How do other religions view Jesus?

[otterman]

Who is father of Adam?

Adam is given as the first man to be created by God, so in one sense you could say that God the Father created Adam.
But Jesus was not “created” in the same way as Adam, and not for the same purpose.

Jesus, the “Son” part of the Trinity, was “created “supernaturally to be born in human form, for mankind to have a relationship with God, whilst living on the earth.
Both Muslims and Christians agree that Adam sinned against God, and was punished by losing his special relationship with God, and creation. But where we differ is our understanding of what happened next. Because man is sinful, he is not able to reconcile sin for himself, only God is. This is where Jesus comes in. Jesus came to reconcile man to God, by giving His life as a sacrifice for the sin of Adam. This is what Christians call the Good News, or Gospel, Jesus is the Good News, He came to bridge the gap between man and God, so that man is able to get back what was lost when Adam sinned, to gain eternal life for his soul in heaven.

 

[hasantas]

Adam is given as the first man to be created by God, so in one sense you could say that God the Father created Adam.
But Jesus was not “created” in the same way as Adam, and not for the same purpose.

Jesus, the “Son” part of the Trinity, was “created “supernaturally to be born in human form, for mankind to have a relationship with God, whilst living on the earth.
Both Muslims and Christians agree that Adam sinned against God, and was punished by losing his special relationship with God, and creation. But where we differ is our understanding of what happened next. Because man is sinful, he is not able to reconcile sin for himself, only God is. This is where Jesus comes in. Jesus came to reconcile man to God, by giving His life as a sacrifice for the sin of Adam. This is what Christians call the Good News, or Gospel, Jesus is the Good News, He came to bridge the gap between man and God, so that man is able to get back what was lost when Adam sinned, to gain eternal life for his soul in heaven.

The creating of Adam is more supernatural because for Adam there was no father, mother, matter and soul.

Adam made a mistake and so he was sinful that is true. But then Adam repent and forswear for his sin and God forgave him. Adam’s sin is not bequest for us but his nature which human may sin easily is heritage for mankind. So man is not sinful unless he sin. Every one may sin because mankind has been created in that disposition. Prophets do not sin because God prevent them from such thing but prophets can make mistake just as Adam made mistake. In Islam that mistakes are called zilla. So there is no a requirement to send a sacrifice for frogiving sins. Everyone can repent and ask God for forgiveness. Prophets like Jesus are teacher who support and teach the way to repent. If someone does not repent then there is no mean to say that Jesus was sacrificed for our sins.

You say that Jesus was created as Son. ok. Then how Jesus can be a divine God while he was created?

 

[Servant19]

Christians believe in a one God who is knowable, …

Just a quick side note dear friend. What you state here is incorrect

strobertbellarmine.net/wi…annell_09.html

A Manual Of Catholic Theology, Based On Scheeben’s “Dogmatik”

1906

CHAPTER II

THE ESSENCE AND ATTRIBUTES OF GOD, CONSIDERED GENERALLY.

SECT. 60.—Fundamental conception of God’s Essence and Nature.

WE have now to inquire whether, among our conceptions of God, there is some one which may be considered as the foundation of all the others.

I. **A direct and intuitive representation of the Divine Substance [Essence] as It is in Itself, is manifestly impossible. Our knowledge of God is restricted to His attributes which we see reflected in creatures, and which we refer to the Divine Substance; but the Substance itself we have no power to apprehend…**We must bear in mind throughout that the conceptions of essence and substance as applied to God are only analogous, because the essences which we know are not identical with existence. Hence the expressions : “God is [Greek words omitted],” that is, God is His own Essence, is above all essences, and is without essence…

Saint Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335 – c. 395) explained this well in his Sermons on the Beatitudes (Sermon 6):

"…The Divine Nature, whatever It may be in Itself, surpasses every mental concept. For It is altogether inaccessible to reasoning and conjecture, nor has there been found any human faculty capable of perceiving the incomprehensible; for we cannot devise a means of understanding inconceivable things. Therefore, the great Apostle calls His ways unsearchable, meaning by this that the way that leads to knowledge of the Divine Essence is inaccessible to thought. That is to say, none of those who have passed through life before us has made known to the intelligence so much as a trace by which might be known what is above knowledge.

Since such is He whose nature is above every nature, the Invisible and Incomprehensible is seen and apprehended in another manner. Many are the modes of such perception. For it is possible to see Him who has made all things in wisdom by way of inference through the wisdom that appears in the universe. It is the same as with human works of art where, in a way, the mind can perceive the maker of the product that is before it, because he has left on his work the stamp of his art. In this, however, is seen not the nature of the artist, but only his artistic skill which he has left impressed on his handiwork. Thus also, when we look at the order of creation, we form in our mind an image not of the essence, but of the wisdom of Him who has made all things wisely. And if we consider the cause of our life, that He came to create man not from necessity, but from the free decision of his goodness, we say that we have contemplated God by this way, that we have apprehended his goodness so again, not his essence, but his goodness. It is the same with all other things that raised the mind to transcendent goodness, all these we can term apprehensions of God, since each one of these sublime meditations places God within our sight. For power, purity, constancy, freedom from contrariety all these engrave on the soul the impress of the divine and transcendent mind. Hence it is clear through what has just been said that the Lord speaks the truth when he promises that God will be seen by those who have a pure heart; nor does Paul deceive when he asserts in his letters that no one has seen God, nor can he see him. For he is invisible by nature, but becomes visible in his energies, for he may be contemplated in the things that are referred to him…"

• Saint Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335 – c. 395)

.

 

[Servant19]

The creating of Adam is more supernatural because for Adam there was no father, mother, matter and soul.

Adam made a mistake and so he was sinful that is true. But then Adam repent and forswear for his sin and God forgave him. Adam’s sin is not bequest for us but his nature which human may sin easily is heritage for mankind. So man is not sinful unless he sin. Every one may sin because mankind has been created in that disposition. Prophets do not sin because God prevent them from such thing but prophets can make mistake just as Adam made mistake. In Islam that mistakes are called zilla. So there is no a requirement to send a sacrifice for frogiving sins. Everyone can repent and ask God for forgiveness. Prophets like Jesus are teacher who support and teach the way to repent. If someone does not repent then there is no mean to say that Jesus was sacrificed for our sins.

You say that Jesus was created as Son. ok. Then how Jesus can be a divine God while he was created?

Hasantas, you might be interested to know that Justin Martyr, one of the most respected Ante-Nicene Fathers of early Christianity called the Divine aspect of Jesus, the “first born of God”

He wrote:

And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God…

ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.xxi.html

.

 

[hasantas]

I say you do understand because you accept Jesus’ words (from Our Scripture) that he will ask the Father to send the Holy Spirit. Why accept Our Scripture? Now you are switching that Mohammed is the Holy Spirit to being sent by the Holy Spirit. Totally inconsistent.

You have to show exactly where Christian clerics changed the perception from what. Be clear. Give me the exact changes.

I know this argument before and it was by a Muslim cleric who debated Jehovah’s Witnesses and never the Church that gave the Scripture which you are borrowing from.

Ah so you think. You simply don’t know or haven’t the inclination to learn about the experience of the man called Jesus and his apostles and the Church, what has been taught long before Islam.

MJ

If we had had the original text of Gospels then we would see what have been changed. I said Muslims think. That thought occured in that way: Jewish and Christian clerics could know and find the evidences of prophethood on Mohammed at that time. There are many samples for that issue. Jews expected that the last prophet would come from Jews as usual. But the last prophet come from among the unimportant folk(Arabs) at that time. So they might changed verses which point to last prophet.

 

[meltzerboy]

The creating of Adam is more supernatural because for Adam there was no father, mother, matter and soul.

Adam made a mistake and so he was sinful that is true. But then Adam repent and forswear for his sin and God forgave him. Adam’s sin is not bequest for us but his nature which human may sin easily is heritage for mankind. So man is not sinful unless he sin. Every one may sin because mankind has been created in that disposition. Prophets do not sin because God prevent them from such thing but prophets can make mistake just as Adam made mistake. In Islam that mistakes are called zilla. So there is no a requirement to send a sacrifice for frogiving sins. Everyone can repent and ask God for forgiveness. Prophets like Jesus are teacher who support and teach the way to repent. If someone does not repent then there is no mean to say that Jesus was sacrificed for our sins.

You say that Jesus was created as Son. ok. Then how Jesus can be a divine God while he was created?

I think, according to Christian belief, Jesus was not created in the ordinary meaning of the term. Rather, Jesus is believed to be co-eternal to the Father and the Holy Spirit since He always existed as divinity although He came to live as a human on earth at a particular moment in time, while simultaneously retaining His divine nature. The problem arises when humans do not realize that time is linear only for the benefit of us humans whereas G-d is outside of time.

With regard to the individual repentance of humans who have sinned, this Islamic teaching is based on what is reiterated many times in the Hebrew Bible.

 

[otterman]

Just a quick side note dear friend. What you state here is incorrect

strobertbellarmine.net/wi…annell_09.html

Saint Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335 – c. 395) explained this well in his Sermons on the Beatitudes (Sermon 6):



.

Thanks for your comment.

However, Catholics believe God is knowable through the Incarnation.

God in His infinite mercy allowed Himself to come to earth in the form of Jesus Christ, the Messiah, who Christians know as God Incarnate.

Confirmed in John 14:9-10 And in Luke 1:35

This is basic Christian theology, anyone who disagrees cannot call themselves a true Christian.

 

[Servant19]

Thanks for your comment.

However, Catholics believe God is knowable through the Incarnation.

God in His infinite mercy allowed Himself to come to earth in the form of Jesus Christ, the Messiah, who Christians know as God Incarnate.

Confirmed in John 14:9-10 And in Luke 1:35

This is basic Christian theology, anyone who disagrees cannot call themselves a true Christian.

Would you say therefore that St.Gregory was not a true Christian?

Thankyou dear friend

.

 

[otterman]

Would you say therefore that St.Gregory was not a true Christian?

Thankyou dear friend

.

St Gregory did not disagree with Church theology, he consolidated it:

“Gregory, following Basil, defined the Trinity as “one essence οὐσία] in three persons ὑποστάσεις]”, the formula adopted by the Council of Constantinople in 381”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_of_Nyssa

 

[TypesAndShadows]

Would you say therefore that St.Gregory was not a true Christian?

Thankyou dear friend

.

You responded to the claim that Christian teaching is that God is knowable, through Jesus who is God, with quotes that say God cannot be fully understood by humans. Is this because you believe “knowing” God is the same thing as fully understanding everything about God and how he works?

 

[Servant19]

St Gregory did not disagree with Church theology, he consolidated it:

“Gregory, following Basil, defined the Trinity as “one essence οὐσία] in three persons ὑποστάσεις]”, the formula adopted by the Council of Constantinople in 381”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_of_Nyssa

Dear friend, thank you, however this is not in response to the clear teaching of St. Gregory that God is unknowable. (very much aligned with Muslim teaching)

It is a de fide teaching of the Catholic Church that the Blessed in heaven even cannot know the essence of God.

I would humbly suggest you study the difference between Deus a se, and Deus pro nobis.

This will clarify for you the understanding that general, basic Catholic understanding (as you call it) is actually incorrect in thinking that God is knowable. His attributes are knowable, but His essence is unknowable by all created beings, and that is a de fide teaching

God bless you!

.

 

[Servant19]

You responded to the claim that Christian teaching is that God is knowable, through Jesus who is God, with quotes that say God cannot be fully understood by humans. Is this because you believe “knowing” God is the same thing as fully understanding everything about God and how he works?

I’m not sure dear friend

What does the phrase “God is knowable” mean to you?

And in contrast, what does the bolded part of St. Gregory’s sermon I quoted, mean to you?



.

 

[dronald]

If we had had the original text of Gospels then we would see what have been changed. I said Muslims think. That thought occured in that way: Jewish and Christian clerics could know and find the evidences of prophethood on Mohammed at that time. There are many samples for that issue. Jews expected that the last prophet would come from Jews as usual. But the last prophet come from among the unimportant folk(Arabs) at that time. So they might changed verses which point to last prophet.

Do you know what the Dead Sea Scrolls are?

 

[TypesAndShadows]

I’m not sure dear friend

What does the phrase “God is knowable” mean to you?

And in contrast, what does the bolded part of St. Gregory’s sermon I quoted, mean to you?



.

I know many people. I know God. Some of the people I know, I understand how they think and work very well. Generally, it is possible for me to understand a lot about how humans work, because I am a human and work in the same way, and because a lot of the workings of humans (being finite) have been uncovered by science.

Some of the people I know, I do not understand as well. They are, perhaps, too different from me or from my current experiences, although no doubt it would be possible for me to learn more about them and their situations and so come to understand them better. But I still know them.

I know God, but I do not expect to ever understand him fully, never really beyond what can be extrapolated from the attributes we know he has and from the things he has said and done. God is infinite, and I am finite. God comprehends the whole of existence simultaneously, and I view my portion of the world moment to moment. He cannot be understood by a creature like myself. But I do know him, and I know him through Jesus. Jesus’s family and disciples knew him, and passed this knowledge on to us, although they did not understand him.

To know someone is not the same as understanding them.

 

[Servant19]

I know many people. I know God. Some of the people I know, I understand how they think and work very well. Generally, it is possible for me to understand a lot about how humans work, because I am a human and work in the same way, and because a lot of the workings of humans (being finite) have been uncovered by science.

Some of the people I know, I do not understand as well. They are, perhaps, too different from me or from my current experiences, although no doubt it would be possible for me to learn more about them and their situations and so come to understand them better. But I still know them.

I know God, but I do not expect to ever understand him fully, never really beyond what can be extrapolated from the attributes we know he has and from the things he has said and done. God is infinite, and I am finite. God comprehends the whole of existence simultaneously, and I view my portion of the world moment to moment. He cannot be understood by a creature like myself. But I do know him, and I know him through Jesus. Jesus’s family and disciples knew him, and passed this knowledge on to us, although they did not understand him.

To know someone is not the same as understanding them.

What you just described dear friend is also the Islamic understanding of God, so this cannot be used as a point of difference.

Islam does not deny that we can understand and know “more” about God through His attributes which are seen in the Prophet Muhammad (and all His other Prophets for that matter) and the whole of creation.

So Catholics cannot say that God is “knowable” without being precise in outlining that His attributes are knowable, not His essence.

The essence of God is unknowable according to Islamic AND Catholic teaching.



.

 

[otterman]

The creating of Adam is more supernatural because for Adam there was no father, mother, matter and soul.

Adam made a mistake and so he was sinful that is true. But then Adam repent and forswear for his sin and God forgave him. Adam’s sin is not bequest for us but his nature which human may sin easily is heritage for mankind. So man is not sinful unless he sin. Every one may sin because mankind has been created in that disposition. Prophets do not sin because God prevent them from such thing but prophets can make mistake just as Adam made mistake. In Islam that mistakes are called zilla. So there is no a requirement to send a sacrifice for frogiving sins. Everyone can repent and ask God for forgiveness. Prophets like Jesus are teacher who support and teach the way to repent. If someone does not repent then there is no mean to say that Jesus was sacrificed for our sins.

You say that Jesus was created as Son. ok. Then how Jesus can be a divine God while he was created?

 

[TypesAndShadows]

What you just described dear friend is the Islamic understanding of God, so this cannot be used as a point of difference.

Islam does not deny that we can understand and know “more” about God through His attributes which are seen in the Prophet Muhammad (and all His other Prophets for that matter) and the whole of creation.

The essence of God is unknowable according to Islamic AND Catholic teaching.



.

There is a difference between “I can know God because he is similar to this person he spoke to, and I know that person” and “I can know God, because he is this person.” You also seem to have switched to again use the word “knowable” as if it meant “understandable”. I know God, as a person, not just some portion of God. But I cannot hope to understand him.

So, you agree that it is entirely possible to know God without understanding him fully, and that the St Gregory quote does not contradict anything Otterman said?

Incidentally, do you think you could avoid appearing to tell people that they believe things that they tell you they do not believe, as you appeared to do with Otterman? No amount of smiley faces in the world make that look less aggressive. I appreciate that part of your faith is believing that all religions agree with each other, but when practitioners of those faiths tell you that their understandings of these points are not what you say they are, and are not in harmony, it would be polite to believe them. Muslims very specifically disagree with a lot of Christian theology, including Catholic theology, partly because it is built on a very different framework of what can be known and understood of God, and what this means. That your own understanding of Christianity and Islam is different, and allows you to harmonise these ideas, does not change what practitioners of these faiths actually believe.

 

[otterman]

What you just described dear friend is also the Islamic understanding of God, so this cannot be used as a point of difference.

Islam does not deny that we can understand and know “more” about God through His attributes which are seen in the Prophet Muhammad (and all His other Prophets for that matter) and the whole of creation.

So Catholics cannot say that God is “knowable” without being precise in outlining that His attributes are knowable, not His essence.

The essence of God is unknowable according to Islamic AND Catholic teaching.



.

I agree the Islamic understanding of God is different to the Christian view.

The Christian God is knowable through His Son Jesus, the second Person of the Trinity.
The Christian God YHWH is also knowable through His creation, the universe and its contents.

The nature, attributes and teachings of the Islamic god Allah are incomplete contrast to the Bible God, and therefore indicate they cannot be the same divine being.

 

[Servant19]

There is a difference between “I can know God because he is similar to this person he spoke to, and I know that person” and “I can know God, because he is this person.” You also seem to have switched to again use the word “knowable” as if it meant “understandable”. I know God, as a person, not just some portion of God. But I cannot hope to understand him.

So, you agree that it is entirely possible to know God without understanding him fully, and that the St Gregory quote does not contradict anything Otterman said?

Incidentally, do you think you could avoid appearing to tell people that they believe things that they tell you they do not believe, as you appeared to do with Otterman? No amount of smiley faces in the world make that look less aggressive. I appreciate that part of your faith is believing that all religions agree with each other, but when practitioners of those faiths tell you that their understandings of these points are not what you say they are, and are not in harmony, it would be polite to believe them. Muslims very specifically disagree with a lot of Christian theology, including Catholic theology, partly because it is built on a very different framework of what can be known and understood of God, and what this means. That your own understanding of Christianity and Islam is different, and allows you to harmonise these ideas, does not change what practitioners of these faiths actually believe.

I mean no disrespect. We are not talking about the general theologies of the two religions here.

We are talking about what is meant by God is knowable/unknowable.

In Catholic theology, God is knowable through His attributes. Unknowable in His essence.

It is the same in Islamic theology.

Why therefore would one state that Islam believes that God is unknowable, and in Catholicism God is knowable? (as Otterman stated)

It is making statements based on differing contexts and frameworks.

It is important that this be clarified to build better harmony.

My motives are nothing more. And I will smile while doing it, unapologetically dear friend. I know this is what the Holy Spirit is guiding me to do…to build better harmony

.

 

[Servant19]

…and therefore indicate they cannot be the same divine being.

Again, dear friend, this contradicts Catholic teaching which clearly and categorically states that the Plan of Salvation includes Muslims, who together with Catholics worship the One God.

I do not believe that the Church ever mentions a “Different” Divine God worshipped by Muslims.

You can believe what you like, and as TypesandShadows would like me to honour your beliefs for what you believe (which I’m happy to) but this belief does not align with Catholic Teaching…

.