Dialogue Between Christians, Jews and Muslims: The Concept of Covenant as Basis By Ian Rex Fry RDA A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy MCD University of Divinity March 14, 2012 Acknowledgements I wish to acknowledge and record my gratitude for advice, guidance and personal assistance received from a number of people during the course of my research. In particular, Revd. Dr. Ruwan Palapathwala, Research Associate, Melbourne College of Divinity, who has been my mentor and has facilitated my research in various ways in addition to being my nominated Supervisor, and my wife, Lynette, whose support, encouragement and considerable tolerance and understanding over several years, as well as assistance with reading and facilitating reference searches, have been enormously important in enabled me to complete the task. There are a number of scholars who have provided specific assistance with works of reference, in personal discussions, correspondence or introductions, including Professor Richard Law, Washington State University, for permission to use his hominid evolution references; Dr. Edmund Chia, Catholic Theological Union. Chicago, for providing his doctoral thesis; Professor Abdul Khaliq Kazi, International Islamic University Islamabad, for personal assistance, guidance and as a mentor for many years; Professor Ira Bashkow, University of Virginia, as a mentor and for introducing me to the scholars of the Children of Abraham Institute; Professor Leonard Swidler, Temple University, for correspondence and references; Professor M. Kamal Hassan, formerly Rector, the International Islamic University Malaysia, for facilitating extensive discussions; Revd. Dr. Rufus Black, Master, Ormond College, and the late Revd. Dr. Douglas Fullerton for guidance as personal mentors; the late professor Syed Hussein Alatas and Professor Syed Farid Alatas, National University of Singapore, for personal assistance and discussions at their homes, and the Melbourne College of Divinity Research Committee for financial assistance to support various field research visits and conference participation in Hawaii, Kerala and Sydney. Then there are the twenty three scholars who responded to my request to participate in a structured research project and, in some cases, entered into extended discussions as well as completing what some people described as a somewhat daunting questionnaire on their understanding of covenant. I understand that I expected a lot of them and I appreciate that they responded with openness to sensitive questions of interfaith relationships. They cannot be named, but I now record my gratitude to them. There are a number of people without whose support I could not have undertaken the current program. Although not directly involved in my thesis research, they have provided assistance, in some cases for many years, and supported me in interfaith discussions when these were widely frowned upon within the church. They include the late Revd. Dr. David Penman, Archbishop of Melbourne; the late Revd. Dr. Alan Brash, Deputy General Secretary, World Council of Churches; the late Professor Kryster Stendahl, Harvard University; Revd. Dr. John Taylor, former WCC Director of Dialogue; Dr. Abraham Karickam, founder, the Kottarakara Intertextuality Conferences; Dr. Chandra Muzaffar, President, International Movement for a Just World; Professor Joseph Camilleri, Centre for Dialogue, LaTrobe University; H.E. Judge Christopher Weeramantry, former Deputy President, International Court of Justice; H.E. Dr. Abdullah Naseef, Secretary General, the World Muslim League, Jeddah; H.E. Dr. Ahmad A. Kamal, former Adviser to the Secretary General, Organization of the Islamic Conference, Jeddah; H.E. Yissakhar Ben-Yaacov, former Special Adviser on Jerusalem, Israeli Foreign Ministry, Rabbi Jonathan Keren Black, Leo Baeck Centre, Melbourne, as a mentor and for help with introductions, and Mr. Peter Leahy whose assistance with research and drafting for Trouble in the Triangle, during a period when I feared poor health might prevent me from completing that prior work, was acknowledged in those books. Title of Thesis: Dialogue Between Christians, Jews and Muslims: The Concept of Covenant as Basis. Name: Ian Rex Fry Declaration I declare that the word length of this thesis is approximately 100,000 words. This does not exceed the maximum length specified in the regulations I declare that the bibliography format is consistent and conforms to the requirements of the Turabian Style (Turabian, Kate L. 2007. A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations, 7th ed. University of Chicago Press.); or that, alternatively, permission has been granted to employ another style. Statement of Originality I hereby certify that this thesis contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other institution and affirm that to the best of my knowledge, the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person, except where due reference is made in the text of the thesis. Signed: ________________________________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________________________ Abstract This thesis examines in what manner and on what basis communities of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, the Abrahamic faiths, can engage in conversation-dialogue relating to the concept of covenant to enable a greater awareness of their relationship with God and the relationships between each of their communities. To achieve this task, this study critically examines the primary texts of each faith in the context of human history, their origins, development and interaction through a series of five epochs which has been identified and constructed as an integral part of this study. Recommendations are made based on the conclusion that dialogue relating to that concept is not only possible but is vital to enable progress towards stability and harmony in human affairs, and a clearer understanding of humanity’s relationship with God. A number of other intimately related conclusions have been reached. Each of Judaism, Christianity and Islam have been called into existence by divine initiative as a consequence of major breaches of covenant by their successive predecessors, namely Yahwism, then Judaism, then Christianity. Those successive initiatives do not mean that any covenant has been abrogated. They are each extant and their operation is cyclical in accord with the conduct of their adherents. Each covenant involves a common obligation as well as responsibilities specific to each faith. The currency of each covenant, and a partnership between each faith, is shown by the convergence of prophecy related to continuing breaches of covenant which were generated within each of them. This has culminated in the establishment of the State of Israel – the central fact of the Common Era – and also in the relative status of the White Western Christian Bloc and the World Majority Peoples being reversed. This requires recognition of the partnership between the three Abrahamic faiths, and dialogue and cooperation on that basis. Table of Contents Title Page !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Chapter Title Page One Introduction. Covenants: templates for the future 17 "# $ % &"' ( ) " $ ) " & "# $ $# # & *"# +,$- . " # +,$- )" # & "# # # ." $ * "# ) &"/ "/ $ ## "$# # . "0 # ## $ % #12$%3 4 #&12 4 $ *"5## * "6$$ # # ** Two The first epoch: stage one. Prehistory, the Abrahamic Era to Israel’s Migration * "' $ * &" # # * "# $ . #14## 7 "# 8 1 9 4 "# 1# 9:#9 # 3 *" 9 # ) "#; 1 $ ) )"# # )* "' '# 1 # 9 $ < ) ."# =8 ; "# 4 % ## ' .& Three The first epoch: stage two. A mature understanding of covenant ready to go! . "' $ . &"' >10 96 . " #$ "-# $ ? "6 1 <$( * *"6$ 9# #%96$ 9 # @ :# "> #$ 9# 1 # $ )" "# 2 "# # & $ $ Four The Second Epoch: shared responsibility "' $ &"A $; $ "# $ 0%1A## 8B A $:B # "A $; 1=7 "+$ $ ; "-# C# : D? *"/E/ %"/$ ;' # % #$# ) "# #$# *& )" ( 1# "# ' " . #"/$ 4 ' # Five The Third Epoch: an extended network, and a new kind of war ) "' $ ) &" # #$ % ) "/ 17 $ $ : E )& "# : #A$ % ) " ' ) *" ) "# F G# . )"A$ 1 # $ # $$ "5$ %9 9 $9$9 B ."H 1$ $ $ ) " 1#I$ 8 ; &. Six Fourth Epoch: a brutal demonstration. Conflict and the reality of &. covenant "' $ &. &"!1'1H %; $ &. "- # $ 14$ $9:# &$!1 &!!" &. "/ $ 7 & "5$# 1 9#$ E &* *"5$# ; 1J 9@ $ 8$ &) " ;' $ 1 & )"# 6$ $ $ && "# # 1 " &&& ." A$ 1/ # 6# #J && "$ ' &&) &"0$ # # #$# && " A$ && "# / K$ & #1/$ 4 1##' & "# 1%8 &. *"- ; # & "# $# $ & )" # % !1' &) " 1 $$ 4 & &."# %# A #K$ & &"2 #$ & &&"7 ; 1 # #? & &" 1% # &* Seven The fifth epoch: covenant applied & "' $ & &" L $ 1 A$ 9 #% ' & "$ 1# #$#$ $% &* "3 I$ &* " 1$ &*) *" 3E$ : &. "@$% #1$% && )"; 1 # &% & "# 1+,$ &) #1+,$-9@/49 36 ' & ."7 3#1 $' &). "$$ # &). &" # &)& "# ' #$ ## 36 &) " 36# % &) "85 936E' B $ $ &)* *" $1# 049 9--8 % & Eight Covenant Theology: current strands and views & "' $ & &"# $ 1# 0 I$ & "# # &) "-# # %? . " 9#J : #