Do Christians and Muslims Worship the Same God?

[apfrita]

Thank You Jakasaki.Well If you ask my point of view then I would like to say that there is huge difference between the God of OT and NT though Christians claim that they are same. Anyway I read OT, Many of it’s verses are as cruel as Koran.So I supposed that Mohammad Copied those verses and altered and created his own New Book Koran.So if anyone say that The God of OT and Islamic Deity Allah is same ,I will agree. But later in NT Jesus Christ became Much softer than The God of OT and NT is beautiful book.I admire it but some verses are not clear like ,“Love your enemy” and few others. So if you Consider the God of NT as the real Christian God, then Indeed I can say that Allah and the God of NT are not the same God,because the God of NT if a very soft and Kind God,not Cruel Like Allah or The God of OT Jehova or whatever you call it.So since Christians say that OT is abolished by NT, **so I do not think that A kind God( of NT) is same as a Cruel God (Allah) who always plan to burn peoples in Hell for eternity **. Thanks.

Reply 1 of 2
Jesus is the Son of the God of the Old Testament. In fact Jesus is shown saying in the gospel of Matthew in the New Testament that he has not come to abolish the Law (meaning the Pentateuch- the first five books of the Old Testament which constitute the Jewish Law), but to fulfil it. There is no contradiction between the Old and the New Testament. Wherever there seems a contradiction, it is only a lack of understanding. Jesus, as the Son of God, knew his Father (the God of the Old Testament) fully. Revelation is always in progression. God revealed himself to the Jews, first through Abraham and then through the later patriachs, very specifically through Moses. But these revelations were not full but partial. The full revelation came only when the second person of the Trinity, God the Son, Jesus came to this earth as a human being. He re-interpreted the Law of the Old Testament as God interprets it. So his interpretation is correct and final. If anyone comes after him and interprets in another way or goes back to the old interpretation of the Old Testament, then he is arrogant and says that he knows better about God than God himself. This is the sin of any religion which goes against the teaching of Jesus. No prophet has ever risen from the dead. Jesus alone rose from the dead, because he is God. No prophet claimed to be God like Jesus did. Jesus claimed to be God because he is God. He claimed to have the power to forgive sins because he is God. He raised dead people like Lazarus to life as told in the bible because he is God. He says he will come again the second time, because he is God and he knows his plan. If anyone whether he is of any religion, whether Jew or Christian or Muslim contradicts what Jesus says, specifically that he said that he and the Father are one, then those religions are not having full revelation yet. The Jews did not accept Jesus because he said that he is God and the Jews could not understand how a person could be a man and at the same time be God and be in heaven. The Christians have an explanation of it, since God the Father could be in heaven at the same time God the Son could be on the earth incarnated as Man because they are two different persons of the same Godhead. Muslims say that Jesus is just a prophet and not God and then believe in the revelation of God through Prophet Mohammed. Since they believe that Jesus is a true prophet of God then they have to believe everything that Jesus said and taught and which is very clearly written down in the New Testament of the Bible. If they believe that Jesus is a true prophet but then say that he is not God, then they contradict what Jesus said about himself and so they make what they call a true prophet tell a blantant lie. This is a big contradiction. Secondly think for e.g. that there is a problem between two countries A and B. B sends many ministers one by one to A. But A does not accept them. So the prime Minister of B goes to visit the prime Minister of A. If the prime minister of B solves the problems that were there between the two countries then the problem is solved once for all. After that B does not have to send any more ministers to re-solve the problem. That is the problem with the Muslim faith. When God sent his only Son to solve the sin problem of mankind once for all, it was once for all solved and there was no requirement of sending any prophets thereafter. Now the only thing that remains to be done is to tell what Jesus did to all those coming in future generations and for that he created the Catholic Church built on Peter his apostle. Then some 600 years after Jesus, Mohammed comes and says that Jesus is merely a prophet and not God. This in fact means that when Jesus rose from the dead, a prophet rose from the dead. Has any prophet before Jesus or for that matter Muhammed been raised from the dead? By saying that after the Son himself came, a prophet like him was even required is like saying that after the Prime Minsiter of a country solves a problem another smaller minister is required to re-solve the problem. So if Muhammed is still right in what he says about the one God, then he cannot be worshipping the same one God of the Universe who revealed himself to the Jews first and then progressed that revelation to reveal himself finally and fully in his Son Jesus. Hence the only conclusion that can be logically drawn is that Muslims and Christians are not worshipping the same God.

 

[apfrita]

Thank You Jakasaki.Well If you ask my point of view then I would like to say that there is huge difference between the God of OT and NT though Christians claim that they are same. Anyway I read OT, Many of it’s verses are as cruel as Koran.So I supposed that Mohammad Copied those verses and altered and created his own New Book Koran.So if anyone say that The God of OT and Islamic Deity Allah is same ,I will agree. But later in NT Jesus Christ became Much softer than The God of OT and NT is beautiful book.I admire it but some verses are not clear like ,“Love your enemy” and few others. So if you Consider the God of NT as the real Christian God, then Indeed I can say that Allah and the God of NT are not the same God,because the God of NT if a very soft and Kind God,not Cruel Like Allah or The God of OT Jehova or whatever you call it.So since Christians say that OT is abolished by NT, **so I do not think that A kind God( of NT) is same as a Cruel God (Allah) who always plan to burn peoples in Hell for eternity **. Thanks.

Reply 2 of 2:
If ever any one makes a statement that Christians and Muslims worship the same God, then both Christians and Muslims will have to simply reframe basic tenets of their faith, which obviously will not happen. So the only conclusion that one can draw from this is that the God of the Muslims who is called Allah and the God of the Christians who is called God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit who are the three persons of the same God YHWH, the name God revealed to Moses, are two different Gods. That in itself is a contradiction since all three religions Jewish, Christian and Muslims say that they believe in God who is one (monotheism). So in that case only one of their beliefs can be true. The Christian faith has a plus point in that it says that its faith in God was revealed to them by none other than God himself who was seen in the flesh. The Christian faith does not contradict the God of the Jews, since Jesus himself who was a Jew in the flesh, called the God of the Jews his Father. Both the Jews and the Muslims have their revelation of God through their prophets: Moses for the Jews and Muhammed for the Muslims. Since they are only prophets there is all possibility that the revelation is incomplete. The Jews stuck to the revelation of God given to them by Moses. Since their faith was much before Jesus came, it can be safely said that their revelation of God is only partial and they were closed in their minds by their partial revelation so much that they could not accept the full revelation when it came. But the Muslim faith was new. They should not have had any blocks accepting Jesus as God when he said he was God. A new faith saying that Jesus was only a prophet when he himself said that he was God and still saying that he is a true prophet is a big contradiction which the Muslims will be able to explain only if they say that the New Testament is false. If anyone objectively studies the New Testament and if he is true to his own mind, then he will easily come to the conclusion that it is true. In it Jesus predicted his passion and death and resurrection 3 times and it exactly happened the way he said it. Who other than God can know future events perfectly? Isaiah’s prophesy in Isaiah Ch 53 is about the suffering servant which was exactly fulfilled in Jesus. Reading that passage and reading about the life of Jesus in the New Testament will very clearly prove to anyone that it was as if Isaiah was there during Jesus’ time and was writing about Jesus in that chapter. Since this is known to be untrue and Isaiah was clearly a major Jewish prophet who prophesied many centuries before Jesus, it means that God who prophesied through Isaiah spoke about his Son in advance. So Jesus as portrayed in the New Testament cannot be false. Has any prophet calmed a storm at sea with his mere word? There are many proofs in the New Testament of the Bible which will prove conclusively that Jesus is God. If that is the case, then a religion which either says that the New Testament is false or which contradicts Jesus will prove itself false especially when it considers Jesus as a true prophet.

Ask any Muslim this question and see whether he can answer it with 100% confidence:
a) If your faith says that Jesus is a true prophet of God then why don’t you believe that he is who he says he is, that is God? By not believing his full revelation, aren’t you making him a false prophet and still saying in the Koran that he is a true prophet?

The only answer that they can give is that Jesus is only a prophet but the Christians falsely claim in their New Testament Bible that he said that he is God when he never made such a claim. This would go against what many scholars say who have objectively studied the original Greek manuscripts of the New Testament gospels. They believe that the original documents are not forgeries. Then have the Muslim translate the original Greek Manuscripts of the gosples into English using any Greek language translation expert and it will match the New Testament English version available today. After this again ask him the same question and see what his answer would be!!! Once it is proved that the New Testament as available in today’s Bible is true, they will have to come to the conclusion that the statement that he is only a prophet and not God is false. Then where does that place the Muslim faith?

So the final conclusion that can be logically drawn is:

1. The Jews worship the same God that the Christians worship but only in one aspect of his person (God the Father)
2. The Muslims worship another God.

 

[Flyingg]

Very well,give replies I have no problem. But you wrote “we” and that’s why I said so.You are an atheist so if I wrote anything to Christians, you can reply but if you use “we” then is it not a bit contradictory?Should I assume that you are a Christian too? Well if you used “WE” for human race then I am also one of them. BTW, I like the word enemy,because it does exist.If any robber will come to your house,will your protest him or will ask him to rob you and you will offer him dinner before he leaves? Anyway everyone can question about the flaws of all religions, but it does not mean that anyone is attacking any religious group,when did I say that Christians are bad? Christians are much better than any Muslim,because Christians have religious tolerance and Muslims don’t have it.Most of Muslims have no religious tolerance and that’s why some Muslims betray and become non religious but most of them even can’t convert to other religion openly because of fear.In Muslim countries we do not live free as you. So we who live in restricted Muslim countries, know the stuffs much better than the peoples who live in free and democratic countries,because we are victims. Thank You.

I meant by WE humans. Most wars, hatred and violence are not based on individual problems but on the convictions of individuels that other people worse nothing simply because of some differences, the irrational fear made by political leaders and high authorities to continue their wars so they can earn more money and have more powers, if my country considers a person from another nationality as my enemy simply because he was born that way, I have then the right to dislike that word.

You mentioned middle ages and christians in that time, if I was wrong I’m sorry.

You said ‘‘In Muslim countries we do not live free as you.’’ I live in a mostly muslims country.

 

[Marybeloved]

Well Christians believe in trinity and claim that they are one. Father, son and holy spirit.though I have no idea how this 3 are actually one God! But it doesn’t matter that if they are 3 or one. But it does matter that the God of NT is not cruel,Like the Allah of Koran and the God of OT. Since you are a Muslim so you must read the Koran,have you read Surah 9? It hurts me a lot when I see that Allah ordered to kill non Muslims where ever you find them. Sounds Like the Old testament! Specially Judges 21 irritates me a lot. here peoples kidnap women and made them pregnant while God actually encouraged them to Do so. Did you read this?However Christians claim that OT is abolished by NT. But What will abolish the Surah 9 of Koran? Muslims believe that Koran can not be changed even a single word!

My, my! The mother-load of the Christian mysteries, no? That and the hypostasis of Christ (God & man) are enough to form the biggest obstacle to understanding Christian faith if not explained properly. I’ll see if I can find links where it’s explained in the best possible way and post them here for you- Mind you, No one can ever fully grasp this or any other aspect of God, but it can be made intelligible, at least to the point where it transcends but doesn’t contradict your own reason. If I thought st. Thomas was easy to read/understand, I would have recommended the Summa, but Thomas Acquinas was just a ridiculously superior intellect and he honestly gives me a headache. Perhaps JP II’s encyclical on the Holy Spirit- It helped me a lot with Trinity and original sin.

Either way, for me what made the difference was understanding the difference between nature (the “what” of a being) and subject/person (the “who” of a being). Like, if an alien asked me “What are you?” I’d answer “I’m a human being” If he asked “Who are you?” I’d give him my name- my identity. It helped me see how one being (one nature, one “thing”) can exist as three who’s (persons), and how one “who” can have two different natures (whats)…Ok, I know I just confused you even more!! Please read books on the subject, it really is worth the search.

 

[MorningSong51]

Let me add one more option:
Did Jesus support the stoning of adulterers?

a. yes
b. no
c. I don’t know

b. No! - The law is what it is, Lisa 44 (as in the same breath,Matthew 8:4 - "Then Jesus said to him, “See that you don’t tell anyone. But go, show yourself to the priest and offer the gift Moses commanded, as a testimony to them.”) even from the beginning of N.T., Mary & Joseph and Elizabeth and Zechariah followed the law - blamelessly, they had walked with God) Any law, the law of the land, and the punishment that goes with it - back then, was a cruelty and so was the punishment, which I don’t agree with, but the Apostle Paul state, the law was meant to be a guidance, as to avoid sin. The woman was aware of the punishment - as the law makers were aware of this woman’s sin -. If woman was caught in the act then the law was clearly apparent and punishment for the actions was there - and understood. Whether the law givers were going to enforce this action - was a debate before Christ.

We all are aware of what the punishment is for adultery in the today’s society but does any one listen and learn from it? Obviously, the punishment isn’t as harsh as it was back then, but look at who it hurts - the unity of the relationship between married couples, the children and the family members who strengthen the ties. Remember, that this same unity is described as Israel’s relationship to God, as one being unfaithful to the relationship - so was the punishment for being unfaithful justified? Did the prophets in the Old Testament plead to God on their behave? Did Moses, after the Golden Calf incident? Did Jesus weep over the people and City of Jerusalem? Jesus is approaching Jerusalem for the last time, “41As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42 and said, “If you, even you, had only known on this day what would bring you peace—but now it is hidden from your eyes.”

So are the laws justifiable when one doesn’t adhere to them? - When one doesn’t obey and turns away from the law, it is on deaf’s ear…we can condemn one law - are we to condemn the law and punishment for all of them - why not go down the list, there are plenty.

. The law was added because of transgressions, v. 19. It was not designed to disannul the promise, and to establish a different way of justification from that which was settled by the promise; but it was added to it, annexed on purpose to be subservient to it, and it was so because of transgressions. The Israelites, though they were chosen to be God’s peculiar people, were sinners as well as others, and therefore the law was given to convince them of their sin, and of their obnoxiousness to the divine displeasure on the account of it; for by the law is the knowledge of sin (Rom. 3:20), and the law entered that sin might abound, Rom. 5:20. And it was also intended to restrain them from the commission of sin, to put an awe upon their minds, and be a curb upon their lusts, that they should not run into that excess of riot to which they were naturally inclined; and yet at the same time it was designed to direct them to the true and only way whereby sin was to be expiated, and wherein they might obtain the pardon of it; namely, through the death and sacrifice of Christ, which was the special use for which the law of sacrifices and purifications was given. LINK

Mary

 

[Peace_of_cake]

Mary

very true
The early Canonists grappled a lot with what of the OT is still appropriate in terms of law. Think they varied greatly, but ultimately they left Halakha law and went with Rome for inspiration. As you imply letter is nothing without spirit of law.

Just giving Augustine his full run of John 8: 1 to 12 then

AUG. And where ought Christ to teach, except

on the mount of Olives; on the mount of ointment, on the mount of chrism. For the name Christ is from chrism, chrism being the Greek word for unction. He has anointed us, for wrestling with the devil.

AUG. They had remarked upon, Him already, as being over lenient. Of Him indeed it had I been prophesied, Ride on because of the word of truth, of meekness, and of righteousness. So as a teacher He exhibited truth, as a deliverer meekness, as a judge righteousness. When He spoke, His truth was acknowledged; when against His enemies He used no violence, His meekness was praised. So they raised the scandal on the score of justice For they said among themselves, If He decide to let her go He will not do justice; for the law cannot command what is unjust: Now Moses in the law commanded as, that such should be stoned: but to maintain His meekness, which has made Him already so acceptable to the people, He must decide to let her go. Wherefore they demand His opinion: And what say You? hoping to find an occasion to accuse Him, as a transgressor of the law: And this they said tempting Him, that they might have to accuse Him. But our Lord in His answer both maintained His justice, and departed not from meekness. Jesus stooped down, and with His finger wrote on the ground.

AUG. As if to signify that such persons were to be written in earth, not in heaven, where He told His disciples they should rejoice they were v written. Or His bowing His head (to write on the ground), is an expression of humility; the writing on the ground signifying that His law was written on the earth which bore fruit, not on the barren stone, as before.

AUG. He did not say, Stone her not, lest He should seem to speak contrary to the law. But God forbid that He should say, Stone her; for He came not to destroy that which He found, but to seek that which was lost. What then did He answer? He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. This is the voice of justice. Let the sinner be punished, but not by sinners; the law carried into effect, but not by transgressors of the law.

AUG. Having with the weapon of justice smitten them, He deigned not even to look on the fallen, but averted His eyes: And again He stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

AUG. Thus smitten then with the voice of justice, as with a weapon, they examine themselves, find themselves guilty, and one by one retire: And they which heard it, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest.

AUG. There were left however two, the pitiable, and the pitiful, And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst: the woman, you may suppose, in great alarm, expecting punishment from one in whom no sin could be found. But He who had repelled her adversaries with there word of justice, lifted on her the eyes of mercy, and asked; When Jesus had lifted Himself up, and saw none but the woman, He said to her, Woman, where are these your accusers? Has no man condemned you? She said, No man, Lord. We heard above the voice of justice; let us hear now that of mercy: Jesus said to her, Neither do I condemn you; I, who you feared would condemn you, because You found no fault in me. What then Lord? Do You favor sin? No, surely. Listen to what follows, Go, and sin no more. So then our Lord condemned sin, but not the sinner. For did He favor sin, He would have said, Go, and live as you will: depend on my deliverance: howsoever great your sins be, it matters not: I will deliver you from hell, and its tormentors. But He did not say this. Let those attend, who love the Lord’s mercy, and fear His truth. Truly, Gracious and righteous is the Lord.

AUG. The Manichaeans suppose the sun of the natural world to be our Lord Christ; but the Catholic Church reprobates such a notion for our Lord Christ was not made the sun, but the sun was made by Him: inasmuch as all things were made by Him. And for our sake did He come to be under the sun being the light which made the sun: He hid Himself under the cloud of the flesh, not to obscure, but to temper His light. Speaking then through the cloud of the flesh, the Light unfailing, the Light of wisdom says to men, I am the Light of the world.

AUG. He withdraws you however from the eyes of the flesh, to those of the heart, in that He adds, He that follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life. He thinks it not enough to say shall have light, but adds, of life. These words of our Lord agree with those of the Psalm, In Your light shall we see light; for with you is the well of life. For bodily uses, light is one thing, and a well another; and a well ministers to the mouth, light to the eyes. With God the light and the well are the same. He who shines upon you, that you may see Him, the Same flows to you, that you may drink Him. What He promises is put in the future tense; what we ought to do in the present. He that follows Me, He says, shall have; i.e. by faith now, in sight hereafter. The visible sun accompanies you, only if you go westward, whither it go also; and even if you follow it, it will forsake you, at its setting. Your God is every where wholly; He will not fall from you, if you fall not from Him. Darkness is to be feared, not that of the eyes, but that of the mind; and if of the eyes, of the inner not the outer eyes; not those by which white and black, but those by which just and unjust, are discerned.

 

[hamba2han]

Good grief!.. I really did not expect much opposition to my definition of who God is.

Anyhow, let us try another approach:

Muslims worship the God that Abraham (pbuh) worshiped and this means that if Christians worship the God of Abraham, then this means that they worship the same God as Muslims do.

I suspect that I need to brace myself for a challenge to this definition of God as well.

 

[MorningSong51]

very true
The early Canonists grappled a lot with what of the OT is still appropriate in terms of law. Think they varied greatly, but ultimately they left Halakha law and went with Rome for inspiration. As you imply letter is nothing without spirit of law.

Just giving Augustine his full run of John 8: 1 to 12 then

AUG. And where ought Christ to teach, except

on the mount of Olives; on the mount of ointment, on the mount of chrism. For the name Christ is from chrism, chrism being the Greek word for unction. He has anointed us, for wrestling with the devil.

AUG. They had remarked upon, Him already, as being over lenient. Of Him indeed it had I been prophesied, Ride on because of the word of truth, of meekness, and of righteousness. So as a teacher He exhibited truth, as a deliverer meekness, as a judge righteousness. When He spoke, His truth was acknowledged; when against His enemies He used no violence, His meekness was praised. So they raised the scandal on the score of justice For they said among themselves, If He decide to let her go He will not do justice; for the law cannot command what is unjust: Now Moses in the law commanded as, that such should be stoned: but to maintain His meekness, which has made Him already so acceptable to the people, He must decide to let her go. Wherefore they demand His opinion: And what say You? hoping to find an occasion to accuse Him, as a transgressor of the law: And this they said tempting Him, that they might have to accuse Him. But our Lord in His answer both maintained His justice, and departed not from meekness. Jesus stooped down, and with His finger wrote on the ground.

AUG. As if to signify that such persons were to be written in earth, not in heaven, where He told His disciples they should rejoice they were v written. Or His bowing His head (to write on the ground), is an expression of humility; the writing on the ground signifying that His law was written on the earth which bore fruit, not on the barren stone, as before.

AUG. He did not say, Stone her not, lest He should seem to speak contrary to the law. But God forbid that He should say, Stone her; for He came not to destroy that which He found, but to seek that which was lost. What then did He answer? He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. This is the voice of justice. Let the sinner be punished, but not by sinners; the law carried into effect, but not by transgressors of the law.

AUG. Having with the weapon of justice smitten them, He deigned not even to look on the fallen, but averted His eyes: And again He stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

AUG. Thus smitten then with the voice of justice, as with a weapon, they examine themselves, find themselves guilty, and one by one retire: And they which heard it, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest.

AUG. There were left however two, the pitiable, and the pitiful, And Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst: the woman, you may suppose, in great alarm, expecting punishment from one in whom no sin could be found. But He who had repelled her adversaries with there word of justice, lifted on her the eyes of mercy, and asked; When Jesus had lifted Himself up, and saw none but the woman, He said to her, Woman, where are these your accusers? Has no man condemned you? She said, No man, Lord. We heard above the voice of justice; let us hear now that of mercy: Jesus said to her, Neither do I condemn you; I, who you feared would condemn you, because You found no fault in me. What then Lord? Do You favor sin? No, surely. Listen to what follows, Go, and sin no more. So then our Lord condemned sin, but not the sinner. For did He favor sin, He would have said, Go, and live as you will: depend on my deliverance: howsoever great your sins be, it matters not: I will deliver you from hell, and its tormentors. But He did not say this. Let those attend, who love the Lord’s mercy, and fear His truth. Truly, Gracious and righteous is the Lord.

AUG. The Manichaeans suppose the sun of the natural world to be our Lord Christ; but the Catholic Church reprobates such a notion for our Lord Christ was not made the sun, but the sun was made by Him: inasmuch as all things were made by Him. And for our sake did He come to be under the sun being the light which made the sun: He hid Himself under the cloud of the flesh, not to obscure, but to temper His light. Speaking then through the cloud of the flesh, the Light unfailing, the Light of wisdom says to men, I am the Light of the world.

AUG. He withdraws you however from the eyes of the flesh, to those of the heart, in that He adds, He that follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life. He thinks it not enough to say shall have light, but adds, of life. These words of our Lord agree with those of the Psalm, In Your light shall we see light; for with you is the well of life. For bodily uses, light is one thing, and a well another; and a well ministers to the mouth, light to the eyes. With God the light and the well are the same. He who shines upon you, that you may see Him, the Same flows to you, that you may drink Him. What He promises is put in the future tense; what we ought to do in the present. He that follows Me, He says, shall have; i.e. by faith now, in sight hereafter. The visible sun accompanies you, only if you go westward, whither it go also; and even if you follow it, it will forsake you, at its setting. Your God is every where wholly; He will not fall from you, if you fall not from Him. Darkness is to be feared, not that of the eyes, but that of the mind; and if of the eyes, of the inner not the outer eyes; not those by which white and black, but those by which just and unjust, are discerned.

Beautiful! and Great thought and wisdom from St. Augustine.

Thank you for the post.
Mary

see additional thought to this

 

[MorningSong51]

Pointing out another thought, In the Bible, covetousness appears as “one of the capital sins” - as one covets a neighbor’s wife (according to Deuteronomy 5:21) “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife. You shall not set your desire on your neighbor’s house or land, his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey” - "therefore it is connected with the concept of “uncleanness”, and because it makes a person unclean in God’s sight and hinders communication with him, it is equated with idolatry (Col 3:5; Eph 5:5). The destruction of being that occurs under the rule of possessions becomes even more clear in the third feature: glory-seeking. One could translate it better as “the domination of appearances”. Man no longer acts for the sake of reality but for the sake of opinion. He judges his activity, no longer according to what it is really worth but, rather, according to how it is evaluated in public opinion. Seeming suppresses being. The appearance becomes the universal standard. Man lives for the appearance, and so his life becomes a semblance of life. In this the Bible rightly sees the essence of slavery, of a lack of freedom. That is why freedom, conversely, is concerned with truth. “Truth and freedom, freedom and truth belong together. There is no courage of freedom when there is no truth, and truth does not manifest itself except by dint of the courage of freedom. The Apostle’s frankness consists of speaking the truth into a world ruled by appearances, even though this means that he must face “great opposition” (I Thess 2:2). hence the frankness of the free man presupposes above all a freedom from oneself, “a detachment from self, because he has begun to proclaim the gospel”. Thus it becomes evident again that freedom starts first in man’s being, so as then to take concrete form in active freedoms, in rights to do things. But where the basis in being is absent, the rights in the realm of activity are empty and run the risk of turning abruptly into their opposite. From this it follow once more that in every instance freedom can be maintained only through a pedagogy of freedom, this is, through a meaningful fabric of constraints for the sake of freedom.”

The law, as Paul said “opened” our eyes and we realize how we are sinful in nature (like in the Garden - with both Adam & Eve - the eyes of both became opened) -

"What shall we say, then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “Do not covet.” Romans 7:7

Reference:

Church, Ecumenism, & Politics
New Endeavors in Ecclesiology
Joseph Ratzinger
Pope Benedict XVI
page 189-190

 

[Marybeloved]

Good grief!.. I really did not expect much opposition to my definition of who God is.

Anyhow, let us try another approach:

Muslims worship the God that Abraham (pbuh) worshiped and this means that if Christians worship the God of Abraham, then this means that they worship the same God as Muslims do.

I suspect that I need to brace myself for a challenge to this definition of God as well.

If I were you, I would

The Catechism in no. 841 says …these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day." The Church has never acknowledged this (that Muslims hold Abraham’s faith) to be true,and indeed I do not foresee any future where the CC admits such a thing. However, I believe it can be said objectively, that Muslims worship the God of Abraham w/out at the same time saying that they hold to the faith of Abraham.

I personally have no problem with this for two reasons:
–The God of Abraham is the only true God. Therefore, having acknowledged that Muslims do indeed worship the one true God, I don’t see how it can be denied that Muslims worship the God of Abraham.
–Muhammad, when he was founding his religion, did deliberately seek to worship the God identified with the Jews and the Christians, and to this end, he adopted numerous traditions of the prophets and their deeds in his own "scripture"albeit altered significantly. Regardless, the God he sought to proclaim was the God of the Jews & Christians and this is the God of Abraham, so I believe it can be acknowledged w/out contradiction that in intention, Muslims direct worship to the God of the Jews and Christians (God of Abraham).

 

[rain_bow]

Reply 1 of 2
Jesus is the Son of the God of the Old Testament. In fact Jesus is shown saying in the gospel of Matthew in the New Testament that he has not come to abolish the Law (meaning the Pentateuch- the first five books of the Old Testament which constitute the Jewish Law), but to fulfil it. There is no contradiction between the Old and the New Testament. Wherever there seems a contradiction, it is only a lack of understanding. Jesus, as the Son of God, knew his Father (the God of the Old Testament) fully.

No contradiction? well How would you explain those verses from OT?

Judges 21:

**Now the Israelites had sworn at Mizpah, ‘No one of us shall give his daughter in marriage to Benjamin.’ 2And the people came to Bethel, and sat there until evening before God, and they lifted up their voices and wept bitterly. 3They said, ‘O Lord, the God of Israel, why has it come to pass that today there should be one tribe lacking in Israel?’ 4On the next day, the people got up early, and built an altar there, and offered burnt-offerings and sacrifices of well-being. 5Then the Israelites said, ‘Which of all the tribes of Israel did not come up in the assembly to the Lord?’ For a solemn oath had been taken concerning whoever did not come up to the Lord to Mizpah, saying, ‘That one shall be put to death.’ 6But the Israelites had compassion for Benjamin their kin, and said, ‘One tribe is cut off from Israel this day. 7What shall we do for wives for those who are left, since we have sworn by the Lord that we will not give them any of our daughters as wives?’

8 Then they said, ‘Is there anyone from the tribes of Israel who did not come up to the Lord to Mizpah?’ It turned out that no one from Jabesh-gilead had come to the camp, to the assembly. 9For when the roll was called among the people, not one of the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead was there. 10So the congregation sent twelve thousand soldiers there and commanded them, ‘Go, put the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead to the sword, including the women and the little ones**. 11This is what you shall do; every male and every woman that has lain with a male you shall devote to destruction.’ 12And they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead four hundred young virgins who had never slept with a man and brought them to the camp at Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan.

13 Then the whole congregation sent word to the Benjaminites who were at the rock of Rimmon, and proclaimed peace to them. 14Benjamin returned at that time; and they gave them the women whom they had saved alive of the women of Jabesh-gilead; but they did not suffice for them.

15 The people had compassion on Benjamin because the Lord had made a breach in the tribes of Israel. 16So the elders of the congregation said, ‘What shall we do for wives for those who are left, since there are no women left in Benjamin?’ 17And they said, ‘There must be heirs for the survivors of Benjamin, in order that a tribe may not be blotted out from Israel. 18Yet we cannot give any of our daughters to them as wives.’ For the Israelites had sworn, ‘Cursed be anyone who gives a wife to Benjamin.’ 19So they said, ‘Look, the yearly festival of the Lord is taking place at Shiloh, which is north of Bethel, on the east of the highway that goes up from Bethel to Shechem, and south of Lebonah.’ 20And they instructed the Benjaminites, saying, ‘Go and lie in wait in the vineyards, 21and watch; when the young women of Shiloh come out to dance in the dances, then come out of the vineyards and each of you carry off a wife for himself from the young women of Shiloh, and go to the land of Benjamin. 22Then if their fathers or their brothers come to complain to us, we will say to them, “Be generous and allow us to have them; because we did not capture in battle a wife for each man. But neither did you incur guilt by giving your daughters to them.” ’ 23The Benjaminites did so; they took wives for each of them from the dancers whom they abducted. Then they went and returned to their territory, and rebuilt the towns, and lived in them. 24So the Israelites departed from there at that time by tribes and families, and they went out from there to their own territories.

25 In those days there was no king in Israel; all the people did what was right in their own eyes.

This in fact means that when Jesus rose from the dead, a prophet rose from the dead. Has any prophet before Jesus or for that matter Muhammed been raised from the dead? By saying that after the Son himself came, a prophet like him was even required is like saying that after the Prime Minsiter of a country solves a problem another smaller minister is required to re-solve the problem. So if Muhammed is still right in what he says about the one God, then he cannot be worshipping the same one God of the Universe who revealed himself to the Jews first and then progressed that revelation to reveal himself finally and fully in his Son Jesus. Hence the only conclusion that can be logically drawn is that Muslims and Christians are not worshipping the same God.

Mohammad is not God for Muslims and for me he is nothing but a power Hungry war lord, who used to see lots of dream and Koran is also his dream partly and the result of his endless power hunger. I admire Jesus for his Good work as a Good man, but He raised from death? What proof would You provide except NT?

 

[rain_bow]

I meant by WE humans. Most wars, hatred and violence are not based on individual problems but on the convictions of individuels that other people worse nothing simply because of some differences, the irrational fear made by political leaders and high authorities to continue their wars so they can earn more money and have more powers, if my country considers a person from another nationality as my enemy simply because he was born that way, I have then the right to dislike that word.

You mentioned middle ages and christians in that time, if I was wrong I’m sorry.

You said ‘‘In Muslim countries we do not live free as you.’’ I live in a mostly muslims country.

If you lives in a Muslim country then I guess you are in pressure right?And I mentioned middle age Christians because You know that their history was not better than Muslims.But they changed their styles but unfortunately Muslims are becoming more violent and intolerant day by day.Anyway its alright,I appreciate that You understood me finally. And I was just talking that nothing is perfect,not NT too,and I just gave my personal opinion .I think all were Just misunderstanding,so chill and enjoy this main topic .

 

[rain_bow]

My, my! The mother-load of the Christian mysteries, no? That and the hypostasis of Christ (God & man) are enough to form the biggest obstacle to understanding Christian faith if not explained properly. I’ll see if I can find links where it’s explained in the best possible way and post them here for you- Mind you, No one can ever fully grasp this or any other aspect of God, but it can be made intelligible, at least to the point where it transcends but doesn’t contradict your own reason. If I thought st. Thomas was easy to read/understand, I would have recommended the Summa, but Thomas Acquinas was just a ridiculously superior intellect and he honestly gives me a headache. Perhaps JP II’s encyclical on the Holy Spirit- It helped me a lot with Trinity and original sin.

Either way, for me what made the difference was understanding the difference between nature (the “what” of a being) and subject/person (the “who” of a being). Like, if an alien asked me “What are you?” I’d answer “I’m a human being” If he asked “Who are you?” I’d give him my name- my identity. It helped me see how one being (one nature, one “thing”) can exist as three who’s (persons), and how one “who” can have two different natures (whats)…Ok, I know I just confused you even more!! Please read books on the subject, it really is worth the search.

Well said,but about mystery I have no taste of any mystery from any religion my friend,do not mind ok? Actually I believe only those stuffs, I can see,touch,smell,hear,and taste. I do not believe in sixth sense so I am neither interested about Christian nor Muslim miracle. I have seen many videos from youtube regarding Islamic miracle,and I found all as garbage.Did you hear the audience of Islamic Scholar Jakir Nayeek? I found the man as the perfect liar,who love to deceive peoples,and I found many flaws,he mentioned some islands that never existed in this planet and mentioned many men who never existed,but Muslims consider him as new era prophet you know that? How pathetic . But yes I want to know about Christianity specially trinity(its a puzzle to me) because I admire Christian peoples for their polite behavior,and for their religious tolerance.So if You can solve me this mystery of trinity by posting some link,I will gladly read them .
Be well

 

[Marybeloved]

Well said,but about mystery I have no taste of any mystery from any religion my friend,do not mind ok?

No problem

Actually I believe only those stuffs, I can see,touch,smell,hear,and taste. I do not believe in sixth sense so I am neither interested about Christian nor Muslim miracle. I have seen many videos from youtube regarding Islamic miracle,and I found all as garbage.Did you hear the audience of Islamic Scholar Jakir Nayeek? I found the man as the perfect liar,who love to deceive peoples,and I found many flaws,he mentioned some islands that never existed in this planet and mentioned many men who never existed,but Muslims consider him as new era prophet you know that? How pathetic .

I get you. Those fake Muslim miracles remind me of Catholics who think they see an apparition/image of Our Lady, Mary, on bread toast, oil spills, even stains etc. It really is very embarrassing! But it’s to be expected. But one thing you ought to know about the Catholic Church is that our hierarchy is made up of people as skeptical as you! Most claimed miracles/apparitions are often rejected by the Church as inauthentic. Whenever such things happen, the Church uses a thoroughly rigorous process involving scientists, doctors, and until they rule out all possible scientific/naturalist explanations for the phenomenon, the Church refuses to accept it. So if you ever here “Catholic miracle/apparition” you should inquire if the church has looked at it.

But yes I want to know about Christianity specially trinity(its a puzzle to me) because I admire Christian peoples for their polite behavior,and for their religious tolerance.So if You can solve me this mystery of trinity by posting some link,I will gladly read them .
Be well

Ok. Will def look for them and post. Peace!

 

[Marybeloved]

No contradiction? well How would you explain those verses from OT?

I honestly cannot pretend to fully know how to reconcile the differences that appear between how God was in the old vs the new testament. I also had a lot of difficulty with passages like those you quoted. I suppose for me, having first believed in Jesus, I have to accept by faith what he taught about the God of the Jews- and he taught us that this God was the one true God. But just speaking as a 21st Century inhabitant of this world, the OT poses zero danger to the World today compared to Islamism which is truly a danger to the freedoms of non-Muslim people or different types of Muslims. I’ll explain why:

1. The nature of the war in OT- The ancient Israelites always made war against specific people and only in specific instances, for limited times. It was never a general war against a group that had no expiration date, as in Islam with idolaters & polytheists on one hand and Jews & Christians on the other hand.
2. The Purpose for the war- You’ll notice that God in the OT never commanded war for the purpose of converting any one to Judaism or ending false religions. In contrast to Islam, the Jewish wars were always about land, and retaliation to an aggressive neighbor/enemy- They were what we could now term as political, not religious. The Jews believe themselves to be a people set apart and have no agenda to impose/spread their religion to others.
3. The Decision to go to war- The Jews never went to war unless God commanded it through a Prophet- Now, the Jews closed their canon of scripture about 1000 years/more or so. That means no “prophet” will appear now to command the Jews to make war against any group- So in this regard, the world is safe from “Jewish terrorism”.
   4)Christians- Christians regard the Jewish people as having their own Covenant- and though, we accept the OT, the legalism in it is generally regarded as having come to fulfillment in Jesus himself who we believe is God’s full revelation to man- Christ himself is our “Quran”. Therefore Christians measure everything (including OT) by him- so the OT cannot be used by Christians for violence.

It’s true that we have also done bad things in the past (though nowhere close to Islam). But that was because of a confusion & mixing of Church & State and politics & religion which the NT shows should be separate. It was also because of Islam, sorry to say. The crusades rose in order to repel an aggressive Islam that wanted to impose Islam on what was then a purely Christian continent. We have learned from our mistakes due to the naked message of peace by Jesus, and as HH Benedict XVI said, God can never be a a reason for any violence- To us, it’s clear that “religious wars” are a misnomer and no one is confused about the fact that those things done in the past were crimes and a clear contradiction with Jesus and the apostles. They can never happen again.

Mohammad is not God for Muslims and for me he is nothing but a power Hungry war lord, who used to see lots of dream and Koran is also his dream partly and the result of his endless power hunger. I admire Jesus for his Good work as a Good man, but He raised from death? What proof would You provide except NT?

Have you looked at apologetic works for Christianity- The “proofs” for it from an outside perspective that starts first without assuming anything to be true and accumulating the evidence? Have you heard about “The case for Christ?” by Lee Strobel and other such works. They’re not 100% but they definitely show that Christianity has a very good case in terms of “proofs”.

Peace.

 

[apfrita]

Mohammad is not God for Muslims and for me he is nothing but a power Hungry war lord, who used to see lots of dream and Koran is also his dream partly and the result of his endless power hunger. I admire Jesus for his Good work as a Good man, but He raised from death? What proof would You provide except NT?

The proof of the resurrection are many:

1. He appeared to many of his disciples after his resurrection. Please note that the disciples never believed in him when he was mentioning during his lifetime that he will be raised from the dead on the third day. They simply did not understand it - what resurrection meant. They never expected him to rise from the dead. In fact many of his disciples wanted to go back to their business after his death, thinking that his death was the end of him and his movement But Jesus appeared to many after his death and then a new life came into them
2. Paul (original name was Saul), one of the greatest apostle of Jesus to spread the gospel to the Gentiles in Europe was an adversary of the Christians. He believed that Jesus was a common man who was punished and crucified and his disciples were spreading lies about his being raised from the dead. When he was going to Damuscus on horseback to arrest the Christians there and bring them in chains back to Jerusalem, he was blinded by a very bright light and he heard a voice saying, “Saul, Saul why are you persecuting me?”. When he asked who the voice belonged to, he was told he was Jesus he was persecuting. Then he was told by the voice to go to a place where a man named Ananias will pray from him and then he will regain his sight. It exactly happened that way and when he regained his sight, he must have reflected and studied scripture(since he was a OT Bible Scholar) and must have come to the conclusion that the Scriptures in many places spoke about Jesus. This persecutor of the church became the greatest apostle of Jesus who was finally martyred for him. This is enough proof for the resurrection of Jesus.
3. Another apostle of Jesus, named Thomas, was not there when Jesus appeared in a closed room to the other apostles. When they told him that Jesus was alive, he did not believe it and wanted to see Jesus himself in order to believe by seeing the nail marks of the cruxifiction on his hands and the lance piercing mark on his side. On another occasion when Jesus re-appeared to the apostles, he was there and he saw and believed. Then Jesus made a statement, “You believed because you saw, happy are those who have not seen and yet believe”
4. If you have a deep religious experience which transformed your life, you will probably write about it. You cannot expect someone who is not associated with that experience to write about it. The media must not have been at that time as it is now. Probably if the incidents in Jesus’ life had happened today, then the news would have been everywhere and every one would have known that he died and then rose. But that time it was not so. So those who experienced him and saw him alive after his death, wrote about him in the NT writings.
5. Many have been martyred for Christ throughout the centuries and they have willingly accepted their deaths rather than go against the truth about Jesus’ resurrection. Why? Is it because they were not convinced about his resurrection? No they were 100% convinced about his resurrection and believed that they too will rise from the dead. The resurrection of Jesus is the only reason why the Church has been alive right from the first century AD to this day. Otherwise if it was a lie, then Christianity which started out in the 1st Century AD would have long fizzled out.
6. The biggest proof by far it that the apostles after his death were so frightened that they wanted to hide themselves from the authorities and rightlly so because they must have feared that they will be next to be punished by them. But when the Holy Spirit came upon the apostles and other disciples (120 of them) as promised by Jesus, they became bold and then they started preaching the gospel in public devoid of any fear of the authorities (Read the Acts of the Apostles in the Bible). It was the reality of the resurrection and the power of the Holy Spirit that convinced them to boldly proclaim Jesus even if they had to die for it.

Also please understand, that the NT of the Bible is only a part of the experience of the disciples of Jesus. John says in his gospel that if all that Jesus did was to be written down all the books of the world would not suffice. The full experience of Jesus was there with his disciples who lived with him and who heard his teaching with their own ears. These disciples formed the early Church and this faith deposit was sincerely transmitted by the bishops of the Church right up to this day. By far, the biggest proof of the resurrection of Jesus is the existence of the Church till this day. If the resurrection was false someone or the other would have easily proved it and the Church would have collapsed. It is only the Resurrection of Jesus, that keeps the Church alive to this day and the hope that Jesus will come back again to take the Church to himself in heaven as he said in John14:1-3. If Jesus was not alive then his teaching that he will come back to take them to himself would be a lie and the Church would have long perished. But see the Catholic Church - it is very much alive to this day and the most progressive nations of the world today are those who are built upon the teachings of the Catholic Church.

 

[MorningSong51]

Reply 1 of 2

Hi Apfrita,

I really liked reading both posts, but the question is about if Christians and Muslims worship the same God? and what was said is that Allah is basically God in Arabic. God in Arabic is Allah, which is not a name of the Muslim God.

Arabic-speakers of all Abrahamic faiths, including Christians and Jews, use the word “Allah” to mean “God”. The Christian Arabs of today have no other word for ‘God’ than ‘Allah’. (Even the Arabic-descended Maltese language of Malta, whose population is almost entirely Roman Catholic, uses Alla for ‘God’.) Arab Christians for example use terms Allāh al-ʾab (الله الأب) meaning God the Father, Allāh al-ibn (الله الابن) mean God the Son, and Allāh ar-rūḥ al-quds (الله الروح القدس) meaning God the Holy Spirit. LINK

 

[Marcarios]

I am Orthodox Christian , and I have to say “No” . No I do not worship the same God as Muslims do. I can give several reasons for this. The obvious reason being that God is Trinity, One in Essence and Undivided. Islam Rejects this , in essence the rejection of the Trinity is a rejection of God’s Nature . Muslims reject the Divinity of Christ , I embrace the Divinity of Christ, as well as the Crucifixion.Muslims deny free will. that “allah” is determinate" and that basically according to their “theology” one is a slave to “allah”. these are all aspects of whom God is not . God revealed himself through the Prophets of the Old Testament and then was Incarnated from the Theotokos and Ever Virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit. and revealed the fullness of Truth to the Apostles and the Church. This Truth was expounded by the Holy Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils who in their teachings speak Infallibly concerning the Nature of God . Looking at this all then how can one say that God , is the 'allah" mentioned in the Koran or by Muslims? Christ being God (God speaking) said “There will be many who say I am Christ etc” There have been many false prophets since the time of Christ , why then is Mohammed any different? Why would the Archangel Gabriel who came to announce the tidings to the Theotokos and Ever Virgin , then contradict himself by speaking to Mohammed ? If this is all the case then God would be a liar? The Neo Ecumenists would like everyone to believe this is not the case that we worship the same God but all the evidence says otherwise.

 

[MorningSong51]

Good grief!.. I really did not expect much opposition to my definition of who God is.

Anyhow, let us try another approach:

Muslims worship the God that Abraham (pbuh) worshiped and this means that if Christians worship the God of Abraham, then this means that they worship the same God as Muslims do.

I suspect that I need to brace myself for a challenge to this definition of God as well.

Although there are differences, hamba2han, between Christian and Muslim form of worship which I think this seems to be very obvious to all - the precepts of who God is, is very diverse - even from within each movement of either religions, and according to following the law. Again, what God gave as instructions and how each follows/adheres to them - the Ultra Orthodox to the Orthodox - Conservative to the Reform. So why do I think of the tower of Babel on this issue?

There is still a break down on divinity points of the mysticism - as to understand that Christians are not getting into areas that are personifying God, but understanding and interpreting scripture as being presented, noting the scriptural text, 11 "Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; and 16 “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever— 17the Spirit of truth.” We understood this in Genesis and in Isaiah 2:3 “the law went forth”…The word of power went forth, much like creation. In John 8:42, “I proceed forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but “He” sent me.” Jesus is the anointed flesh and bones which God brought forth to life by His own Holy Spirit - so we understand, as each as being within one God. This is so illustrated in God’s creation with Adam and Eve, let us make man in “our” own image, image to create wisdom, compassion, mercy, judgment, and the ability for woman to bare children - to create another human being. There are subdivision to each attribute that was listed - yet man was created and Christ was formed - and went forth out of the Mouth of God (which being is the law):

Ge 1:3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.
Ge 1:6 Then God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.”
Ge 1:9 Then God said, “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so.
Ge 1:11 Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit after their kind, with seed in them, on the earth”; and it was so.
Ge 1:14 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years;
Ge 1:20 Then God said, “Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens.”
Ge 1:24 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind”; and it was so.
Ge 1:26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

---

Ge 1:5 And God called the light day
Ge 1:5 And the darkness He called night.
Ge 1:8 And God called the expanse heaven.
Ge 1:10 And God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of the waters He called seas.
Ge 1:10 And the gathering of the waters He called seas.

These verbal commands of God are called “decrees” or “counsels,” made all the events of nature and history to be the effects of God’s Words. Adam’s first experience was that on hearing the Word of God (Gen. 1:28ff.) and the first command was given to Adam (mankind) in Genesis 2:16. Adam’s life Genesis 26:5, Deuteronomy 11:1, Joshua 22:2-3, 1 Kings 2:2-4 and also death depended upon his obedience to that Word (Gen. 2:17). After the fall, Adam’s only hope was that God would fulfill the promise of his Word (Gen. 3:15) – to redeem man…

So really there are arguments on interpretations of the law, as there is separations between conservative and extremist. All these controversy - are due to one’s ability to understand the law and transmit them into a language that is understood. I think, that’s 99.9% of what seems to be the problems are - transmitting the law and concepts, knowing that this is a way of life or a path to follow within your own faith - as well as in our own. In each religious denomination/movements, the understanding the code of conduct from one era to the next has changed - even in the approach.

So how can someone define, like I said - who God is, unless we find some kinda of mutual agreement.

Thanks
Mary

 

[Marybeloved]

I admire Jesus for his Good work as a Good man, but He raised from death? What proof would You provide except NT?

Rain-bow, I found a piece of apologia for the Resurrection on this link:
catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/islam/resurex.htm

I don’t expect that this link will convince you of anything, because after all, believing (faith) is both gift and choice, and cannot be forced upon anyone. In truth nobody can prove to you 100% the Christian faith. Using the natural tools at your disposal (reason) and being properly disposed (being intellectually honest & willing to follow reason to it’s ultimate logical conclusions) and being open to receive the truth wherever it may be found-These together will get you there. I suppose I’m saying that even if you find very convincing reasons for Jesus’ resurrection, if you are not willing to accept this, you wont. So it’s also a choice.

Personally, historically, the most convincing proof of the resurrection for me is simply the apostle’s martyrdom & St paul’s conversion and martyrdom. No one can find a single person in History who embraced such horrifying deaths for a lie that they knew were lies. People may do that for belief in something or someone, but bottom line- they’ll die because they are convinced it’s the truth. These men claimed they saw Christ resurrected, St Paul (The greatest student of the greatest Jewish rabbi in that century) suddenly joined the persecuted group he had been at the forefront of persecuting, and suffered in many ways, claiming he had encountered Christ. These were strict monotheistic Jews, like those guys in Saudi Arabia!- Can you imagine the top Islamic scholar suddenly claiming he encountered Christ and embracing all the persecutions that follow, ultimately martyrdom? What madness would lead him to do this unless it were true? Do you think he’d make it all up? For what? There was nothing to be gained by being Christian but suffering upon suffering upon suffering, and the most intense persecutions! And the first Christians were Jews! Why would they damn their souls by committing what was considered blasphemy (Believing Christ to be divine) when they had nothing to gain on earth (they lost everything, ultimately their lives) if they knew that they never saw Christ alive and it was all a hoax! knowing human nature, Isn’t this more difficult (believing that people generally suffer and die for hoaxes they’re aware of with no expectation of any gain whatsoever) than concluding that they did in fact experience exactly what they went to their deaths saying they did! :shrug:And by the way, there’s a lot of documentation from the early centuries that document Christian beliefs and practices, beyond just new testament.

Explanation for Trinity can be found in several places- But they are so complex (in my opinion). A fairly simple explanation is to be found here:
catholicmessage.blogspot.com/2007/03/trinity.html

But just google “catholic encyclopedia Trinity” and you’ll find fairly long and complex pieces, St Thomas’ Summa is also there- The link is newadvent.org/summa/1.htm

He starts with “The one God” and then “The Blessed Trinity”.
Now st Thomas was no light weight- He’s been included among the greatest Thinkers ever with the likes of Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, Confucius etc (To be fair, the list maker expressed regret at not including st Augustine). Anyway, St Thomas is truly a master of reason and logic. The reason I’d advise you to read him if you’re genuinely interested in understanding our faith is simply that I think reason alone is the best proof of our faith. There’s no belief system so complete and perfectly intellectually consistent in itself as well as consistent with our experience of reality- there just isn’t, and there’s and no one greater than st Thomas in showing the flow of reason that is found in it.