My question is I am a Christian what do I say to Muslims who say God can't become a man/human ?

[CopticChristian]

My question is I am a Christian what do I say to Muslims who say God can’t become a man/human and or he would not because it would contradict His divine attributes they say God would not do things such as forgetting sleeping repenting growing or eating since a Spirit does not need to do these things God does not need to sleep eat or drink therefor they say what makes you Christians think God the Creator can become a man or become his own Creation I tell them that God can do all things therefor God can become man but is there a better answer I can give ?

Therefore, the term “all things” in the phrase “God is able to do all things” excludes the absurdities. It cannot include things that contradict His divine attributes; things that would make Him less than God, like, forgetting, sleeping, repenting, growing, eating, etc. Instead, it includes only “all things” that are consistent with Him being God. This is what the statement “God is able to do all things” means. It cannot be understood in the absolute sense; it must be qualified.

missionislam.com/comprel/godman.htm

There is a book written by I believe Geisler “answering Islam” that may be helpful as a background. In this situation choices are ignore, reframe, redirect.

Ignoring is OK unless you want to continue the dialogue.

Reframing is to repeat what is said in a different way such as " I understand your question about Christian beliefs, may I ask you is God in your belief limited" or something like that

Redirect would be to politely call out some discrepancy in their beliefs after repeating what was asked and then asking about something they believe that makes no sense…such as “I find it hard to believe that Mohammed ascended to heaven” how did that happen…

Whatever answer will be Allah…and the retort is…well then perhaps you might understand that I believe that Jesus ascended into heaven by the power of God and then add and I believe Jesus to be God…next question.

Beliefs are like that.

 

[Peace_of_cake]

Somehow they put limitations on what God can do - however - in the koran it states that Allah can do all things…

Here are some verses

Did you not see my post I have to say that at times you come across as someone who just mocks with little attempt to use the intellect.
Any monotheistic religion believes in an omnipotent God etc So we don’t really need the verses and especially underlined
What the Muslims are saying is the infinite cannot become finite. It’s a famous argument and not in anyway simplistic. Saying that God can do all things again and again won’t help, because like I said the God becomes other than God a paradox so obviously absurd that everyone has clearly argue that God can’t do certain things; that is logically absurd things. They aren’t really ‘acts’ at all just a jumble of words, like the example I game of a 4 sided triangle. The argument is decent because every Christian theologian would also claim that the infinite becoming finite is logically absurd and cannot be done - as is obvious. So how do we deal with this knock down argument?
As Aquinas points out no orthodox theologian has said God mixed with the bone and flesh etc Because this is the impossible infinite becoming finite. That’s the basic argument; they’re mistaken we don’t say that. We have two separate natures, and since God’s might is not something measurable physically it is not a problem to say Jesus had a Divine nature, but it would be if we said it became physically measurable.
It was an argument that raged until Nicea… And after. We need to know these arguments because otherwise it looks too complex, which is an argument itself! Muslims on the whole do not realise how sophisticated Western theology is, but it doesn’t help that Catholics don’t!!!
Of course there are arguments as to why it’s necessary too, which may surprise others. Being on the back foot all the time apologising makes you look silly

 

[MartinJordan]

As far as I am concerned this question if asked by a Muslim I would only offer them to come for a Mass to see how we worship God Almighty. Alternatively ask them to come to the Novena in honour of our blessed Mother.

MJ

 

[jakasaki]

Did you not see my post I have to say that at times you come across as someone who just mocks with little attempt to use the intellect.
Any monotheistic religion believes in an omnipotent God etc So we don’t really need the verses and especially underlined
What the Muslims are saying is the infinite cannot become finite. It’s a famous argument and not in anyway simplistic. Saying that God can do all things again and again won’t help, because like I said the God becomes other than God a paradox so obviously absurd that everyone has clearly argue that God can’t do certain things; that is logically absurd things. They aren’t really ‘acts’ at all just a jumble of words, like the example I game of a 4 sided triangle. The argument is decent because every Christian theologian would also claim that the infinite becoming finite is logically absurd and cannot be done - as is obvious. So how do we deal with this knock down argument?
As Aquinas points out no orthodox theologian has said God mixed with the bone and flesh etc Because this is the impossible infinite becoming finite. That’s the basic argument; they’re mistaken we don’t say that. We have two separate natures, and since God’s might is not something measurable physically it is not a problem to say Jesus had a Divine nature, but it would be if we said it became physically measurable.
It was an argument that raged until Nicea… And after. We need to know these arguments because otherwise it looks too complex, which is an argument itself! Muslims on the whole do not realise how sophisticated Western theology is, but it doesn’t help that Catholics don’t!!!
Of course there are arguments as to why it’s necessary too, which may surprise others. Being on the back foot all the time apologising makes you look silly

I did see you post(s)…

I did not read your post(s).

I scroll right past them…

Happy Sunday…!!

 

[perro_sarnoso]

My question is I am a Christian what do I say to Muslims who say God can’t become a man/human and or he would not because it would contradict His divine attributes they say God would not do things such as forgetting sleeping repenting growing or eating since a Spirit does not need to do these things God does not need to sleep eat or drink therefor they say what makes you Christians think God the Creator can become a man or become his own Creation I tell them that God can do all things therefor God can become man but is there a better answer I can give ?

Therefore, the term “all things” in the phrase “God is able to do all things” excludes the absurdities. It cannot include things that contradict His divine attributes; things that would make Him less than God, like, forgetting, sleeping, repenting, growing, eating, etc. Instead, it includes only “all things” that are consistent with Him being God. This is what the statement “God is able to do all things” means. It cannot be understood in the absolute sense; it must be qualified.

missionislam.com/comprel/godman.htm

These are my thoughts on this:

In Islam, the Q’ran is sacred…as a matter of fact they treat it as God’s word and even as God because it is His Word.

So, God can become word ( a book) but He can’t become man???

If sin comes into the world by the flesh, being born, then how does God destroy the power of sin? By the sword?? Yes, but not the physical weapon of the sword but through His Incarnate Word.
The Father didn’t become flesh nor did the Holy Spirit…The Word - Jesus Christ - became flesh and the entirety of the divinity is in Him.

Born of the Immaculate, Perpetual Virgin, Mother of God. Muslims recognize this about Mary and recognize great holiness in Jesus Christ her son. But beyond that, they throw the brakes.

The Immaculate Heart of Mary and her image as portrayed in the Apocalypse will triumph over Islam and convert them to her Son Jesus Christ.

Her feet on the crescent moon is an image that muslims will recognize in time.

Once the conversions to Christianity start…that’s when the heads will literally start to roll.

The Theotokos has been given this final triumph by her Son Jesus Christ and she will bring them and all the hearts to her son Jesus Christ because that’s what Mary does - she brings her children to Him.

 

[Peace_of_cake]

In Islam, the Q’ran is sacred…as a matter of fact they treat it as God’s word and even as God because it is His Word.

So, God can become word ( a book) but He can’t become man???

it was common for Arab Christians to make this argument… But it’s perrilous! Basically the Quran as God’s speech is an attribute, the Actual book, words etc are created, but God does not become a book. The attributes (Sifat) are not like the persons of the trinity. The Sifat are ‘external’ if you will and are intelligible only, ie you can comprehend them, but they have no separate existence per se. Whereas the persons are ‘internal’ if you will and make up the essence of God. Sydney Griffiths has written a lot on the subject.

Her feet on the crescent moon is an image that muslims will recognize in time.

Once the conversions to Christianity start…that’s when the heads will literally start to roll.

 

[CopticChristian]

Did you not see my post I have to say that at times you come across as someone who just mocks with little attempt to use the intellect.

Any monotheistic religion believes in an omnipotent God etc So we don’t really need the verses and especially underlined
What the Muslims are saying is the infinite cannot become finite.

 

[Peace_of_cake]

I don’t want to insult you and I am sure that you are not trying to be insulting but when I read everything you write, it is at an adolescent level. Kick it up a notch so I can engage in your dialogue.

 

[CopticChristian]

CopticChristian;8471924:

OK thanks for that I am aware that I can come across as condescending. I’m definitely with you on your points about generalisations. The additions you have noted would indeed have clarified the point I was making. Despite the pidgen English I have presented I am actually aware of the improvements you mention. God willing, I will endeavour to do better… Hmm… Perhaps writing on the iPhone while walking isn’t the most conducive thing to coherent communication Since 80% of communication is non-verbal then I suppose it is imperative to really think about how one frames an opinion.
Woz I as bad as da yoof innit?
The irony is I’m a teacher (maths and physics) and I say the same thing to adolescents all day So I guess my report card says gifted but must try harder?

Not sure what you meant by the last point, please elaborate

Use your imagination. This is Catholic Answers. People come here to ask questions of Catholics. If you have not noticed there is a section “apologetics” for the sincere to engage in questioning that is not satisfied in the usual posts.

There are rules in posting. Coming to teach another religion, coming to trash our beliefs, believing that there are things we have not heard of or are not aware of are frowned on. I am a Physician, schooled in many other things including NLP, Neurosemantics, Hypnotherapy, and many on this post cause me to relfect on what I know. There are people on this post with knoweldge and understanding that are far superior to mine and I approach these postings with respect. You may consider this and then when you post again you will understand that your audience may be other than what you think.

I suggest you post with the notion that you have a question, want understanding, and try not to teach…If you want to teach then I would state…that and frame that with a statement that says…I understand your perspective…here is what I know and I would like you to understand about what I know…this will create a back and forth dialogue…

OK:thumbsup:

 

[Peace_of_cake]

Peace of cake;8472036:

OK:thumbsup:

Thank-you for this. I am sorry that I have presented myself in this way. The point you have made about changing my style from one of teaching to one of learning was a very helpful reminder
It seems that I have fooled you into thinking I am something other than Catholic. Forgive me. Often I get confused as being Muslim. This may be due to engaging with their literature and scholars for the last 10 years. In addition I probably am a little impatient with some posters as I’m frustrated. This frustration may be due to some internal sickness, or a perceived sense - from my opinion - that the intellectual level on this forum is quite low, or from tiredness of hearing arguments levied at Islam that could equally be levied at Catholicism, or a bit of all three? I suppose I also get the feeling that some of us are a bit too comfortable with the modern World and so speak from a modern rather than what might be termed a classically Catholic mindset.
Do you think it prudent to rephrase what I have written previously on this thread? Or has it at least been intelligible enough to get some meaning? Thanks

 

[CopticChristian]

CopticChristian;8472065:

Thank-you for this. I am sorry that I have presented myself in this way. The point you have made about changing my style from one of teaching to one of learning was a very helpful reminder
It seems that I have fooled you into thinking I am something other than Catholic. Forgive me. Often I get confused as being Muslim. This may be due to engaging with their literature and scholars for the last 10 years. In addition I probably am a little impatient with some posters as I’m frustrated. This frustration may be due to some internal sickness, or a perceived sense - from my opinion - that the intellectual level on this forum is quite low, or from tiredness of hearing arguments levied at Islam that could equally be levied at Catholicism, or a bit of all three? I suppose I also get the feeling that some of us are a bit too comfortable with the modern World and so speak from a modern rather than what might be termed a classically Catholic mindset.
Do you think it prudent to rephrase what I have written previously on this thread? Or has it at least been intelligible enough to get some meaning? Thanks

I believe that it would be prudent to carry on and shoot for the stars in your discussions. If you find that someone does not understand you they can always ask for clarificiation. Go ahead and dazzle us.

 

[Peace_of_cake]

I believe that it would be prudent to carry on and shoot for the stars in your discussions. If you find that someone does not understand you they can always ask for clarificiation. Go ahead and dazzle us.

I wrote something and then the Internet went down… Guess it wasn’t good enough
Just keeping to God can’t for the meantime
Theologians say God can do that which is intrinsically possible. This includes things we are familiar with all the way to miraculous things. For example God could shrink the universe into something the size of a peanut… And it would be easy for Him.
As we know God is all powerful and unlimited so he can do all things, so why do theologians make this particular point? The reason why they have done this is to avoid difficulties with certain questions. For example:
‘Since God is able to do all this can he make Himself not exist?’
If we answer this question with no then we are suggesting that God is not all powerful. If we answer with yes then we have denied God’s existence. No matter how we answer this, the answer is unsatisfactory. So is religion as silly as Dawkins suggests? No, it is rather that the question is silly as it makes no logical sense.
God is defined by Aquinas and others as essence of being. What this means is that what defines God in of himself (essence) is existence (being), so by definition God cannot not exist. Therefore the question of whether he can make himself exist is actually a logically false question because by definition God exists.
Perhaps for clarity I could rephrase what the question actually says to show it’s absurdity:
‘Can that which always exists by necessity not exist?’
It makes no sense, it’s just a jumble of words.
it has nothing to do with limiting God’s Power, it is simply not intrinsically possible in other words impossible in the true sense.
Theologians have thus said that God cannot do that which is intrinsically impossible. This does not mean something we may think is impossible like the sun rising from the West or what have you, but something which by logic cannot be. Examples might include: could God make black a different colour? No because by definition black is the dark colour we know. Or can God make pi a different value? No because by definition pi is 3.14… Etc.
God can do everything possible as He pleases, but not that which is intrinsically impossible. Both us and Muslims agree on this, perhaps they are a little more explicit?
In terms of the question: ‘can God become man?’ What is implied is that can the infinite become finite? Clearly this is intrinsically impossible since the infinite by definition means not finite, or to put it another way the limitless can’t be limited. So it is a valid question which on the face of it would suggest God cannot be man. However theologians have grappled with this for a long time and so have coherently answered it.
Hopefully this was useful to others and somewhat understandable. It is merely the fruit of informal comparative theological studies I have done. I would highly recommend Aquinas: a beginners guide by E Feser as a good accessible overview.
Should people wish we could venture into Christology, or the theology of the nature of Christ into understanding the OP’s question more fully?

 

[CopticChristian]

I wrote something and then the Internet went down… Guess it wasn’t good enough
Just keeping to God can’t for the meantime
Theologians say God can do that which is intrinsically possible. This includes things we are familiar with all the way to miraculous things. For example God could shrink the universe into something the size of a peanut… And it would be easy for Him.
As we know God is all powerful and unlimited so he can do all things, so why do theologians make this particular point? The reason why they have done this is to avoid difficulties with certain questions. For example:
‘Since God is able to do all this can he make Himself not exist?’
If we answer this question with no then we are suggesting that God is not all powerful. If we answer with yes then we have denied God’s existence. No matter how we answer this, the answer is unsatisfactory. So is religion as silly as Dawkins suggests? No, it is rather that the question is silly as it makes no logical sense.
God is defined by Aquinas and others as essence of being. What this means is that what defines God in of himself (essence) is existence (being), so by definition God cannot not exist. Therefore the question of whether he can make himself exist is actually a logically false question because by definition God exists.
Perhaps for clarity I could rephrase what the question actually says to show it’s absurdity:
‘Can that which always exists by necessity not exist?’
It makes no sense, it’s just a jumble of words.
it has nothing to do with limiting God’s Power, it is simply not intrinsically possible in other words impossible in the true sense.
Theologians have thus said that God cannot do that which is intrinsically impossible. This does not mean something we may think is impossible like the sun rising from the West or what have you, but something which by logic cannot be. Examples might include: could God make black a different colour? No because by definition black is the dark colour we know. Or can God make pi a different value? No because by definition pi is 3.14… Etc.
God can do everything possible as He pleases, but not that which is intrinsically impossible. Both us and Muslims agree on this, perhaps they are a little more explicit?
In terms of the question: ‘can God become man?’ What is implied is that can the infinite become finite? Clearly this is intrinsically impossible since the infinite by definition means not finite, or to put it another way the limitless can’t be limited. So it is a valid question which on the face of it would suggest God cannot be man. However theologians have grappled with this for a long time and so have coherently answered it.
Hopefully this was useful to others and somewhat understandable. It is merely the fruit of informal comparative theological studies I have done. I would highly recommend Aquinas: a beginners guide by E Feser as a good accessible overview.
Should people wish we could venture into Christology, or the theology of the nature of Christ into understanding the OP’s question more fully?

Aquinas is good. Who is to say that the Universe is not a peanut. It would depend on your perspective. You certainly have lots of thoughts.

 

[Peace_of_cake]

missionislam.com/comprel/godman.htm

I just pressed this link and found it was written by Bilal Phillips. It might be that this book gets some circulation, but Phillips cannot be considered to represent Islam at all. To the ulama (the scholarly body who preserve Sunni Islam) he is considered a fasiq (tricky to translate, but of deviant beliefs) and he may even be considered a kafir (disbeliever) owing to him calling virtually the whole Muslim community polytheists due to some perverted ideas he holds that are in complete contrast with the ijma (consensus).
As a general guide I would suggest The Cambridge companion to classical Islamic theology edited by T J Winter and then if you want to see some perspectives of Christian beliefs Faysal al Tafriqa by Ghazali that has been translated with excellent notes by S Jackson.
On the whole I would say Muslim theologians haven’t really got the trinity. There are a number of reasons, but perhaps two important ones: are that Christian Arabs used Islamic theological terminology which aren’t equivalent to their original Greek (meaning they were basically speaking two different languages); and they just didn’t give it the time of day so greats like Fakh al din al Razi gave no more than a few lines to the trinity.
Islamic theology is highly sophisticated and in my opinion it is not an area where anyone can decisively ‘prove’ one’s religion correct. Certainly with the right (or more aptly wrong) opponent it could prove perilous. However, I think many lay (even scholarly) Muslims do not understand the sophistication of Western theology and so it is good to know some responses so that one can show them that they shouldn’t be quite so condescending - generally speaking. If done with the right etiquette then we may even open up a little more unity; only disagreeing over what we actually disagree on… Just some thoughts

 

[Ginger2]

Post #'s 2 & 26 have your answer.

I witnessed several years ago to three Muslin men.

My advice is to pray a lot and follow the lead of the Holy Spirit, without whom you will be wasting your time.

In the end, I said, “The question is not whether God can or not, the question is whether or not God did”

There was only one of the men there that day. I handed him a piece of paper I prepared for him to look at when I said those words. The paper showed it is a scientific fact that water can be solid liquid and vaper all at the same time. It is still the same water and has not changed its chemical makeup, etc. I also told him, if God can do this with a part of His creation, why would you doubt He could do it Himself. Is not the Creator greater than His creation?

The Muslin man stared at the paper and said, “This is good, this good. Can I keep this?”

I hope this helps you.