Continuation of my Contentions Series.
Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.
40. The Paraclete was indeed the Comforter. We were in a state of ascetical panic about ourselves.
Terms: Paraclete
From the Catholic Encyclopedia:
Paraclete, Comforter (L. Consolator; Gr. parakletos), an appellation of the Holy Ghost. The Greek word which, as a designation of the Holy Ghost at least, occurs only in St. John (xiv, 16, 26; xv, 26; xvi, 7), has been variously translated “advocate”, “intercessor”, “teacher, “helper”, “comforter”. This last rendering, though at variance with the passive form of the Greek, is justified by the Hellenistic usage, a number of ancient versions, patristic and liturgical authority, and the evident needs of the Johannine context. According to St. John the mission of the Paraclete is to abide with the disciples after Jesus has withdrawn His visible presence from them; to inwardly bring home to them the teaching externally given by Christ and thus to stand as a witness to the doctrine and work of the Saviour.
This contention is again in the theme of Chistianity, as Paraclete was the term found in the New Testament which Muslims such as Shaikh Ahmad Deedat held referred to Muhummad (S). I remember that Shaikh Ahmad Deedat often referred to this reference of “Paraclete” in his pamphlet/books as well as speeches.
Although I have learned since that discussing the polemic debate over what such things actually reference is somewhat futile with Christians, but it is definately good to be aware of as a Muslim. I find that sincerity and iklhas, not such debate, is usually the best Dawah, as the other post from Sheykh Abdal Hakim Murad shows.
The second sentence of the contention indicates that the Parcalete, in our case Muhummad (S), was a comforter of a phase of an “ascetical panic“.
I find that asceticism and “panic” are two contrary words, since one often views asceticism in terms of patience, self-denial and self discipline. So one word naturally denies the other, most ascetics wouldn’t be “panic-prone”, in my opinion.
So if we take it a level above, then it may be that it is the result of their panic over the nature of God’s instructions for us that led the religious people of the time to an extreme lifestyle of asceticism, celebacy, etc.
So in this way, Muhummad(S), can be viewed as a comforter for us that he indeed brought a sense of calmness to our nature, allowing Muslims to live worldy lives with religious meaning.
39. Christianity was providential as preparatio evangelica.
preparatio evangelica – As far as I could discover its origins are from a book of early Christian historian, Eusebius. Translating to “The Evanglical Preperation”
From http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/jackson2/04_eus.html
“The object of this work, which is in fifteen books, is to predispose the thoughtful to receive the Christian religion by dissipating their pagan prejudices. The first six books are employed in demolishing the pagan systems of religion, which the author shatters by his learned elucidations. The pure and reasonable character of the Christian theology and the blessings which the faith has brought to the world are set forth in contrast with the absurd teachings of polytheism….
-snip-
From all this the author concludes that Christians are right in abandoning a false theology in favor of that of the Jews.”
This is a great introduction to the early Christian writings which may have envisioned a Christianity much more similar to Islam and Judaism in theology.
As far as the Sheykh’s contention, I believe it is simply indicating that the discussion of Christianity within this text is representing (at some level) the divinely sent religion of Isa (AS).
Continuation of my Contentions Series.
Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.
38. Annunciation vs. enunciation: the word is best made word.
Terms:
Annunciation- a festival commemorating the announcement of the Incarnation by the angel Gabriel to the Virgin Mary; a quarter day in England, Wales, and Ireland
Enunciation- the articulation of speech regarded from the point of view of its intelligibility to the audience
Interpretation:
The first part pits two like-sounding words against each other.
“the word is best made word”
This part seems open for the most interpretation. If we relate the first reference of “word” to “Annunciation”, and the second reference of “word” to “Enunciation”, then we begin to see something form here. I feel its legitimate to replace them as I do, since both refer to forms of speech or announcements/pronouncements.
“The Annunciation is best made Enunciation”
A verse to keep in mind here is, Sura 3:59 Translated as:
“The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: Be! And he was.
We might understand this contention better if we associate “enunciation” as the reference to this concept of “Be!”. Obviously wary of the fact that enunciation could be miscontrued as a bit anthropomorphic so I wonder if this is really where the Sheykh was going with this.
So.. finally, I would understand this as:
“The announcement of Isa’s (AS) birth (Annunciation) should best be understood through the acknowledgement of Allah’s ability to say “Be!” (enunciation), and it is. “
Perfect time to remind everyone that I’m no expert and I have never even met Sheykh Abdal Hakim Murad, so any interpretations you have, feel free to post about them.
37. Some religions out-narrate others.
Short but sweet.
My interpretation:
A few possibilities.
One interpretation could be that the Sheykh is discussing direct narrations of the founders of each religion. This brings out the point that Christianity is sprinkled with some sayings of Jesus (AS) in the New Testament, but in comparison to the narrations of Muhummad (S) present in Islam, it is minor. I’m unfamiliar with the amount of direct narration within Judaic tradition.
The other meaning could be in terms of narrations as stories or traditions to learn from. In this case, the number of traditions is equivilant to their place in history. For example, Jews accept the narration of the Old Testament alone, Christians accept the narrations of the Old Testament and New, Muslims accept (different versions of) those same stories, along with the tradition of the Prophet (S) and the Companions (Ra).
Another meaning could be the emphasis placed on accuracy and the sciences involved with narration, within each religion.
the truth on 
m.a.kidwai,CME/IND.RLY.(retd.) on 
Contentions 1 (41)
Continuation of my Contentions Series.
Link to Sheykh Abd al Hakim Murad’s Contentions part 1.
Interpretation:
I first viewed this contention differently than I do now. First it made me think that the Sheykh was saying something to the extent of “reacting to liberalism is making Islam stronger”, but I have since changed my mind and below is my reasoning why.
First we must understand what is meant by “the liberal theory of religion”.
In terms of religion liberalism is defined as: the movement away from traditional orthodoxy often in an attempt to harmonize biblical teachings with science, humanism, or other secular fields. Liberal forms of religion are often viewed as “watered down”, similar to what the Sheykh is saying up above.
Next, I somewhat understood homeopathy as a “natural” healing form of medicine, but to my surprise I found that is not the case:
So here we find that homeopathic medicine is based off the idea of using small amounts of a substance to make it a strong cure for the illness (second part of contention).
The next thing to establish is how homeopathy is generally viewed. Well, most people I know would not consider the above to be true medicine at all.
We can now put together the pieces of this contention. With the “watered down” aspect of the contention, the Sheykh is asserting that liberalism is a watered down version of Islam.
In summary, the Sheykh is indicating that the liberals in religion are following the homeopathic principle which is to believe that the more you water it down, the stronger it is as a cure.
As a final conclusion, one could consider that homeopathy, although it may have had a fevered adherence for some time, was not a very successful form of medicine in the long run. So the relationship may be drawn here to the failure of homeopathy and eventual failure of liberalism in religion.