finally, I would
like to express my sincere appreciation to my parents
- devout, practicing Catholics - who, although
strongly disapproving of my conversion to Islam on
theological grounds, have accepted my decision and
have continued to show me great love, understanding,
sensitivity and practical support. I have been most
blessed in this regard.