Do Christians and Muslims Worship the Same God?

[MorningSong51]

Good afternoon

Buenas Noches!

 

[Mar044]

yes same god, and they even think Jesus is the messiah, Mohammad was a prohibit of god

 

[MorningSong51]

This is how the non-muslims can live in peace with Muslims:

fordham.edu/halsall/source/pact-umar.html

 

[MorningSong51]

This is how the non-muslims can live in peace with Muslims:

fordham.edu/halsall/source/pact-umar.html

 

[gerhardc]

Gerhad, I’m not about to debate the real presence of our Lord in the Eucharist with you here. This was the unanimous belief in all Christendom for 1500 years until the Protestants came along, threw away centuries of tradition and interpretation and brought in novelties that had hitherto been completely unheard of in Christendom, such as denial of the real presence, salvation by faith alone, sola scriptura etc. I’m sure there are many many threads on this site that discuss this and give apologetics for the bread becoming Christ, or you could start a fresh one where people will be more than happy to give you all the scriptural verses and early christian sayings that showed that from the beginning no christian had understood the Eucharist as being anything other than Christ himself, until protestantism came along 1500 years later.

Three times in a short space did I expressly qualify that I was not debating it either.

• “the point I wish to make is not around transubstantiation but around unbelief.”
• “transubstantiation. Whether or not it is a correct teaching is not the issue here.”
• “I say again, this (transubstantiation), however, is not the subject of the debate.”

 

[gerhardc]

Gerhad, I’m not about to debate the real presence of our Lord in the Eucharist with you here. This was the unanimous belief in all Christendom for 1500 years until the Protestants came along, threw away centuries of tradition and interpretation and brought in novelties that had hitherto been completely unheard of in Christendom, such as denial of the real presence, salvation by faith alone, sola scriptura etc.

Three times in a short space did I expressly qualify that I was not debating it either.

• “the point I wish to make is not around transubstantiation but around unbelief.”
• “transubstantiation. Whether or not it is a correct teaching is not the issue here.”
• “I say again, this (transubstantiation), however, is not the subject of the debate.”

I am happy, however, to discuss your thoughts around the point I was making about unbelief:

The point is that people can believe what is not expressed in words in the Bible. But what is expressly stated in the Bible, that they cannot believe. Instead, for these verses, alternative meanings are conjured up and explanations given to reject the literal meaning thereof. That is called unbelief. The verse "God is love" is received as a literal meaning but the verse "He who is not with Me is against Me" somehow gets to mean something else.

Alternatively people feel perfectly ‘qualified’ to understand the meaning of John 3:16 or 1 John 4:8 ("God is love") but somehow feel inadequately prepared or qualified or experienced to understand "He who is not with Me is against Me".

That is called selective perception or, in a spiritual sense, unbelief. "And He marveled because of their unbelief."

And so, we have a choice to believe or to cast aside the following:

• “He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters.” (Luke 11:23)
• “He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.” (1 John 5:12)
• “I and My Father are one” (John 10:30)

If you actually believe the above you will know that Muslims and true Christians do not serve the same person. This truth has absolutely nothing to do with the commandment to “love they neighbour”. Nothing whatsoever. The verses above are truth given by God. We choose to believe it or to cast it aside. The choice is yours.

 

[apfrita]

the problem with the muslims is that they believe in, follow an preach the teachings of a man who strongly denied that jesus is the christ. Reference to jesus as the christ is met with vehement opposition, if not violence, in most muslim communities. Their complaint against christians is that christ was not the son of god; their god does not have a son.

The holy spirit knew what would come and warned us not to be deceived. The test, he noted, was fairly simple - something anyone could understand:*

who is a liar but he who denies that jesus is the christ? He is antichrist who denies the father and the son. (1 john 2:22).*

muslims deny that jesus is the christ. Therefore, according to scripture, they serve antichrist. He who serves antichrist does not serve god. Muslims do not serve god.

amen to that!!!

 

[Marybeloved]

Three times in a short space did I expressly qualify that I was not debating it either.

• “the point I wish to make is not around transubstantiation but around unbelief.”
• “transubstantiation. Whether or not it is a correct teaching is not the issue here.”
• “I say again, this (transubstantiation), however, is not the subject of the debate.”

OK, My bad Apologies

 

[MorningSong51]

This is how the non-muslims can live in peace with Muslims:

fordham.edu/halsall/source/pact-umar.html

 

[Marybeloved]

Above we find an explanation of a controversial issue - transubstantiation. Whether or not it is a correct teaching is not the issue here. However, what it demonstrates is that people can believe things that are taught but which are not expressed as such in the Bible. In this case it is that the bread we use in remembering Jesus today actually changes into His body, whether or not we taste or smell or see it that way. “It is a matter of faith”.

Refer Luke’s words: "And He took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” (Luke 22:19). The Bible does not actually say anything about bread becoming Jesus’ body, etc. It only says that we use the bread & wine as a symbol in remembrance of Him. I say again, this, however, is not the subject of the debate.

The point is that people can believe what is not expressed in words in the Bible. But what is expressly stated in the Bible, that they cannot believe. Instead, for these verses, alternative meanings are conjured up and explanations given to reject the literal meaning thereof. That is called unbelief. The verse "God is love" is received as a literal meaning but the verse "He who is not with Me is against Me" somehow gets to mean something else.

OK, I know that we’ve agreed not to debate the Eucharist here, but this is not a good example of a non-literal belief- It’s anything but!!! Jesus said “If you do not eat my flesh and drink my blood, you’ll have no life in you!” The people took him literally at his word, many of his disciples were scandalized at this teaching of cannibalism and left him over it- Did he explain it further?- Give a none-literal teaching of what he had just said?- No! He repeated it even more vehemently and more literally (John 6:51 - 58)- If you ask me, it’s the belief that we do not eat Jesus’ flesh and drink his blood that is metaphorical/non-literal- Not the belief that we do- which is very literal. It has been the historical Catholic argument against protestants that we take the scriptures literally on the eucharist, whereas the Protestants have argued that it’s to be interpreted metaphorically. Here we just wont agree that the real presence in the Eucharist is not a literal teaching of the New Testament. Perhaps you could pick another example, for the purposes of this discussion.

And so, we have a choice to believe or to cast aside the following:

• “He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters.” (Luke 11:23)
• “He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.” (1 John 5:12)
• “I and My Father are one” (John 10:30)

If you actually believe the above you will know that Muslims and true Christians do not serve the same person. This **truth **has absolutely nothing to do with the **commandment **to “love they neighbour”. Nothing whatsoever. The verses above are **truth **given by God. We choose to **believe **it or to cast it aside. The choice is yours.

I do believe the above, but I do not think that it means that Muslims worship a different God. The Jews rejected Christ to the point of killing him- They certainly were not “with him” but “against him”- However, I would be loathe to find any mature Christian saying that the Jews do not worship the One true God (YHWH)!! Not just the Jews after Christ but before him- No one ever thought of YHWH as Trinity until Jesus revealed it.

Muslims worship one, invisible, eternal, benevolent, infinite God- Creator and Judge of mankind. I know that only one such being exists- And any one who turns to such a being, turns to the one true God regardless of how little they may know about him. I do not accept the Islamic “revelation” in the least and I see them as people in deep error. That does not mean that when they go to prayer, they are not directing their thoughts, feelings and sentiments to the one true God.

I do not accept that only people who have received a revelation can pray to the true God- Any human who understands that there is only one creator and intends to commune with him, does so, albeit in a very limited way. Haven’t you heard of people who said- *“God if you are there, then guide me to the truth” *, and were guided to Christianity?- including Muslims! Meaning that when they spoke to a non-defined God who was ultimate, they were actually speaking to the true God and not just that but he both heard and answered their prayer. To me this is clear proof that when someone in his heart intends to speak with the true God regardless of little knowledge of him, they do commune with him- because God is everywhere and is loving.

 

[John_Paul_Jones]

Really islam does not present the same god as in the Judeo-Christian tradition, imo there is no reason to believe allah is the same as God the Father because there isn’t a strong connection to either tradition of Judaism or Christianity. The formation of islam was not from a schism from the Church but an amalgamation of Christian-Gnosticism & Kabbalism, (NB both well outside the legitimate traditions of their respective religions) with pre-islamic paganism of Suadi Arabia. The First Person of the Trinity Who is called God the Father, in the NT Jesus addresses Him as Abba, and Jews also called God “Father” both historically and now. In the koran allah is never mentioned as God the Father. It seems to me that who ever constructed the koran probably had known the term but went out of their way to make sure that it wasn’t used at all just to prove that allah is not God the Father of the Jews and Christians.

 

[gerhardc]

OK, I know that we’ve agreed not to debate the Eucharist here, but this is not a good example of a non-literal belief- It’s anything but!!!

I also was not referring to the teaching of Transubstantiation as unbelief. Refer what I said below:

Above we find an explanation of a controversial issue - transubstantiation. Whether or not it is a correct teaching is not the issue here. However, what it demonstrates is that people can believe things that are taught but which are not expressed as such in the Bible. In this case it is that the bread we use in remembering Jesus today actually changes into His body, whether or not we taste or smell or see it that way. “It is a matter of faith”.

That is not to say that their belief is wrong. The word Trinity is not expressly noted in the Bible, yet we use it to describe what is written in it about our triune God - Father, Son and Holy Spirit. So, again, I was not discussing Transubstantiation, not even as an example of unbelief. The point is that people can believe things that are not expressly noted in the Bible but they have difficulty in believing things that is indeed written expressly in the Bible. That is called unbelief.

If you find yourself trying to dilute or diminish or argue away what is written there in plain text then you may very well suffer from unbelief. Forgive me but here is a good example:

I do believe the above, **but **I do not think that …

… trying to argue away what is written in plain text. Remember:

• "Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son." (1 John 2:22)
• “He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters.” (Luke 11:23)
• “He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.” (1 John 5:12)
• “I and My Father are one” (John 10:30)

The above verses are all examples of truth given to mankind. You cannot say "I believe but, …". There is no “but” in believe. You either believe it or you don’t. It is that simple. What’s more is that you are perfectly capable of understanding what is written there. There are no hidden meaning. Three of the above verses were written by the same person who wrote John 3:16 - do you have any difficulty in believing that? What about 1 John 4:8 (“God is love”). No difficulties there? Probably not. Why then does one need to try and argue away what the four verses above say? Unbelief.

The Jews rejected Christ to the point of killing him- They certainly were not “with him” but “against him”- However, I would be loathe to find any mature Christian saying that the Jews do not worship the One true God (YHWH)!! Not just the Jews after Christ but before him- No one ever thought of YHWH as Trinity until Jesus revealed it.

As is the case with Muslims’ unbelief that Jesus is the Son of God in which I make no pronouncement as to their judgement, I also make no pronouncement about the Jews either. Fortunately, I don’t have to make a judgement because on the Day of Judgement the Word will judge. More importantly, I don’t judge any issue on whether or not there are many people who follow it as you have suggested that we should. Neither do I judge an issue on how long it has been in practice as you have also suggested that we should. I judge an issue on whether or not it is written in the Bible.

Nevertheless, Scripture does give us a clue as to God’s plan and the question regarding Jews’ non-belief in Jesus:

• "What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded. Just as it is written: “ God has given them a spirit of stupor, Eyes that they should not see and ears that they should not hear, to this very day.” (Romans 11:7-8)
• "For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in." (Romans 11:25)

We are all learning. But a knowledge of the above two answers would have settled a long time ago much of the argument about the Jews, which you raised. The key is the Word, not the arguments of men. "Faith without works is dead" as James reminds us. In this context "works" means that your words and your actions in debate tie up with the faith in the Bible which you profess.

Where they do not tie up there is a question concerning unbelief.

 

[Ahimsa]

Are there any muslim followers that believe that Yousef Nadarkhani should not be executed for believing in Jesus?

Uh, yeah.

 

[domandcarols]

The Catechism states that GOD does have a plan for salvation for the muslims . They worship God the father . The god of the old testament just as the Jews do.Surely they do reject the trinity but they do worship the first divine person in the trinity . God the father .

 

[Marybeloved]

I also was not referring to the teaching of Transubstantiation as unbelief…If you find yourself trying to dilute or diminish or argue away what is written there in plain text then you may very well suffer from unbelief. Forgive me but here is a good example:

OK, I think I may understand what you’re trying to say.

… trying to argue away what is written in plain text. Remember:

• "Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son." (1 John 2:22)
• “He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters.” (Luke 11:23)
• “He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.” (1 John 5:12)
• “I and My Father are one” (John 10:30)

The above verses are all examples of truth given to mankind. You cannot say "I believe but, …". There is no “but” in believe. You either believe it or you don’t. It is that simple. What’s more is that you are perfectly capable of understanding what is written there. There are no hidden meaning. Three of the above verses were written by the same person who wrote John 3:16 - do you have any difficulty in believing that? What about 1 John 4:8 (“God is love”). No difficulties there? Probably not. Why then does one need to try and argue away what the four verses above say? Unbelief.

I’m sorry, Gerhard, but I think you are the one misunderstanding and not really trying to understand what others are saying. I, for one, think that Islam is a work behind which is the Devil, I do not believe in the least that Mohammed received any revelation, at least none from any being from Heaven. However, that is not what we are discussing here, is it?- You’re compounding issues. What we are discussing is whether Muslims worship the one true God- That is wholly different.

You can turn to the true God and still be completely mistaken as to the truth about him. Otherwise, how do you explain St. Paul’s telling the pagan Greeks who were idolaters and polytheists that they actually worshiped the true God without knowing it? Was he not aware of those truths illustrated in the passages you quoted? Isn’t he better placed than any of us to determine which people worship the True God? Clearly he does not think that:

• only the people who have received a special revelation, such as Jews and Christians worship the true God; nor that
• only the people with the right beliefs about God worship the true God- These guys had so many gods that they put out an extra alter just in case they forgot one- And st. Paul grants that they worship the true God!

Again, Whether or not a belief-system is wrong and even of the anti-Christ is not the issue under discussion- it’s whether these people, here it’s Muslims, worship the true God.

We are all learning. But a knowledge of the above two answers would have settled a long time ago much of the argument about the Jews, which you raised. The key is the Word, not the arguments of men. "Faith without works is dead" as James reminds us. In this context "works" means that your words and your actions in debate tie up with the faith in the Bible which you profess. Where they do not tie up there is a question concerning unbelief.

Gerhard, with all due respect, I think you’re doing what is called pontificating- Insisting on your particular understanding of scripture as the one truth that if others fail to accept- they must suffer from unbelief/Heresy. Now I, as a Catholic, believe in the Magisterium’s authority to “pontificate” and accuse holders of divergent beliefs of heresy. But really this is something too close to hypocrisy for sola-scriptura believers who insist that each individual must read and understand the bible for themselves, without any other human authority!

At-least take the meaning that

• includes all the passages in which scripture speaks on an issue; and
• does not contradict other truths of the faiths.

That’s responsible exegesis. Otherwise, based on your own criteria, Catholics have a good case for accusing you of unbelief in Jesus’ plain words, that is*“Truly, Truly I say to you, Unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood, you do not have life in you.”* How do you pick and choose which parts of scripture are to be taken literally and which ones are metaphorical?- What if other sola-scriptura believers insist that those passages you quoted are only broad and symbolic and not literal like you read them- What basis/authority have you in saying they are wrong, but you are right? Wouldn’t you then be guilty of the same crime that Martin Luther accused the CC of? Besides, we don’t believe in scripture as the dictated speech of God, like Muslims, but inspiration. That’s why you have to read scripture as one whole, not parts.

Peace!

 

[Marybeloved]

Hey buddy,what if I preach a new religion and many peoples follow me?And if i proclaim that I am the prophet of Abrahamic God, would you believe me?.

This is an excellent (and hilarious) point!

 

[schaick]

*Originally Posted by rain_bow
Hey buddy,what if I preach a new religion and many peoples follow me?And if i proclaim that I am the prophet of Abrahamic God, would you believe me?. *

You would have to show me some miracles and show me verses from the original Scripture that point to you as a prophet.

Now Mohammad says some unlettered prophet is mentioned in the Bible but does not mention which verses. Muslims try desperately to find the mention of Mohammad. He just isn’t there. Doesn’t this sound a lot like Jesus?:

7.157 “Those who follow the messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the law and the Gospel;- for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him,- it is they who will prosper.”

 

[schaick]

Sorry Schaick;

I ran the sentences together and I didn’t mean to do that - what I wanted to show is where “Love thy neighbor as yourself” derives from:

and is based on Exodus 22:21 “Do not mistreat an alien or oppress him, for you were aliens in Egypt.” - In Psalms 119, it is expressed "I am a stranger in the earth - A wayfaring man; a pilgrim; a so-journer; a man whose permanent home is not in this world. The word is applicable to one who belongs to another country, and who is now merely passing through a foreign land, or sojourning there for a time. Compare the notes at Hebrews 11:13. The home of the child of God is heaven. Here he is in a strange - a foreign - land. He is to abide here but for a little time, and then to pass on to his eternal habitation.

Yes the Golden Rule, every religion has a form of it. Here is Islam from the sayings of Mohammad:

Kitab al-Kafi, vol. 2, p. 146
A Bedouin came to the prophet, grabbed the stirrup of his camel and said: O the messenger of God! Teach me something to go to heaven with it. Prophet said: “As you would have people do to you, do to them; and what you dislike to be done to you, don’t do to them. Now let the stirrup go! [This maxim is enough for you; go and act in accordance with it!]”

An-Nawawi’s Forty Hadith 13 p. 56
“None of you [truly] believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.”

The problem - the Quran outweighs the sayings of Mohammad:

48.29 Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Taurat; and their similitude in the Gospel is: like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward.

Then the next problem is the following quranic verse:
2.106 None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things

The Quran was not compiled in chronological order, but by length of chapter. Here is the order it was “revealed” to Mohammad. As it just so happens the peaceful verses came first followed by the violent ones:

The Early Meccan Surahs-
1 The Clot (96)
2 The Pen (68)
3 The Enshrouded One (73)
4 The Cloaked One (74)
5 The Opening (1)
6 Palm Fibre (111)
7 The Overthrowing (81)
8 The Most High (87)
9 The Night (92)
10 The Dawn (89)
11 The Morning Hours (93)
12 Solace (94)
13 The Declining Day (103)
14 The Coursers (100)
15 Abundance (108)
16 Rivalry in Worldly Increase (102)
17 Small Kindnesses (107)
18 The Disbelievers (109)
19 The Elephant (105)
20 The Daybreak (113)
21 Mankind (114)
22 The Unity (112)
23 The Star (53)
24 He Frowned (80)
25 Power (97)
26 The Sun (91)
27 The Mansions of the Stars (85)
28 The Fig (95)
29 Winter or Qureysh (106)
30 The Calamity (101)

Middle Meccan Surahs (618-620)-
31 The Rising of the Dead (75)
32 The Traducer (104)
33 The Emissaries (77)
34 Oaf (50)
35 The City (90)
36 The Morning Star (86)
37 The Moon (54)
38 Sad (38)
39 The Heights (7)
40 The Jinn (72)
41 Ya Sin (36)
42 Criterion (42)
43 The Angels (35)
44 Mary (19)
45 Ta Ha (20)
46 The Event (56)
47 The Poets (26)
48 The Ant (27)
49 The Story (28)
50 The Children of Israel (17)
51 Jonah (10)
52 Hud (11)
53 Joseph (12)
54 Al-Hijr (15)
55 Cattle (6)
56 Those Who Set the Ranks (37)
57 Luqman (31)
58 Saba (34)
59 The Troops (39)
60 The Believer (40)

Late Meccan Surahs (620-622)-
61 Fusilat (41)
62 Counsel (42)
63 Ornaments of Gold (43)
64 Smoke (44)
65 Crouching (45)
66 The Wind-Curved Sandhills (46)
67 The Winnowing Winds (51)
68 The Overwhelming (88)
69 The Cave (18)
70 The Bee (16)
71 Noah (71)
72 Abraham (14)
73 The Prophets (21)
74 The Believers (23)
75 The Prostration (32)
76 The Mount (52)
77 The Sovereignty (67)
78 The Reality (69)
79 The Ascending Stairways (70)
80 The Tidings (78)
81 Those Who Drag Forth (79)
82 The Cleaving (82)
83 The Sundering (84)
84 The Romans (30)
85 The Spider (29)
86 Defrauding (83)

The 28 Medina Surahs-
87 The Cow (2)
88 Spoils of War (8)
89 The Family of ‘Imran (3)
90 The Clans (33)
91 She That is to be Examined (60)
92 The Women (4)
93 The Earthquake (99)
94 Iron (57)
95 Muhammad (47)
96 The Thunder (13)
97 The Beneficent (55)
98 Time or Man (76)
99 Divorce (65)
100 The Clear Proof (98)
101 Exile (59)
102 Light (24)
103 The Pilgrimage (22)
104 The Hypocrites (63)
105 She That Disputeth (58)
106 The Private Apartments (49)
107 Banning (66)
108 Mutual Disillusion (64)
109 The Ranks (61)
110 The Congregation (62)
111 Victory (48)
112 The Table Spread (5)
113 Repentance (9)
114 Succour (110)

 

[rain_bow]

The Catechism states that GOD does have a plan for salvation for the muslims . They worship God the father . The god of the old testament just as the Jews do.Surely they do reject the trinity but they do worship the first divine person in the trinity . God the father .

That’s great, but you believe that trinity is one God right? So is it not necessary to worship the trinity to worship the same God? Well Jews also do not believe in Trinity but atleast they accept the Old Testament , but Muslims claim that both OT & NT are forged, and even they believe that following trinity is a work of Satan. what would you explain it?

PS. I have no problem if everyone in this world worship the Christian or Muslim God. I am just asking because I am curious about this theory.

 

[rain_bow]

This is an excellent (and hilarious) point!

Hehehe, but Muslims will ask me to show miracles because they believe that, Koran is full of miracle , though I never found any miracle in this book.