| Summary: | Muslims and Christians in Indonesia havestruggled in communicating faith in the new
context of religious plurality. Abū Is� al Warr�q and the three Christian communities,
Nestorians, Jacobites, and Melkites, are among pioneers in finding appropriate ways to
communicate faith in a world characterized by religious diversity. The questions I am
to answer are : What are Abū Is� al Warr�q�s objections against Christologies
formulated by Christian Nestorians, Jacobites, and Melkites? What are supporting and
unsupporting factors in their Christological polemics? With the failure doctrinal mode
in communicating faith, what kind of alternative approach that allows Muslims and
Christians to learn from each other�s christological reflection?
To answer these questions, I review the works of Abū 'Is� al-Warr�q. He
engaged in Christological polemics against Christian Nestorians, Jacobites, and
Melkites. The objection of Al-Warr�q towards Christology because his excessive
emphasis on rationality. Al-Warr�q argued that the concept of unity between the divine
and the human nature in Christ formulated by these communities was complex,
contradictive, and illogical. His Islamic tradition that absolutely distinguishes God from
humans, influenced his critical questions against them.
I analyze a number of factors of the polemic Christology that makes it difficult
to have inter-religious dialogue. 1) Christological polemic underway with doctrinaire
approach. The religious communities difficultly involved in communicating each other
because each of them strictly adhered to the official teachings of religion. 2) Another
factor, Christological polemic is difficult to understand due to cultural differences in
ways of thinking between Muslim and Christian communities. 3) In addition, the
development of language and terms that vary from era to era and the influence of
traditional theology, have contributed to complicate the polemic Christology. 4) Factor
that increasingly emphasizes the difficulty in polemics Christology is the attempt to
blame the teaching of other religions.
After understanding and analyzing their Christological polemics, I offer an
alternative Christology to help Muslims and Christians in building communication of
faith such as, Christ as mediator, Jesus as messenger of God, Jesus as compassionate
person to human problem, Jesus as a true friend. I owe debts from both Muslim and
Christian thinkers in formulating it. My intense involvements in interfaith dialogue
shape my Christological reflection.
Through this research, I am aware that religious communities in Indonesia,
especially Muslims and Christians, need to formulate Christology informed by
interfaith dialogue. This new Christology goes beyond confrontational and doctrinal
models. By fostering mutual respect between Muslims and Christians, we can expect
that they learn about the religious others� faith and deepen their own faith.
|
|---|