The dilemma of Jesus as God

[NeuralMonk]

So I repeat my question again: How a omnipotent and omniscient God could not make his message to get through? The main reason for repeating is a God who is omniscient knows how to convey his message so it could not be any conflict in understanding. Hence how he could fail?

Indeed, how could He fail? This question assumes there was a failure on His part. Without absolute knowledge, how can one claim that the uncaused Causer has failed?

Could it be that is omnipotence is so potent that He will cause evil to do good regardless of what happens? Even though His omniscience understands the reality of free will, and the absolute value of choice in the face of love and justice, He knows that all things are good through Him? Here is a novel concept, maybe God has faith in God.

There is also an assumption that all ways are valid and God decreed. There is no determinism with God. “Choose today whom you will serve.” It is the struggle of choice which must occur every day. Every day you reset, and “Choose today.” Justice and love require the choice.

If God made it as clear as you desire, there would be no choice. There would be no justice. There would be no love.

 

[Bahman]

The question must be “why” but not “how”. Because there is no thing which God cannot do. But God does not everything whatever we can think.

I can propose that X (whatever you please) because of Y (whatever you please) caused universe. What this lack as a system of belief? Nothing. In fact you can find people around the world believing on different religion. Hence, the only way to justify a system of belief is HOW?

For example God is never to be unjust so isn’t God omnipotent? Can God not get all humans in Heavens or Hell? …

Hemmm. I don’t understand how things you said are related.

Well we must focus on why God allow revelation to be corrupted otherwise a question how God cannot protect His revelation is not use. And there is no use to argue on that issue any more.

Because a corrupted revelation has no use. For example suppose that the part related to God justice is corrupted and God is not just. Would you worship such a God?

And ıf you mean that revelation has been corrupted so indeed that revelation is not belong to God and anyhow there is no God… That is a very fallacious argument. That is all.

No I didn’t meant meant that but what you said (bold part) in fact make complete sense.

 

[hasantas]

=Bahman;12618944]I can propose that X (whatever you please) because of Y (whatever you please) caused universe. What this lack as a system of belief? Nothing. In fact you can find people around the world believing on different religion. Hence, the only way to justify a system of belief is HOW?

If that system and belief is being supported and proved by many evidences then that is valid. God send thousands prophets and gave them scriptures and many miracles to inform existence of Himself. People who saw prophets tranfered that revelation to people following.

There are many different religions and Christianity and Islam is the major of them. There are some major religions in India etc too but in every religion there is a “belief of God or Gods”. There are many reasons of that one is: Because God sent prophets to every nation so every nation know the belief of God also first human was a prophet.

The second is that: That universe cannot be by itself or by chances. It needs a omnipotent effect and the conscious feel that.

The belief of existence of God is not fallacious argument and there are many moral proofs whic one can experience byself.

 

[hasantas]

Because a corrupted revelation has no use. For example suppose that the part related to God justice is corrupted and God is not just. Would you worship such a God?

You are right. A corrupted revelation is not use. Hence God send prophets to renew revelation and the last revelation “Quran” has not been corrupted even a letter has not been changed.

As I mention before we can discuss “why” God allow revelations to be forgotten or changed but “how” is not use. Quran refute “how” because Quran never has been changed.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Well, then I can argue that we came out X (nothingness worse case scenario, etc.). How? I don’t know! :bounce: So to me how is not the first question about a system of belief but the very important question which validates the system of belief. What you think?

I think you should rewrite this comment so I can understand what you are saying. It is a terrible task to always have to guess what you are trying to say. And the same time it is important to understand what it is you are saying.

Linus2nd

 

[NeuralMonk]

You are right. A corrupted revelation is not use. Hence God send prophets to renew revelation and the last revelation “Quran” has not been corrupted even a letter has not been changed.

As I mention before we can discuss “why” God allow revelations to be forgotten or changed but “how” is not use. Quran refute “how” because Quran never has been changed.

Since the late AD 700’s, because that is the oldest manuscript which is used to “prove” this point. Mohammed left this earth in AD 632? So a minimum of 150 (scholarly 200) years after his death? I wonder how many changes Uthman and his committee changed to produce this unchanged work?

In fact, Mohammed used these “changed” manuscripts when he referenced stories out of them, like Noah, Abraham and even the prophet Jesus. He did not “trust” them, but he most assuredly used them in his writings.

Secondly, I tend to reject a definition of God who cannot keep his scripture from being corrupted until 1300 years ago. Especially when there is ancient documents much older.

Lastly, if you reference the Bible, there are not that many “variations” in the manuscripts which change the theology and teaching of a loving God who came to earth to rescue his creation. Many of the New Testament writings created within 40-100 years of the events. In other words, in the lifespan of the people who where there to refute them. In all of ancient literature, the New Testament stands as the most accurate to the original events. Those are not my words, but scholars who have studied both.

There are fewer still which change the first hand accounts of Jesus who Mohammed said was a prophet, but was killed for what He said. He cannot be a prophet and a liar. So Mohammed was right, Jesus is just a prophet, but then He lied. Or Jesus was right when he said He was THE way, THE truth and THE life. No one comes to God except through Him.

 

[hasantas]

Since the late AD 700’s, because that is the oldest manuscript which is used to “prove” this point. Mohammed left this earth in AD 632? So a minimum of 150 (scholarly 200) years after his death? I wonder how many changes Uthman and his committee changed to produce this unchanged work?

In fact, Mohammed used these “changed” manuscripts when he referenced stories out of them, like Noah, Abraham and even the prophet Jesus. He did not “trust” them, but he most assuredly used them in his writings.

Secondly, I tend to reject a definition of God who cannot keep his scripture from being corrupted until 1300 years ago. Especially when there is ancient documents much older.

Lastly, if you reference the Bible, there are not that many “variations” in the manuscripts which change the theology and teaching of a loving God who came to earth to rescue his creation. Many of the New Testament writings created within 40-100 years of the events. In other words, in the lifespan of the people who where there to refute them. In all of ancient literature, the New Testament stands as the most accurate to the original events. Those are not my words, but scholars who have studied both.

There are fewer still which change the first hand accounts of Jesus who Mohammed said was a prophet, but was killed for what He said. He cannot be a prophet and a liar. So Mohammed was right, Jesus is just a prophet, but then He lied. Or Jesus was right when he said He was THE way, THE truth and THE life. No one comes to God except through Him.

 

[tonyrey]

Since the late AD 700’s, because that is the oldest manuscript which is used to “prove” this point. Mohammed left this earth in AD 632? So a minimum of 150 (scholarly 200) years after his death? I wonder how many changes Uthman and his committee changed to produce this unchanged work?

In fact, Mohammed used these “changed” manuscripts when he referenced stories out of them, like Noah, Abraham and even the prophet Jesus. He did not “trust” them, but he most assuredly used them in his writings.

Secondly, I tend to reject a definition of God who cannot keep his scripture from being corrupted until 1300 years ago. Especially when there is ancient documents much older.

Lastly, if you reference the Bible, there are not that many “variations” in the manuscripts which change the theology and teaching of a loving God who came to earth to rescue his creation. Many of the New Testament writings created within 40-100 years of the events. In other words, in the lifespan of the people who where there to refute them. In all of ancient literature, the New Testament stands as the most accurate to the original events. Those are not my words, but scholars who have studied both.

There are fewer still which change the first hand accounts of Jesus who Mohammed said was a prophet, but was killed for what He said. He cannot be a prophet and a liar. So Mohammed was right, Jesus is just a prophet, but then He lied. Or Jesus was right when he said He was THE way, THE truth and THE life. No one comes to God except through Him.

:thumbsup:The fundamental difference between Islam and Christianity is the remoteness of Allah: God is believed to be "above having a son”. (Qur’an 4:171) It seems impossible for Muslims to have a close relationship with the Creator like those who believe in the Real Presence of Jesus and partake of the Holy Eucharist. Yet the Sufis have overcome that obstacle through mysticism, demonstrating that love will always find a way to reach God:

In some respects Sufi mysticism can be compared to Christianity, as it is argued the term ‘Sufi’ was first used in a Christian, rather than an Islamic, milieu to refer to a deviating trend that emerged in the late sixth century among the Nestorian Christians of Seleucia-Ctesiphon. Early Muslim ascetics shared with Nestorian Christians ‘both word and practice as an identification with a humble, lowly status and a recognition of values other than material’ (Green 2012, 18). Another comparison can be made with Christian monks. Both Sufis and Monks dedicate their lives to servitude and sincere devotion. However, whereas Sufis are able to marry monks cannot. Vedantism, which originated in Hindu philosophy, is also similar to Sufism, not only in the practice of meditation, breathing exercises and observing fasts, but in** their shared belief in universal love and tolerance towards other religions**.

atp.uclan.ac.uk/buddypress/diffusion/?p=1942

Nothing could be further from the diabolical fanaticism of those “Muslims” who are slaughtering innocent people…

 

[Bahman]

If that system and belief is being supported and proved by many evidences then that is valid. God send thousands prophets and gave them scriptures and many miracles to inform existence of Himself. People who saw prophets tranfered that revelation to people following.

Why send thousands of prophet to make a such a mess? One prophet and one religion.

There are many different religions and Christianity and Islam is the major of them. There are some major religions in India etc too but in every religion there is a “belief of God or Gods”. There are many reasons of that one is: Because God sent prophets to every nation so every nation know the belief of God also first human was a prophet.

Why even two religion? How may wars did take place between Muslim and Christian?

The second is that: That universe cannot be by itself or by chances. It needs a omnipotent effect and the conscious feel that.

I claim that universe could comes of nothing. How? I don’t know. How is the very basic question.

The belief of existence of God is not fallacious argument and there are many moral proofs whic one can experience byself.

How God create universe?

 

[Bahman]

You are right. A corrupted revelation is not use. Hence God send prophets to renew revelation and the last revelation “Quran” has not been corrupted even a letter has not been changed.

As I mention before we can discuss “why” God allow revelations to be forgotten or changed but “how” is not use. Quran refute “how” because Quran never has been changed.

According to what is written in Quran, Mohamad received the message from an Angel. How could be so sure that the Angel was not evil at least in some occasions?

 

[Bahman]

I think you should rewrite this comment so I can understand what you are saying. It is a terrible task to always have to guess what you are trying to say. And the same time it is important to understand what it is you are saying.

Linus2nd

I am sorry, so I try again: I can argue that universe did pop up of nothingness (for example). The only way to validate this argument or theory is to answer the question of HOW. For example: How such a thing is possible? Otherwise, we can come up with huge number of scenarios each as an attempt to explain creation. The key question is what is the relevant question which we can discard the irrelevant theories and pick up the right one. It is how question?

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Well, then I can argue that we came out X (nothingness worse case scenario, etc.). How? I don’t know! :bounce: So to me how is not the first question about a system of belief but the very important question which validates the system of belief. What you think?

So you want me to prove to you that the Catholic understanding of God, his existence and nature, and his purposes is correct. Is that what you are asking?

Linus2nd

 

[Bahman]

So you want me to prove to you that the Catholic understanding of God, his existence and nature, and his purposes is correct. Is that what you are asking?

Linus2nd

Well, his purpose, no. His nature, yes. But not in the sense that he exist or his existence can be proven but in the sense that how was the act creation. That is definition of God anyway. How he manage to turn nothingness into something?

 

[hasantas]

According to what is written in Quran, Mohamad received the message from an Angel. How could be so sure that the Angel was not evil at least in some occasions?

Do you believe in existence of evil?

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Well, his purpose, no. His nature, yes. But not in the sense that he exist or his existence can be proven but in the sense that how was the act creation. That is definition of God anyway. How he manage to turn nothingness into something?

As I said before no one will ever to answer that. Only God has the answer to that and I doubt he will ever explain that to us because I don’t think we would be able to understand it. Such knowledge and understanding will always be beyond our comprehension. And I see no reason why that question should be important to us. The important thing is that he did it. We are here and God created us, that is all we need to know.

Linus2nd

 

[Bahman]

Do you believe in existence of evil?

Sure, I do. But what is your definition of evil?

 

[Bahman]

As I said before no one will ever to answer that. Only God has the answer to that and I doubt he will ever explain that to us because I don’t think we would be able to understand it. Such knowledge and understanding will always be beyond our comprehension. And I see no reason why that question should be important to us. The important thing is that he did it. We are here and God created us, that is all we need to know.
Linus2nd

How you could be sure that the person you will meet after death is God then? It could be me or anyone else.

 

[hasantas]

=Bahman;12621295]Why send thousands of prophet to make a such a mess? One prophet and one religion.

In the past there were not so improved inter communication. The nations were far from each other. So the rituals of religion maybe different but the main points were same: Believing in God, prophet, scripture, angels, life after world. After Muhammed there would not need for an other religion because all world could be like a country. The facilities of communication and transportation were developed.

Why even two religion? How may wars did take place between Muslim and Christian?

There were many prophets and perhaps many religions but Islam and Christian colud stay as major religions. There have been allways wars but most of them were not because of religions but the parts who battle were Christian and Muslim. And who were wrong God will judge them.

I claim that universe could comes of nothing. How? I don’t know. How is the very basic question.

Yes you must tell “how” can universe come from nothing and you must define that dark “nothing”.

How God create universe?

If you accept and respect God then it is easy to understand God “how” cretae every thing. Because God can create everything from “nothing”.

 

[hasantas]

Sure, I do. But what is your definition of evil?

evil is some of moral but you do not accept something except matter . If evil is Devil then you must verify that God created Devil?

 

[Bahman]

In the past there were not so improved inter communication. The nations were far from each other. So the rituals of religion maybe different but the main points were same: Believing in God, prophet, scripture, angels, life after world. After Muhammed there would not need for an other religion because all world could be like a country. The facilities of communication and transportation were developed.

Then send enough prophet at the same time in different location to resolve the problem.

Yes you must tell “how” can universe come from nothing and you must define that dark “nothing”.

Why should I answer to that question. My claim was just an example. That is you that needs to have an understanding of HOW God could create a universe because you claim so.

If you accept and respect God then it is easy to understand God “how” cretae every thing. Because God can create everything from “nothing”.

You know? I would be happy to hear.