King Solomon the Wise

  • Thread starter Thread starter SalamKhan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SalamKhan

Guest
In Islam, we believe that Sulayman (A), the son of Dawud (A), was not only a great king like his father, but also a great Prophet like his father. We also deny what has been attributed to him in the Bible, namely comitting apostasy towards the end of his life. In Christianity, you believe that Sulayman (A) was the inspired author of some books in the Old Testament. My question is, considering the authority of Scripture, how can you accept that an inspired author could have fallen into apostasy, would that not cast doubt on whether he was inspired at all?
 
Last edited:
well let’s see.

Take a respected author in any field (let’s say chemistry). Over a 50 year period of writing, his or her books were clear, concise, impeccably researched, thoroughly accurate. Then in the last year or two of life he or she developed Alzheimer’s or Lewy body dementia (not known until autopsy after death). During the last year or two that person wrote a book slated for publishing in which he/she repudiated all the accepted chemistry teachings in favor of the idea that an alien civilization had ‘given’ chemistry to prehistoric humans.

Now, does this last book ‘invalidate’ all the other books the person wrote?
 
I anticipated someone giving this kind of answer, and this is why I specifically wrote “considering the authority of Scripture”. This is not a mere human author writing his own opinions.
 
I don’t believe that Solomon died in a state of apostasy. He was led astray by his many wives for a time, but ultimately repented, no?
His built the temple too… he definitely had an important role in salvation history.
 
Last edited:
The point is, the Bible claims he had fallen into apostasy.

Another question is, since he was a Prophet (I don’t know if Christians agree with this but they do believe he was inspired), should he have been obeyed? Because if he has really committed apostasy, then wouldn’t the men of God have been required to follow him even in this?
 
Last edited:
There is a Catholic saying (in Latin of course), Ex Opere Operato. Meaning “by the work worked”. Basically, as long as the Holy Spirit influenced King Solomon, what he did afterwards has no say on what he wrote before. Inspiration does not depend on the person and his faith or morals. It depends on the work performed.

By the way, Christians do not consider Solomon a prophet. His Song of Songs or Canticle of Canticles is inspired but he is not a prophet like John the Baptist.
 
We are Christians, not Solomonians. All the kings and prophets of the old testaments had their weaknesses and mistakes.
 
Nonetheless, you consider him an instrument in salvation history. Yet, according to the Bible, he couldn’t even save himself (metaphorically speaking) from falling away from God.
 
True. Yet none, except the Virgin Mary and Jesus, were perfect. God can do anything with anyone. Solomon had free will as do we all.
 
We believe that men can be great sinners at some point in their life but still be saints. God’s grace, His mercy, is greater than their sins.
Let’s look at St Paul in the New Testament. At first he persecuted the Church. But then he came to know the Gospel and devoted himself to it.
Solomon doesn’t normally have the title Prophet, but you are right that he had spiritual authority - both as an anointed king and as a sacred writer.
 
SalamKhan said:
In Islam, we believe that Sulayman (A), the son of Dawud (A), was not only a great king like his father, but also a great Prophet like his father. We also deny what has been attributed to him in the Bible, namely comitting apostasy towards the end of his life. In Christianity, you believe that Sulayman (A) was the inspired author of some books in the Old Testament. My question is, considering the authority of Scripture, how can you accept that an inspired author could have fallen into apostasy, would that not cast doubt on whether he was inspired at all?
Click to expand...
Even Cain wasn’t evil in the beginning, no?
 
The authority of scripture doesn’t rely on the virtue of the person writing it. God can use whoever he wants to accomplish something.

The virtue of any writer - notwithstanding Solomon - wouldn’t be tenable. Even if a person were allegedly sinless, that still wouldn’t give them any special revelation. God is required in order to inspire them. It’s top-down, not bottom-up.
 
Last edited:
How do you know? Islam did not come from the Jews. YOu could not have relaible source to believe different than the Jews who were Solomon’s descendants.
 
No one is perfect. Not Solomon and certainly not Muhammad, who you thought was.
 
Here’s the thing: Simultaneously, you assert the authority of Scripture and question it at the same time. As for Solomon; he didn’t die an apostate. He repented of his idolatry to God.
 
I’m not 100% sure on the Catholic view on this (I just returned to the Catholic Church a little over a year ago), but we were taught in the evangelical church I used to go to that it wasn’t the author that was inspired, but rather the words that were inspired. It also isn’t all the words they ever spoke or wrote, but only the words that are included in Scripture. Thus, for example, St. Paul can quote pagan poets in his writings without us saying that everything those pagans wrote was inspired.
 
The Islamic spins on the Biblical narratives that are integral to the Judeo-Christian tradition are just silly. I find it funny how you try and quote the Bible when you think it supports your beliefs, but when it doesn’t you say it’s corrupted. Anyway, to answer your question:
  1. Certain book such as Ecclesiastes, Wisdom, Song of Songs, and Proverbs have traditionally been attributed to Solomon, but this isn’t necessarily dogma that has to be accepted without question. Authorship of the Biblical text isn’t as important as you may think, because either way, it’s inspired. God can work through the hands of authors who aren’t even aware of it.
  2. It’s possible Solomon wrote these before he fell into idolatry
  3. He may have repented afterwards and reconciled himself to God, in fact this seems to be the traditional point of view, even though it isn’t explicitly stated in the Bible but may be implied depending on how you read the text. Solomon is venerated as a Saint in much of eastern Christianity.
The works traditionally attributed to Solomon are scripture, they contain the word of God no matter who wrote them.

Now is Solomon a prophet? I’d say yes, but not the kind Islam imagines up. Solomon certainly wasn’t a prophet like Abraham, Moses, Elijah, or John the Baptist; he seems to have had inspiration from God during some time in his life, but he wasn’t the kind of prophet to give revelation or work miracles or announce the coming of another prophet.
 
Last edited:
SalamKhan said:
how can you accept that an inspired author could have fallen into apostasy, would that not cast doubt on whether he was inspired at all?
Click to expand...
No. Why would it? The book can be written by a flawed author yet still contain truth in it. What I find unusual is that Islamic theologians seem to need to paint all the figures in scripture as flawless, sinless individuals. I never understood why that needs to be the case. I certainly don’t understand how anyone can claim that Muhammed was sinless, given his record.
 
SalamKhan said:
In Christianity, you believe that Sulayman (A) was the inspired author of some books in the Old Testament.
Click to expand...
Correct.
My question is, considering the authority of Scripture, how can you accept that an inspired author could have fallen into apostasy,
Click to expand...
Apostasy? If he apostasized, he came back.

Apostasy | Definition of Apostasy by Merriam-Webster


Definition of apostasy. plural apostasies. 1 :an act of refusing to continue to follow, obey, or recognize a religious faith. 2 :abandonment of a previous loyalty :defection.

But, I don’t see evidence of apostasy. He committed the sin of idolatry. But he continued in the Faith of His Fathers.

1 Kings 11:6 So Solomon did what was evil in the sight of the Lord and did not wholly follow the Lord,

He did not follow the Lord perfectly. But he did follow Him.
would that not cast doubt on whether he was inspired at all?
Click to expand...
God is not affected by human weakness. He has spoken through donkeys. Through pagans and through sinful humans throughout salvation history. King Solomon is just one more example of such.

Remember, King Solomon’s dad was a murderous adulterer.
 
It seems to me that the incarnation of Solomon can be called William Shakespeare.
No wonder he is called the Solomon a New Era.
There are allegations that Shakespeare was a Catholic.
Shakespeare also knew the Bible by heart.
Such Shakespeareans as Richmond Noble, Thomas Carter, Wilson Knight confirm this.
There are versions that Shakespeare like Solomon, was very sttongly-sexed heterosexually, women were his obsession/inspiration/weakness , but his works remained.
Reading his latest tales, you can assume the flowering of the soul, and believe in Jesus the Saviour and the Resurrection.
A person is weak, women sometimes take away the mind, but what remains is the God-inspired genius.
But beauty itself is not evil but good.
Beauty is a flower!
Shakespeare’s character-monk Lorenzo figuratively speaks of a medicinal flower:
“Smell the flower and you LL get more strength, but if you swallow the flower, it will kill you.”
The poet Omar Khayyam, who is also considered to be the greatest poet in the Eastern world, also often exaggerated beauty in an original way.
God created the woman from the top to the bottom , and rewarded her with dignity and esteem. God did not create her as a slave to Adam, аnd again, the Solomon’s warnings about women’s written in the poetic spirit of that time, are very valuable, but in his apostasy he was to blame.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top