Simple Question: Why is Christianity considered Shirk in Islam?

[Hatikvah]

Now, I intend for this to be a simple question on my part, which is why I do not delve into this that deeply.

This Muslim website states the following, though I have removed the attachments such as “peace be upon him” merely for the sake of a clearer reading:

The first of the Greater Sins is to associate anyone or anything with Allah. That is to attribute partners to Allah. Regarding Shirk we have received clear traditions from the Holy Prophet as well as… (other Islamic religious figures)…

Now, my question is simply this: Why is Christianity considered to be shirk? As we Christians know, Jesus is God in the Christian faith, so it is not associating anyone or anything with Allah; rather, He is Allah.

So in what way is our faith considered to be polytheism? We do believe in one God, though He happens to appear in a plurality of Persons.

Thanks for reading and responding!

 

[Allegra]

You should probably ask this on Muslim forum to get a more clear and accurate answer, but I suspect that the issue is that they simply don’t agree that Jesus is God.

 

[meltzerboy]

Now, I intend for this to be a simple question on my part, which is why I do not delve into this that deeply.

This Muslim website states the following, though I have removed the attachments such as “peace be upon him” merely for the sake of a clearer reading:

Now, my question is simply this: Why is Christianity considered to be shirk? As we Christians know, Jesus is God in the Christian faith, so it is not associating anyone or anything with Allah; rather, He is Allah.

So in what way is our faith considered to be polytheism? We do believe in one God, though He happens to appear in a plurality of Persons.

Thanks for reading and responding!

I would guess that the problem is that “plurality of Persons,” the Trinity. The manifestation of G-d by means of three distinct, albeit not separate, Persons suggests a less than (or more than) monotheistic faith despite Christianity’s denial of such. Add to that the requirement that one must believe in the divinity of the Son of G-d to gain access to the Father and the imaginary line in the sand has been crossed.

 

[thephilosopher6]

I would guess that the problem is that “plurality of Persons,” the Trinity. The manifestation of G-d by means of three distinct, albeit not separate, Persons suggests a less than (or more than) monotheistic faith despite Christianity’s denial of such. Add to that the requirement that one must believe in the divinity of the Son of G-d to gain access to the Father and the imaginary line in the sand has been crossed.

Well, Christianity at it’s heart is monotheistic. The entire idea of the Trinity itself espouses monotheism. Three person yet ONE eternal all loving God. We’re not Mormons who falsely believe that the Trinity is three gods. Such a belief is blasphemous (to make it clear, despite Mormons claiming to be, Mormons are not Christians. This, however, is a discussion for another time).

 

[RPRPsych]

They’re just jealous that (a) our churches are cooler, and (b) if we are saved, we get the Beatific Vision, not just 72 almonds or raisins.

 

[thephilosopher6]

They’re just jealous that (a) our churches are cooler, and (b) if we are saved, we get the Beatific Vision, not just 72 almonds or raisins.

 

[Cheiron]

C.S. Lewis wrote that if Jesus was not divine, then his teachings were immoral and wicked. I agree with Lewis on that. Yet muslims want to have it both ways: they say Jesus is a prophet, but he’s not the Son of God. That can’t be right.

 

[Matthew_Light]

C.S. Lewis wrote that if Jesus was not divine, then his teachings were immoral and wicked. I agree with Lewis on that.

Can you elaborate?

 

[Cheiron]

Can you elaborate?

Certainly. I shall quote Lewis in full, because I’m terrible at summarizing arguments. And Lewis writes quite well. This is from Mere Christianity, book 2, Chapter 3: The Shocking Alternative:

"One part of the claim tends to slip past us unnoticed because we have heard it so often that we no longer see what it amounts to. I mean the claim to forgive sins: any sins. Now unless the speaker is God, this is really so preposterous as to be comic. We can all understand how a man forgives offences against himself. You tread on my toe and I forgive you, you steal my money and I forgive you. But what should we make of a man, himself unrobbed and untrodden on, who announced that he forgave you for treading on other men’s toes and stealing other men’s money? Asinine fatuity is the kindest description we should give of his conduct. Yet this is what Jesus did. He told people that their sins were forgiven, and never waited to consult all the other people whom their sins had undoubtedly injured. He unhesitatingly behaved as if He was the party chiefly concerned, the person chiefly offended in all offences. This makes sense only if He really was the God whose laws are broken and whose love is wounded in every sin. In the mouth of any speaker who is not God, these words would imply what I can only regard as a silliness and conceit unrivalled by any other character in history.

Yet (and this is the strange, significant thing) even His enemies, when they read the Gospels, do not usually get the impression of silliness and conceit. Still less do unprejudiced readers. Christ says that He is “humble and meek” and we believe Him; not noticing that, if He were merely a man, humility and meekness are the very last characteristics we could attribute to some of His sayings.

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic-on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg-or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."

 

[St_Francis]

I heard a talk by the author of The Closing of the Moslem Mind, and he says 2 things about these issues.

Re: the Trinity: they think we think the Third Person is Mary, not the Holy Spirit, which they may have gotten from a heretical sect which taught that.

Re: Christianity: they believe Allah gave his teachings to the Israelites, who messed them up; then to the Christians, who messed them up; and then to the Moslems, who are not messing them up.

 

[drac16]

It’s considered to be shirk because Christianity associates Divine attributes to Jesus [peace be upon him]. For example: as far as muslims are concerned, only Allah is the All-Hearer, but since christians associate that attribute to Jesus, they commit shirk in doing so. To translate “shirk” as “polytheism” can be a bit misleading. It’s not that Christians worship three Gods-- they worship one God, but they associate Divinity to Jesus, thereby committing shirk.

Associating a Divine attribute to a created being is blasphemy; as far as muslims are concerned, Jesus is a created being. There’s another way they commit shirk; they love Jesus more than they ought to. A god [note the small g] can be anything that’s put over and above God. For some people, football is their good inasmuch as they love football over and above the one God. Jesus is their God, both figuratively and literally.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

I think it’s good for Muslims to be open concerning Christianity. By Islam we are incorrectly associating deity to some who is not God, thus we are committing Shirk.

If this is granted it seems to me Muslims cannot say we worship the same God, because our ideas concerning what is divine are totally different.

 

[Vico]

Now, I intend for this to be a simple question on my part, which is why I do not delve into this that deeply.

This Muslim website states the following, though I have removed the attachments such as “peace be upon him” merely for the sake of a clearer reading:

Now, my question is simply this: Why is Christianity considered to be shirk? As we Christians know, Jesus is God in the Christian faith, so it is not associating anyone or anything with Allah; rather, He is Allah.

So in what way is our faith considered to be polytheism? We do believe in one God, though He happens to appear in a plurality of Persons.

Thanks for reading and responding!

Because Islam does not accept the Trinity:

O followers of the Book! do not exceed the limits in your religion, and do not speak (lies) against Allah, but (speak) the truth; the Messiah, Isa son of Marium is only a messenger of Allah and His Word which He communicated to Marium and a spirit from Him; (Surah 4:171 – Shakir)

 

[RPRPsych]

Sorry, 'twas too good an opportunity to pass up.

 

[gazelam]

Well, Christianity at it’s heart is monotheistic. The entire idea of the Trinity itself espouses monotheism. Three person yet ONE eternal all loving God. We’re not Mormons who falsely believe that the Trinity is three gods. Such a belief is blasphemous (to make it clear, despite Mormons claiming to be, Mormons are not Christians. This, however, is a discussion for another time).

For the record, Mormons don’t believe there is a Trinity. We do believe there is a Godhead composed of God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, with God the Father reigning supreme.

The New Testament itself is far from any doctrine of the Trinity or of a triune God who is three co-equal Persons of One Nature. (William J. Hill, The Three-Personed God (Washington DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1982), 27.)

Now, back to your regularly scheduled debate…

 

[Expatreprocedit]

For the record, Mormons don’t believe there is a Trinity. We do believe there is a Godhead composed of God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, with God the Father reigning supreme.

The New Testament itself is far from any doctrine of the Trinity or of a triune God who is three co-equal Persons of One Nature. (William J. Hill, The Three-Personed God (Washington DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1982), 27.)

Now, back to your regularly scheduled debate…

No, let’s stay here for a second.

The Church council (Nicea) that selected the books to be included in the Canon (the New Testament), the books the LDS church recognizes, is the exact same council that defined that Christ is eternally of one substance with the Father. Why does the LDS church accept the decrees of Nicea with respect to one thing, but not the other?

 

[thephilosopher6]

For the record, Mormons don’t believe there is a Trinity. We do believe there is a Godhead composed of God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, with God the Father reigning supreme.

The New Testament itself is far from any doctrine of the Trinity or of a triune God who is three co-equal Persons of One Nature. (William J. Hill, The Three-Personed God (Washington DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1982), 27.)

Now, back to your regularly scheduled debate…

The New Testament is far from the doctrine that the “Godhead”, as you call it, is three gods.

 

[St_Francis]

I heard a talk by the author of The Closing of the Moslem Mind, and he says 2 things about these issues.

Re: the Trinity: they think we think the Third Person is Mary, not the Holy Spirit, which they may have gotten from a heretical sect which taught that.

Re: Christianity: they believe Allah gave his teachings to the Israelites, who messed them up; then to the Christians, who messed them up; and then to the Moslems, who are not messing them up.

I want to correct this post of mine: this writer did not say what I thought he said! He actually knows what shirk is, which is, if I’ve got it right, “comparing” anything to Allah, which may extend to attributing to anything else attributes which Moslrms believe belong to Allah alone. So they think teaching the divinity of Christ is Shirk.

 

[hasantas]

I heard a talk by the author of The Closing of the Moslem Mind, and he says 2 things about these issues.

Re: the Trinity: they think we think the Third Person is Mary, not the Holy Spirit, which they may have gotten from a heretical sect which taught that.

Re: Christianity: they believe Allah gave his teachings to the Israelites, who messed them up; then to the Christians, who messed them up; and then to the Moslems, who are not messing them up.

78-And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, “This is from Allah,” but it is not from Allah. And they speak untruth about Allah while they know.

79-It is not for a human [prophet] that Allah should give him the Scripture and authority and prophethood and then he would say to the people, “Be servants to me rather than Allah,” but [instead, he would say], “Be pious scholars of the Lord because of what you have taught of the Scripture and because of what you have studied.”

80-Nor could he order you to take the angels and prophets as lords. Would he order you to disbelief after you had been Muslims? Al-Imran(3)

God do not say Trinity is consist of God, Mary and Jesus. Yes Qur’an say do not attribute Mary divinity because some Christians had done. Look at the verse 80 I underlined. God say do not ascribe divinity to angels(Holy Spirit, Gabriel) and prophet(Jesus).

Christians say God is one. Well that is very good. But they add that also Jesus is God and also Holy Spirit is God. So how many gods do you consider?

Was not Jesus a human? Yes. Jesus was % 100 human. And Christians also attribute Jesus divinity. So that is the definition of Shirk. And Holy Spirit come on the world and take form of a dove etc. So Holy Spirit is in the time and space but a bit free fromm physical. Then Holy Spirit can be an angels(and realy holy Spirit is angel). Christians attributes Holy Spirit divinity and that is the definition of Shirk.

I think Christians may have a way of salvation. Although Shirk is not a sin/crime to be forgiven but God say in Qur’an that do not say three and it is better to say one. Because Christians also say God is one.

And also I want to notice 78 that someone try to make it as if it(Trinity) is from scripture(Bible) but it is not. God know what was revealed through Bible!

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

No, let’s stay here for a second.

The Church council (Nicea) that selected the books to be included in the Canon (the New Testament), the books the LDS church recognizes, is the exact same council that defined that Christ is eternally of one substance with the Father. Why does the LDS church accept the decrees of Nicea with respect to one thing, but not the other?

The council of Nicaea did not select the books that were in the canon.