A question with a question,the point is you overstepped here. Or prove your point?
- We know quite a bit about second-millennium culture, and we know it was polytheistic. We also know that people of that culture had “personal gods” with whom they had special relationships.
- Everything in the Genesis narrative fits this “personal god” concept. Nothing requires us to believe that Abraham was breaking with the basic polytheistic assumptions of his culture.
Now the burden of proof is on those who think that Abraham is the person to whom this revolutionary concept was revealed–this in spite of the fact that even God’s revelations to Moses speak primarily in terms of “worship me, not those other gods.”
But you don’t believe Abraham was a monotheist and you would argue their point for them?
Argue what point for Muslims? I disagree with the Islamic claim that Abraham was a monotheist, right.
Ok go ahead I disagree in fact its impossible since in the Old Testament, God reveals himself to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The same God
Exactly. It was the same God, even though Abraham almost certainly didn’t think in explicitly monotheistic terms.
And yet you and others actually claim that Muslims, who
are monotheists, are worshiping a different god?
My argument is simple: the gap between Abraham and us, in terms of explicit belief about God, is greater than the gap between Abraham and Muslims, and much greater than the gap between us and Muslims. If we were to plot the respective beliefs on a line, with 0 being polytheism and 10 being Trinitarian Christianity, Abraham would be at about 5 and Muslims would be at about 8 (this is just off the top of my head to give you a clearer idea of what I’m claiming–obviously these numbers aren’t important in themselves). Hence, if Abraham worshiped the true God, Muslims worship the true God.
not a created fallacy in bad scholarly plagiarism.
Now
that’s insulting.
Whats cute is again your twist of words which limit linguistics again to the God of Abraham. Sikhism, Zoroastrianism and the Bahá’í Faith are the god of Abraham also?
I don’t know what you mean (and again, “cute twist of words” is very insulting language).
There are two issues here: a historical connection with the revelation to Abraham, and monotheism. We all believe that the revelation to Abraham was genuine, so that Abraham was worshiping the true God even though he may not have been (in my opinion almost certainly was not) a monotheist. Muslims claim to be heirs of that revelation. But even if we discount that claim (I myself would qualify but not dismiss it entirely), the fact remains that they are monotheists and thus worship the true God. You can’t be a monotheist and not worship the true God.
Sikhs and Bahai both receive some measure of whatever genuine connection with Abrahamic revelation Muslims have. But more to the point, they’re both monotheistic religions and so obviously worship the true God, yes. I would say the same of Zoroastrians as well, though it gets a bit trickier and I won’t press the point there (especially since I know very little about that religion).
Your at “probably” now which leaves you out on the limb of assumption?
No, it makes me a cautious historian
. All historical judgments are probable. But this one seems pretty solid to me–I don’t see any counter-evidence at all unless you count much later Jewish/Muslim/Christian tradition.
Your language is very insulting
I apologize for the word “honestly.” I don’t think you are dishonest.
About what?
Did you admit your were wrong above? Of course not
Of course not, because I wasn’t.
and I don’t expect you to nor did I insult you.
Perhaps not in the initial round of posts, but you have insulted me pretty nastily in this post (“plagiarism” is one of the worst insults there is to a scholar
).
So your linguistics were also incorrect?
No. Muslims call Jesus the Messiah. They do not call Muhammad the Messiah. You stated otherwise. You were incorrect.
Of course so why so insulting? Do you actually think it lends authenticity to your words?
I have no idea in this case how you think I’ve insulted you, but I’m sorry for my strong language in my previous post generally.
Hey Edwin are you following this conversation or what is the issue?
I asked you a simple question: when did Constantine convert? You’re the one who said that he didn’t worship the true God before his conversion and he did afterwards. He was baptized on his deathbed–did he only start worshiping the true God then? When he presided at the Nicene Council and prodded the bishops to clarify their doctrine on the nature of God, did he not even mean the same thing by the word that they did?
Or did he come to believe in the true God at the battle of the Milvian Bridge, perhaps? After that time he still pretty clearly identified the true God with the “Unconquered Sun,” given the evidence of coinage, etc.
This is relevant to the broader discussion because it shows that the sharp line you’re trying to draw doesn’t work, in an example that you yourself chose.
Edwin
