Islam and Catholicism Same God?

[Ridgerunner]

WO!
I wouldn’t go as far as to say God and Zeus are similar, yes “Zeus”
linguistically traces back to a word meaning god, but Zeus was a
dirty philanderer, I think then there can be no correlation between
the two.

Not to overstretch the comparison, but if you really study it, you will find that for many Greeks, Zeus “morphed” from one of many earthy gods of a formerly primitive people to a very sophisticated supreme being not entirely unlike the Jews’ concept. How you saw it depended a great deal on how sophisticated and, indeed, seriously religious you were.

As an aside, Tom Wolfe treats “Zeus theology” hilariously but with piquant irony in his novel “Man in Full”. Worth the read for a lot of reasons.

 

[Genesis315]

The Trinity can only be known by faith–through believing God’s revelation. The Church has also defined that without faith God can be known from the things that are made, and can be honored as the Creator of all things (this is the virtue of religion, which is not a theological virtue but one of justice).

St. Paul describes a similar situation to th Athenians, saying they worshipped the one true God along side their idols (these people did not have the faith yet or believe in the Trinity):

Acts 17 [22] But Paul standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious. [23] For passing by, and seeing your idols, I found an altar also, on which was written: To the unknown God. What therefore you worship, without knowing it, that I preach to you: [24] God, who made the world, and all things therein; he, being Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; [25] Neither is he served with men’ s hands, as though he needed any thing; seeing it is he who giveth to all life, and breath, and all things: [26] And hath made of one, all mankind, to dwell upon the whole face of the earth, determining appointed times, and the limits of their habitation. [27] That they should seek God, if happily they may feel after him or find him, although he be not far from every one of us: [28] For in him we live, and move, and are; as some also of your own poets said: For we are also his offspring. [29] Being therefore the offspring of God, we must not suppose the divinity to be like unto gold, or silver, or stone, the graving of art, and device of man.

False gods are contingent beings like idols and contingent beings that may not even exist, whereas the true God is a fully self-actualized being for whom essence and existence are the same. The Muslims describe their God as the Creator of all, fully self-actualized, for whom essence and existence is the same. This can only refer to the God that exists, nothing else.

Objectively, Muslims do not know God by faith, nor do they know Him as the Father of an only begotten Son (this is called affective knowledge, as opposed to speculative knowledge), nor can they be said to “have the Father” or worship God in Spirit and in truth. Their religion was also created by false prophet and their book is not true revelation from God. Their religion is not salvific (although it has certain beliefs and practices which can serve as soil to receive seeds of the Gospel). But all that does not mean they worship some other being (as, say, Mormons do by worshipping a god that was a created man first).

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

The Trinity can only be known by faith–through believing God’s revelation. The Church has also defined that without faith God can be known from the things that are made, and can be honored as the Creator of all things (this is the virtue of religion, which is not a theological virtue but one of justice).

St. Paul describes a similar situation to th Athenians, saying they worshipped the one true God along side their idols (these people did not have the faith yet or believe in the Trinity).

False gods are contingent beings like idols and contingent beings that may not even exist, whereas the true God is a fully self-actualized being for whom essence and existence are the same. The Muslims describe their God as the Creator of all, fully self-actualized, for whom essence and existence is the same. This can only refer to the God that exists, nothing else.

Objectively, Muslims do not know God by faith, nor do they know Him as the Father of an only begotten Son (this is called affective knowledge, as opposed to speculative knowledge), nor can they be said to “have the Father” or worship God in Spirit and in truth. Their religion was also created by false prophet and their book is not true revelation from God. Their religion is not salvific (although it has certain beliefs and practices which can serve as soil to receive seeds of the Gospel). But all that does not mean they worship some other being (as, say, Mormons do by worshipping a god that was a created man first).

An excellent post. Seriously, well done. Everyone who discusses this question ought to read and understand your words.

 

[nmgauss]

Many ancient Greeks were monotheists, despite the fact that we all think they were all polytheists, believing in only one supreme god; Zeus. Study their writings carefully and you’ll see that it’s so. Even in the Iliad sometimes Zeus is the one supreme being. Some characterizations of Zeus could have come from the Old Testament practically. Some characterizations from some bawdy novel. They didn’t all believe the same thing.

So, in answering the question, I would say “yes”; the god of the Muslims is the same as the God of the Christians in the same sort of way that Zeus was the same god to the Greeks who were monotheistic. But not a bit more.

In the days of Abraham, polytheism was widespread. Even in the early days of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, Yahweh, El, Elohim, and Baal were worshipped. But when Yahweh became jealous because the Jews were including other deities in their religious life, he commanded them to worship only him. The others were still acknowledged to exist, but only Yahweh was to be worshipped.

 

[abucs]

I don’t think either Christians or Muslims believe there are different Gods.

I don’t like use terms such as ‘the Christian God’ or ‘the Muslim God’ because i think it plays into the hands of atheists who believe all such God’s are man made constructions.

I think we would say there is the one God but a difference in how He is perceived and what His actions and intent are and have been.

 

[Jeanne1184]

There is only one True God, The Trinity.

Compromise is not possible - both will lose. It’s like becoming blind so we can lead the blind.

The only way to the True Father is through Christ; the only way to Christ is through the Holy Spirit.

1Cor12:3 - “…and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.”

Eph. 6:11 - "11.Put on the full armor of God, so that you will be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil. 12.For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places. 13.Therefore, take up the full armor of God, so that you will be able to resist in the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm.…"

John 14:30 - Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.

2 Cor 4:3-4 - But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4. Whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the Light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them.

1 John 5:19 - We know that we are of God, and the whole world likes under the sway of the wicked one. And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an Understanding ((the Holy Spirit)), that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

Eph 2:1-3 - And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 2.in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. 3Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.…

1 John 2:19-27: These people left our churches because they never really belonged with us; otherwise they would have stayed with us. When they left us, it proved that they do not belong with us. But you are not like that, for the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and all of you know the truth. So I am writing to you not because you don’t know the truth but because you know the difference between truth and falsehood. And who is the great liar? The one who says that Jesus is not the Christ. Such people are antichrists, for they have denied the Father and the Son. Anyone who denies the Son doesn’t have the Father either.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Just a thought:
Muslims say God cannot have a Son, cannot be a Triune Being, cannot become incarnate in the flesh or die. The can also say Jesus is not the Son of God, that the Holy Spirit is just the Spirit of God, not another Person of the Trinity because God isn’t a Trinity. A Muslim is able to say all these things and more.

Now once a Christian says that they worship a different God and believe in a different Jesus, than EVERYTHING the Muslims says is absolutely correct, and you can’t say they are wrong.

If the Muslim says Jesus is not the Son of God, how can you say he is wrong when you’re talking about a different Jesus than he is? Muslims say Jesus is not the Son of God, I say they are wrong, because we see the same Jesus, but we have different understandings of Jesus, one right the other wrong, I hold my understanding as the right and theirs as the wrong.

 

[jakasaki]

Just a thought:
Muslims say God cannot have a Son, cannot be a Triune Being, cannot become incarnate in the flesh or die. The can also say Jesus is not the Son of God, that the Holy Spirit is just the Spirit of God, not another Person of the Trinity because God isn’t a Trinity. A Muslim is able to say all these things and more.

Now once a Christian says that they worship a different God and believe in a different Jesus, than EVERYTHING the Muslims says is absolutely correct, and you can’t say they are wrong.

If the Muslim says Jesus is not the Son of God, how can you say he is wrong when you’re talking about a different Jesus than he is? Muslims say Jesus is not the Son of God, I say they are wrong, because we see the same Jesus, but we have different understandings of Jesus, one right the other wrong, I hold my understanding as the right and theirs as the wrong.

Just like to point out that the “holy spirit” according to Islam is the Angel Gabriel…

Here is your reference point:

Surat al-Ma’idah (5: 110).

"The Holy Spirit mentioned in the above verse refers to the Angel Jibreel (Gabriel), also known as Jibraaeel; he is the message-bearer par excellence from Allah, the Lord of Glory and Grace; he is also the conduit of divine support and assistance bestowed on Prophets, Messengers as well as righteous people who strive in the path of Allah.

islamawareness.net/Angels/fatwa_holyspirit.html

 

[nmgauss]

Just like to point out that the “holy spirit” according to Islam is the Angel Gabriel.

Why is it that God needed Gabriel to communicate with Muhammad, but God spoke directly to Abraham and Moses? Indeed with Moses and Ezekiel, there was thunder,
swirling wind and fire.

Why is it that if God walked and talked with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and sat down to lunch with Abraham, he could not do the same with Jesus?

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Our instince to reject the notion of oneness with Islam is set aside by the holy Father defining our commonality. Like St Francis confession of faith before the sultan.

franciscanfriarstor.com/archive/stfrancis/stf_st_francis_and_the_muslims.htm

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Just like to point out that the “holy spirit” according to Islam is the Angel Gabriel.

THANK YOU, really helpful!

 

[TheSufi]

Just like to point out that the “holy spirit” according to Islam is the Angel Gabriel…

Islam has its own terminology. What is equavilent in Islam to the Holy Spirit in Christianity is sakina, which equavilent to the Jewish understanding of Shakinah, which is another understanding of the Holy Spirit, in Jewish Theology.

Don’t get lost in terminology. Strive to find the meaning of things.

 

[TheSufi]

Just a thought:

If the Muslim says Jesus is not the Son of God, how can you say he is wrong when you’re talking about a different Jesus than he is? Muslims say Jesus is not the Son of God, I say they are wrong, because we see the same Jesus, but we have different understandings of Jesus, one right the other wrong, I hold my understanding as the right and theirs as the wrong.

Islamic belief about God conform to Jewish belief about God, that God is not a man nor the son of man. (Number 23:19)

We believe in the same Jesus but understand him differently.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Islamic belief about God conform to Jewish belief about God, that God is not a man nor the son of man. (Number 23:19)
We believe in the same Jesus but understand him differently.

You run into a chronological issue there.
God had not yet become incarnate in the flesh yet, so AT THE TIME when Balaam (I think) was sent by the Lord to tell Balak (I think) that God IS not a man or son of man, do Christians claim that God had become incarnate yet? I don’t think so. Plus, it was to be understood that God is not a created thing like man.

It was many centuries later when God would enter into his
creation and take on a human form, as seen in John 1:1,14.

Since you appealed to the Bible to support
your beliefs, I hope I showed you otherwise
by appealing to the Bible also.

 

[TheSufi]

That’s cool.

 

[TheSufi]

You run into a chronological issue there.
God had not yet become incarnate in the flesh yet, so AT THE TIME when Balaam (I think) was sent by the Lord to tell Balak (I think) that God IS not a man or son of man, do Christians claim that God had become incarnate yet? I don’t think so. Plus, it was to be understood that God is not a created thing like man.

It was many centuries later when God would enter into his
creation and take on a human form, as seen in John 1:1,14.

Since you appealed to the Bible to support
your beliefs, I hope I showed you otherwise
by appealing to the Bible also.

Ok. In the Old Testament, when it says, God is not a man that He should lie nor the son of man that He should repent." To me this means, God is not a man, means God is not a man, nor the Son of man, means God would never become man. That is how I understand it.

Plus, God saying He is not the son of man, is a proof that He is not Jesus, because Jesus is the Son of man.

 

[dronald]

Ok. In the Old Testament, when it says, God is not a man that He should lie nor the son of man that He should repent." To me this means, God is not a man, means God is not a man, nor the Son of man, means God would never become man. That is how I understand it.

Plus, God saying He is not the son of man, is a proof that He is not Jesus, because Jesus is the Son of man.

I thought we explained this to you already. God was speaking of the characteristics, I also quoted Daniel 7:13-14 for you and how Jesus said it applies to Him. Please stop using the same tactics once they’ve been answered.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Ok. In the Old Testament, when it says, God is not a man that He should lie nor the son of man that He should repent." To me this means, God is not a man, means God is not a man, nor the Son of man, means God would never become man. That is how I understand it.

Plus, God saying He is not the son of man, is a proof that He is not Jesus, because Jesus is the Son of man.

What you are actually doing is putting words into God’s mouth. God never said that
he would not take incarnate form in the likeness of man, so you can’t just put your
own spin on it like that.

And on your “Plus…”, AGAIN, you have a Chronological Issue there.

 

[dronald]

I decided to dig into my old posts and copy and paste my original reply to this objection:

"And let’s look at the first half of your quote:
Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie;

So you’ve quoted a part of the OT and it is used against your theory that God tricked the entire world into believing Jesus really was crucified as shown in your quote. That’s not the part you’re interested in though, you’re interested in the part that says, “God is not a man.”

This passage is showing the qualities that man has and is teaching that God does not share these qualities that men have. God has made a promise and He must follow through with such a promise, that’s what the entire passage is about.

“God is not a Son of Man that He should change His mind” is one translation of the rest of the passage. However the word used here is נָחַם which is “nachem” and means God does not feel sorry about His word. God does not take the quality of a mans son by apologizing for what He has promised and turning His back on it.

I would think that you also believe that God does not share qualities with men or men’s sons in that God could change His mind or feel sorry for His decision. I’m not sure about the lie part though from your point of view, just from our conversation thus far.

The passage concludes: “Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?” Saying that God always acts on what He promises. And what did He promise in the Scriptures about the Son of Man to come?

Daniel 7:13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

Again, worship, authority, glory, sovereign power, everlasting dominion… All qualities for God, yet even in Daniel, given to the Son of Man."

 

[TheSufi]

And my reply again to this objection, is the most obvious meaning is that because God is not man, He does not lie, because God is not the son of man, He doesn’t repent (or go back on His word, God knows all things, past, present and future). For God to suddenly become man, would mean He went back on His word in the Old Testament, of Him, not being man.