B
But_for_Grace
Guest
Why is it that when the Qu’ran speaks of Jesus I feel like I am reading descriptions of the belief’s of Arius.
- Status
A
Ahimsa
Guest
But for Grace:
Arius wasn’t the inventor of what he taught concering the unity of God; he was just the most vocal.
Arius gave one interpretation of who Jesus is. It’s an interpretation that, for many people, does not violate God’s unity. Thus, you might find passages in the Qur’an that deny that God has a Daughter, or a Son, who is of equal status to God.
Arius wasn’t the inventor of what he taught concering the unity of God; he was just the most vocal.
B
But_for_Grace
Guest
Then Muslims consider Arius to of taught the truth? or did I misunderstand your post.
H
hlgomez
Guest
What was that interpretation of Arius?
Can you explain more further about what he taught?
Pio
H
hlgomez
Guest
The fact that Arianism started in the early 300 AD and didn’t died out until Mohammed’s time could be a possibility that Muhammad met those Arian heretics. It is a possiblity that Mohammed included some Arian beliefs in his Quran.
Pio
A
Ahimsa
Guest
But for Grace said:
Muslims don’t believe Arius taught the total truth.
Arius taught that only God the Father was eternal. The Father then created the Son, and the Son then created the world. The Son also then took human form as Jesus.
Muslims don’t believe that God has a Son of any kind. So Muslims reject the Arian idea of God having a Son. Arius, after all, was still a Christian – he believed God has a Son, even though the Son was not equal to God.
Yet, insofar as Arius maintained God’s Unity and lack of having a Son or Daughter who is equal to God , Muslims might find his ideas more acceptable than the ideas of orthodox Christianity. But Arius did argue that God has a Son, which is still a big No-No for Muslims.
B
But_for_Grace
Guest
This is despite the fact that Arius was declared heretical at the **First Council of Nicea ** in 325 AD. Saying in its THE LETTER OF THE SYNOD IN NICAEA TO THE EGYPTIANS:
"It was unanimously agreed that anathemas should be pronounced against his impious opinion and his blasphemous terms and expressions which he has blasphemously applied to the Son of God, saying “he is from things that are not”, and “before he was begotten he was not”, and “there once was when he was not”,saying too that by his own power the Son of God is capable of evil and goodness, and calling him a creature and a work.
Against all this the holy synod pronounced anathemas, and did not allow this impious and abandoned opinion and these blasphemous words even to be heard."
But I suppose that the authority of this council will just be considered to be another example of the corruption of Christianity by our Muslim friends.
"It was unanimously agreed that anathemas should be pronounced against his impious opinion and his blasphemous terms and expressions which he has blasphemously applied to the Son of God, saying “he is from things that are not”, and “before he was begotten he was not”, and “there once was when he was not”,saying too that by his own power the Son of God is capable of evil and goodness, and calling him a creature and a work.
Against all this the holy synod pronounced anathemas, and did not allow this impious and abandoned opinion and these blasphemous words even to be heard."
But I suppose that the authority of this council will just be considered to be another example of the corruption of Christianity by our Muslim friends.
H
hlgomez
Guest
And then, Muhammed tickles the ideas of Arius a little bit and got some ideas from the Jews about God. It’s that simple.
The fact is, there had been no Islam before Judaism and Christianity. And Muhammed got the combinations of both religions and twisted it a little bit to form a “true” religion.
Pio
- Status