How is this not heresy?

[Divine3]

Heresy Alert! Heresy Alert! And who truly knows the Most Holy, Blessed, Trinity but God? -----The one God!
Ahh— the Divine mystery of it all!
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

The book of Genesis says that"God" appeared to Abraham (Gen 17.1), but in other places it says “Word of God” came to him (Gen 15:4). Orthodox interpret this to mean “The Word of God” as in “Jesus Christ” (John 1:1). We don’t view the difference of terms as arbitrary, and like someone else said, God doesn’t change, so if Abraham knew God, then He must have known the Trinity.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[twf]

They don’t HAVE the Father, and their attempt at worship is not in accord with divine law, but they do intend to worship the one true God of Abraham… it’s an ecumenical overture, recognizing that attempt so we can build common ground, not a dogmatic decree affirming Muslim worship.

 

[twf]

Yes, Christ is everywhere in the Old Testament. This is lived and breathed in the Catholic liturgy. When we pray the Office, we pray the Psalms in a Christological sense.

…but that doesn’t mean the Jews “got it”. It wasn’t until the incarnation that the Trinity was fully revealed. Yes, we see the Trinity in the Old Testament now, but it wasn’t explicit.

 

[Divine3]

I wonder why you have this thread under Moral Theology—It might be better in a different place–Maybe someone who does those things, like move topics, might agree and find a better place for this… Just a thought

 

[Frankenfurter]

The “god” Muslims worship is not Trinitarian

Wait.

The text you have included does not say that. You have added that. I thought we were just commenting on the text itself?!?

You have changed the rules of the question that you have posed yourself.

 

[Gab123]

I don’t believe in the Roman Catholic Church. I am Orthodox

Christ instituted The Church. Schisms have brought division. But it was Christ who instructed Peter:

“Feed my lambs.” Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep.” The third time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my sheep.” John 21:15-17

Jesus didn’t put Greek or Russians Orthodox national churches in charge of the flock, instead He put Peter in charge, and Peter’s successor is in Rome and head of the One, Holy, Catholic (Universal) Church…

 

[Dovekin]

You are sounding like a follower of Marcion. When he tried to exclude the Hebrew scriptures because the Christian God was greater than the God of Jerusalem, Christians roundly condemned that position and adopted the Hebrew scriptures as part of our canon. The underlying idea was that the Jews worshipped the same God, even though they did not know the revelation in Christ.

The situation is different with Muslims, but they are able to worship the one God despite not knowing the revelation in Christ.

…
Parts of Daniel appear in the Apocrypha in most protestant bibles like the KJV. But not every edition of the KJV includes the Apocrypha these days.

 

[Gab123]

that God is the Holy, Consubstantial and Indivisible Trinity. And anyone who doesn’t worship Him, is worshipping a fiction. Or a demon. Or themselves.

The Jews do not accept the Holy Trinity, are they worshipping a false God?

Paul asked:

“is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.”- Romans 3:29-3

 

[Genesis315]

To everyone directly above: if they don’t have Jesus, then they don’t have the same God as us. The Bible says that clearly: “Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father” (I John 2:23). If you claim they do have the same God, Saint John says they don’t.

…And so does our Lord. Like I said: the sine qua non for knowing the Father, is the Son: “ He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father; no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me ” (St. John 14:6, 9).

You are confusing speculative and affective knowledge of God, as well as the salvific relationship established with God through supernatural faith, vs that natural knowledge of God available to all by reason (which, of itself, is not salvific).

Your second verse, for example, is speaking of union with Christ through faith and charity as the only means by which we have communion with the Father.

The same with the first quote. To “have the Father” means more than just a speculative knowledge of God, but rather an affective knowledge of the Trinity–to affectively know the only begotten Son is to know the consubstantiatial begetting Father and vice versa.

Others in Scripture are said to worship the one God, without faith in the Trinity, as is mentioned in Acts 17:22-29 and Romans 1:19.

In his commentary on the Gospel of John, St. Thomas comments (par. 2265) on how a quote from Our Lord about those without faith not knowing God are reconciled to passages which say they did or can know God:

“But this seems to conflict with Romans (1:19) ‘For what can be known about God is plain to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made.’ We should say to this that knowledge is of two kinds: one is speculative, and the other affective.” Specifically, St.Thomas notes Our Lord was saying that those with speculative, but not affective knowledge “did not know God as the Father of an only begotten and consubstantial Son ‑ and our Lord is talking about knowledge of these things.”

In fact, he goes on to mention other errors those with speculative knowledge might have, acknowledging that some even “worshiped other gods along with Him.”

 

[Vico]

First, two points:

1. The belief that God is a Trinity is orthodox.
2. Claiming that a non-Trinitarian “god” (whether the Arian god, or the Sabellian god, or any other) is the true God is heresy.

By those two points, how is this statement as written not objectively heretical?

The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even his inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God.
(Vatican II, Nostra Aetate, Section 3)

Consider the formal definition of heresy given in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2089 … Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith;…

However material (not formal) schism, heresy, or apostacy is based upon ignorance. Islam does not accept the basic dogmatic teaching of Christianity so is therefore a material apostacy. Material implies neither guilt nor sin against faith.

 

[Salibi]

Replying to your OP as I still haven’t caught up with the whole thread. (Sorry if this has been already said).

The Muslims’ problem is their understanding of the nature of God-it’s faulty. Their belief that there is one God, however, is not. Misunderstanding or denying the true nature of God does not mean they don’t worship God, nor does it mean their God is different from ours.

 

[Salibi]

This view is based on an incorrect interpretation of the Koran and this has been explained to us several times by Muslim CAF’ers such as @Niblo and @SalamKhan.

 

[Dovekin]

So you can profess and claim that Arabs are not descendants of Abraham, but that would not make it true? You can profess that Muslims do not worship the God of Abraham, but it could be a bold faced lie?

I am just trying to understand the value of your contributions, when they contain a standard for rejecting them. It is confusing. “My opinion is “Muslims do not worship the God we worship,” but my opinion may be a bold faced lie”?

 

[BartholomewB]

Yes, Jesus himself quotes this verse in his reply to the Pharisees who accost him in the Temple (Matt 22:44, Mark 12:36, Luke 20:42-43). His intention here, according to commentators, is to deflect questioning about his ancestry (he neither affirms nor denies that he is descended from David) and at the same time to reject the idea of a political Messiah, asserting, instead, that he will be a more exalted figure: instead of sitting on the throne of David, he will share the throne of God. Jesus is warning the people of Judea that he is not the Messiah, or Christ, or king that their Scriptures had led them to expect. He is placing an original interpretation of his own upon this verse in Psalm 110 (or 109) and, as a result, all Christians, naturally, now read this verse as a prophecy of Jesus as the Messiah. But it’s not the plain meaning of the words, where the Hebrew form, “Yahweh said to Adonai,” suggests that “Adonai” refers to a human lord, possibly David himself, not to a divine being.

 

[Ana_v]

At the end of each one of Aquinas’ proofs of the existence of God, he concludes “And this [e.g. First Mover] is what all men call God.”

We can make the distinction between “that he is” and “what he is”.

In his proofs for God’s existence, Aquinas’ is focusing on the “that he is” and not his precise understanding of what God is (his essence).

The existence of God can be known by arguing from effects back to their cause.

I think the document is acknowledging the common affirmations that Christians and Muslims make about God (one God, creator, outside of time, etc).

It is entirely possible to believe in something or someone and be mistaken
or ignorant about it’s nature,whether

in part or whole. How many people throughout the ages (e.g. ancient civilizations) have known the existence of the sun and have used it’s heat and light sourced without knowing it’s composition of hydrogen, helium etc.?,

The only way the document would be heretical is if it intended to affirm those aspects of Islamic theism that are false. But I think it intends to affirm the aspects that are true. And in this regard, show solidarity with Muslims.

Think of it this way. If you put the Creed to Muslims, which lines would they affirm?

I believe in one God
the Father almighty
Maker of Heaven and Earth
And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord
Who was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit
Born of the Virgin Mary

Etc.

 

[Dovekin]

We are getting somewhere here. Christians and Muslims do not belong to the same religion. Not much controversy there.

I changed physically to objectively which I think is closer to what you meant. (Physically there is no God, right?) If you are uncomfortable with that, say something.

What is the basis for the other clause, “what other religions believe is not the same or true.” Certainly there are differences, or they would not be “other religions.” But are there only differences? Can there be shared beliefs? “God sends messengers (angels) to reveal what God wants us to know.” Muslims and Christians agree on this, they even agree if we were to use Gabriel instead of “messengers.” Why should we think they are describing different Gods?

 

[Dovekin]

What is the basis for these assertions? The first paragraph is ok, though you do not make a connection between their conception of God, and God who exists. You have been insisting there is a reality, but suddenly you seem to think the reality is less important than our conceptions of it. The issue, as I see it, is the reality of God, not our conception or theology.

What is the basis for your assertion that they don’t believe in the same God? You treat it as a conclusion, but you only showed that there conception of God is different, which is not the same thing. Or ist ?

You continue, saying they do not know God? Is there any basis for saying that, other than your personal opinion? Do you think that people can only know God through the Christian revelation? It makes sense to conclude that “they reject the truth about [God]” given your earlier statements about their conception of God. But is that the same as “They do not know God” or different

 

[ReaderT]

I think you misunderstand that as there is only one God, if you worship one God then you are worshipping the true God

Essentially, as long as you understand that their is one God, you are worshipping God regardless of your depleted understanding.

It shocks me that you guys believe people can even deny Jesus and still be claiming to worship the same God as us.

How can people deny God the Son and still be worshipping the same God as us?

Is Jesus’ entire existence less important than the “number” of gods involved?!

More importantly, the Bible says this position isn’t correct: If you don’t have God the Son, you don’t have God the Father (I John 2:23). No man can even come to God the Father except by God the Son (John 14:6,9). So there you have it, the Bible says clearly, it’s not our God that these people are coming to.

I guess this will show you that they do have Jesus. Here are references to him in the Qur’an.

First of all, I know the Koran talks about Jesus. I’ve read the book from cover to cover. But it doesn’t follow that their “god” is the Christian God. Please see my response directly above to catholic03.

But that doesn’t amount to Abraham believing in the doctrine of the Trinity. Here are 19 references from the OT stressing the imperative of believing that there is only One God and no other.

And I agree that there is only One God. “I believe in One God, the Father Almighty…”
One God, Three Persons.

The Jews do not accept the Holy Trinity, are they worshipping a false God?

If you’re talking about present-day Jews, then Yes. I’ve answered this before. Any “god” who is not the Holy Trinity does not exist - the Holy Trinity is the only God that exists. It astounds me that you guys don’t seem to fathom this!

Paul asked:

“is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.”- Romans 3:29-3

And I agree. The God of the Jews (who was, is, and will always be The Holy Trinity) is the God of all people, not just the “Chosen People”.

Wait.

The text you have included does not say [that Muslims worship a non-Trinity]. You have added that. I thought we were just commenting on the text itself?!?

Frankenfurter, that’s a basic fact about Islam. Anyone who knows anything about Islam knows that.

 

[ReaderT]

You are sounding like a follower of Marcion. When he tried to exclude the Hebrew scriptures because the Christian God was greater than the God of Jerusalem, Christians roundly condemned that position and adopted the Hebrew scriptures as part of our canon. The underlying idea was that the Jews worshipped the same God, even though they did not know the revelation in Christ.

Dovekin, Marcion rejected the Trinity and was condemned and anathematized. He also wrote the “Gospel of Marcion”. There are many problems with your argument.

it’s an ecumenical overture, recognizing that attempt so we can build common ground, not a dogmatic decree affirming Muslim worship.

Any ecumenical overture that would even slightly compromise our sacred and non-negotiable beliefs about the Holy Trinity has gone way too far and must be condemned. But that is exactly what this document does - I spelled this out to someone else:

1. The “god” Muslims worship is not Trinitarian
2. Thit document says the “god Muslims adore” is the “one God … all-powerful … the Creator” (i.e. the true God)
3. Therefore, by substitution, it says “this (non-Trinity) god is all-powerful, the Creator of Heaven and Earth…”

That is the clear-cut, simple, textbook definition of a heretical statement…

Jesus put Peter in charge, and Peter’s successor is in Rome and head of the One, Holy, Catholic (Universal) Church…

Obviously we disagree. But that is a subject for a different topic.

The same with the first quote. To “have the Father” means more than just a speculative knowledge of God, but rather an affective knowledge of the Trinity–to affectively know the only begotten Son is to know the consubstantiatial begetting Father and vice versa.

I disagree with your interpretation. The Bible says that those who deny God the Son cannot:

• know God the Father (Matthew 11:27)
• come to God the Father (John 14:6,9)
• have God the Father (I John 2:23)

Yet somehow people here think you could not know or have (at least) 2/3rds of our God and still worship our God (!)

However material (not formal) schism, heresy, or apostacy is based upon ignorance. Islam does not accept the basic dogmatic teaching of Christianity so is therefore a material apostacy. Material implies neither guilt nor sin against faith.

Vico - I’m saying that the statement from Vatican 2 is heretical.

Misunderstanding or denying the true nature of God does not mean they don’t worship God, nor does it mean their God is different from ours.

Salibi, thank you for the reply. I’ve covered this ground in my above responses. Basically, here is my stance: How can people deny God the Son and still be worshipping the same God as us?

Is Jesus’ entire existence less important than the “number” of gods involved?

 

[chercheur]

God is more than just an idea though, God is. So why can’t it be said that Muslims adore God, just not as a Trinity? I may be missing something but that’s just what I think.