Not the same God?

[Simka]

You first said, “many hundreds of thousands of Christians use the term Allah in their liturgies and have done so for many, many centuries.” I have no cause to challenge your statement. Clearly, we use many terms and names and references in our liturgies. Not all of these terms refer to God. Not all of them refer to deity. As an example, I mentioned St. Peter, simply to show this fact. Use of the term Allah in Christian liturgies may – or may not – have reference to the divine.

What I am saying is that the entity to whom Muslims pray, known to the world as Allah, is not at all the same entity to whom Christians pray. That there may be some Christians who use the same term in reference to God, the Father of the Lord Jesus, does not mean they are worshiping the same god as Muslims … even though the situation is greatly confused by use of an identical term in two distinctly different contexts.

You went on to say, “The Church itself grants that Muslims worship the one true God”. Some branches of the Church may make this concession, but the sentiment is far from unanimous. Moreover, I am reasonably confident you are not referring to extensions of the Church in Nigeria, or Ethiopia, or Somalia.

 

[rinnie]

No, Edwin, not mystic knowledge, just hard, cold observation. I don’t know where you have met “conservative Muslims who are quite polemical toward Christianity” but I’m referring to the African and Arab communities of Muslims I lived in the midst of, for years … who today are terrorizing Christian communities, attacking and burning Christian churches after locking dozens of people inside the buildings. I’m talking about hundreds of people I knew firsthand, who were my neighbors, and threatened me with death unless I converted. Instead, I escaped.

I have witnessed gangs of Muslims in the heart of Islamic communities, killing and maiming Christians - not because they were ‘heretics’ (i.e professed a distorted faith) but because they were regarded as pagan - that is, worshiped a false god, not Allah. I have been confronted with what dedicated Muslims preach and profess.

Don’t be so patronizing. Do you really want to get into a discussion of “evidence”?

Before this gets ugly, which for some reason it continues to get, Can we agree on ONE thing?

Just because there are tons of Muslims that follow a false teaching, can we at least agree on the teaching that Alllah is indeed the Same God the God of Abraham.

It seems that because these people do not follow the true teachings of the One True God, we still cannot accuse them praying to a false god.

I do not believe the Church has ever said that we agree on much else really. Only that when they pray to Allah is the ONE TRUE GOD. The same God they we pray to.

Please believe me when I say we agree that they do not have the true teachings of Allah. But the true teachings and the True God are 2 very different things. Can you see what I am saying?

 

[illusion_buster]

How do you know if this was part of the original gospel or added later?

the “my God My God” was also varified by roman reports and the Our Father? There was varification by roman reports on the gathering but not on exactly what was said…so…I guess you can claim it was added (by whom & why?)…If so…then you can claim that Jesus whipping the lenders out of the temple probably was added (a more likely ipothosis as Jesus generally taught against anger) or the miracle on the loaves & fishes.etc etc…why stop at that…let’s question whether or not Jesus body was taken from the tomb by roman soldiers & buried elsewhere to prevent His followers from claiming ressurrection…(this was stated in another ancient document) & that this was ‘added later’ to support Jesus claim. We Christians KNOW the truth in this regard from the other evidence surrounding events emidiatly after…but all the other scenereos?.. Are you saying that what the apostles taught was all authentic while what Jesus was supposed to say could have been tampered with?..By whom? The apostles?

 

[PRmerger]

Are you saying that what the apostles taught was all authentic while what Jesus was supposed to say could have been tampered with?..By whom? The apostles?

No, illusion buster. That’s YOUR claim. YOU believe that the gospel message may have been tampered with.

You said so right here:

There seems to be a misunderstanding as to WHAT IS the ORIGINAL gospel and what was added through tradition and succession. Not that what was added isn’t perfectly valid and in line with God’s plan to further enrich Christian living. But to state that those who do not practice the ‘added enlightenment’ but follow original gospel beliefs in their simplicity ie (Jesus’ divinity, Christ Risen, Love God first above all and love one another as self), are " portraying a false gospel and divorcing themselves from the one faith" is somewhat exclusive in understanding.

So I want to know: how do you know what was part of the original gospel and what was later added?

 

[Simka]

Can we agree on ONE thing? … can we at least agree on the teaching that Alllah is indeed the Same God the God of Abraham.

… the true teachings and the True God are 2 very different things. Can you see what I am saying?

Yes, I believe I understand what you are saying. To help me be sure, let me ask you a hypothetical question (following this introduction).

Suppose I have a vision in which I am persuaded that I have been chosen as a disciple to announce the revelation of the REALLY True God, the God of Abraham, Isaac and … Esau, from whom I am descended. This REALLY True God has revealed himself to me by the name HAH. With help from neighbors who become faithful converts, I build an entire theology around the worship of HAH.

The fundamental doctrines of our faith include teaching that Jews were wrong in elevating Jacob over Esau; that Muslims were mistaken in allowing Ishmael precedence over Isaac; that Christians are similarly off track in following an imposter, an illegitimate son; and that marriage between human beings is an obsolete ordinance to be abandoned from henceforth.

But from Abraham back, HAH-ites acknowledge the legitimacy of the Qur’an, the Bible and the Torah, in all their essential areas of agreement.

My question is, would this be worshiping a different god, or simply following false teachings concerning the True God? I suggest to you that my simple contention that HAH is the God of Abraham is insufficient to establish any connection with the God of Christians, Jews, or Muslims.

 

[Contarini]

No, Edwin, not mystic knowledge, just hard, cold observation.

You can’t possibly observe what someone “realizes inwardly.” And it doesn’t sound as if there is anything cold about your observation of Muslim violence–nor should there be.

I don’t know where you have met “conservative Muslims who are quite polemical toward Christianity”

In Fort Wayne, Indiana. I had been taking my students on a field trip to one of the two mosques in town every semester, and I decided to try the other one. The guest preacher was a Kenyan who had trained at Al Azhar, and when he realized there were Christians in the audience he launched into an attack on our belief in Jesus’ divinity. Certainly this isn’t the kind of violence you have experienced. I can certainly understand why your experience would cause you to wish to think the worst of Islam as a religion. But no religion can be judged by what violent mobs do in its name. Do you want Christianity judged by the violence committed in the name of Christ? (Yes, I know that many people come up with clever arguments to prove that somehow it’s different, because after all we know what the “real” principles of Christianity are and they don’t condone violence, whereas we can condemn all of Islam because Islam’s “real” principles do promote violence. I find such arguments to be nothing more than special pleading.)

but I’m referring to the African and Arab communities of Muslims I lived in the midst of, for years … who today are terrorizing Christian communities, attacking and burning Christian churches after locking dozens of people inside the buildings. I’m talking about hundreds of people I knew firsthand, who were my neighbors, and threatened me with death unless I converted. Instead, I escaped.

That’s a terrible experience. I understand why you are bitter toward Islam. But that doesn’t make injustice justice or theological error truth. It is unjust and theologically wrong to say that Muslims worship a different god. And that is true no matter what atrocities Muslims commit.

I have witnessed gangs of Muslims in the heart of Islamic communities, killing and maiming Christians - not because they were ‘heretics’ (i.e professed a distorted faith) but because they were regarded as pagan

You’re begging the question. Their violent actions are no proof of whether they are heretics or pagans. Indeed, orthodox Christians have committed such actions.

that is, worshiped a false god, not Allah. I have been confronted with what dedicated Muslims preach and profess.

Some dedicated Muslims, yes. Again, you and others who agree with you beg the question when you say that those who commit violence are the “dedicated” ones while those who don’t are somehow “bad” Muslims. (Of course, it would be equally indefensible to make the reverse argument, as many who wish to promote peace between the religions do. It would appear that one can find devout Muslims who commit violence and devout Muslims who do not, and anyone who claims otherwise is putting bias above evidence, as far as I can see.)

Don’t be so patronizing.

If it is patronizing to call out injustice and error when I see it, then I’m afraid I’m going to go on being patronizing.

Do you really want to get into a discussion of “evidence”?

Yes. Violence committed by Muslims is not evidence in this particular case. Unfortunately, people who worship the same God sometimes kill each other. The history of Christian-on-Christian violence demonstrates this.

Edwin

 

[rinnie]

Yes, I believe I understand what you are saying. To help me be sure, let me ask you a hypothetical question (following this introduction).

Suppose I have a vision in which I am persuaded that I have been chosen as a disciple to announce the revelation of the REALLY True God, the God of Abraham, Isaac and … Esau, from whom I am descended. This REALLY True God has revealed himself to me by the name HAH. With help from neighbors who become faithful converts, I build an entire theology around the worship of HAH.

The fundamental doctrines of our faith include teaching that Jews were wrong in elevating Jacob over Esau; that Muslims were mistaken in allowing Ishmael precedence over Isaac; that Christians are similarly off track in following an imposter, an illegitimate son; and that marriage between human beings is an obsolete ordinance to be abandoned from henceforth.

But from Abraham back, HAH-ites acknowledge the legitimacy of the Qur’an, the Bible and the Torah, in all their essential areas of agreement.

My question is, would this be worshiping a different god, or simply following false teachings concerning the True God? I suggest to you that my simple contention that HAH is the God of Abraham is insufficient to establish any connection with the God of Christians, Jews, or Muslims.

Okay if you said that you had a vision from the True God the God of Abraham, I would agree with you on one thing, and ONE thing only. The only truth that you have is the True God the True God of Abraham.

Do I believe you had a vision:shrug: sure I guess you could have. But it was not from the True God the True God of Abraham.

But the point of the matter is the false teaching and the false revelation you have presented does not take away from the one truth you do have. That the God of Abraham is indeed the One True God.

But let me ask you this in another way Because Mohammad is a false prophet, does it make the ONE TRUE GOD, the God of Abraham a false God?

 

[rinnie]

Simka, If I may

I asked this on another site numerous times, and not one person responded, even when I asked them personally. Maybe you can respond to it for me.

Okay here it is! You Ready?

Some, not All, Protestants do not see Christ in the Eucharist. Now for the Protestant who does not accept Christ in the Eucharist, although they accept Christ in the Trinity but not in the Eucharist as does the Catholic Church, is their God false then?

So do you see my point. To me personally what is the difference of rejecting Christ in the Eucharist, or rejecting him in the Trinity? Are you not rejecting Christ in some way?

But is rejecting a truth take away from the truth that you do have, that Christ is indeed the True God.

Are you getting my point here? Because a Protestant and Catholic are in someways worlds apart from their teaching’s does it make the One True God a false teaching?

If you agree it does not. Then why with Muslims then?

 

[PRmerger]

Simka, If I may

I asked this on another site numerous times, and not one person responded, even when I asked them personally. Maybe you can respond to it for me.

Okay here it is! You Ready?

Some, not All, Protestants do not see Christ in the Eucharist. Now for the Protestant who does not accept Christ in the Eucharist, although they accept Christ in the Trinity but not in the Eucharist as does the Catholic Church, is their God false then?

So do you see my point. To me personally what is the difference of rejecting Christ in the Eucharist, or rejecting him in the Trinity? Are you not rejecting Christ in some way?

But is rejecting a truth take away from the truth that you do have, that Christ is indeed the True God.

Are you getting my point here? Because a Protestant and Catholic are in someways worlds apart from their teaching’s does it make the One True God a false teaching?

If you agree it does not. Then why with Muslims then?

Excellent point, Rinnie!

IOW: Some people have a partial truth. To the degree that a person proclaims a truth consonant with the Fullness of Truth is the degree that we worship the same God.

So while a Methodist rejects the Eucharist but worships Christ, we give him a for getting it right about Christ.

And while a Muslim rejects the Trinity but worships God, we give him a for getting it right about God.

 

[jam070406]

Before this gets ugly, which for some reason it continues to get, Can we agree on ONE thing?

Just because there are tons of Muslims that follow a false teaching, can we at least agree on the teaching that Alllah is indeed the Same God the God of Abraham.

It seems that because these people do not follow the true teachings of the One True God, we still cannot accuse them praying to a false god.

I do not believe the Church has ever said that we agree on much else really. Only that when they pray to Allah is the ONE TRUE GOD. The same God they we pray to.

Please believe me when I say we agree that they do not have the true teachings of Allah. But the true teachings and the True God are 2 very different things. Can you see what I am saying?

Muslims willfully reject the Trinity and therefore do not worship the one true God.

 

[PRmerger]

Muslims willfully reject the Trinity and therefore do not worship the one true God.

And Methodists reject the Eucharist, so do they therefore not worship the correct Jesus?

 

[rinnie]

Excellent point, Rinnie!

IOW: Some people have a partial truth. To the degree that a person proclaims a truth consonant with the Fullness of Truth is the degree that we worship the same God.

So while a Methodist rejects the Eucharist but worships Christ, we give him a for getting it right about Christ.

And while a Muslim rejects the Trinity but worships God, we give him a for getting it right about God.

Exactly. How can we deny that the God of Abraham is not the One True God, because a Muslim cannot see the fullness of that same One True God in the Trinity.

We would then be making ourself a liar. We cannot say the God of Abraham is not the One True God.

 

[jam070406]

And Methodists reject the Eucharist, so do they therefore not worship the correct Jesus?

Apples and oranges.
Muslims do not have Faith.

Dominus Iesus:

20 For this reason, the distinction between theological faith and belief in the other religions, must be firmly held. If faith is the acceptance in grace of revealed truth, which “makes it possible to penetrate the mystery in a way that allows us to understand it coherently”, 21 then belief, in the other religions, is that sum of experience and thought that constitutes the human treasury of wisdom and religious aspiration, which man in his search for truth has conceived and acted upon in his relationship to God and the Absolute. 22 This distinction is not always borne in mind in current theological reflection. Thus, theological faith (the acceptance of the truth revealed by the One and Triune God) is often identified with belief in other religions, which is religious experience still in search of the absolute truth and still lacking assent to God who reveals himself. This is one of the reasons why the differences between Christianity and the other religions tend to be reduced at times to the point of disappearance.

 

[PRmerger]

Apples and oranges.
Muslims do not have Faith.

I don’t believe “faith” was mentioned in my response at all, jam.

What we call it is irrelevant to this discussion.

Muslims, like Methodists who reject the Eucharist but believe in the same Christ, believe in the One True God.

 

[rinnie]

I don’t believe “faith” was mentioned in my response at all, jam.

What we call it is irrelevant to this discussion.

Muslims, like Methodists who reject the Eucharist but believe in the same Christ, believe in the One True God.

Even if we call it faith, we can be in full agreement with the teachings of our Church.

CCC 841 The Church’s relationship with Muslims the plan of Salvation also incudes those who acknowledge the CREATOR in First Place among whom are the Muslims who profess to hold the FAITH of Abraham and Together WITH US they ADORE the ONE merciful God mankinds judge on the last day.

 

[jam070406]

I don’t believe “faith” was mentioned in my response at all, jam.

What we call it is irrelevant to this discussion.

Muslims, like Methodists who reject the Eucharist but believe in the same Christ, believe in the One True God.

Methodists accept the Trinity. Muslims reject the Trinity. The Eucharist is a completely different issue all together.

Dominus Iesus:

16 The obedience of faith implies acceptance of the truth of Christ’s revelation, guaranteed by God, who is Truth itself: 17 “Faith is first of all a personal adherence of man to God. At the same time, and inseparably, it is a free assent to the whole truth that God has revealed”. 18 Faith, therefore, as “a gift of God” and as “a supernatural virtue infused by him”, 19 involves a dual adherence: to God who reveals and to the truth which he reveals, out of the trust which one has in him who speaks. Thus, “we must believe in no one but God: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit”.

 

[rinnie]

Methodists accept the Trinity. Muslims reject the Trinity. The Eucharist is a completely different issue all together.

Dominus Iesus:

16 The obedience of faith implies acceptance of the truth of Christ’s revelation, guaranteed by God, who is Truth itself: 17 “Faith is first of all a personal adherence of man to God. At the same time, and inseparably, it is a free assent to the whole truth that God has revealed”. 18 Faith, therefore, as “a gift of God” and as “a supernatural virtue infused by him”, 19 involves a dual adherence: to God who reveals and to the truth which he reveals, out of the trust which one has in him who speaks. Thus, “we must believe in no one but God: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit”.

Why? Why is it okay to reject Christ in the Eucharist, but not okay to reject him in the Trinity? Is both not rejecting Christ and the fullness of his truth?

But How does the truth you accept take away from the truth you do not accept? Is not truth still truth?

 

[jam070406]

Even if we call it faith, we can be in full agreement with the teachings of our Church.

CCC 841 The Church’s relationship with Muslims the plan of Salvation also incudes those who acknowledge the CREATOR in First Place among whom are the Muslims who profess to hold the FAITH of Abraham and Together WITH US they ADORE the ONE merciful God mankinds judge on the last day.

As pointed out, Muslims do not have Faith which the Church teaches is an infused grace resulting in the profession of the Triune God.

The Catholic encyclopedia states:

Faith is an infused virtue, by which the intellect is perfected by a supernatural light, in virtue of which, under a supernatural movement of the will, it assents firmly to the supernatural truths of Revelation, not on the motive of intrinsic evidence, but on the sole ground of the infallible authority of God revealing. For as man is guided in the attainment of natural happiness by principles of knowledge known by the natural light of reason, so also in the attainment of his supernatural destiny his intellect must be illumined by certain supernatural principles, namely, Divinely revealed truths.

 

[jam070406]

Why? Why is it okay to reject Christ in the Eucharist, but not okay to reject him in the Trinity? Is both not rejecting Christ and the fullness of his truth?

But How does the truth you accept take away from the truth you do not accept? Is not truth still truth?

Methodists have partial Truth. Muslims have zero, they reject Jesus is God.

 

[illusion_buster]

That is, well, absurd, that you are maintaining that I cannot follow your arguments because it’s a “left brain/right brain” type of thing.

I have been in dialogue here to the tune of over 12,000 posts, with thousands of people. And had quite satisfactory discourses with them. You are telling me that every single one of those people here on the CAFs was right brained and that’s why I could have a dialogue with them? And the reason I can’t follow your arguments is because you’re the first left brainer I’ve encountered?

That’s just plain :whacky:

I can see you have a sense of humor at least…It is my experience that right brained people seem to understand me perfectly while left brained people think I’m speaking a different language. I’ts possible that forum correspondence is dominated by left brained people as such types enjoy facts and the arguments that support them. Right brained people like to look between the lines and see what isn’t visable. I do not take your use of ‘absurd’ personally…nor the implication that I am an unsatisfactory communicator.