Help me to answer Muslim Apologetics!

  • Thread starter Thread starter myLordandGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
That would be considered a heretical hymn akin to Sabellianism rather than Orthodox Trinitarianism it’s always required to define what you mean by three in one as it’s a broad term open to interpretation some of which are quite heretical.
 
Last edited:
Where did I use the words ‘One God in three God’s’ or ‘three persons in one person’? Us Trinitarian Baptists knew exactly what the hymn was saying; That within the one Godhead are three co-equal and co-eternal divine persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). One God, not three gods. Our Sunday School teacher told us as much. I doubt we understood her, but we weren’t going to argue!.

However, I agree - on reflection - that my original post could confuse. Unfortunately. I can no longer edit it; so here’s the amendment:

‘Like it or lump it…as far as the Qur’an is concerned, the Exalted is not a trinity.’

Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut.
 
Last edited:
SalamKhan said:
The fact remains, that Christians believe that Jesus (A) is the Son of God in the real sense, this is not something figurative for them, and this is what we Muslims reject.
Click to expand...
This is where you error in your false assumption.
How does a Muslim reject what a Muslim does not know or understands correctly about a subject? The Muslim is misinformed about the Catholic faith and her understanding’s of God’s divine revelation’s given to her, by God.

Catholics believe that the Trinity is a divine mystery, and cannot be defined and understood totally in human terms.

Catholic’s believe that by divine revelation, God sent His Son to us in space and time, to reveal the Father to our Humanity and reveal God’s salvation for the fallen human race and creation.

Catholic’s do not believe Jesus is the Son of God “in the real sense” as a Muslim wrongly believes about the Trinity, that God is misunderstood by Christians who believe in a trinity, had a son by carnal relations. Although, there were Arab Christian heretics in the Arab territories who believed in such heresies

A Muslim’s “real sense” of a Son is carnal logic, never a Catholic faith.

Jesus is the eternal begotten Son of the Father in divinity and procession of divine revelation. This is never believed in “figuratively” by a Catholic, but is understood as an eternal begetting and existing. Something “figurative” does not exist.Thus your “figuratively” assumption does not compute with the Catholic faith and understanding of God’s divine revelation and how God proceeds His divine revelation through His Son and confirmed by God the Holy Spirit, in space and time to our humanity.
 
Last edited:
That understanding of the trinity would be Orthodox then. But I prefer to avoid using the term three in one or one in three as it avoids much confusion and heresy among other things. The Trinity also requires a more philosophical understanding, one I don’t think most children in Sunday school are capable of.
 
Christians interpret anthropomorphic passages about God in the Bible as metaphorical. The Orthodox Muslim (Salafists) interpretations of anthropomorphic passages in the Quran have taken a literal approach, which are quite absurd. But in any case the viewpoint of Mu’tazilites and Asharis wouldn’t be valued in modern day Islam as they were condemned heresies by mainstream Islam and Muslims.
 
I agree. I suspect that most of what she said went in through one ear and out the other. Children are particularly good at spotting nonsense…except when it comes to the Tooth Fairy or Father Christmas (or maybe they hide the fact that they’ve sussed us; after all, it’s in their interest to do so).
 
Last edited:
It has nothing to do with nonsense, it’s like trying to teach kids the doctrine of Divine Simplicity or Theophany.
 
It’s not nonsense to Trinitarians, I agree. But it is utter nonsense to those who are not. Like it or lump it, this is the way things are.

Having been a Trinitarian I can appreciate how you feel; and I respect your sincerity. However, having rejected your doctrine…a long and difficult process…it is now impossible for me to turn back. There is no argument you can offer that I have not heard…and championed…before…many times before. You trust your judgement in this matter; and I trust mine. You will understand, I hope, that (for me) my judgement is the one that matters. Thank you for your time.
 
Last edited:
It’s not nonsense to anyone who understands its philosophy, Three persons bearing the essence of one single deity, effectively making them one single divinity as a result of posseing the same divine essence while remaining separate in personhood.
 
I repeat: There is no argument you can offer that I have not heard…and championed…before…many times before. You trust your judgement in this matter; and I trust mine. You will understand, I hope, that (for me) my judgement is the one that matters. Thank you for your time.
 
Niblo said:
It’s not nonsense to Trinitarians, I agree. But it is utter nonsense to those who are not.
Click to expand...
Does it not stand to logic and reason for those “who are not” first learn and understand the True doctrine of the blessed Trinity before attempting to attack it or discredit the True Trinity?

For example; When the Catholic Church teaches her catechumen, she never attacks another faith in order to prove her own ground in faith.

I find that the teachers of Islam and most non-Catholic Christians who teach their doctrines to their students, include attacks on the Catholic faith and doctrines in order to justify Islam’s belief’s or non-Catholic Christian belief’s.

Should we not allow TRUTH to stand alone, if? one is teaching TRUTH. Instead of attacking or discrediting another’s faith to justify another’s faith for existing.
 
From my profile:

I was raised as a Baptist in South Wales. At the age of fifteen I became a Catholic, and I remained one for over fifty years. For ten years I was a professed member of the Carmelite Third Order; and studied biblical and dogmatic theology, as well as other relevant stuff. I spent a year with the Carmelite Friars at Hazlewood Castle in Yorkshire (now a hotel); and over a year with the Cistercians at Mount Saint Bernard Abbey in Leicester, testing a vocation. It became clear that life in a religious order was not my calling, and so I became a husband (as the Abbey Secretary said to me: ‘Our novitiate is a seedbed of good Catholic marriages!’). I look back at my time with the Carmelites and Cistercians with great affection. Even though I no longer share their doctrinal beliefs I admire their spirituality, and their honest convictions; and their way of life - especially the Cistercians. It has been my privilege to know many excellent Christians: paternal grandfather; priests, religious and laity. Each was an example of the best of their Faith.

Can’t speak for the knowledge of other people (except those friends and family who are former Catholics, and who no longer except the doctrine of the trinity. None of these folk, by the way, are Muslims - apart from my son).

Because certain folk do not believe what we believe does not, of itself, make them ignorant fools.

One man’s sense is another man’s nonsense. It is what it is.
 
Last edited:
Good profile. Why did you leave the faith to become Muslim? Would you not afraid that history may repeat itself?
 
Last edited:
Having gained a Muslim family (my son became a Muslim about fourteen years ago) I made it my business to learn all I could about Islam (still learning). It was during this long process that I began to question certain Christian beliefs I once held as true; and which I had defended many times over the years. I have seen people move from disbelief in Christianity to disbelief in God; but I was, and am, not able to do that. For me, the existence of God is a certainty, founded upon decades of interaction with believers, and personal experience (I can’t say more than that). I trust my judgement that Islam’s perception of God is the correct one. It really is that simple.

Am I afraid of history repeating itself? No. If all Scripture…all Scripture… were to vanish this very day – or be proven false – I would still be certain of God’s existence, and of His love. This is probably why I don’t fall into a tizz when folk disagree with me!
 
Chaldean said:
The verse clearly says APPEARED
Click to expand...
You cited the mountain verse when I said burnig bush. Goodbye.
Chaldean said:
So you’re not saying the truth
Click to expand...
So because they teach the Muslims where you are, just as they teach the Muslims where I am, the false narrative that the collection of Bukhari is the most authentic book after the Qur’an; means I’m not saying the truth about Muslims being unaware of Hadith history and its studies? Okay fine, goodbye.
Chaldean said:
But People like you are easy to read. When things do not go their way, they resort to attacking others
Click to expand...
I’m sorry you feel that way. But from my end, it felt as if I was conversing with a brick wall. Enjoy the rest of your life.
 
Masihi said:
God doesn’t hold people responsible for their parents sins either
Click to expand...
Once again, I said first parents, which refers to Adam and Eve.

I’m ignoring your highlighter edition quoting, go and read what Ibn Qayyim al Jawziyyah had to say (it’s been translated and published as Divine Wisdom and the Problem of Evil), because I’m not interested in discussing this topic.
 
OriginalGabrielof12 said:
This is where you error in your false assumption.
How does a Muslim reject what a Muslim does not know or understands correctly about a subject
Click to expand...
Read this:
40.png
Help me to answer Muslim Apologetics! Non-Catholic Religions
I am aware that Christians do not believe that the begetting of the Son from the Father was sensible, but rather they believe it is intelligible; but this is still irrelevant. Because we deny that God could beget a Son in the real sense, whether it is sensible, imaginable, or intelligible. My friend, I have said twice by now that I am aware that Christians believe the begetting is intelligible, so why do you assert that I think Christians believe the begetting was sensible? Yes, the Qur’an den…
Click to expand...
 
Masihi said:
Christians interpret anthropomorphic passages about God in the Bible as metaphorical. The Orthodox Muslim (Salafists) interpretations of anthropomorphic passages in the Quran have taken a literal approach, which are quite absurd. But in any case the viewpoint of Mu’tazilites and Asharis wouldn’t be valued in modern day Islam as they were condemned heresies by mainstream Islam and Muslims.
Click to expand...
You generalised that all Christians interpret anthropomorphic verses in the Bible as metaphorical, when clearly Chaldean did not. You also deemed Salafi Islam as being orthodox Islam, I wonder what makes you an authority on this.

The Asharis were actually mainstream Islam from the 11th century until the 20th century. Then the Salafis became mainstream Islam from the late 20th century onwards. The question of orthodoxy in Islam is irrelevant to me anyway, since hardly anything is black and white on this question.
 
Last edited:
The Bible Shaw God is a spirit, so that pretty much sums up why Christians should interpret Anthropomorphic passages as metaphorical. Asharis were Philosophical and based their theology upon Greek Philosophy and were declared as heretics from the 12th century and onwards. Salafism follows the Quran, Sunnah, and Hadith, it doesn’t base its theology on Rationalism as Asharism does which is why it is the mainstream Islam and orthodox Islam:

 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top