Good Works

2021 ◽  
Vol 77 (8) ◽  
pp. 20-23
Author(s):  
NANCY D. LAMONTAGNE
Keyword(s):  
2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elia Yuhanon Mellus
Keyword(s):  

PMLA ◽  
1901 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-116
Author(s):  
W. H. Carruth

In Westermann's Monatshefte for January, 1891, and later in his ‘Life of Lessing,‘ Professor Erich Schmidt has outlined the chief features of the history and transformations of the story of the three rings in Europe. On examination it will be found that all the versions of the story belong to one or the other of two types, which are represented by the two earliest forms of the story preserved to us. The oldest version, that of the Spanish Jew Salomo ben Verga, tells of two rings or jewels only, which were in outward appearance exactly alike, and there is no question of one being genuine and the other false, but only of the relative value of the two. In the absence of the father it is found impossible to decide the question, and thus the decision between Christianity and Judaism is simply avoided. In Li Dis dou vrai aniel, a French poem of the end of the twelfth century, three rings appear, and to the original or genuine ring is attributed a marvelous healing power by which it may be recognized, and following which a decision is arrived at among the three religions, in this case in favor of Christianity, although ther were not wanting later narrators so bold as to hint that the true ring was possessed by Judaism. The version of Etienne de Bourbon, the versions of the Cento Novelle, the three versions of the Gesta Romanorum, all belong to one or the other of two types. We may refer to these two types as the Spanish type and the French type. Those of the first type, to which belongs also the version of Boccaccio, the one from which Lessing took his point of departure, avoid a decision, implying that all religions are equally authoritative, but without inherent or inner evidence of their quality. Those of the second type, to which in many of its features Lessing's final version of the story is allied, lead to a decision, making religion of divine origin indeed, but supplying a test, that of good works, whereby the true religion may be recognized.


Metrics ◽  
2016 ◽  
pp. 163-177
Author(s):  
Lily Walkover
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-66
Author(s):  
Amri Azhari

There are two different thoughts of the scholars since the last period to the present about the use of Veil. The first thought which oblige a woman Muslim to close the face [Veiled] in front of the male who is not her Mahram; because the face is a primary body part that must be covered. This thought being the opinion of Imam Ahmad bin Hambal, and a strong thought of Imam Syafi'i. The second opinion says Istihbab [Highly recommended], this being the opinion of the Imam Malik and Abu Hanifah's thought and Imam Malik, but, on the other thought of Hanafi and Maliki, since then,  they oblige a veiled woman when they're worried about a slander that will occurr to them. It could happen to her if she is pretty girl, so it appears a libel damages and a malice outbreaking. As this opinion asserted by Al imam Ibn ' Abidin Alhanafi his book [Raddul Muhtar ' Ala Addurul Mukhtar] said: the young girl is prohibited to open her face in the presence of a male [that is not her mahram], it does not because of the face is a body part that must be covered, nevertheless it is concerned as a defamation that occur to the tempted men though his desires are not appeared. Then, the thought about this istihbab is strongly assumed by Shaykh Muhammad al-Albani, a great scholar in the field of Hadith. In addition, he also has a considerable role in enriching the treasure in the field of Islamic law by producing a good works such as the book: (Hijab Almar-ah Almuslimah Fii Alkitaab Wa Assunnah) and a book (Arradul Mufhim ' Ala Man Khalafa Al ulamaa Wa tasyadda Wa ta'shshaba Wa alzama  Almar ata antastura Wajhaha Wa kaffaiha Wa awjaba Wa lam yaqna ' Biqaulihim Innahu Sunnatun  wa Mustahabbun). those two books were his Ijtihad about the use of the veil and islamic law.  Mustahabbun/Sunnah (highly recommended for Muslim women and it does not up to the obligatorily required status). Based on the some Imam Madzhab's thought being compared with the opinions of Shaykh Muhammad al-Albani about the veil, as a result, the author of this scientific works has  aims to explain a different thought among Mutaqaddimin and Muakhkhirin scholars about the veil. I pray to Allah, may Allah gives a great benefits, Aamiin Yaa Rabbal 'alamiin.Para Ulama sejak dahulu sampai sekarang berselisih paham tentang hukum Cadar dangan dua pendapat: yang pertama pendapat yang mewajibkan seorang wanita muslimah untuk menutup wajah [ Bercadar ] didepan laki-laki yg bukan Mahram; dikarenakan Muka adalah Aurat yang wajib di tutut, hal ini menjadi pendapat Imam Ahmad bin Hambal, dan pendapat yang kuat dalam madzham Imam Syafi’. Yang kedua pendapat yang mengatakan Istihbab [ Sangat di anjurkan] , ini menjadi pendapat Madzhab Imam Abu Hanifah dan Imam Malik, Namun di sisi lain para ulama Hanafi dan Maliki- sejak dahulu kala meraka mewajibkan wanita bercadar ketika di khawatirkan terjadinya fitnah yang akan menimpanya; hal tercebut bisa terjadi jika seorang wanit yg cantik maka timbullah fitnah berupa kerusakan dan merebaknya kefasikan. Sebagaimana pendapat ini di tagaskan oleh Al imam Ibnu ‘ Abidin Alhanafi di dalam kitab beliau [ Raddul  Muhtar  ‘Ala  Addurul Mukhtar ]  berkata: Wanita yg masih muda di larang membuka wajah di hadapan laki-laki [ yg bukan mahram baginya] , bukan karena wajah iyu Aurat , namun khawatir fitnah yg akan menimpa laki- laki seperti terlena/ tergoda walaupun tidak bangkit syahwatnya. Lalu pendat yg mengatakan Istihbab ini di kuat oleh Syaikh Muhammad Nashiruddin al Albani, beliau adalah seorang yang mampuni dalam bidang hadits. Di samping itu beliau juga memiliki peran yang cukup besar dalam memperkaya khazanah  dalam bidang hukum-hukum Islam dengan karya-karya yang bermutu semisal buku beliau:  ( Jilbab Almar-ah Almuslimah Fii Alkitaab Wa Assunnah ) Dan kitab  ( Arradul Mufhim ‘Ala Man Khalafa Al ulamaa Wa tasyadda Wa ta’shshaba Wa alzama Almar-ata An Tastura Wajhaha Wa kaffaiha Wa awjaba Wa lam yaqna’ Biqaulihim Innahu Sunnatun Wa Mustahabbun .dua  buku tersebut merupakan Ijtihad beliau tentang hukum Cadar  dalam huk um Islam yaitu: Mustahabbun/ Sunnah ( Sangat di anjurkan bagi wanita muslimah dan tidak sampai ke status Wajib). Berangkat dari pendapat Para Imam- imam Madzhab dan di bandingkan dengan pendapat Syaikh Muhammad Nashiruddin al Albani tentang Cadar, maka Penulis karya Ilmiah ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan khilafiyah di antara ulama Mutaqaddimin dan Muakhkhirin tentang Cadar tersebut. Saya berdoa kepada Allah Suabhanu Wata’aala memberikan Manfa’at  yang  besar, Amiin Ya Rabbal ‘Alamiin .   اختلاف العلماء قديماً، وحديثا في حكم النقاب على قولين: الأول: يجب على المرأة ستر وجهها أمام الرجال الأجانب؛ لأن الوجه عورة، وهو مذهب الإمام أحمد، والصحيح من مذهب الشافعي، الثاني: استحباب النقاب، وهو مذهب أبي حنيفة ومالك، لكن أفتى علماء الحنفية والمالكية - منذ زمن بعيد - أنه يجب على المرأة ستر وجهها، عند خوف الفتنة بها أو عليها، والمراد بالفتنة بها: أن تكون المرأة ذات جمال، والمراد بخوف الفتنة عليها، أن يفسد الزمان بكثرة الفساد وانتشار الفساق؛ قال "ابن عابدين الحنفي" في (رد المحتار على الدر المختار): "وتمنع المرأة الشابة من كشف الوجه بين رجال، لا لأنه عورة، بل لخوف الفتنة كمسه وإن أمن الشهوة. إن العلماء الذين يقولون باستحباب حكم النقاب لقد أيده الشيخ محمد ناصر الدين الألباني, كان رجلا بارعا في المجال الحديثي وله مساهمة غير قليلة في إثراء المكتبة الفقهية الإسلامية بالمؤلفات المفيدة منها: جلباب المرأة المسلمة في الكتاب والسنة والرد المفحم على من خالف العلماء وتشدّد وتعصب وألزم المرأة أن تستر وجهها وكفيها وأوجب ولم يقنع بقولهم: إنه سنة ومستحب, ومنخلال كتابيه راى وأخذ القول مجتهدا أن النقاب مستحب/ سنة وليس بواجب. انطلاقا من أراء العلماء المتقدمين والمعاصرين ثم المقارنة باجتهاد الشيخ الألباني عن النقاب, فلبى الباحث كتابة هذه الرسالة مبيّناً عن خلافية العلماء في أحكام النقاب, الله أسأل أن يمن علي الأجر والنفع الكبير, ويرزقنا العمل الصالح, آمين يا رب العالمين


Author(s):  
Olli-Pekka Vainio

The doctrine of justification is an account of how God removes the guilt of the sinner and receives him or her back to communion with God. The essential question concerns how the tension between human sin and divine righteousness is resolved. Luther’s central claim is that faith alone justifies (that is, makes a person righteous in the eyes of God) the one who believes in Christ as a result of hearing the gospel. This faith affects the imputation of Christ’s righteousness that covers the sins of the believer. In contrast to medieval doctrines of justification, Luther argues that Christ himself, not love, is the form, or the essence, of faith. Love and good works are the necessary consequences of justification even if they are not necessary for justification. However, the inclination to love and perform good works is present in the believer through Christ, who is present in faith, but these characteristics do not as such, as renewed human qualities, have justifying power. Luther’s doctrine of justification cannot be classified with simplistic categories like “forensic” and “effective” (see the section “Review of the literature” below). Often these terms are used to refer to differing interpretations of justification. However, several recent traditions of scholarship perceive this categorical differentiation as simplistic and misleading. Instead, these terms may well function to designate different aspects of God’s salvific action. In the narrow sense, justification may refer to the forensic and judicial action of declaring the sinner free from his or her guilt. A broader sense would include themes and issues from other theological doctrines offering a holistic and effective account of the event of justification, in which the sinner believes in Christ, is united with Christ’s righteousness, and receives the Holy Spirit. Depending on the context, Luther may use both narrow and broad definitions of justification. Here Luther’s doctrine of justification is approached from a broader perspective. On the one hand, justification means imputation of Christ’s alien righteousness to the believer without merits. On the other hand, faith involves effective change in the believer that enables one to believe in the first place. This change is not meritorious because it is effected by Christ indwelling in the believer through faith. Thus, Christ gives two things to the sinner: gratia, that is, the forgiveness of sins, and donum, that is, Christ himself. The media through which Christ offers his mercy are the word and sacraments. Thus, Luther’s sacramental theology, Christology, and soteriology form a coherent whole. Because justification involves union with Christ, which means participation in Christ’s divine nature, Luther’s doctrine of justification has common elements with the idea of deification.


2004 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 715-740 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey D. Dunn

In a letter from Cyprian, bishop of Carthage in the middle of the third century, written while he was in hiding during the Decian persecution to the imprisoned confessors in Carthage, there is mention of two crowns, two colors and two flowers. The letter can be dated to the middle of April 250. Cyprian wanted to console those in prison that they would not be failures if they failed to be martyred. Those who were not martyred could receive equal renown through their confession as those who were martyred. As much as martyrdom was highly prized among African Christians, Cyprian wanted to assure the imprisoned confessors that it was not the only way to please God. In the past (ante), in a time undoubtedly before persecution, one could be clad in white for good works, just as now one could be clad in crimson for martyrdom. For those who were not going to die a martyr's death and win the crimson crown for suffering or the flower of warfare, Cyprian seemed to say that the confession of their faith could now be counted as a good work for which the reward was the white crown or the flower of peace.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document