Christian worship of Jesus..

[anatolian]

Salaam all. As we know that the major Christianity worship Jesus and I have a question regarding this. If Jesus is both fully human and fully God, do not you think that you worship human along with God when you worship Him? Other wise you have to seperate Jesus as Jesus the human and Jesus the God.

[Uthman]

[Supreme]

Salaam all. As we know that the major Christianity worship Jesus and I have a question regarding this. If Jesus is both fully human and fully God, do not you think that you worship human along with God when you worship Him? Other wise you have to seperate Jesus as Jesus the human and Jesus the God.

Salaam!

Are you anatolian from ChristianForums? Hiya, brother!

In response to the question, yes, we believe Jesus is both fully human and fully divine. And no, we don't need to seperate Jesus' humaness from His divinity when we worship Him, because Jesus is not suffering from some sort of multiple personality disorder and there aren't two completely different Jesus'- His human nature is divine, and His divine nature is human, if that makes sense! It's like referring to someone who's black and male as seperate people, merely because they have two different traits that makes them who they are. It's like saying 'Oh, you know Dave?' 'Who, black Dave or the male Dave?' 'Well, both... they're the same person.'

[Grace Seeker]

To say that Jesus is both fully human and fully divine is not to create a hyrbrid God-man, nor is it to say that Jesus has a split personality (though, admittedly, sometimes we do when we talk about him). He is just Jesus -- God incarnated among us. When we worship him we are worshipping God, yet I never feel any need to do any mental gymastics to somehow separate his humanity from his divinity.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[The_Prince]

i have a seperate question, can Christians produce a single verse from the Gospels where Jesus ever claimed to have two natures, or where he claimed to have a divine and human nature all in one, being fully man, and fully God, and where he made such a distinction?

[Grace Seeker]

i have a seperate question, can Christians produce a single verse from the Gospels where Jesus ever claimed to have two natures, or where he claimed to have a divine and human nature all in one, being fully man, and fully God, and where he made such a distinction?

Nope. What happened is that in reading the scriptures as they talked about Jesus, Christians realized that in some places it talked about Jesus as just an ordinary man -- he wept, was hungry, bled and died, he had limited knowledge, he was clearly uniquely not God the Father; yet in those same scriptures, often in the same context, he exhibited traits that are known to be uniquely divine in nature -- he did miracles, he claimed the power to forgive sins, he was describe as existing before time and outside of creation, even being the one who did the act of creating, he was one with the Father.

The first century Christians never seemed to question these things, they just accepted them as all being true of Jesus. But in later centuries questions arose about whether one set of traits meant that Jesus ought to be understood as divine and then another that Jesus ought to be understood as merely human, and then some came up with all sorts of hybrid options -- a human body with a divine soul for instance or that his body was just an illusion. The church wrestled with it for about 300 years till the forumula called the hypostatic union was articulated and that idea seems to have stuck, at least with the majority.

But while the idea as you hear us talk about it has its roots in the Bible it is never specifically spelled out in the Bible. If it had been, it would have saved us a few hundred years of reading and wrestling with the idea to understand how it was that the Bible presented Jesus both ways at the same time.

[Ramadhan]

The first century Christians never seemed to question these things, they just accepted them as all being true of Jesus. But in later centuries questions arose about whether one set of traits meant that Jesus ought to be understood as divine and then another that Jesus ought to be understood as merely human, and then some came up with all sorts of hybrid options -- a human body with a divine soul for instance or that his body was just an illusion. The church wrestled with it for about 300 years till the forumula called the hypostatic union was articulated and that idea seems to have stuck, at least with the majority.

Is there possibility that first century christians never question the status of jesus pbuh because they knew for certain that Jesus pbuh was a human and not god?

[Grace Seeker]

Is there possibility that first century christians never question the status of jesus pbuh because they knew for certain that Jesus pbuh was a human and not god?

The "possibility"? Sure. Anything's possible. But the probability? I would say, NO. We get first century reports of people worshipping Jesus from as varied source materials as the Didache (a first century book of rituals for worship in the infant church) and official governmental reports of the Roman empire. Add to that the reality that Christians suffered death rather than deny Jesus as Lord and worship the emperor as God, and it becomes pretty clear that whether it was true or not, first century Christians certainly behaved as if they believed Jesus was God and worthy of worship.

[Danah]

Nope. What happened is that in reading the scriptures as they talked about Jesus, Christians realized that in some places it talked about Jesus as just an ordinary man -- he wept, was hungry, bled and died, he had limited knowledge, he was clearly uniquely not God the Father; yet in those same scriptures, often in the same context, he exhibited traits that are known to be uniquely divine in nature -- he did miracles, he claimed the power to forgive sins, he was describe as existing before time and outside of creation, even being the one who did the act of creating, he was one with the Father.

Did he hold the two natures at the same time? meaning that at a certain time he is acting as a human and as a God?

[Supreme]

Is there possibility that first century christians never question the status of jesus pbuh because they knew for certain that Jesus pbuh was a human and not god?

Oh sure. I'll post a video later addressing such concerns.

[Grace Seeker]

Did he hold the two natures at the same time? meaning that at a certain time he is acting as a human and as a God?

Danah, I notice that you are a Muslim and a woman. Let me ask you: Do you hold those two natures at the same time? Meaning that at a certain you are acting as a Muslim and as a woman?

Yes, from his conception, Jesus held both natures simualtaneously with one another. Prior to his conception the human Jesus did not exist, only the one eternal God who eternal exists in Trinity. But with God's putting on of flesh, his incarnating of himself as one of us, from that time on there has always existed this hypostatic union of the divine and human in which Jesus possessed the two natures in the one person but they were neither comingled. So, his human nature was in no way confused with nor subsumed into the divinity. The "official" language coming out of the Council of Chalcedon where this was discussed at great length was that perfect divinity and perfect humanity are united in Christ "without confusion, without change, without division, without separation."

[The_Prince]

here are your own Gospel sources showing nobody believed Jesus was God or worshipped him, this was during his lifte time:

http://muslim-responses.com/Just_a_P...ust_a_Prophet_
http://muslim-responses.com/The_Blin...The_Blind_Man_
http://muslim-responses.com/Messiah_...ah_or_Prophet_
http://muslim-responses.com/Doubting...ubting_Thomas_

and all of the above is from the Gospel of John!

in matthew, mark, luke, u always have ppl going up to Jesus as a prophet, heck when he entered jerusalem they said he is the prophet messiah, no one ever said here is God!

so i would challenge the statement that ppl used to worship Jesus as God while he was alive, because the Gospel references themselves show otherwise.

[Danah]

Danah, I notice that you are a Muslim and a woman. Let me ask you: Do you hold those two natures at the same time? Meaning that at a certain you are acting as a Muslim and as a woman?

Yes, from his conception, Jesus held both natures simualtaneously with one another. Prior to his conception the human Jesus did not exist, only the one eternal God who eternal exists in Trinity. But with God's putting on of flesh, his incarnating of himself as one of us, from that time on there has always existed this hypostatic union of the divine and human in which Jesus possessed the two natures in the one person but they were neither comingled. So, his human nature was in no way confused with nor subsumed into the divinity.

Of Course I am both at the same time, but I don't think that this can serve as an example to clarify that matter.

Say that Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him) is the god and the human at the same time, how can a God feels hungry? or cry? or be vulnerable to death? or crucifixion? See, I am not looking for a debate here, but I feel its hard to digest such a concept for me.

The "official" language coming out of the Council of Chalcedon where this was discussed at great length was that perfect divinity and perfect humanity are united in Christ "without confusion, without change, without division, without separation.

but they are totally opposite to each other, I can't put a vulnerable dependent being "human" and a supreme being "God" attached at the same place and same time without confusion !!

[Supreme]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5ubG...eature=related

It's a good watch for Christians.

[anatolian]

Salaam!

Are you anatolian from ChristianForums? Hiya, brother!

Yes same person, hiya friend!

In response to the question, yes, we believe Jesus is both fully human and fully divine. And no, we don't need to seperate Jesus' humaness from His divinity when we worship Him, because Jesus is not suffering from some sort of multiple personality disorder and there aren't two completely different Jesus'- His human nature is divine, and His divine nature is human, if that makes sense! It's like referring to someone who's black and male as seperate people, merely because they have two different traits that makes them who they are. It's like saying 'Oh, you know Dave?' 'Who, black Dave or the male Dave?' 'Well, both... they're the same person.'

Well, I know that Christian belief concerning the nature of Jesus. So you have to worship the human along with the God when you worship Jesus just like you have to refer to a black along with a man when you refer to Dave..

[anatolian]

To say that Jesus is both fully human and fully divine is not to create a hyrbrid God-man, nor is it to say that Jesus has a split personality (though, admittedly, sometimes we do when we talk about him). He is just Jesus -- God incarnated among us. When we worship him we are worshipping God, yet I never feel any need to do any mental gymastics to somehow separate his humanity from his divinity.

It seems a logical conclusion. If you worship Jesus as one being, you worship the human as the God.

[Karl]

The Christians believe that Jesus (PBUH) is an Avatar (god in flesh) of Jehovah. The reason a god appears in the flesh is that the gods power in god form is so intense that the people would be incinerated. Avatar is a Hindi word and in Hindu Avatars are common, maybe there is some relationship there. As Brahma is the God Head in the Hindu religion and all the other gods are manifestations of Brahma and Avatars etc. Maybe thousands of years ago Brahma was the only god worshiped in it's locale eg monotheism, but over time more gods were added and things got more and more fantastic. Maybe Christianity was an early stray from the strict monotheistic Jewish religion. Even Islam has been breaking up into sects and squabbling amongst itself. So who knows?

[mkh4JC]

here are your own Gospel sources showing nobody believed Jesus was God or worshipped him, this was during his lifte time:

http://muslim-responses.com/Just_a_P...ust_a_Prophet_
http://muslim-responses.com/The_Blin...The_Blind_Man_
http://muslim-responses.com/Messiah_...ah_or_Prophet_
http://muslim-responses.com/Doubting...ubting_Thomas_

and all of the above is from the Gospel of John!

in matthew, mark, luke, u always have ppl going up to Jesus as a prophet, heck when he entered jerusalem they said he is the prophet messiah, no one ever said here is God!

so i would challenge the statement that ppl used to worship Jesus as God while he was alive, because the Gospel references themselves show otherwise.

Well, I'll just go over the first link. The gentlemen on the Islamic site first says that John the Baptist called Jesus 'The Lamb of God.' The way the gentlemen expressed himself, it impressed upon me that he doesn't know what the title means. Jesus being 'The Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world,' is in reference to what he would have to do on the cross, shedding his blood and paying humanity's sin debt, liberating those who come to him from a life of bondage to sin, and is a picture of the Old Testament covenant whereby lambs blood would be shed, acting as a temporary covering and atonement for their sins. Here's a good couple of scriptures expounding upon that concept:

1Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?

2For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

3He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

4Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

6All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

7He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb,

8He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

9And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

10Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

11He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

12Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

Isaiah 53

The Muslim author then says that Jesus is called the son of God and that this does not denote divinity. Well, actually it does. Because Jesus is not a son of God but THE Son of God. There is a difference. In the Old Testament even angels were called 'sons of God' and all those who accept Christ are adopted into the family of God and become 'sons and daughters of the Most High God.'

But Jesus is the Son (capital) of God, existing from eternity to eternity with the Father. And there are scriptures even in the Old Testament that point to Jesus and who he is, such as Psalm 110: 1:

'The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou at my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.' Which Jesus referenced to the Phariesees here:

'Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he?> They say unto him, the son of David.

He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,

The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?

If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?

And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.' Matthew 22: 42-46.

The Muslim gentlemen then goes on to say that because the woman at the well perceived Jesus to be a prophet and not God that Jesus wasn't God. The thing is, Jesus was a prophet. But he was--as he himself said--'greater than a prophet.' The site Jews for Jesus is quoted as referring to Jesus as a 'Jewish-God-Man-King' and asks, 'could the Messiah be anyone else.' So Jesus is unique throughout all of human history.

I think I'll stop there. The last two points by the Muslim gentlemen seem to be refreshing over the Jews of the day referring to Jesus as a prophet or just the Messiah.

[Grace Seeker]

Of Course I am both at the same time, but I don't think that this can serve as an example to clarify that matter.

Say that Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him) is the god and the human at the same time, how can a God feels hungry? or cry? or be vulnerable to death? or crucifixion? See, I am not looking for a debate here, but I feel its hard to digest such a concept for me.


but they are totally opposite to each other, I can't put a vulnerable dependent being "human" and a supreme being "God" attached at the same place and same time without confusion !!

You said that you aren't looking for debate. So, I just want to clariy that I didn't say that it wasn't confusing. Nor can I explain how it was that God was able to make himself incarnate, other than that scripture also says that with God all things are possible. That it is the most humbling event imaginable, actually even beyond human imagination, I completely agree. All I can say is that it is the Christian understanding that it is what was so with respect to Jesus.


The_Prince's post not withstanding, the following are all cases of people recorded as worshipping Jesus: Matthew 2:2, Matthew 14:33, Matthew 28:9, Matthew 28:17 and John 9:38 during his lifetime. And in John 20:28 his own disciple directly addresses Jesus as nothing less than God. As a Muslim I don't expect you to accept that they were speaking the truth with regard to Jesus. But please don't accept as factual those who can't even take the time to verify a statement such as "nobody believed Jesus was God or worshipped him, this was during his lifte time" without double checking it for themselves. Running a simple word search on www.biblegateway.com was all that was needed to verify or contradict such a statement.

[Grace Seeker]

It seems a logical conclusion. If you worship Jesus as one being, you worship the human as the God.

I don't deny that if the man Jesus were to be standing in front of me that I would indeed worship him. But I woud not worship him for his human acts, even as meritorious as I understand them to be, I would only worship him because I also believe him to be the God of all the universe, even when he is incarnate in human form.


The Avatar idea spoken of by Karl I don't quite get. But then it is not a word I am familiar with outside of their use on computer screens.

[Danah]

You said that you aren't looking for debate. So, I just want to clariy that I didn't say that it wasn't confusing. Nor can I explain how it was that God was able to make himself incarnate, other than that scripture also says that with God all things are possible. That it is the most humbling event imaginable, actually even beyond human imagination, I completely agree. All I can say is that it is the Christian understanding that it is what was so with respect to Jesus.


The_Prince's post not withstanding, the following are all cases of people recorded as worshipping Jesus: Matthew 2:2, Matthew 14:33, Matthew 28:9, Matthew 28:17 and John 9:38 during his lifetime. And in John 20:28 his own disciple directly addresses Jesus as nothing less than God. As a Muslim I don't expect you to accept that they were speaking the truth with regard to Jesus. But please don't accept as factual those who can't even take the time to verify a statement such as "nobody believed Jesus was God or worshipped him, this was during his lifte time" without double checking it for themselves. Running a simple word search on www.biblegateway.com was all that was needed to verify or contradict such a statement.

Well, that has nothing to do with me being believe it or not, but I was curious of how Christians themselves view that issue for a being to hold two totally opposite features at the same time. Thanks for the other part of your reply, I shall go through all verses you mentioned when I get sometime soon

[Khaldun]

:sl:

Say: If the Beneficent God has a son, then I would be the first one to worship him. [Surah Zukhruf verse 81]

The very fact that God made Himself into a human would cease His fact of being a God, since God is above His creation not part of it. God created His creation and is the Lord above it, He is not a part of His creation. This is in fact only repeating the beliefs of the ancient greeks who believed that Zues had children etc.

And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah fight them; how worng are they! [Surah Tawbah verse 30]

[Grace Seeker]

And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah fight them; how worng are they! [Surah Tawbah verse 30]

Where in their scriptures do Jews actually say that Ezra is the son of God? I've heard this referred to by Muslims many times, but never have I heard a Jew say this, nor found it in any Bible used by either Jew or Christian. Maybe I'm just not looking in the right place. Since the Qur'an said it, it must be so. So, where exactly is this statement to be found?


As to the other part of your statement:

The very fact that God made Himself into a human would cease His fact of being a God, since God is above His creation not part of it.

To me this sounds like a human dictating to God what God can and cannot do. While God entering into a human body might seem demeaning, and humbling when we think that we have to preserve God's glory. But even among men, I notice that truly great men don't have a problem stooping down to help others and that only the vain refuse to do so. For myself, I don't see how it necessarily makes God less than God to enter into humanity, unless it is your contention that God would become despoiled by such an act. My view is that to so say that God cannot do something is to put God into a smaller box, made by our own limited understanding of his nature, than the act in and of itself would do.

[Khaldun]

:sl:

Yes you are right because the Qur'aan said it it is right.

There is no clear verse neither in the Torah nor Bible that says Jesus was son of God nor God himself so the issue is not about the scriptures it is about what people want to believe.

And it was the Jews of the arabian peninsula that in particular believed that Uzair was the son of God, read up on Arabic History before Islaam and you will find it there.

We are not putting limits on our Lord, it is rather you that are. All we are saying is that our Lord is above His creation not part of it. Jesus [according to you] died, our Lord is ever-Living and never dies. Perfection belongs only to Allah, and thus human beings are imperfect and if Allah became human it would make Him imperfect unless you want to say He was a human but not imperfect?

[anatolian]

Jesus [according to you] died..

This is another question, I think. What does it mean "Jesus died"? If it is the death of Jesus whom christians consider fully God along with fully human, then God died. Otherwise they mean only Jesus the human died.

[anatolian]

...When we worship him we are worshipping God, yet I never feel any need to do any mental gymastics to somehow separate his humanity from his divinity.

I don't deny that if the man Jesus were to be standing in front of me that I would indeed worship him. But I woud not worship him for his human acts, even as meritorious as I understand them to be, I would only worship him because I also believe him to be the God of all the universe, even when he is incarnate in human form.

So God does not care whether you seperate these two natures of Jesus when you worship him?

The Avatar idea spoken of by Karl I don't quite get. But then it is not a word I am familiar with outside of their use on computer screens.

Avatars are the incarnations of God in hinduism.

[mkh4JC]

:sl:

Yes you are right because the Qur'aan said it it is right.

There is no clear verse neither in the Torah nor Bible that says Jesus was son of God nor God himself so the issue is not about the scriptures it is about what people want to believe.

And it was the Jews of the arabian peninsula that in particular believed that Uzair was the son of God, read up on Arabic History before Islaam and you will find it there.

We are not putting limits on our Lord, it is rather you that are. All we are saying is that our Lord is above His creation not part of it. Jesus [according to you] died, our Lord is ever-Living and never dies. Perfection belongs only to Allah, and thus human beings are imperfect and if Allah became human it would make Him imperfect unless you want to say He was a human but not imperfect?

Those verses I quoted above are strong evidence that the Jesus of the New Testament is who he says he is.

[Khaldun]

:sl:

I am sorry but I do not see the relievant passage.

[OurIslamic]

Interesting question. Whenever I think about Christians worshipping Jesus, I think that if a god was in human form, the form would disintegrate from the power of the god.

If it didn't disintegrate, that would mean that humans have the power to sustain god's power within themselves. Allah (SWT) has already mentioned that humans are limited creatures, so it is impossible for us (our human 'form') to sustain god's limitless power.

The thought that Jesus was a god is paradoxical.

[mkh4JC]

:sl:

I am sorry but I do not see the relievant passage.

These are the three passages I quoted:

1Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed?

2For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

3He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

4Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

6All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

7He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb,

8He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

9And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

10Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

11He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied:. by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities

12Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
Isaiah 53

The entirety of the chapter is talking about what the Messiah--that is, Jesus Christ--would have to do to redeem man. Just read over it and compare it to what you know of the Christian understanding of Jesus (ie dying on the cross to bring fallen man to holy God). And this is in the Old Testament.

Also here, Psalm 110: 1:

'The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou at my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.' Here is Jesus referencing this verse to the Phariesees in the New Testament:

'Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he?> They say unto him, the son of David.

He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,

The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?

If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?

And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.' Matthew 22: 42-46.

So here we have the Psalmist--David--saying that 'The Lord (God the Father) said unto my Lord (God the Son) sit thou at my right hand, til I make thine enemies thy footstool.' Now, David didn't understand what this meant when he wrote it, he was just writing under the influence of the Holy Spirit.

[Grace Seeker]

Interesting question. Whenever I think about Christians worshipping Jesus, I think that if a god was in human form, the form would disintegrate from the power of the god.

If it didn't disintegrate, that would mean that humans have the power to sustain god's power within themselves. Allah (SWT) has already mentioned that humans are limited creatures, so it is impossible for us (our human 'form') to sustain god's limitless power.

The thought that Jesus was a god is paradoxical.

This is just one more reason why there can never be a syncretistic religion that involves both Christianity and Islam. We Christians would indeed hold that God is capable of having his infinite presence and power residing in a finite human being, for that is exactly what we mean when we speak of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in one's life. That you can't imagine that we would see as telling God that he is incapable of something. I know you don't see it that way. Just as I don't see the idea of Jesus as God as being paradoxical in a way that would prohibit it from being true.

[Khaldun]

:sl:

aha I see, so people are saying Jesus is son of God in the bible? But he himself does not say anything to that effect?

Makes sense I guess if people claim a person to be something he himself does not say he is then obviously the claim of the People must be true.

And when Allah will say: O Jesus son of Mary! did you say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah, he will say: Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed have known it; Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in Thy mind, surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things.

I did not say to them aught save what Thou didst enjoin me with: That serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst take me away, Thou wert the watcher over them, and Thou art witness of all things. [Chapter The Dinner Table verses 116-117]

[mkh4JC]

:sl:

aha I see, so people are saying Jesus is son of God in the bible? But he himself does not say anything to that effect?

Makes sense I guess if people claim a person to be something he himself does not say he is then obviously the claim of the People must be true.

And when Allah will say: O Jesus son of Mary! did you say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah, he will say: Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed have known it; Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in Thy mind, surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things.

I did not say to them aught save what Thou didst enjoin me with: That serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst take me away, Thou wert the watcher over them, and Thou art witness of all things. [Chapter The Dinner Table verses 116-117]

Actually, Jesus did say as much:

'The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemeth, because I said, I am the Son of God?

If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.

But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.' St John 10: 33-38.

[Grace Seeker]

:sl:

aha I see, so people are saying Jesus is son of God in the bible? But he himself does not say anything to that effect?

It seems to me that he did:

They all asked, "Are you then the Son of God?" He [Jesus] replied, "You are right in saying I am." (Luke 22:70)

John 1
49Then Nathanael declared, "Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel."

50Jesus said, "You believe because I told you I saw you under the fig tree. You shall see greater things than that."

On top of that, it is reported that an angel also said that Jesus would be called the Son of God:

The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.

The real debate is not whether this was a title used to describe and accepted by Jesus, but what the title means.

[جوري]

Do you not find an inherent difference between:

22:70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.

and your previous quoted:

They all asked, "Are you then the Son of God?" He [Jesus] replied, "You are right in saying I am." (Luke 22:70)

one is an affirmation and the other is an evasion, that is if I am to take the translation to denote what you desire for it to say anyway..

the take home message for someone who isn't entrenched in this mess, is a fearful god (prays to himself before he is crucified in the garden of Gethsemane, yet forsakes himself the next day, inept at choosing his apostles, given that he told Peter he'd denounce him three times and Peter did, so a dying god leaving the world to folks who can't at all shoulder the responsibility while god is alive in their midst let alone after his death, and last for our purposes here a god that can't actually come out and say yes I am your god or I am the son of your god, rather, YOU say that I am....:hmm:

all the best

[Khaldun]

:sl:

I thin sister Gossamer Skye made an important point.

Also Grace Seeker I think you nailed the issue. Many people before jesus said they were sons of God, in particular the jews. Based on your understanding these people are the sons of God too. Or perhaps it is a figure of speech rather then a literal meaning?

And the Jews and the Christians say: We are the sons of Allah and His beloved ones. Say: Why does He then chastise you for your faults? Nay, you are mortals from among those whom He has created, He forgives whom He pleases and chastises whom He pleases; and Allah's is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and what is between them, and to Him is the eventual coming. [Chapter The Dinner table verse 18]

[mkh4JC]

the take home message for someone who isn't entrenched in this mess, is a fearful god (prays to himself before he is crucified in the garden of Gethsemane, yet forsakes himself the next day, inept at choosing his apostles, given that he told Peter he'd denounce him three times and Peter did, so a dying god leaving the world to folks who can't at all shoulder the responsibility while god is alive in their midst let alone after his death, and last for our purposes here a god that can't actually come out and say yes I am your god or I am the son of your god, rather, YOU say that I am....:hmm:

all the best

In Peter's case, he just didn't fully understand what the Messiah would have to do. He was focusing on the restoration of Israel, which the Messiah was prophesied to do, but he didn't grasp that Jesus had to first come as a suffering servant, to save man from his sins. Here in Matthew we find this:

'From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not (don't understand) the things that be of God, but those that be of men.' Matthew 16: 21-23.

And also we have this in Acts 1: 6-7.

'When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom of Israel?

And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.'

So it's understandable why Peter would deny him, he didn't have the complete picture of the Messiah. Peter had a very limited view of what the Messiah had to ultimately do. Jesus didn't come just to restore the nation of Israel, or to liberate the Jews (and he will do this) but God also had a plan to remedy the sin problem, and how he--being completely holy--could fellowship with that which was fallen.

And I quoted a scripture where Jesus does come out and say that he is the Son of God.

[جوري]

In Peter's case, he just didn't fully understand what the Messiah would have to do. He was focusing on the restoration of Israel, which the Messiah was prophesied to do, but he didn't grasp that Jesus had to first come as a suffering servant, to save man from his sins. Here in Matthew we find this:

'From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest (don't understand) the things that be of God, but those that be of men.' Matthew 16: 21-23.

And also we have this in Acts 1: 6-7.

'When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom of Israel?

And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.'

So it's understandable why Peter would deny him, he didn't have the complete picture of the Messiah. Peter had a very limited view of what the Messiah had to ultimately do. Jesus didn't come just to restore the nation of Israel, or to liberate the Jews (and he will do this) but he was also had a plan to remedy the sin problem, and how he--being completely holy--could fellowship with that which was fallen.

And I quoted a scripture where Jesus does come out and say that he is the Son of God.

ah but peter was chosen by Jesus he is an apostle.. Paul wasn't chosen by jesus, he is self-proclaimed ... doesn't that make god ineffectual on multiple levels?
god can't pick out an apostle who will carry out the message upon his death, almost similar to god cursing the earth he allegedly created for not bearing him fruit..
How does this ineffectual god reconcile with an all knowing god who created everything with such great detail and intricacies from the smallest cell to the grandest planet in the cosmos and all that is in between?

Personally I can't wrap my mind around why god would descend and show up in Nazareth or beyt lahm to be discussing silly little passages by a man whose identity we don't actually know (know) and scrutinize further already questionable details in a foreign tongue than that of your god to claim his deification.

all the best

[Grace Seeker]

Do you not find an inherent difference between:

22:70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.

and your previous quoted:

They all asked, "Are you then the Son of God?" He [Jesus] replied, "You are right in saying I am." (Luke 22:70)

one is an affirmation and the other is an evasion, that is if I am to take the translation to denote what you desire for it to say anyway..

M you're absolutely right, those two translations carry significantly different connotative baggage with them. And though I generally prefer the NIV, I will attest that looking in the Greek the idea of it being an affirmation is not stated as concretely as the NIV makes it appear. The better translation of his response is "You say that I am."

Only Luke has this question (v. 70). Standing independent of and subsequent to the question about messiahship, it servs to emphasize that Jesus is himself the Son of God and not merely called such as an honorific title because of his role as Messiah. Jesus' reply--lit., "You say that I am" (hymeis legete hoti ego eimi)--while not a direct affirmation, was taken as such, as v. 71 shows. The nature of this reply is understandable in view of Jesus' remarks in vv. 67b-68.


Walter L. Liefeld, Luke, The Expositor's Bible Commentary, Vol. 8, Frank E. Gaebelien, ed., Zondervan, c. 1984.

[YusufNoor]

Where in their scriptures do Jews actually say that Ezra is the son of God? I've heard this referred to by Muslims many times, but never have I heard a Jew say this, nor found it in any Bible used by either Jew or Christian. Maybe I'm just not looking in the right place. Since the Qur'an said it, it must be so. So, where exactly is this statement to be found?

EXACTLY where in the Qur'an does it say that the Jews "wrote in their Scripture that Ezra is the son of God"

As to the other part of your statement: To me this sounds like a human dictating to God what God can and cannot do. While God entering into a human body might seem demeaning, and humbling when we think that we have to preserve God's glory. But even among men, I notice that truly great men don't have a problem stooping down to help others and that only the vain refuse to do so. For myself, I don't see how it necessarily makes God less than God to enter into humanity, unless it is your contention that God would become despoiled by such an act. My view is that to so say that God cannot do something is to put God into a smaller box, made by our own limited understanding of his nature, than the act in and of itself would do.

This is just one more reason why there can never be a syncretistic religion that involves both Christianity and Islam. We Christians would indeed hold that God is capable of having his infinite presence and power residing in a finite human being, for that is exactly what we mean when we speak of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in one's life. That you can't imagine that we would see as telling God that he is incapable of something. I know you don't see it that way. Just as I don't see the idea of Jesus as God as being paradoxical in a way that would prohibit it from being true.

we know that Allah is capable of doing ANYTHING, yes, but He only does things that befit His Majesty. being an amoeba by splitting into 3 isn't one of them, nor would be defecating or urinating on Himself [Nowuthubillah]. we try to persuade you to stop saying these things about Our Creator for your own good and salvation.

[mkh4JC]

This is just one more reason why there can never be a syncretistic religion that involves both Christianity and Islam. We Christians would indeed hold that God is capable of having his infinite presence and power residing in a finite human being, for that is exactly what we mean when we speak of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in one's life. That you can't imagine that we would see as telling God that he is incapable of something. I know you don't see it that way. Just as I don't see the idea of Jesus as God as being paradoxical in a way that would prohibit it from being true.

There is actually a movement called Chrislam. I've read about it in several places. I was visiting a Christian site not too long ago. There was a bishop(ess?) in the Episcopal Church who claims she's both a Christian and a Muslim. Of course, as a born again Christian I don't believe that the two faiths are compatible, I was just pointing that out.

[Grace Seeker]

There is actually a movement called Chrislam. I've read about it in several places.

Interesting. I would love to find more common ground. But I don't see how it is possible to create a "Chrislam" that doesn't violate the basic tenents of at least one, if not both, faiths. However, I would be willing to at least listen and hear them out.

I was visiting a Christian site not too long ago. There was a bishop(ess?) in the Episcopal Church who claims she's both a Christian and a Muslim. Of course, as a born again Christian I don't believe that the two faiths are compatible, I was just pointing that out.

Yeah, I know about an Episcopal priest in Oregon of whom this is true. I couldn't believe that her orders were not revoked. Now you are saying there is an Episcopal bishop as well?????? I'm hoping that we are merely confusing different elements of the same story with one another.

[Grace Seeker]

EXACTLY where in the Qur'an does it say that the Jews "wrote in their Scripture that Ezra is the son of God"

I suspect it doesn't. But according to Khaldun it does say:

And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah fight them; how worng are they! [Surah Tawbah verse 30]

The use of the definitive article "the" in refering to "the Jews" makes this a much more absolute statement than if it were to say "some Jews say" or even "Jews say." The reasonable (in my opinion) implication of the definitive article is make it seem as if this is a view held by not just a small isolated sect within Judaism, but that it is a representative statement for all Jews as a whole.

Imagine the outrage that would properly follow if I were to say, "the Muslims are terrorists." Of course, I don't believe that as a general statement about Muslims to be anywhere close to true. I do think that some small percentage of Muslims have committed acts of terror. No doubt there are small percentages of Jews and Christians who have committed acts of terror as well and with those isolated pockets that may even say that terrorism is justified. But I don't think it improves the situation to say, "the Muslims, the Jews, and the Christians say, 'terrorism is justified'."

So, perhaps there needs to be a new translation of the Qur'an produced for the use of English speaking Muslims, one that would remove the article "the" from that passage. I'm hoping, trusting that in the original Arabic no such article exists within the text.

[mkh4JC]

Yeah, I know about an Episcopal priest in Oregon of whom this is true. I couldn't believe that her orders were not revoked. Now you are saying there is an Episcopal bishop as well?????? I'm hoping that we are merely confusing different elements of the same story with one another.

No, I called her a bishop(ess) because I thought she was a woman bishop. It's been a while, so maybe I confused the story, maybe the woman wasn't a bishop.

[YusufNoor]

Originally Posted by YusufNoor View Post
EXACTLY where in the Qur'an does it say that the Jews "wrote in their Scripture that Ezra is the son of God"

I suspect it doesn't.

well if it doesn't, why do you pursue a line of questioning that you know is incorrect?

But according to Khaldun it does say:

i didn't ask you what Khaldun said, i asked to you to point out where the the statement THAT YOU MADE was in the Qur'an.

Originally Posted by Khaldun View Post
And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah fight them; how worng are they! [Surah Tawbah verse 30]

The use of the definitive article "the" in refering to "the Jews" makes this a much more absolute statement than if it were to say "some Jews say" or even "Jews say." The reasonable (in my opinion) implication of the definitive article is make it seem as if this is a view held by not just a small isolated sect within Judaism, but that it is a representative statement for all Jews as a whole.

Imagine the outrage that would properly follow if I were to say, "the Muslims are terrorists." Of course, I don't believe that as a general statement about Muslims to be anywhere close to true. I do think that some small percentage of Muslims have committed acts of terror. No doubt there are small percentages of Jews and Christians who have committed acts of terror as well and with those isolated pockets that may even say that terrorism is justified. But I don't think it improves the situation to say, "the Muslims, the Jews, and the Christians say, 'terrorism is justified'."

ALL Christians are polytheists is different than the Christians are polytheists. see the difference? one is all inclusive, the other seeks clarification.

So, perhaps there needs to be a new translation of the Qur'an produced for the use of English speaking Muslims, one that would remove the article "the" from that passage. I'm hoping, trusting that in the original Arabic no such article exists within the text.

everything you writ there is goobledy gook. unlike some Christians that claim the bible is the Bible in EVERY language, we don't claim that translations are "the Qur'an." IF you want to understand the Qur'an, which seems highly unlikely as you are just trying to argue, you have to:

a) look at the Qur'an in it's original language and

b) see if it is explained anywhere else in the Qur'an

c) check the Tafseer of the Qur'an, esp. Ibn Abbbas.

d) see if the language itself explains it.

THEN, you might know what it means.

Originally Posted by Grace Seeker View Post
Where in their scriptures do Jews actually say that Ezra is the son of God? I've heard this referred to by Muslims many times, but never have I heard a Jew say this, nor found it in any Bible used by either Jew or Christian. Maybe I'm just not looking in the right place. Since the Qur'an said it, it must be so. So, where exactly is this statement to be found?

again, where does it say this in the Qur'an?

:wa:

[Khaldun]

:sl:

I am sorry Grace Seeker but this shows how utterly little you know about the Qur'aan and its language. First of all when it says that the jews said, the al you are refering to is not the defenite particular rather this is what is known as 'aad dhinyy and only refers to the Jews of that area, this is a very well known thing in the arabic language and is used throughout the Qur'aan. For you to make your own opinion and then translate that into english is a grave injustice to say the least.

Also 'Khaldun said' What did I excatly say? I qouted the Qur'aan for you and that this is what the jews in madeenah say, I never refered to any scriptures nor did the Qur'aan, because these statments saying that Allah has a son is utter blasphemy, rather it was the jews and christians themselves [without any evidence in their scriptures] that said these things.

And they say: The Beneficent God has taken (to Himself) a son

Certainly you have made an abominable assertion

The heavens may almost be rent thereat, and the earth cleave asunder, and the mountains fall down in pieces,

That they ascribe a son to the Beneficent God.

And it is not worthy of the Beneficent God that He should take (to Himself) a son.

There is no one in the heavens and the earth but will come to the Beneficent God as a servant. [Surah Maryaam]

[Grace Seeker]

:sl:

I am sorry Grace Seeker but this shows how utterly little you know about the Qur'aan and its language. First of all when it says that the jews said, the al you are refering to is not the defenite particular rather this is what is known as 'aad dhinyy and only refers to the Jews of that area, this is a very well known thing in the arabic language and is used throughout the Qur'aan. For you to make your own opinion and then translate that into english is a grave injustice to say the least.

I didn't do that. I read what you provided. If it was not a good translation into English that isn't my doing. I'm simply saying that when one uses the definite article in English in the way that the translation you provided did that it indicates a more universal statement as if refering to all Jews. If that isn't what it means, then fine, but your complaint is not with me, but with the translator.



May I ask, what it was that you were trying to communicate when you posted this:

Originally Posted by Khaldun
And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah fight them; how worng are they! [Surah Tawbah verse 30]

What is the point of saying "and the Jews say...", if it isn't a statement that is actually representative of Jewish belief, but only true of a small isolated group that is not reflective of Judaism?

[YusufNoor]

I didn't do that. I read what you provided. If it was not a good translation into English that isn't my doing. I'm simply saying that when one uses the definite article in English in the way that the translation you provided did that it indicates a more universal statement as if refering to all Jews. If that isn't what it means, then fine, but your complaint is not with me, but with the translator.



May I ask, what it was that you were trying to communicate when you posted this:What is the point of saying "and the Jews say...", if it isn't a statement that is actually representative of Jewish belief, but only true of a small isolated group that is not reflective of Judaism?

the Surah was revealed in Madinah. the Jews in Madinah said it. EVERYONE knew what the Ayat was talking about. in fact, a former Christian questioned this part of the Surah, the very next ayat:

Sahih International
: They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah , and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him.

well, to start with, the original post was commenting on how the Jews and the Christians were merely repeating the beliefs on the Greeks. it looks quite clear actually. let's look at it:

Say: If the Beneficent God has a son, then I would be the first one to worship him. [Surah Zukhruf verse 81]

The very fact that God made Himself into a human would cease His fact of being a God, since God is above His creation not part of it. God created His creation and is the Lord above it, He is not a part of His creation. This is in fact only repeating the beliefs of the ancient greeks who believed that Zues had children etc.

And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah fight them; how worng are they! [Surah Tawbah verse 30]
__________________

i don't see any deception there.

i don't know why you go on like this. it's like you claiming that that you have a daughter that is a Muslim. a statement like that would imply that you actually have a daughter that is a Muslim. BUT you do NOT actually have a daughter that is a Muslim and yet you constantly make that statement.



:wa:

[Grace Seeker]

well, to start with, the original post was commenting on how the Jews and the Christians were merely repeating the beliefs on the Greeks. it looks quite clear actually. let's look at it:

Again, which Jews? And for that matter which Christians?

If this is only a small isolated group, then it is irrelevant. If it is speaking of Jews and Christians as entire communities, then where have the Jews made the statement that they have been accused of making?

[YusufNoor]

Again, which Jews?
the ones in Madinah

And for that matter which Christians?
i'm sure there are Christians SOMEWHERE that calls Jesus the son of God!

If this is only a small isolated group, then it is irrelevant. If it is speaking of Jews and Christians as entire communities,

does it say AS COMMUNITIES?

then where have the Jews made the statement that they have been accused of making?

you're really having a tough time with English today, aren't you?

if you go back to the post:

this little bit here:
the Surah was revealed in Madinah. the Jews in Madinah said it. EVERYONE in Madinah knew what the Ayat was talking about. in fact, a former Christian questioned this part of the Surah, the very next ayat:

Sahih International
: They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah , and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him.

can you read that? to the people of Madinah, the Jews living in Madinah were very relevant to the Muslims living in Madinah. [in fact, they could see them and everything! :hmm:]

with all this fuss about English, let's go back to:

i don't know why you go on like this. it's like you claiming that that you have a daughter that is a Muslim. a statement like that would imply that you actually have a daughter that is a Muslim. BUT you do NOT actually have a daughter that is a Muslim and yet you constantly make that statement.

and in your Bible, in Matthew 24:

33so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right (AR)at the door.

34"Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

35"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.

36"But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.

right there in English, it says that "The "Father" knows when Qiyama is, but the "Son" doesn't! and yet, you still claim the "Son" IS God!? but somehow "he" doesn't know what "He" knows!? co-equal, eh? trinity? or henotheism?

and you claim the Qur'an is unclear?

SubhanAllah!

btw, what do you do for a living?

[Khaldun]

:sl:

Like brother YusufNoor said, if you want to understand Islaam and Qur'aan leave these translations. Also what you did Grace Seeker was to jump to conclusions you did not ask the muslims what this "the" really means? Rather you understood it in your particular way and made a silly argument on baseless stuff. You are right to say that the english translation was not good but what you did was shameful, if you do not understand something you ask not claim something falsely.

And Uzair being son of God is indeed part of Judaism, because this was a belief held by jews themselves unless you want to role out the jews of madeenah as not being real jews because they lived somewhere distant as the arabic peninsula.

To answer your last question I would like to draw your attention to the last portion of the verse.

How wrong/mistaken are they!

This refers to alot of aspects, one of them being the fact that these claims the christians and the jews made where not even in their scriptures in the first place, then how could they have gone so far astray and attribute offspring to the All-Mighty excatly as the pagans before them had done.

Judaism Christianity and Islaam are Abrahamic religions, they are built on the fundemental principle of one God monotheism and this is what seperates them from many other religions. Then how is it possible for the followers of Moses and Jesus to suddenly turn their heels against this very fundemental fact and actually repeat the excat same words of the pagans before them?

The Hindus believe in one God yet they have many sub gods, the ancient scandinavians believed in Oden as the supreme God yet he had other gods beside him. The ancient egyptains Atum was revered as the supreme God yet he too had gods besides him. And the list goes on.

The Abrahamic religions put a stop to this and called mankind towards the worship of one true God, without any partners not a child nor any assosciates.

Say: O followers of the Scritpures [Jews and Christians]! come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate aught with Him, and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah; but if they turn back, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. [Suurah ale Imraan]

[anatolian]

Again, which Jews? And for that matter which Christians?

If this is only a small isolated group, then it is irrelevant. If it is speaking of Jews and Christians as entire communities, then where have the Jews made the statement that they have been accused of making?

One thing I see while reading Quran is that It doesn't make generalizations about people. When Quran says something good or bad for a group it is only the ones who do the things to deserve the attributions.

[Grace Seeker]

:sl:

Like brother YusufNoor said, if you want to understand Islaam and Qur'aan leave these translations. Also what you did Grace Seeker was to jump to conclusions you did not ask the muslims what this "the" really means?

OK. I'm guilty of jumping to conclusions. I apologize. So, allow me to return to where this discussion started.

:sl:

Say: If the Beneficent God has a son, then I would be the first one to worship him. [Surah Zukhruf verse 81]

The very fact that God made Himself into a human would cease His fact of being a God, since God is above His creation not part of it. God created His creation and is the Lord above it, He is not a part of His creation. This is in fact only repeating the beliefs of the ancient greeks who believed that Zues had children etc.

And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah fight them; how worng are they! [Surah Tawbah verse 30]

So, what does this really mean? How does this passage apply to the discussion? Are you saying that Jewish thought and Christian teachings are descendants of the beliefs of ancient Greeks who believed that Zeus had children? If not that, then what are you trying to say by the use of this quote?

[Khaldun]

:sl:

Apolgizing and saying I am sorry are two different things.

I made it clear in my posts, the verse is refering to the fact that both jews and christians ascribed offspring to Allah, just how the ancient greeks (as an example) ascribed offspring to their deity.

Thus you are repeating the statement of disbelievers of old.

Did you even read the post I posted previously?

[CuteStuff]

If Jesus was GOD wouldnt Jesus been able to un-do himself from the cross? Instead God took him away before more pain was caused....

[mkh4JC]

If Jesus was GOD wouldnt Jesus been able to un-do himself from the cross? Instead God took him away before more pain was caused....

Here's a good couple of scriptures concerning what you just brought up:

'Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.' Phillipians 2: 5-11.

So the point of this passage is to communicate to the reader that Christ willingly submitted himself to will of the Father. That Christ died on the cross does not mean that his life was taken from him, he willingly sacrificed himself to bring sinful, fallen man back to a holy God. Here's Jesus' own words:

'Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.

No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.' St. John 10: 17-18.

[Grace Seeker]

:sl:

Apolgizing and saying I am sorry are two different things.

I made it clear in my posts, the verse is refering to the fact that both jews and christians ascribed offspring to Allah, just how the ancient greeks (as an example) ascribed offspring to their deity.

And is this an assertion you are now making with regard to all Jews, to Judaism as a religion, or just to a few isolated Jews that are not actually representative of Jews as a whole?

(I don't want to misconstrue your posts to say something that you aren't really saying. That is why, even if you have addressed this before, I am asking again rather than assuming I know the answer.)

[tango92]

can god die? no
can a man die? yes
can a god man die? christians say yes

if jesus the "godman" died then it makes sense that his manly side dies, but his godly side by definition cannot die - if his godly side did not die then his death cannot bear the sins of humanity.

if jesus' god and human side are intertwined then he can no longer posess all the atributes of god - eg he can forget - then he ceases to be god.

(you cant fit an infinitely large thing into a an infinitley small space - god is infinitely large relative to humans and humans are infinetly small relative to god, in terms of power)

[mkh4JC]

can god die? no
can a man die? yes
can a god man die? christians say yes

if jesus the "godman" died then it makes sense that his manly side dies, but his godly side by definition cannot die - if his godly side did not die then his death cannot bear the sins of humanity.

Well, the reason that he was able to bear the sins of humanity, is because he didn't sin.

'For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be the righteousness of God in him.' II Corinthians 5: 21.

It was Christ's divine nature that allowed him to live life perfectly and without sin. His was the perfect sacrifice.

if jesus' god and human side are intertwined then he can no longer posess all the atributes of god - eg he can forget - then he ceases to be god.

(you cant fit an infinitely large thing into a an infinitley small space - god is infinitely large relative to humans and humans are infinetly small relative to god, in terms of power)

Christians believe that God is omnipresent, that he exists everwhere and at all times.

'Thus saith the Lord, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest?'

Isaiah 66: 1

'But who is able to build him an house, seeing the heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain him? who am I then, that I should build him an house, save only to burn sacrifice before him?'

II Chronicles 2: 6

So Christ just took on flesh at an appointed time to die for the sins of the world, but while he was down here on earth he still existed in heaven.

[Grace Seeker]

can god die? no
can a man die? yes
can a god man die? christians say yes

if jesus the "godman" died then it makes sense that his manly side dies, but his godly side by definition cannot die - if his godly side did not die then his death cannot bear the sins of humanity.

if jesus' god and human side are intertwined then he can no longer posess all the atributes of god - eg he can forget - then he ceases to be god.

(you cant fit an infinitely large thing into a an infinitley small space - god is infinitely large relative to humans and humans are infinetly small relative to god, in terms of power)

I pretty much disagree with all your conclusions. Plus you don't fit God into anything, neither do I. God incarnates himself. No one does it to him.

[Khaldun]

:sl:

You are utterly unbelievable Grace Seeker! You DONT read peoples posts yet you keep repeating the same thing like a broken cd player. I answered that before! You do not have any evidence nor anything to go with and now you are clearly staling you keep repeating the same thing we discuss over and over again. How sad.

And plus you have not said I am sorry yet, I am still waiting.

[Grace Seeker]

:sl:

You are utterly unbelievable Grace Seeker! You DONT read peoples posts yet you keep repeating the same thing like a broken cd player. I answered that before! You do not have any evidence nor anything to go with and now you are clearly staling you keep repeating the same thing we discuss over and over again. How sad.

And apparently you don't read mine:

(I don't want to misconstrue your posts to say something that you aren't really saying. That is why, even if you have addressed this before, I am asking again rather than assuming I know the answer.)

And plus you have not said I am sorry yet, I am still waiting.

A said, "I apologize." Meaning that I acknowledged my faults, shortcomings, and failings. I didn't say that I also regret them, I had hoped you would have understood that as well. But you didn't. So, let it be known that I did and do indeed regret them.



Now, will you please humor me. I've tried to go back to where I went wrong. You told me that I didn't ask what it means, so now I am.

And in so doing am indeed asking some of the same questions a second time. That is because since I jumped to a conclusion and misunderstood you the first time, I want to be sure to not do the same and misunderstand your meaning the second time.

You have said that Jews ascribe offspring to Allah. But the text you cite as support for that statement I am told is referring only to a handful of Jews in one isolated spot and is not representative of all of them. So, what is your point? It seems irrelevant to your larger thesis.

[mariyyah]

Allah - The One and Only God

The essence of godhood is authority, whether it is conceived as sovereignty of a supernatural kind over the whole universe, or on the basis that man is bound by God's law in his worldly life and that all of His injunctions are to be complied with because they emanate from Him.

To Him is due the primal origin of the heavens and the earth. How can He have a son when He had no consort? He it is Who created all things, and He alone has full knowledge of all things; That is God, your Lord! No god there is but He, the Creator of all things; Then give your worship to Him; And He it is Who looks after the safety and well-being of all. (Quran 6:102-103)

Lord - Concept and History
A perspective and analysis based on the Holy Quran on the concept of Lord God(Rabb in Arabic) in Islam and some other religions and how it was understood by various nations in history.
The Most Beautiful Names belong to Allah

The most beautiful names belong to God: so call on Him by them; but shun
such men as use profanity in His names: for what they do, they will soon be requited. (The Holy Quran, 7:180)


Concept of Lord God by the Jews and Christians

After Pharaoh's people, the next in historical order are the Israelites and those people who adopted the Jewish religion or Christianity. In their case, there can obviously be no question about their either not acknowledging the existence of God or not believing in His being the Ilah and the Rabb. The Qur'an itself affirms their belief in Him on the point and the question which therefore arises is of the particular error for which they were characterized in the Qur'an as "those who went astray". (Quran 1:7)

A brief answer is:

Say (O' Muhammed): "O' people of the Book: Do not exaggerate concerning your faith, and adopt not the wrong notions of those who have gone astray before you, who misled many others, and themselves too strayed from the straight path." (Quran 5:77)

From this, one may conclude that, in essence, the Jews and Christians too were guilty of the same error into which others had fallen earlier, and that in their case this arose out of exaggerated piety. Let us go into the matter in some detail, with the help of the Qur'an:

(i) And the Jews said: "Uzair (Ezra) is son of God, while the Christians said, "Isa (Jesus) is son of God." (Quran 9:30)

(ii) It was kufr on the part of Christians, to say that God was the same as Jesus son of Mary; though Jesus had himself said, for a fact, "O' sons of Israel, give your 'ibadah to Allah. Who is also your Rabb and my Rabb." (Quran 5:72)

(iii) Verily those who said 'that God is one of three, committed kufr, for there is but one Ilah and there is no ilah but He. (Quran 5:73)


(iv) And there will come a time (the Day of Judgment) when God will ask "O' Jesus, son of Mary, did you tell people to take you and your mother as ilahs besides Myself?" to which Jesus will reply, "Glory be to you! How could I have dared say that which I had no right to utter!" (Quran 5:116)

(v) It is not for any person that, after being given the Book, and being endowed with hikmah [Literally, this word means wisdom; but when used in reference to a Prophet, it means that special wisdom which comes automatically after investment with the office of Prophethood, and which enables the Prophet to understand and expound the implications, and requirements of the Divine Injunctions. A. A. Maududi] and invested with Prophethood, he should go about telling people to give up God and instead give their allegiance and 'ibadah to him. Far more fitting it is that he should say: "Believe firmly in Allah as the Rabb (in every sense of the word), as you find it written in His Book, and as you learn of yourselves and teach others." Nor, again, is it for a prophet to tell the people to regard the angels and the prophets as rabbs. Would he enjoin kufr to you after you have become Muslims? (Quran 3:79-80)

What we learn from the relevant verses is that the first error of the Jews and Christians was to raise their Prophets, and saints, and the angel, etc., to the status of divinity out of exaggerated regard for them, to believe them to have a say in the ordering of the universe and its affairs, to worship and address their prayers to them, treat them as partners in rububiyyah and in godhood in the supernatural sense, and to believe that they could remit their sins and come to their rescue and protect them from misfortune and disasters.

Their second error lay in their making even their scribes and hermits into rabbs, besides God (cf.9:31). In other words, the people whose real function was to expound God's law to others, and to reform the people morally and spiritually to make their conduct conform to Divine precepts were gradually assigned authority to determine, on their own, what was to be treated as forbidden and what as permitted, without reference to what was said in the Book. They could forbid any practices they did not approve, and institute any others they fancied. And in this way both Jews and Christians fell into the same two basic errors as that into which the people of Prophets Nuh and Ibrahim (on whom both be peace), the 'Aadites and the Thamud and the people of Madyan and others had fallen earlier. Like them, they too made the angels and their religious leaders to be partners with God in Rububiyyah in the supernatural sense, and in moral, cultural and political spheres too. And so they began to take their cultural, economic, moral and political principles from human beings, disregarding the Divine injunctions, until they reached a stage about which the Qur'an says:

Have you noticed the people who were given a portion of the Book of God, but who (instead of making it the basis for their conduct), believed in jibt and taghoot? (Quran 4:51)

Say (O' Muhammad): "Shall I tell you who are worse as to their ultimate fate with Allah than even the fasiqs [A fasiq, according to the Qur'an is one who breaks his covenant with Allah, who severs the ties between Him and His creatures and between man and man, and who creates mischief upon earth (cf. note in Tafhim-ul-Qur'an. Vol.1. p.61. relative to 2-27-2). A. A. Maududi]. It is those who drew the curse of God upon them, those who invited His wrath, and of whom many were turned into apes and swine by His Command, and who gave their worship to taghoot; they are the lowest in degree, and the farthest astray from the straight path." (Quran 5:60)

The word jibt is a comprehensive term for all myths and superstitions, embracing such superstitious things as magic, the art of the occult, black magic, necromancy, witch-craft, soothsaying, divination, the belief in talismans or lucky stones or unlucky colors or numbers or natural phenomena, etc., or in the influence of the heavenly bodies on human affairs. As for taghoot, this term applies to every person, or group of persons, or organization or institution which, instead of submitting to God and His Injunctions, rebels against them and virtually sets up himself or itself as god instead, or is so set up by people. So when the Jews and Christians committed the two errors indicated above, the result of the first was that different kinds of superstitious beliefs took hold of their minds and of the second that their scribes and hermits, etc., gradually came to assume the same right to tell people what to do and what not as had been presumConcept of Lord God in Islam

Allah - The One and Only God - Lord - Concept and History
Concept of Lord God in Islam

The foregoing detailed exposition of the misguided conceptions of various pre-Islamic people make it patently clear that from earliest times to the revelation of the Qur'an, none of those whom it mentions as the transgressors, the misguided, and the astray, actually denied the existence of God, or His being the Rabb and the ilah. All, however, went wrong in much the same ways in dividing the attributes of rububiyyah, in its five different senses, into two separate compartments.

Insofar as such attributes of Allah as His being the Cherisher, the Provider, and the Protector and Helper of the creatures in the transcendental sense were concerned, the people regarded them as something apart from the rest. And, although in this sphere they did regard Allah as the Supreme Rabb, they also believed that the angels and various gods, the genii, and invisible forces, the stars, and other heavenly bodies, the Prophets and saints and other holy men, also had different shares in this rububiyyah.

As for the remaining attributes, namely, Allah's being the Supreme Sovereign, the Fountainhead of authority, the Supreme Law-giver, and the Supreme Lord of all creation etc., the people either assigned these roles wholly to particular human beings or, while assigning them to God in theory, in practice treated the entire rububiyyah in moral, cultural, and political spheres as vesting in these beings.

It was for the task of removal of both these types of misconceptions that there were ordained all the different Prophets from time to time (may peace be upon them) and, finally, Allah sent Muhammad (peace be upon him), as His last Prophet. All of the Prophets called to man to believe that there was but one Rabb, that is, Allah, in all of the various senses of the word, and that rububiyyah was not divisible nor was any portion of it available to any creature. The management and control of the universe, they emphasized, was centered is One Authority only, the Authority Who alone had created it, entirely to His own Grand Design and purpose, and Who exercised both de jure and de facto rule over all its affairs, and no-one had any share either in the creation or the running of the universe. As the Center of all authority, God alone was and is the Rabb, in all the senses of the word, both in transcendental matters and the temporal affairs of men. He alone was and is worthy of all worship, of being made the focus of all adoration and prayer. He alone listens to all prayers and He alone is worthy of our reliance and capable of providing for the needs of all too. He alone is at the same time the King, the Lord of the Universe and the source of all law and authority, and He alone has therefore the right to lay down what is right and what is wrong and what ought or ought not to be done. It is in the very nature of things a misconceived notion to think of rububiyyah as something which could be split up into compartments. It is an essential, and exclusive attribute of Allah and; hence, obviously and necessarily indivisible.

This call of the various Prophets (on whom be peace), is brought out in the Qur'an in many a place, e.g.:

Verily, your Rabb is Allah (alone)-He Who created the heavens and the earth in six days, and then established Himself on the Mighty Throne; He it is Who draws the night as a veil over the day, each seeking the other in rapid succession; the sun and the moon, and the stars are all subservient to His Law and Commands; Verily, it is patent that all creation is His, and authority too vests in Him, and Most Blessed is he, the Lord of all the Worlds. (Quran 7:54)

Ask them (O Prophet), "Who is it who provides sustenance for you from the heavens and the earth? Is it He in Whose power are hearing and sight, and Who brings forth the living from the dead and the dead from the living, and Who rules and regulates all affairs?" (If you ask) they will say, "It is Allah (Who does all this)." Ask them, then, "Wherefore, then, do you not fear Him (and change your ways)?" (Say): "Such is Allah, your real Rabb and true, and, apart from Truth, what remains but error, and so wherefore do you get turned astray?’ (Quran 10:31,32)

He (it is Who) created the heavens and the earth in Truth; He it is Who makes the night overlap the day and the day overlap the night, and made, the son and the moon subservient (to His Law), each one following a course till an appointed time … such is God, your Rabb; His is the Kingdom and there is no ilah but He; and why, then, do you keep getting turned away? (Quran 39:5-6)

Allah it is Who made the night for you that you may find rest and peace in it, and the day in which you are enabled to see ... Such is Allah, your Rabb Creator of every thing. There is no ilah but He; so why are you deluded into straying? ... Allah it is Who made the earth a place for you to live and rest upon, and the sky a roof over you, and gave you shapes; and good shapes at that, and provided for your provision good and wholesome food; such is Allah, your Rabb, and, so, blessed be He, the Lord of all the Worlds. He alone is the Living (One); there is no ilah, but He and to Him alone then address all your prayers. (Quran 40:61-65)

And Allah (it was Who) created you from clay…He merges night into day and day into night, and made the sun and the moon obey His Law, each following its course until an appointed timer Such is Allah, your Rabb; in Him vests all Sovereignty, while those; on call to besides him possess no such authority; and if you call upon them, they hear not your call and if they did they would not make any reply and, on the Day of Judgement, they will (to you discomfiture), (but) repudiate (and disown) your association of them with God. (Quran 35:11,13-14)

And to Him belongs all that is in the heavens and the earth, and all are abjectly obedient and subservient to Him..., He propounds to you a similitude from your own (experience): Has any of your slaves a share in owning any of the things which We have bestowed upon you? Do they equal right, with you in the ownership and use of these things? Do you fear them as you fear your equals? Thus do we expound arguments to point the way to reality to those with wisdom and understanding, but wrong-doers merely follow their own baseless notions… Therefore (O' Prophet, and those of you who believe in him), set your face steadily and truly to the Faith; establish God's handiwork according to the pattern on which He has read, mankind; no change let there be in the work wrought by Him. This is the straight and correct road, but many among mankind know this not. (Quran 30:26,28,20,30)

And, (the wrongdoers) did not appreciate God (and His attributes) in proper measure, and (they will see that) on the Day of judgment He will hold the earth in his fist, and the heavens will be rolled-up in His right hand; blessed is He and far above the (supposed) partners they associate with Him. (Quran 39:67).

And praise all is due to Allah alone, the Rabb of the heavens and the Rabb of the earth, and Rabb of all the Worlds; and to Him belongs all Greatness and Glory throughout the heavens and the earth; and He is exalted in Power, and the All-Wise. (Quran 45:36,37)

He is the Rabb of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them; so give your 'ibadah to Him (O' Prophet) and remain steadfast in your worship of Him; (and) do yen know of aught like Him? (Quran 19:65)

And Allah (alone) knows the hidden realities of the heavens and the earth, and to Him are referred all matters, so give your 'ibadah to Him (alone), and rely not upon any but Him. (Quran 11:123)

He is the Rabb of the East and of the West; No ilah there is but He, and so entrust all your affairs unto Him (alone). (Quran 73:9)

Verily this brotherhood of yours (that is, of all the prophets) is a single brotherhood, and I am your Rabb, wherefore give your 'ibadah to Me. Men have apportioned rububiyyah and the duty of 'ibadah on their own (without any sanction from Us), and all of them will, ultimately, return to Us. (Quran 21:92-93)

Obey that which has been sent down to you from your Rabb, and do not obey others besides Him (as supposed protectors or guardians). (Quran 7:3)

Say (O Prophet): "O people of the Book: Pledge your creed to that which is common between us and you, that we do not give our 'ibadah to any but Allah and that we associate none with Him, and that we do not asks any human being a rabb besides Him. (Quran 3:64)

Say (O Prophet): I seek refuge with the (Sole) Rabb of all mankind, the (Sole) Monarch over all mankind, and the (Sole) Ilah of all." (Quran 114:1-3)

So whosoever looks forth to meeting his Rabb let him do pious deeds, and associate not any with his worship of Him. (Quran 18:110)

The foregoing verses bring out as clearly as possible that the Holy Qur'an uses rububiyyah as exactly synonymous with sovereignty, and the concept of Rabb it presents is that Allah is the Absolute Monarch of all creation, and its sole Lord and Master, and, as such:

He is our Cherisher and Provider and Sustainer, and of all that constitutes creation; It is He Who looks after all our needs, governs all our affairs, and is alone worthy of our entrusting all our affairs to His discretion; It is by virtue of this very attribute that faith. in Him is the only right basis on which to build up the structure of human life in proper manner, and attachment only to His central Personage is capable of bringing together different individuals and groups and forming them into an Ummah.

He alone is worthy of the 'ibadah, and submission, and worship, of all humanity and other creatures; and He alone is the Lord, Master, and Ruler, of ourselves, and all else besides.

The pagans, whether Arabs or others, have always committed the error, which continues even today, of splitting up the comprehensive concept of rububiyyah into its five facets as if they could exist separately or be vested in different beings. The Qur'an lives most cogent and irrefutable arguments that the Universe is one, and that there is no room in it at all for Supreme Authority and rububiyyah vesting in any but the same Being. The very fact that the universe is subject to one supreme law shows that rububiyyah is reserved solely for Allah, Who alone brought the universe into existence. Therefore, whoever attributes any portion of rububiyyah to any but Him seeks but to depart from or ignore the ultimate fundamental Reality, to turn away from the Reality of the universe, to rebel against Truth, and, by thus going against what exists, only brings loss to himself and ultimate disaster.


ed by those who were open rebels against God.

[tango92]

well seeing as how no refutation was made to my points, ill move on

who did jesus pray to? i have yet to hear any argument from a christian answering this (i define argument as some point that makes sense)

if jesus prayed to god then he prayed to himeself - why do we never hear of the father worshipping jesus? why does the holy ghost never pray?

[Khaldun]

:sl:

A said, "I apologize." Meaning that I acknowledged my faults, shortcomings, and failings. I didn't say that I also regret them, I had hoped you would have understood that as well. But you didn't. So, let it be known that I did and do indeed regret them.

I did not ask you to apologize I ask you to say I am sorry, will you do this? A simple yes or no will do.

You have said that Jews ascribe offspring to Allah. But the text you cite as support for that statement I am told is referring only to a handful of Jews in one isolated spot and is not representative of all of them. So, what is your point? It seems irrelevant to your larger thesis.

I told you the jews of madeenah said this, I have told you again and again yet you keep asking what jews? And yes the jews of madeenah are considered as any other jews so they are not some kind of minority that can be brushed aside. No one ever claimed all the jews say this, did we? Perhaps you thought this.

I am sorry to say that if after these many pages of discussion you have not an idea of what my point is, I really see this as a utter waste of time.

I have a feeling that you do not even know what your own point is!

[Danah]

who did jesus pray to? i have yet to hear any argument from a christian answering this (i define argument as some point that makes sense)

if jesus prayed to god then he prayed to himeself - why do we never hear of the father worshipping jesus? why does the holy ghost never pray?

very important questions!

Its as if a God is either praying to himself, or a God praying to another God higher than him in the level of divinity.

[Grace Seeker]

:sl:



I did not ask you to apologize I ask you to say I am sorry, will you do this? A simple yes or no will do.

No.

I have apologized and expressed regret. Perhaps English is not your native language, here is a definition of what you are asking for:

Main Entry: sor·ry
Pronunciation: \ˈsär-ē, ˈsȯr-\
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): sor·ri·er; sor·ri·est
Etymology: Middle English sory, from Old English sārig, from sār sore
Date: before 12th century
1 : feeling sorrow, regret, or penitence
2 : mournful, sad
3 : inspiring sorrow, pity, scorn, or ridicule : pitiful <their affairs were in a sorry state>

As you don't want to repeat yourself, neither do I.

I told you the jews of madeenah said this, I have told you again and again yet you keep asking what jews? And yes the jews of madeenah are considered as any other jews so they are not some kind of minority that can be brushed aside. No one ever claimed all the jews say this, did we? Perhaps you thought this.

I am sorry to say that if after these many pages of discussion you have not an idea of what my point is, I really see this as a utter waste of time.

Your point is to show that the Jews have beliefs that have come from paganism. However, pointing to an anacronist belief amongst the Jews of Medinah, one that is not reflective of Judaism as a whole, simply does not show this. That is what I thought you were doing form the start and why I challenged you to show me where it was in Jewish scripture. I can point to all sorts of beliefs and behaviors on the parts of Muslims as well -- including, I kid you not, examples of some Muslims who worship Jesus as the Son of God. You would object if I removed the qualifier from the front of that statement and simply said "Muslims worship Jesus as the Son of God." And you would be right to do so. But you have in essence done the very thing with regard to the Jews, and it is just as objectionable there as well. For Jews do not believe Ezra to be the Son of God, any more than Muslims believe Jesus to be the Son of God. And to use that quote to either assert or imply that they do, when in fact they do not, is to distort the truth. That is my point!

[Grace Seeker]

very important questions!

Its as if a God is either praying to himself, or a God praying to another God higher than him in the level of divinity.

You are actually correct. It is as if God is praying to himself. When one recalls that prayer is conversation and that Christians understand that God exists in one being, but three persons, then this makes a little more sense. (Not that I expect you to accept it. I'm just trying to answer your questions as to why he would do so.) Christians understand that the three persons of the one Godhead are (and have always been from before the beginning of time) in community with one another. Since God is the eternal Father, then there has never been a time when God was not the Father. But to speak of him being the Father before the existence of the Son is nonesense. (Yeah, that's an opening for someone to suggest that the whole concept is nonensense. Take your best shot, I'm going to move on.) Thus it follows that if we have an eternal Father that there is also a etneral Son. For just the Father has always been the Father, then there must have always been a Son to be the Father of. Notice that this means that they are co-eternal. One does not come before the other. So the ideas of offspring really is not what we are talking about when we talk about Jesus as the Son of God. Rather we are talking about the nature and intimacy of their relationship. How Jesus and God the Father share the same nature. Thus, if Jesus shares the same nature with God the Father, then he too must be God. But we also still affirm the Shema of the Jews: "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one." Now, I didn't mean to go off into a discussion of the Trinity, so, I'll stop there. But this sets up for us the idea of one being and 3 persons (or at least 2 for how far I went with it). And these persons, though one, are still distinct. A type of this can be seen in scriptures description of a man and a woman being joined to become one. If you're married you might even have some idea from your own experience what is meant by that. You are a couple and you one couple made of two persons. To remain a healthy couple you have to spend a lot of time in communication with each other. Not just for day to day affairs, but because of the importance of sharing yourself with the other with whom you are in such an intimate relationship. And so, the Father and the Son have this relationship. While the term prayer is never used to describe the Father's communication with the Son, it is clear that the Father and the Son do engage in two-way communication. And that happens in the form of prayer. Interestingly enough, if one does a word search you will find that scripture also never mentions that Jesus prayed to the Father. It says things like "I will ask the Father", but never that he prayed to the Father. Yet, he taught his disciples to pray to the Father. And he spent time in prayer in conversation with the Father. So, here we have the conversation, but not as if directed outside of himself. Almost what you said, with just one modification. Jesus is not an example of God praying to himself, but of him praying with himself.

As to the Holy Spirit praying, we actually do see this in scripture. People are often mentioned praying "in the Spirit". But perhaps the verse that sheds the most light on this is Romans 8:26 -- "In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express." So, because we cannot express to God what we want to say, God himself (in the person of his Holy Spirit), comes and helps us (that is what it means to intercede) to express what we could not say and in this instance, since he goes so far as to pray on our behalf, it really might be consider as God praying to God. Again this gives us an example for our lives. We are to live in community with one another just as God lives in a communal relationship with himself.

[mariyyah]

That is the explanation you need
Allah - The One and Only God

The essence of godhood is authority, whether it is conceived as sovereignty of a supernatural kind over the whole universe, or on the basis that man is bound by God's law in his worldly life and that all of His injunctions are to be complied with because they emanate from Him.

To Him is due the primal origin of the heavens and the earth. How can He have a son when He had no consort? He it is Who created all things, and He alone has full knowledge of all things; That is God, your Lord! No god there is but He, the Creator of all things; Then give your worship to Him; And He it is Who looks after the safety and well-being of all. (Quran 6:102-103)

Lord - Concept and History
A perspective and analysis based on the Holy Quran on the concept of Lord God(Rabb in Arabic) in Islam and some other religions and how it was understood by various nations in history.
The Most Beautiful Names belong to Allah

The most beautiful names belong to God: so call on Him by them; but shun
such men as use profanity in His names: for what they do, they will soon be requited. (The Holy Quran, 7:180)


Concept of Lord God by the Jews and Christians

After Pharaoh's people, the next in historical order are the Israelites and those people who adopted the Jewish religion or Christianity. In their case, there can obviously be no question about their either not acknowledging the existence of God or not believing in His being the Ilah and the Rabb. The Qur'an itself affirms their belief in Him on the point and the question which therefore arises is of the particular error for which they were characterized in the Qur'an as "those who went astray". (Quran 1:7)

A brief answer is:

Say (O' Muhammed): "O' people of the Book: Do not exaggerate concerning your faith, and adopt not the wrong notions of those who have gone astray before you, who misled many others, and themselves too strayed from the straight path." (Quran 5:77)

From this, one may conclude that, in essence, the Jews and Christians too were guilty of the same error into which others had fallen earlier, and that in their case this arose out of exaggerated piety. Let us go into the matter in some detail, with the help of the Qur'an:

(i) And the Jews said: "Uzair (Ezra) is son of God, while the Christians said, "Isa (Jesus) is son of God." (Quran 9:30)

(ii) It was kufr on the part of Christians, to say that God was the same as Jesus son of Mary; though Jesus had himself said, for a fact, "O' sons of Israel, give your 'ibadah to Allah. Who is also your Rabb and my Rabb." (Quran 5:72)

(iii) Verily those who said 'that God is one of three, committed kufr, for there is but one Ilah and there is no ilah but He. (Quran 5:73)


(iv) And there will come a time (the Day of Judgment) when God will ask "O' Jesus, son of Mary, did you tell people to take you and your mother as ilahs besides Myself?" to which Jesus will reply, "Glory be to you! How could I have dared say that which I had no right to utter!" (Quran 5:116)

(v) It is not for any person that, after being given the Book, and being endowed with hikmah [Literally, this word means wisdom; but when used in reference to a Prophet, it means that special wisdom which comes automatically after investment with the office of Prophethood, and which enables the Prophet to understand and expound the implications, and requirements of the Divine Injunctions. A. A. Maududi] and invested with Prophethood, he should go about telling people to give up God and instead give their allegiance and 'ibadah to him. Far more fitting it is that he should say: "Believe firmly in Allah as the Rabb (in every sense of the word), as you find it written in His Book, and as you learn of yourselves and teach others." Nor, again, is it for a prophet to tell the people to regard the angels and the prophets as rabbs. Would he enjoin kufr to you after you have become Muslims? (Quran 3:79-80)

What we learn from the relevant verses is that the first error of the Jews and Christians was to raise their Prophets, and saints, and the angel, etc., to the status of divinity out of exaggerated regard for them, to believe them to have a say in the ordering of the universe and its affairs, to worship and address their prayers to them, treat them as partners in rububiyyah and in godhood in the supernatural sense, and to believe that they could remit their sins and come to their rescue and protect them from misfortune and disasters.

Their second error lay in their making even their scribes and hermits into rabbs, besides God (cf.9:31). In other words, the people whose real function was to expound God's law to others, and to reform the people morally and spiritually to make their conduct conform to Divine precepts were gradually assigned authority to determine, on their own, what was to be treated as forbidden and what as permitted, without reference to what was said in the Book. They could forbid any practices they did not approve, and institute any others they fancied. And in this way both Jews and Christians fell into the same two basic errors as that into which the people of Prophets Nuh and Ibrahim (on whom both be peace), the 'Aadites and the Thamud and the people of Madyan and others had fallen earlier. Like them, they too made the angels and their religious leaders to be partners with God in Rububiyyah in the supernatural sense, and in moral, cultural and political spheres too. And so they began to take their cultural, economic, moral and political principles from human beings, disregarding the Divine injunctions, until they reached a stage about which the Qur'an says:

Have you noticed the people who were given a portion of the Book of God, but who (instead of making it the basis for their conduct), believed in jibt and taghoot? (Quran 4:51)

Say (O' Muhammad): "Shall I tell you who are worse as to their ultimate fate with Allah than even the fasiqs [A fasiq, according to the Qur'an is one who breaks his covenant with Allah, who severs the ties between Him and His creatures and between man and man, and who creates mischief upon earth (cf. note in Tafhim-ul-Qur'an. Vol.1. p.61. relative to 2-27-2). A. A. Maududi]. It is those who drew the curse of God upon them, those who invited His wrath, and of whom many were turned into apes and swine by His Command, and who gave their worship to taghoot; they are the lowest in degree, and the farthest astray from the straight path." (Quran 5:60)

The word jibt is a comprehensive term for all myths and superstitions, embracing such superstitious things as magic, the art of the occult, black magic, necromancy, witch-craft, soothsaying, divination, the belief in talismans or lucky stones or unlucky colors or numbers or natural phenomena, etc., or in the influence of the heavenly bodies on human affairs. As for taghoot, this term applies to every person, or group of persons, or organization or institution which, instead of submitting to God and His Injunctions, rebels against them and virtually sets up himself or itself as god instead, or is so set up by people. So when the Jews and Christians committed the two errors indicated above, the result of the first was that different kinds of superstitious beliefs took hold of their minds and of the second that their scribes and hermits, etc., gradually came to assume the same right to tell people what to do and what not as had been presumConcept of Lord God in Islam

Allah - The One and Only God - Lord - Concept and History
Concept of Lord God in Islam

The foregoing detailed exposition of the misguided conceptions of various pre-Islamic people make it patently clear that from earliest times to the revelation of the Qur'an, none of those whom it mentions as the transgressors, the misguided, and the astray, actually denied the existence of God, or His being the Rabb and the ilah. All, however, went wrong in much the same ways in dividing the attributes of rububiyyah, in its five different senses, into two separate compartments.

Insofar as such attributes of Allah as His being the Cherisher, the Provider, and the Protector and Helper of the creatures in the transcendental sense were concerned, the people regarded them as something apart from the rest. And, although in this sphere they did regard Allah as the Supreme Rabb, they also believed that the angels and various gods, the genii, and invisible forces, the stars, and other heavenly bodies, the Prophets and saints and other holy men, also had different shares in this rububiyyah.

As for the remaining attributes, namely, Allah's being the Supreme Sovereign, the Fountainhead of authority, the Supreme Law-giver, and the Supreme Lord of all creation etc., the people either assigned these roles wholly to particular human beings or, while assigning them to God in theory, in practice treated the entire rububiyyah in moral, cultural, and political spheres as vesting in these beings.

It was for the task of removal of both these types of misconceptions that there were ordained all the different Prophets from time to time (may peace be upon them) and, finally, Allah sent Muhammad (peace be upon him), as His last Prophet. All of the Prophets called to man to believe that there was but one Rabb, that is, Allah, in all of the various senses of the word, and that rububiyyah was not divisible nor was any portion of it available to any creature. The management and control of the universe, they emphasized, was centered is One Authority only, the Authority Who alone had created it, entirely to His own Grand Design and purpose, and Who exercised both de jure and de facto rule over all its affairs, and no-one had any share either in the creation or the running of the universe. As the Center of all authority, God alone was and is the Rabb, in all the senses of the word, both in transcendental matters and the temporal affairs of men. He alone was and is worthy of all worship, of being made the focus of all adoration and prayer. He alone listens to all prayers and He alone is worthy of our reliance and capable of providing for the needs of all too. He alone is at the same time the King, the Lord of the Universe and the source of all law and authority, and He alone has therefore the right to lay down what is right and what is wrong and what ought or ought not to be done. It is in the very nature of things a misconceived notion to think of rububiyyah as something which could be split up into compartments. It is an essential, and exclusive attribute of Allah and; hence, obviously and necessarily indivisible.

This call of the various Prophets (on whom be peace), is brought out in the Qur'an in many a place, e.g.:

Verily, your Rabb is Allah (alone)-He Who created the heavens and the earth in six days, and then established Himself on the Mighty Throne; He it is Who draws the night as a veil over the day, each seeking the other in rapid succession; the sun and the moon, and the stars are all subservient to His Law and Commands; Verily, it is patent that all creation is His, and authority too vests in Him, and Most Blessed is he, the Lord of all the Worlds. (Quran 7:54)

Ask them (O Prophet), "Who is it who provides sustenance for you from the heavens and the earth? Is it He in Whose power are hearing and sight, and Who brings forth the living from the dead and the dead from the living, and Who rules and regulates all affairs?" (If you ask) they will say, "It is Allah (Who does all this)." Ask them, then, "Wherefore, then, do you not fear Him (and change your ways)?" (Say): "Such is Allah, your real Rabb and true, and, apart from Truth, what remains but error, and so wherefore do you get turned astray?’ (Quran 10:31,32)

He (it is Who) created the heavens and the earth in Truth; He it is Who makes the night overlap the day and the day overlap the night, and made, the son and the moon subservient (to His Law), each one following a course till an appointed time … such is God, your Rabb; His is the Kingdom and there is no ilah but He; and why, then, do you keep getting turned away? (Quran 39:5-6)

Allah it is Who made the night for you that you may find rest and peace in it, and the day in which you are enabled to see ... Such is Allah, your Rabb Creator of every thing. There is no ilah but He; so why are you deluded into straying? ... Allah it is Who made the earth a place for you to live and rest upon, and the sky a roof over you, and gave you shapes; and good shapes at that, and provided for your provision good and wholesome food; such is Allah, your Rabb, and, so, blessed be He, the Lord of all the Worlds. He alone is the Living (One); there is no ilah, but He and to Him alone then address all your prayers. (Quran 40:61-65)

And Allah (it was Who) created you from clay…He merges night into day and day into night, and made the sun and the moon obey His Law, each following its course until an appointed timer Such is Allah, your Rabb; in Him vests all Sovereignty, while those; on call to besides him possess no such authority; and if you call upon them, they hear not your call and if they did they would not make any reply and, on the Day of Judgement, they will (to you discomfiture), (but) repudiate (and disown) your association of them with God. (Quran 35:11,13-14)

And to Him belongs all that is in the heavens and the earth, and all are abjectly obedient and subservient to Him..., He propounds to you a similitude from your own (experience): Has any of your slaves a share in owning any of the things which We have bestowed upon you? Do they equal right, with you in the ownership and use of these things? Do you fear them as you fear your equals? Thus do we expound arguments to point the way to reality to those with wisdom and understanding, but wrong-doers merely follow their own baseless notions… Therefore (O' Prophet, and those of you who believe in him), set your face steadily and truly to the Faith; establish God's handiwork according to the pattern on which He has read, mankind; no change let there be in the work wrought by Him. This is the straight and correct road, but many among mankind know this not. (Quran 30:26,28,20,30)

And, (the wrongdoers) did not appreciate God (and His attributes) in proper measure, and (they will see that) on the Day of judgment He will hold the earth in his fist, and the heavens will be rolled-up in His right hand; blessed is He and far above the (supposed) partners they associate with Him. (Quran 39:67).

And praise all is due to Allah alone, the Rabb of the heavens and the Rabb of the earth, and Rabb of all the Worlds; and to Him belongs all Greatness and Glory throughout the heavens and the earth; and He is exalted in Power, and the All-Wise. (Quran 45:36,37)

He is the Rabb of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them; so give your 'ibadah to Him (O' Prophet) and remain steadfast in your worship of Him; (and) do yen know of aught like Him? (Quran 19:65)

And Allah (alone) knows the hidden realities of the heavens and the earth, and to Him are referred all matters, so give your 'ibadah to Him (alone), and rely not upon any but Him. (Quran 11:123)

He is the Rabb of the East and of the West; No ilah there is but He, and so entrust all your affairs unto Him (alone). (Quran 73:9)

Verily this brotherhood of yours (that is, of all the prophets) is a single brotherhood, and I am your Rabb, wherefore give your 'ibadah to Me. Men have apportioned rububiyyah and the duty of 'ibadah on their own (without any sanction from Us), and all of them will, ultimately, return to Us. (Quran 21:92-93)

Obey that which has been sent down to you from your Rabb, and do not obey others besides Him (as supposed protectors or guardians). (Quran 7:3)

Say (O Prophet): "O people of the Book: Pledge your creed to that which is common between us and you, that we do not give our 'ibadah to any but Allah and that we associate none with Him, and that we do not asks any human being a rabb besides Him. (Quran 3:64)

Say (O Prophet): I seek refuge with the (Sole) Rabb of all mankind, the (Sole) Monarch over all mankind, and the (Sole) Ilah of all." (Quran 114:1-3)

So whosoever looks forth to meeting his Rabb let him do pious deeds, and associate not any with his worship of Him. (Quran 18:110)

The foregoing verses bring out as clearly as possible that the Holy Qur'an uses rububiyyah as exactly synonymous with sovereignty, and the concept of Rabb it presents is that Allah is the Absolute Monarch of all creation, and its sole Lord and Master, and, as such:

He is our Cherisher and Provider and Sustainer, and of all that constitutes creation; It is He Who looks after all our needs, governs all our affairs, and is alone worthy of our entrusting all our affairs to His discretion; It is by virtue of this very attribute that faith. in Him is the only right basis on which to build up the structure of human life in proper manner, and attachment only to His central Personage is capable of bringing together different individuals and groups and forming them into an Ummah.

He alone is worthy of the 'ibadah, and submission, and worship, of all humanity and other creatures; and He alone is the Lord, Master, and Ruler, of ourselves, and all else besides.

The pagans, whether Arabs or others, have always committed the error, which continues even today, of splitting up the comprehensive concept of rububiyyah into its five facets as if they could exist separately or be vested in different beings. The Qur'an lives most cogent and irrefutable arguments that the Universe is one, and that there is no room in it at all for Supreme Authority and rububiyyah vesting in any but the same Being. The very fact that the universe is subject to one supreme law shows that rububiyyah is reserved solely for Allah, Who alone brought the universe into existence. Therefore, whoever attributes any portion of rububiyyah to any but Him seeks but to depart from or ignore the ultimate fundamental Reality, to turn away from the Reality of the universe, to rebel against Truth, and, by thus going against what exists, only brings loss to himself and ultimate disaster.


ed by those who were open rebels against God.

[tango92]

Thus it follows that if we have an eternal Father that there is also a etneral Son.

the entire crucifixion philosphy depends on jesus dying as god (because only then can his sacrifice bear the sins of humanity or whatever)- if jesus is really eternal then he cannot by definition die - you've said it yourself.

eternal life = no death = no crucifixion

i have thought a long time about this and there is no logical comeback, i leave it to you to present more made up philosophies and concepts to explain. :hmm:

for the life of me i cannot begin to comprehend your concept that jesus and god - TWO DISTINCT GODS, with infinite power - have this intimate relationship, where they need to have conversations to show they love each other or whatever. :raging:

Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?’--"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’” (Matthew 27:46). (jesus' last words on the cross)

that doesnt sound like a very caring relationship to me. it seems poor jesus has no say in the matter.:hmm:

[Danah]

Since God is the eternal Father, then there has never been a time when God was not the Father.

You said that there was no time where the father was not really a father .
I am very sure that I asked a question about who did create Jesus and a Christian here answered that it was God "the father"....I can't tell where and when exactly I posted that, but anyways what is your answer to such question?

Rather we are talking about the nature and intimacy of their relationship. How Jesus and God the Father share the same nature. Thus, if Jesus shares the same nature with God the Father, then he too must be God

If they are both Gods sharing the same features, and even communicate with each other, then why they don't "pray" or lets use your word "converse" with each other?
why its only one way from the son to the father?

While the term prayer is never used to describe the Father's communication with the Son, it is clear that the Father and the Son do engage in two-way communication.

Is it really two-way communication?
because as I said they don't pray to each other. They are equal in features, so there must be no problem of any of them to "converse" with the other!

And that happens in the form of prayer. Interestingly enough, if one does a word search you will find that scripture also never mentions that Jesus prayed to the Father. It says things like "I will ask the Father", but never that he prayed to the Father.

Didn't he say "My God! My God why have you forsaken me?" is he his God when Jesus himself is a God? Can a God call another God "My God"?

As to the Holy Spirit praying, we actually do see this in scripture. People are often mentioned praying "in the Spirit". But perhaps the verse that sheds the most light on this is Romans 8:26 -- "In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express." So, because we cannot express to God what we want to say, God himself (in the person of his Holy Spirit), comes and helps us (that is what it means to intercede) to express what we could not say and in this instance, since he goes so far as to pray on our behalf, it really might be consider as God praying to God.

Interesting!
if someone need something from God and the spirit came as you said to intercede for people in what they cant express. Can't they pray to the Spirit himself directly to grant them what they wish for?

Why the Spirit has to pray on behalf of them to another God?

Another thing, what about the "communication" between Jesus and the holy spirit? did anyone pray to the other?


At the end, thanks a lot for your continuous answering to most of my questions here. I really appreciate your time.

Peace

[Khaldun]

:sl:

Wether english is my native language or not does not have anything to do with this discussion other then you want to claim that your better then me in english because you are a native speaker and I am not? lol [just for the record english is my 4th language *winks*]

Apologising is not the same as saying sorry, what shows this fact is that it is easy for you to say I apologise but very very difficult for you to utter the simple words I am sorry. Deep down you might still think you have not done anything wrong.

Your point is to show that the Jews have beliefs that have come from paganism. However, pointing to an anacronist belief amongst the Jews of Medinah, one that is not reflective of Judaism as a whole, simply does not show this. That is what I thought you were doing form the start and why I challenged you to show me where it was in Jewish scripture. I can point to all sorts of beliefs and behaviors on the parts of Muslims as well -- including, I kid you not, examples of some Muslims who worship Jesus as the Son of God. You would object if I removed the qualifier from the front of that statement and simply said "Muslims worship Jesus as the Son of God." And you would be right to do so. But you have in essence done the very thing with regard to the Jews, and it is just as objectionable there as well. For Jews do not believe Ezra to be the Son of God, any more than Muslims believe Jesus to be the Son of God. And to use that quote to either assert or imply that they do, when in fact they do not, is to distort the truth. That is my point!

Wow so you knew my point all this time! Why play stupid and in the dark Grace Seeker? Why ask about something you knew?

Your point is flawed, because your still stuck several posts behind, I never claimed that all jews believe 'uzair is son of God, no one ever said that, do you not see what everyone else sees on their screen?

What the jews of madeenah did was to make up lies against Allah and say about the torah what was never in it and similarly the christians said about jesus what he never said about himself! Do you not understand the point! You are right in saying that this is to disort the truth but not on my part it is on the part of the jews and christians who said against Allah a blatant lie. And similarly any Muslim who you might qoute worship Jesus than he has lied against his scripture i.e the Qur'aan because there is no such verse to be found. Similarly any jew or christian who say God had a son be it jesus or 'uzair they have clearly lied!

[mariyyah]

Danah and tango i think you are playing a dangerous game regarding our religion and i doubt about your muslims please saythe truth what is your real religion because a muslim cannot talk like that even it should be no doubt about ALLAH SWT so please say the true

[mariyyah]

Your point is flawed, because your still stuck several posts behind, I never claimed that all jews believe 'uzair is son of God, no one ever said that, do you not see what everyone else sees on their screen?


Khaldoun you are wrong because in the quran said that the jews believe that uzair is son of god and the christians said isa jesus is son of god a3ozobillah and this is the proof

(i) And the Jews said: "Uzair (Ezra) is son of God, while the Christians said, "Isa (Jesus) is son of God." (Quran 9:30)


plus you can read my post and you can proof to them that they are wrong

[Danah]

Danah and tango i think you are playing a dangerous game regarding our religion and i doubt about your muslims please saythe truth what is your real religion because a muslim cannot talk like that even it should be no doubt about ALLAH SWT so please say the true

lol, thanks for making me laugh sis.....I wont take the part about me being Muslim or not seriously though!

dear? I don't think that I am saying anything wrong. I am just trying to understand the faith of Christians NOTHING else and I found many who are helping in answering my questions here.

[Khaldun]

:sl:

Sisiter Marriyah please read every single post in this thread before posting again.

[YusufNoor]

Interestingly enough, if one does a word search you will find that scripture also never mentions that Jesus prayed to the Father. It says things like "I will ask the Father", but never that he prayed to the Father. Yet, he taught his disciples to pray to the Father. And he spent time in prayer in conversation with the Father. So, here we have the conversation, but not as if directed outside of himself. Almost what you said, with just one modification. Jesus is not an example of God praying to himself, but of him praying with himself.

except here

Matthew 26:36Then Jesus went with his disciples to a place called Gethsemane, and he said to them, "Sit here while I go over there and pray." 37He took Peter and the two sons of Zebedee along with him, and he began to be sorrowful and troubled. 38Then he said to them, "My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death. Stay here and keep watch with me."

39Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will."

and here:

40Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. "Could you men not keep watch with me for one hour?" he asked Peter. 41"Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak."

42He went away a second time and prayed, "My Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be done."

and here:

43When he came back, he again found them sleeping, because their eyes were heavy. 44So he left them and went away once more and prayed the third time, saying the same thing.

and here:

Mark 14 32They went to a place called Gethsemane, and Jesus said to his disciples, "Sit here while I pray." 33He took Peter, James and John along with him, and he began to be deeply distressed and troubled. 34"My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death," he said to them. "Stay here and keep watch."

35Going a little farther, he fell to the ground and prayed that if possible the hour might pass from him. 36"Abba,[e] Father," he said, "everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will."

and here:

37Then he returned to his disciples and found them sleeping. "Simon," he said to Peter, "are you asleep? Could you not keep watch for one hour? 38Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak."

39Once more he went away and prayed the same thing. 40When he came back, he again found them sleeping, because their eyes were heavy. They did not know what to say to him.

SubhanAllah, i wonder if that is it?

ooops, no. here:

39Jesus went out as usual to the Mount of Olives, and his disciples followed him. 40On reaching the place, he said to them, "Pray that you will not fall into temptation." 41He withdrew about a stone's throw beyond them, knelt down and prayed, 42"Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done." 43An angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him. 44And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground.

kind of reminds of these:

Romans 3:5But if our unrighteousness brings out God's righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) 6Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? 7Someone might argue, "If my falsehood enhances God's truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?" 8Why not say—as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say—"Let us do evil that good may result"? Their condemnation is deserved.

and one mustn't leave this out:

Main Entry: pray
Pronunciation: \ˈprā\
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French prier, praer, preier, from Latin precari, from prec-, prex request, prayer; akin to Old High German frāga question, frāgēn to ask, Sanskrit pṛcchati he asks
Date: 13th century

transitive verb 1 : entreat, implore —often used as a function word in introducing a question, request, or plea <pray be careful>
2 : to get or bring by praying intransitive verb 1 : to make a request in a humble manner
2 : to address God or a god with adoration, confession, supplication, or thanksgiving

prayer
1  /prɛər/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [prair] Show IPA

–noun
1. a devout petition to God or an object of worship.
2. a spiritual communion with God or an object of worship, as in supplication, thanksgiving, adoration, or confession.
3. the act or practice of praying to God or an object of worship.
4. a formula or sequence of words used in or appointed for praying: the Lord's Prayer.
5. prayers, a religious observance, either public or private, consisting wholly or mainly of prayer.
6. that which is prayed for.
7. a petition; entreaty.
8. the section of a bill in equity, or of a petition, that sets forth the complaint or the action desired.
9. a negligible hope or chance: Do you think he has a prayer of getting that job?
Origin:
1250–1300; ME preiere < OF < ML precāria, n. use of fem. of precārius obtained by entreaty, equiv. to prec- (s. of prex) prayer + -ārius -ary; cf. precarious

hmmm, how can God "worship, supplicate, adore or confess to God?"
unless of course, Jesus really isn't God!

:wa:

[mariyyah]

lol, thanks for making me laugh sis.....I wont take the part about me being Muslim or not seriously though!

dear? I don't think that I am saying anything wrong. I am just trying to understand the faith of Christians NOTHING else and I found many who are helping in answering my questions here.

Sometimes is good to laugh especially when there is serious things involved , as you are muslim you dont need to know about the christians faith from the christians because you have the holly quran that explain everything to you without involving with a serious matters which you will give sheytan opportunity to play with your mind and religion and ALLAH SWT knows best

Read my post and you will know what you need and you can see even i post it twice nobody could discuss it with me because they knows iam right ALHAMDOLIALLAH , They are going only to the weak muslims people

[Grace Seeker]

And similarly any Muslim who you might qoute worship Jesus than he has lied against his scripture i.e the Qur'aan because there is no such verse to be found. Similarly any jew or christian who say God had a son be it jesus or 'uzair they have clearly lied!

Yes, exactly. Any Muslims who says this has lied against his scripture. For this reason I don't evaluate Islam based on the practices of a handful of Muslims, but on the teaching of the Islamic scriptures.


And if the Jews of madeenah ever said "uzair is son of God", they were likewise lying against their scriptures. So, I'm suggesting to you to evaluate Judaism based on the practices of a handful of Jews in Madeenah is the err you are making -- and you are making it when you go on to say things like

And yes the jews of madeenah are considered as any other jews so they are not some kind of minority that can be brushed aside.

or

And Uzair being son of God is indeed part of Judaism, because this was a belief held by jews themselves

-- because to say the things you have said in the way that you have said them, whether you intended it or not, is to direct the statement against all Jews not just those at Madeenah. And that is the err.


In another post you said:

... unless you want to role out the jews of madeenah as not being real jews because they lived somewhere distant as the arabic peninsula.

I would indeed rule out the Jews of Madeenah as not being real Jews, not because of where they lived, but because what they teach is not consistent with established Jewish thought. So, even if they have coopted ideas from pagan cultures, it does not say anything about Judaism as a whole. And that is why I asked why you made reference to it -- except of course I do understand how the verse applies to Christians, for it does correctly represent Christian teachings. As the practices of this small enclave of Jews of Madeenah simply is not representative of Jews as a whole it seems in unfair to refer to them in a discussion of Jews beliefs and practices, just as it would be unfair for me to talk about Islam by referring to that handful of Muslims I know of who worship Jesus as the Son of God.



Now I have said it twice before, so this will be the third and final time, I am sorry for jumping to conclusions. And I regret leading this conversation far afield. But, no, I don't regret asking the questions I have asked, nor for attempting to make my point. I don't think there is anything wrong in that intent, only in not doing a better job of seeking clarification before I made assumptions about your meaning and began to dispute you on them prior to being sure of what you meant. For returning to the same point over and over again, I don't apologize. It made no sense to me to move on when that issue remained unresolved.

[mariyyah]

:sl:

Sisiter Marriyah please read every single post in this thread before posting again.

I did and i know what iam talking about and you too you know what iam talking about i took it from your post answers

[Grace Seeker]

except here

and here:

and here:

and here:

and here:

SubhanAllah, i wonder if that is it?

ooops, no. here:


kind of reminds of these:


and one mustn't leave this out:





hmmm, how can God "worship, supplicate, adore or confess to God?"
unless of course, Jesus really isn't God!

:wa:

Nice list. Now, where in any of them does it say that Jesus prayed to the Father? I affirm very much that he was in constant prayer and communication with God the Father.

As to your definitions, I would suggest that you would do better to research not the definitions of the English word "prayer" in a secular dictionary, but of the Greek words that lay behind the translation in a dictionary of NT terms. I will give you some help. The word used in each of the passages you referenced is prosukomai (or a form of it) and does not have anything to do with worship. It it does however carry with it the idea of making a request of or addressing a diety, and of course in talking with the Father, Jesus is conversing with diety. (Interesting then that this word is used to describe prayers directed toward Jesus in Revelation 5:8.)


Now, though your list doesn't include it, I did make a mistake in saying that Jesus never is listed a "praying to God." Luke 6:12 reports "One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God." So, I do stand corrected on that, even if you aren't the one to find it. The preposition in this instance comes from the object of the sentence, "God", being in the genitive case with the article "tou theou" so that it expresses relationship between the nouns for prayer and God. The more literal translation of the phrase in which the term is found would read as follows: "and [he] (implied) was spending the whole night in the prayer of God."

This is the only such case that I was able to find in scripture where Jesus is spoken of as praying to anyone, and I don't think it does any damage to my overall thoughts on the matter. But I did want to correct myself.

[Danah]

Sometimes is good to laugh especially when there is serious things involved , as you are muslim you dont need to know about the christians faith from the christians because you have the holly quran that explain everything to you without involving with a serious matters which you will give sheytan opportunity to play with your mind and religion and ALLAH SWT knows best

Read my post and you will know what you need and you can see even i post it twice nobody could discuss it with me because they knows iam right ALHAMDOLIALLAH , They are going only to the weak muslims people

I read your post and it is amazing without any doubt, I understand your concern. Yeah I have the holy Quran which I am proud of. I don't have any doubt in my faith Alhumdulilah. There is no harm in learning others' faiths. I don't know about you but I do have the interest in knowing about different faiths.

I don't want this thread to turn to a discussion between me and you about that issue. If you have anything more to say you are welcomed to PM inshaAllah

:w:

[Khaldun]

:sl:

I am glad that we have finally reached an agreement. The Jews who say 'Uzair is God and the Christians who say Jesus is God and then end up worshipping these people have spoken a lie against their religions. Just like the Qur'aan said.

Most surely there is a party amongst those who distort the Book with their tongue that you may consider it to be (a part) of the Book, and they say, It is from Allah, while it is not from Allah, and they tell a lie against Allah whilst they know.

It is not meet for a mortal that Allah should give him the Book and the wisdom and prophethood, then he should say to men: Be my servants rather than Allah's; but rather (he would say): Be worshippers of the Lord because of your teaching the Book and your reading (it yourselves). [Suurah Ale Imraan]

[Supreme]

Nice list. Now, where in any of them does it say that Jesus prayed to the Father? I affirm very much that he was in constant prayer and communication with God the Father.

As to your definitions, I would suggest that you would do better to research not the definitions of the English word "prayer" in a secular dictionary, but of the Greek words that lay behind the translation in a dictionary of NT terms. I will give you some help. The word used in each of the passages you referenced is prosukomai (or a form of it) and does not have anything to do with worship. It it does however carry with it the idea of making a request of or addressing a diety, and of course in talking with the Father, Jesus is conversing with diety. (Interesting then that this word is used to describe prayers directed toward Jesus in Revelation 5:8.)


Now, though your list doesn't include it, I did make a mistake in saying that Jesus never is listed a "praying to God." Luke 6:12 reports "One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God." So, I do stand corrected on that, even if you aren't the one to find it. The preposition in this instance comes from the object of the sentence, "God", being in the genitive case with the article "tou theou" so that it expresses relationship between the nouns for prayer and God. The more literal translation of the phrase in which the term is found would read as follows: "and [he] (implied) was spending the whole night in the prayer of God."

This is the only such case that I was able to find in scripture where Jesus is spoken of as praying to anyone, and I don't think it does any damage to my overall thoughts on the matter. But I did want to correct myself.

Nice post brother, raises some very good arguments.

I did and i know what iam talking about and you too you know what iam talking about i took it from your post answers

Why are you even in the comparitive religion section in the first place, if you're so against Muslims discussing it?

[Grace Seeker]

:sl:

I am glad that we have finally reached an agreement. The Jews who say 'Uzair is God and the Christians who say Jesus is God and then end up worshipping these people have spoken a lie against their religions.

I agree that those few Jews who say that Ezra is the Son of God have spoken a lie against their religion. I don't know of any (including the Jews of Medina) who are ever reported to have said that 'Uzair is God. (Isn't the phrase in the Qur'an that they called him the Son of God?) Perhaps you mistyped or mis-spoke in saying that? If not, and that is what you meant to say, please, educate with regard to that reference.

As for Christians who say Jesus is God, I would not agree that this is a lie against their religion. I submit to you that it is indeed the very heart of our religion. It is not in accordance with Islam, and you may hold that Islam is true and that Christianity is false. But (unless you are Grenville or Arius) it is not a lie against the Christian faith to say that Jesus is God. And to say that Jesus is the Son of God is all over our scriptures.

Beyond that, I too am glad that we have reached a better understanding. And so we are back understanding that Christians worship Jesus because they understand that in referring to Jesus as the Son of God, it is a claim for divinity for him as well.

Perhaps we need to spend some more time discussing what was meant when, in the Christian scriptures, Jesus disciples and others in the early church spoke of him by the title "son of God"? By the time of the patristic church (200-300 AD) this title was clearly understood to be a reference to Jesus' divinity. But was it actually understood that way by those who themselves wrote the scriptures?

[Khaldun]

:sl:

The son of God is a diety and something that is worshipped. Thus that would make him a God aswell. In arabic a God is something that is worshipped, if you worship money then that becomes your God.

Hang on why did you dismiss the Jewish thing so quickly but stuck to the Christian beliefe. Please show me where in your scripture Jesus says he is son of God.

[mariyyah]

Danah sister iam proud of to hear from you that you are ALHAMDOLIALLAH , Iam muslim as well ALHAMDOLIALLAH

[mariyyah]

all i can say that the engeel and torat were cheated and thats why they lost their mind and way and religion and they are talking anything without any sense nor any proof but INSHALLAH they will regret when they will face ALLAH SWT then they will ask for forgivness but it will be late for them so no need to waste your time explaning to them because they are stubborn and they dont wanna accept anything

[Supreme]

I agree that those few Jews who say that Ezra is the Son of God have spoken a lie against their religion. I don't know of any (including the Jews of Medina) who are ever reported to have said that 'Uzair is God. (Isn't the phrase in the Qur'an that they called him the Son of God?) Perhaps you mistyped or mis-spoke in saying that? If not, and that is what you meant to say, please, educate with regard to that reference.

As for Christians who say Jesus is God, I would not agree that this is a lie against their religion. I submit to you that it is indeed the very heart of our religion. It is not in accordance with Islam, and you may hold that Islam is true and that Christianity is false. But (unless you are Grenville or Arius) it is not a lie against the Christian faith to say that Jesus is God. And to say that Jesus is the Son of God is all over our scriptures.

Beyond that, I too am glad that we have reached a better understanding. And so we are back understanding that Christians worship Jesus because they understand that in referring to Jesus as the Son of God, it is a claim for divinity for him as well.

Perhaps we need to spend some more time discussing what was meant when, in the Christian scriptures, Jesus disciples and others in the early church spoke of him by the title "son of God"? By the time of the patristic church (200-300 AD) this title was clearly understood to be a reference to Jesus' divinity. But was it actually understood that way by those who themselves wrote the scriptures?

One confusing thing I have discovered through reading the Gospels is that Jesus refers to Himself as the 'son of Man'. Example:

6And the Lord said, "Listen to what the unjust judge says. 7And will not God bring about justice for his chosen ones, who cry out to him day and night? Will he keep putting them off? 8I tell you, he will see that they get justice, and quickly. However, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?"

(Luke 18:6-8)

Now, you have obviously been a Christian longer than I have, and you are clearly more capable of answering theological questions than me. So, may I ask, are the phrases 'son of Man' and 'Son of God' synonymous, and if not, what does the former mean?

God Bless.

[Humbler_359]

Older Manuscripts found in Palestine say that Jesus is a Prophet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeOd9KyyvF0

Christians perhaps so confusing these days in their faith systems.

For example:
Catholics
Baptists
Jehovah Witness (believe Jesus(PBUH) is Prophet but son of God only)
Amish
Evangelical
Anglicans
Methodists
so on.....

At last point:


"O mankind! Indeed God’s promise, of resurrection and of other issues mentioned in the Quran, is true. So do not let the life of this world deceive you, from believing in all of that, and do not let the Deceiver, Satan, deceive you concerning God, on account of His forbearance and respiting of sinners in this life. " (Qur'an 35:5)

"The Truth (comes) from they Lord alone; so be not of those who doubt." ( Qur'an 3:60)

"This is the true account; There is no god except God; and only One God-He is indeed the Exalted in Power, the Wise. " (Qur'an 33:62)

[mkh4JC]

:sl:

The son of God is a diety and something that is worshipped. Thus that would make him a God aswell. In arabic a God is something that is worshipped, if you worship money then that becomes your God.

Hang on why did you dismiss the Jewish thing so quickly but stuck to the Christian beliefe. Please show me where in your scripture Jesus says he is son of God.

I gave you these verses earlier in the thread and you ignored me:

'Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemeth; because I said, I am the Son of God?

If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.

But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the FAther is in me, and I in him.' St. John 10: 34-38.

[Humbler_359]

"And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God." (Mark 10:18).

"And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord:" (Mark 12:29)

"Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying Eli, Eli, lama sabachtani? . . ." (Matthew 27:46)- (why are you forsaking me?)

[mkh4JC]

"And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God." (Mark 10:18).

That was rhetorical. Even devils and demons when they saw Christ acknowledged and recognized who he was:

'And unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God.

And he straitly charged them that they should not make him known.' Mark 3: 11-12.

"And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord:" (Mark 12:29)

He is one, but he is one God in Three Persons. The knowledge that God has a Son is what is called in the New Testament a hidden truth. Meaning, if God didn't send his Son into the world to redeem us, the nature of God would have remained a mystery.

"Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying Eli, Eli, lama sabachtani? . . ." (Matthew 27:46)- (why are you forsaking me?)

That was an expression of Jesus' humanity. He was fully God, then he came into the world and added humanity to his divinity.

[Supreme]

Brother Fedos, may you address my question on the previous page?

[mkh4JC]

One confusing thing I have discovered through reading the Gospels is that Jesus refers to Himself as the 'son of Man'. Example:

(Luke 18:6-8)

Now, you have obviously been a Christian longer than I have, and you are clearly more capable of answering theological questions than me. So, may I ask, are the phrases 'son of Man' and 'Son of God' synonymous, and if not, what does the former mean?

God Bless.

Well, Son of Man is just a title ascribed to Jesus. It doesn't mean that he isn't divine or that he's not the Son of God. Jesus has many titles, the Lamb of God for instance. He's the Son of God and the Son of Man. Son of Man is in reference to his humanity. Here in Daniel we find the term Son of Man used.

'I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of Man (Jesus) came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days (the Father), and they brought him near before him.

And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.' Daniel 7: 13-14.

Both of these verses are Messianic.

[Khaldun]

:sl:

That is pretty convienient. Why not the other way around Fedos? Why isnt son of God just a title?

[mkh4JC]

:sl:

That is pretty convienient. Why not the other way around Fedos? Why isnt son of God just a title?

Well, it's not. Son of Man refers to Christ's humanity, and his relationship to mankind in his incarnate state. Son of God refers to his divinity. I've already shown how in the Old Testament that it is taught that the Son of Man's (ie the Lord Jesus Christ's) kingdom will have no end, and how that all nations will be under his rule (ie the thousand year reign of Christ). This is taught of Jesus in both the Old and New Testaments, the Old Testament points to Jesus is what I'm getting at.

[Grace Seeker]

"And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God." (Mark 10:18).

"And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord:" (Mark 12:29)

"Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying Eli, Eli, lama sabachtani? . . ." (Matthew 27:46)- (why are you forsaking me?)

All of these have been addressed before. If you are really interested in seeking edification regarding them we can help you find them. But if you're just being an apologist, you should know that you're just wasting your time with such posts as none of the verses help your cause -- not with Muslims because they are already convinced of what you say, and not with Christians because we know that the true meaning and context behind these passages do not speak negatively to our understanding of Jesus.

[Grace Seeker]

:sl:

That is pretty convienient. Why not the other way around Fedos? Why isnt son of God just a title?

Indeed, it is also used as a title in some situations. In short the terms "Son of God" and "Son of Man" both have histories of being used as Messanic titles. But they are used differently by different groups of people to mean different things. That they are both applied to Jesus tells us that the NT writers saw Jesus a fulfilling both of these Messianic roles and then some, including expressing the hypostatic union -- the fact that they understood him to be both fully human and fully God at the same time.

The longer answer I would give cites 13 pages of academic exposition from professor George Ladd on each term and another 57 pages technical discussion of their respective Greek etymologies from The Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Colin Brown, ed.) if that's really what you want.

[Danah]

^^ Grace Seeker, I am sure you didn't notice my post at page 5 otherwise you would surly reply. I am still waiting your reply "if" you have the time to address it.

[Ramadhan]

This thread is the latest thread that confirms my opinion of my personal finding that the explanation of the definition of God in christianity would require hundreds and hundreds of pages of debates, arguments, research, etc. And even that would not be satisfactorily to everyone.
While definition of God in Islam is very simple as stated in QS. Al-Ikhlas

[Grace Seeker]

^^ Grace Seeker, I am sure you didn't notice my post at page 5 otherwise you would surly reply. I am still waiting your reply "if" you have the time to address it.

:sl:

I'll do my best. But I fear you may think naidamar is right by the time I'm done. May peace be upon you in your search for Allah's ‘hidayah.

You said that there was no time where the father was not really a father .
I am very sure that I asked a question about who did create Jesus and a Christian here answered that it was God "the father"....I can't tell where and when exactly I posted that, but anyways what is your answer to such question?

Let's be clear. Are you talking about Jesus or are you talking about God the Son? The fact that God has always been an eternal Father tells us that God the Son is also co-eternal with him. In other words, there never was a time when the Son was not. To orthodox Christian understanding, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit are all co-eternal and have always existed in community and relationship with each other from before the beginning of time. In fact, with regard to creation itself (which would include the creation of time) our Christian scriptures have this to say:

For by him [the Son] all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. (Colossians 1:16)

So, we don't believe that the Son was created, but was the creator. But you also asked about Jesus and that needs a different answer. That might be confusing for a moment, if you are jumping to certain conclusions. So, let me just address what one of those possible issues right away with the following assertion: while Jesus has always been the Son, the Son was not always Jesus.

Now what do I mean by that? I mean just what I said. God has always existed. Hence God the Son has always existed. But this does not mean that Jesus is pre-existent. Another set of scriptures might help with this.

John 1

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

If you accept, as Christians do based on later passages, that "the Word" being referred to in this passage is one and the same as "God the Son", then this passage pretty much says the same thing as the previous one did in terms of creation and the pre-existence of the Son (or Word in this case). Now if we keep reading we find that a little more is disclosed regarding the Word:

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)

In saying that the Word become flesh and made his dwelling among us, Christians understand this as a reference to incarnation. To be incarnate (with the stem word "carne", meaning "flesh") tells us that there has been a change in the way the Word relates to the world. The word is not just the creator outside of the world, but not enters into the world as a person just like the rest of us. This may be an outrageous and completely unacceptable concept for Muslims, but we Christians can't just dismiss it. It is right there in our text. And when read in the context of the rest of the chapter, it is pretty obvious that the person that is being referred to who is the incarnation of the Word is none other than Jesus. So this is one of several texts that causes us to say that Jesus is not just a man, but uniquely the one and only God who has incarnated himself among us.

The actual word for "dwelling" here is in older English versions translated as "tabernacled." So, the Word became flesh and "tabernacled" among us, reminding the reader of the stories of how God used to dwell in the tabernacle (a tent used in place of the temple during the nation of Israel's Exodus experience) where God would converse with Moses. And it might be helpful to think of Jesus' body as God putting on a fleshly tent in the same way that we put on clothes. Although I warn you that some people have taken that picture too far and tried to suggest that this means that Jesus wasn't really human. In all honestly, that is one of the difficult things about Christianity. God is constantly stretching our understanding of him. Jesus is God. Jesus is human. Jesus is both at the same time.

How exactly this can be is never something that we will explain to everyone's satisfaction, we hardly explain it to our own. What we have to remember to do is to keep the two concepts in tension, never allowing one understanding of Jesus' nature to dictate completely our understanding of the other aspect of his shared nature. So, Jesus is completely God. And we know that God has no needs. Yet Jesus is reported to have been hungry, tired, thirsty, even angry and to have felt sorrow -- all very human things. Perhaps this was just God dwelling ("tenting") among us like a person putting on a costume for a masquerade? Except such an understanding would make Jesus (and therefore God) into a fraud as he shared that human side of himself. Further, Paul's letter to the Philippians records specifically that

Philippians 2

6[Christ Jesus] Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
7but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.

It is interesting that this is not just Paul's own thought. It is actually one of the earliest hymns of the church that Paul has borrowed to make his point in this letter. Namely that in coming to earth in the person of Jesus that God the Son has emptied himself of those divine perogatives that we are so familiar with ascribing to God:

• omnipresence -- dwelling in the flesh, Jesus cannot be in more than one place at a time

• omniscience -- dwelling in the flesh, there are things that Jesus doesn't know, things that he reports are only known by the Father or only known by him as the Father reveals them to him

• omnipotence -- the one who once had by the power of his word simply spoken world into being, is now going to be subject to the actions of cruel evil mean

Hardly sounds like God, does it? And it shouldn't. Jesus may be God the creator, but he dwells on earth just as every other created being does, so much has he humbled himself in order to identify with his creation. And so, while his spiritual, divine nature is eternal, his human, earthly nature actually has a beginning, a conception when the cells which will become the baby Jesus are given life within the womb of Mary. (Whether this is one more miracle of creation of an embryo ex nihlo or the miraculous generating of life from Mary's own eggs without the need for sperm cells the scriptures do not say. We are just told that what was conceived in Mary was through the power of the Holy Spirit, not the normal form of mechanical biological reproduction.)

So, that's a long way to finally answer your question: Jesus' human body does have a beginning as God created a body for himself by which he could enter into creation, even as God the Son has always existed and is the creator, not a part of creation until he arrived to dwell on earth in the person of Jesus.

If they are both Gods sharing the same features, and even communicate with each other, then why they don't "pray" or lets use your word "converse" with each other?
why its only one way from the son to the father?

First they are not both Gods (plural). They are both God (singular). We believe in just one and only one God. Again, you can see that in the very passages we have already looked at:

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)

comapre that with

No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known. (John 1:18)

God makes God known. And this God who makes God known is the Word who dwells among us. And at the same time is God the One and Only. There is no other God for us Christians, than the one and only God who created the world (remember we have already seen that this is the Son), who made covenant with Abraham, and who tabernacled in the desert with Moses and command to the nation of Israel that they were to have no other gods before Him.

But just as long before the time of Jesus we can see recorded in the Old Testament itself how the God's monotheistic people personified God's Spirit and God's Word (for examples see Gen. 1:2; Job 32:8; Ps. 33:6-9; Ps. 104: 29-30; Is. 11:2; Is. 55:10-11), so too Jesus' own disciples in understanding that Jesus had made God known to them, did not consider that the God Jesus had made known to them was any different God than Yahweh whom they had always worshipped. Indeed, when you see in the (Greek) New Testament that Jesus is called Lord, the writers are using the very same term ("kyrios") as the Jews used to speak of Yahweh in their own Greek translation of the Tanakh, it was not just another way of saying "Sir" as some suggest, but an announcement that whether referring to Jesus or the God worshipped by the Jews, these followers of Jesus were referring to one and the same being, just in known to them in different personas (of the Father and of the Son, and ultimately also of the Spirit).

Perhaps no biblical writer links Jesus so closely with the Jewish concept of Yahweh as does Paul. (Not surprising as he was a rabbinically schooled pharisee, and always wrote of Jesus within the context of God's covenant with Israel.) Picking up the song Paul was quoting in Philippians were we left off, he goes on to record of the man Jesus:

Therefore God exalted him [Jesus] to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name... (Philippians 2:9)

The "name" which is being referred to, that the early church said was given to Jesus is the name that was so high that it could not even be spoken aloud and when written was written without the vowels so that no one might accidentally speak it. It was the name revealed in the Old Testament as the sacred name of God, the tetragammaton (YHWH) -- four consonant which orthodox Jews do not dare to speak for its holiness and which, even today, most English Bibles simply print as 'LORD'.

What is particularly striking is the way that two Old Testament passages are combined in this early Christian hymn Paul borrows:

Philippians 2

9Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

Isaiah 45

22 Turn to me and be saved,
all you ends of the earth;
for I am God, and there is no other.

23 By myself I have sworn,
my mouth has uttered in all integrity
a word that will not be revoked:
Before me every knee will bow;
by me every tongue will swear.

Six times in that chapter of Isaiah comes the refrain in which God declares, "there is no other." Clearly God is emphasizing his uniqueness, the fact that God and God alone is the one and only -- there is no other God, but God.

The other passage incorporated into this hymn about Christ is also from Isaiah:

Isaiah 42

8 I am the LORD; that is my name!
I will not give my glory to another
or my praise to idols.

By using this hymn which incorporates this language to speak of Christ, the monotheistic Jew, Paul, is taking some of the strongest language about the sovereignty and identity of God found in the Tanakh (the Old Testament) and saying that it applies to Jesus, before whom every knee will bow in worship. This sort of adoration would not be used by any Jew of Paul's pharisical background and rabbinical training to refer to any mere creature, not even an angel, and illustrates the completeness with which the early church identified Jesus as the one God.

Curiously, they never bothered to relate how or why they came to this view, only that they did. But from that understanding, any time that we see Jesus in prayer, should be understood as a time of communication with his Father. And it begins at a very young age.

One of the few accounts of Jesus non-adult life is the story of him remaining behind in the temple after his parents had made a journey to Jerusalem. When they realize that Jesus is missing from the family caravan headed home, Joseph and Mary return to Jerusalem looking for the boy-Jesus and finding him discoursing with the elders in the temple. On questioning him for why he caused them to worry and search for him, he cryptically responds: "Why were you searching for me? Didn't you know I had to be in my Father's house?"

And all four gospel accounts record that at the beginning of Jesus' ministry, the Father did indeed speak so that others could hear his affirmation of Jesus as his beloved Son. But most of the time that we see Jesus praying, he goes off by himself. We simply aren't priviledge to those experiences but rarely. One of those times was when Jesus invited Peter, James, and John to go up with him to the top of what today we call the Mount of Transfiguration. For Jesus the conversation (which included a manifestation of Moses and Elijah) was about Jesus' approaching death; for the disciples what they heard was another affirmation of Jesus as the beloved son of God. While we were not party to what Jesus was praying, the way Luke (chapter 9) tells the story, I expect the arrival of Moses and Elijah was perhaps in answer to the conversation he was having with his Father.

The other time we are invited to join Jesus in prayer is in the garden of Gethsemane. Unfortunately, the disciples were not very attentive at the time, and one wonders how the gospel writers are even able to report what they do, unless it might have been shared with them later, perhaps by Jesus himself in the days between his resurrection and ascension. Anyway, the form of the report that we have is like listening to just one end of a telephone conversation. I don't think that just because we don't hear the voice on the other end ourselves, and only that of the person in the room with us, that we should suppose that it is a one-way conversation.

You can see how the Father is indeed responsive to Jesus' prayers, but that we are generally going to be privilded to listen in from the story of a time when the Father's response was actually intended for us. On that occassion the conversation was one that others heard as well:

John 12 [Jesus knows that his death is less than a week away as he speaks.]

27"Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say? 'Father, save me from this hour'? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. 28Father, glorify your name!"

Then a voice came from heaven, "I have glorified it, and will glorify it again." 29The crowd that was there and heard it said it had thundered; others said an angel had spoken to him.

30Jesus said, "This voice was for your benefit, not mine."

Is it really two-way communication?
because as I said they don't pray to each other. They are equal in features, so there must be no problem of any of them to "converse" with the other!

My own conversations with God are not one-way, why should Christ's have been when he prayed?

That Jesus did receive information from the Father is clearly seen in these comments that Jesus made to his disciples:
"The world must learn that I love the Father and that I do exactly what my Father has commanded me" (John 14:31).

and

"Everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you" (John 15:15b).

Didn't he say "My God! My God why have you forsaken me?" is he his God when Jesus himself is a God? Can a God call another God "My God"?

I've already spent quite a bit of time above discussing that we are not talking about two different gods, but just one. I can understand how it might be that someone from outside of our faith might think in terms of two gods, or a big God and a little god. Indeed, some of the early church fathers had trouble with this sort of language at times themselves. But even the idea of Jesus being subordinated to the Father, other than that which he did so voluntarily in terms of obediently seeking to fulfill and submit to the Father's will (which of course was his whole purpose in entering into identification with humanity on earth), is not supported in the orthodox Christian understanding of scripture.

The passage you quote is, in my opinion, often misunderstood as a cry of deriliction and abandonment. I don't see it this way at all. The reason I don't is that I happen to know where it comes from. It is the opening line of(i.e., the equivalent of a title or way of referencing) Psalm 22

Psalm 22

1 My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
Why are you so far from saving me,
so far from the words of my groaning?
2 O my God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer,
by night, and am not silent.

3 Yet you are enthroned as the Holy One;
you are the praise of Israel.

4 In you our fathers put their trust;
they trusted and you delivered them.

5 They cried to you and were saved;
in you they trusted and were not disappointed.

6 But I am a worm and not a man,
scorned by men and despised by the people.

7 All who see me mock me;
they hurl insults, shaking their heads:

8 "He trusts in the LORD;
let the LORD rescue him.
Let him deliver him,
since he delights in him."

9 Yet you brought me out of the womb;
you made me trust in you
even at my mother's breast.

10 From birth I was cast upon you;
from my mother's womb you have been my God.

11 Do not be far from me,
for trouble is near
and there is no one to help.

12 Many bulls surround me;
strong bulls of Bashan encircle me.

13 Roaring lions tearing their prey
open their mouths wide against me.

14 I am poured out like water,
and all my bones are out of joint.
My heart has turned to wax;
it has melted away within me.

15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
you lay me in the dust of death.

16 Dogs have surrounded me;
a band of evil men has encircled me,
they have pierced my hands and my feet.

17 I can count all my bones;
people stare and gloat over me.

18 They divide my garments among them
and cast lots for my clothing.

19 But you, O LORD, be not far off;
O my Strength, come quickly to help me.

20 Deliver my life from the sword,
my precious life from the power of the dogs.

21 Rescue me from the mouth of the lions;
save me from the horns of the wild oxen.

22 I will declare your name to my brothers;
in the congregation I will praise you.

23 You who fear the LORD, praise him!
All you descendants of Jacob, honor him!
Revere him, all you descendants of Israel!

24 For he has not despised or disdained
the suffering of the afflicted one;
he has not hidden his face from him
but has listened to his cry for help.

25 From you comes the theme of my praise in the great assembly;
before those who fear you will I fulfill my vows.

26 The poor will eat and be satisfied;
they who seek the LORD will praise him—
may your hearts live forever!

27 All the ends of the earth
will remember and turn to the LORD,
and all the families of the nations
will bow down before him,

28 for dominion belongs to the LORD
and he rules over the nations.

29 All the rich of the earth will feast and worship;
all who go down to the dust will kneel before him—
those who cannot keep themselves alive.

30 Posterity will serve him;
future generations will be told about the Lord.

31 They will proclaim his righteousness
to a people yet unborn—
for he has done it.

This was known even then as a Psalm representative of the Messiah, as God's anointed suffering servant who comes to make atonement for God's people. Note that while it starts off in distress that it culminates in praise of the God who does NOT abandon his servant: "But you, O Lord, be not far off; O my Strength come to help me" (vs. 19). And the events that Jesus is himself suffering are very much alluded to in the Psalm itself. If you accept the idea of prophecy, I think it even looks ahead to the time of the Church when: "Posterity will serve him; future generations will be told about the Lord. [And] they will proclaim his righteousness to a people yet unborn— for he has done it [made atonement]" (vs. 30-31). Thus, Jesus' cry is anything but a sense of being forsaken, rather it is a proclamation of the grace of God at work even in the midst of so much suffering, and Jesus' trust in the final outcome that he had already wrestled while praying in the garden.

Interesting!
if someone need something from God and the spirit came as you said to intercede for people in what they cant express. Can't they pray to the Spirit himself directly to grant them what they wish for?

Indeed we can, and there are examples of this even in scripture itself. After all, praying to the Spirit is just praying to God.

Why the Spirit has to pray on behalf of them to another God?

He doesn't and isn't. Again, just one God. Three persons, but just one God.

Another thing, what about the "communication" between Jesus and the holy spirit? did anyone pray to the other?

Jesus claimed that the Spirit of the Lord was an anointing upon him and his ministry:

Luke 4

14Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. 15He taught in their synagogues, and everyone praised him.
16He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. And he stood up to read. 17The scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:
18"The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to release the oppressed,
19to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."

20Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him, 21and he began by saying to them, "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing."

And we are frequently told about how the Spirit led Jesus: "Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the desert" (Luke 4:1).

At the end, thanks a lot for your continuous answering to most of my questions here. I really appreciate your time.

Peace

Are you sure? I can't imagine you expected a response this long. You asked a lot of good, but involved, questions that deserved as full of an answer as I could provide right now. My apologies if overwhelms more than addresses what you were seeking to know.

[Abdul Qadir]

Sometimes is good to laugh especially when there is serious things involved , as you are muslim you dont need to know about the christians faith from the christians because you have the holly quran that explain everything to you without involving with a serious matters which you will give sheytan opportunity to play with your mind and religion and ALLAH SWT knows best

Read my post and you will know what you need and you can see even i post it twice nobody could discuss it with me because they knows iam right ALHAMDOLIALLAH , They are going only to the weak muslims people

I agree with mariyyah...if im not wrong, ur that girl who said one of the qualities u will be looking for in ur husband is interest in other religions...y would u even care about exploring other religions?

[Abdul Qadir]

The bible is so confusing..is it really the words of god? y are there updates every now and then? like last time, the nuns must cover their hair...now, they can reveal it...who is updating them? can the words of god be updated? at one passage, the bible says jesus should be worshipped..then, another passage quotes jesus saying there is only one who has the right to be worshipped..y so confusing? y must all the neutrals be a rocket scientists to understand the bible? now compare it with the Quran...is there any confusion or contradicting statements of your Rabb?

[Supreme]

Fantastic post Grace Seeker! I can't speak for our Muslim friends, but it certainly helped me out!

[mariyyah]

I agree with mariyyah...if im not wrong, ur that girl who said one of the qualities u will be looking for in ur husband is interest in other religions...y would u even care about exploring other religions?

what you mean please

[Grace Seeker]

The bible is so confusing..is it really the words of god?

If you mean like in recitation or dictation, then NO. I don't believe so. There are a few places where such things are reported, but on the whole it is not that sort of document which can claim to be God speaking directly to us through some prophetic writer. I understand it to be very much a book in which humans are reporting what they understand with regard to God's revelation of himself.

However, there are some Christians more conservative than myself who would have answered differently and claimed that it is indeed the dictated words of God.

y are there updates every now and then?

Again, No. I understand that Muhammad (pbuh) did get periodic updates in the receiving of the Qur'an. But just as that eventually came to an end, so to we believe that all that is to be part of the Bible has been received and the canon of scripture is closed.

like last time, the nuns must cover their hair...now, they can reveal it...who is updating them?

Now you are not talking about updates to the book, but interpretations of it. At some level each person has to reach his/her own understanding of what it says and how it is to apply to their own life. Sometimes pastors, priests, and theologians are called upon for assistance in this process and sometimes people each go their own way.

can the words of god be updated? at one passage, the bible says jesus should be worshipped..then, another passage quotes jesus saying there is only one who has the right to be worshipped..y so confusing? y must all the neutrals be a rocket scientists to understand the bible?

No, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand it.

now compare it with the Quran...is there any confusion or contradicting statements of your Rabb?

Yes, there are passages in the Qur'an that I find confusing. Parts of the Hadith that I find contradictory. Outsiders always see a text differently than insiders do. If we saw them the same way we wouldn't be outsiders and insiders.

[muslimbhai]

what you mean please

Talking about Danah...

[muslimbhai]

If you mean like in recitation or dictation, then NO. I don't believe so. There are a few places where such things are reported, but on the whole it is not that sort of document which can claim to be God speaking directly to us through some prophetic writer. I understand it to be very much a book in which humans are reporting what they understand with regard to God's revelation of himself.

However, there are some Christians more conservative than myself who would have answered differently and claimed that it is indeed the dictated words of God.


Again, No. I understand that Muhammad (pbuh) did get periodic updates in the receiving of the Qur'an. But just as that eventually came to an end, so to we believe that all that is to be part of the Bible has been received and the canon of scripture is closed.

Now you are not talking about updates to the book, but interpretations of it. At some level each person has to reach his/her own understanding of what it says and how it is to apply to their own life. Sometimes pastors, priests, and theologians are called upon for assistance in this process and sometimes people each go their own way.

No, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand it.



Yes, there are passages in the Qur'an that I find confusing. Parts of the Hadith that I find contradictory. Outsiders always see a text differently than insiders do. If we saw them the same way we wouldn't be outsiders and insiders.

Ur bible is not clear...let me tell u why...does ur bible mention heaven and hell? it does right? i have heard of it...my bro-in-law is a catholic...just confirm with me...it mentions heaven and hell right?

[Danah]

:sl:

I'll do my best. But I fear you may think naidamar is right by the time I'm done. May peace be upon you in your search for Allah's ‘hidayah.

lol, I already read and agreed to what naidamar said before you even post your reply, the God definition is very confusing in the Christianity I must admit.


okay so you said there are two distinct beings, they didn't start at the same time? Jesus "the human" was created by God. Jesus "the son" wasn't created since he is uncreated.

while Jesus has always been the Son, the Son was not always Jesus.

I think you mean that for a certain time, there was a time where the son God identity was not known yet?

Namely that in coming to earth in the person of Jesus that God the Son

has emptied himself of those divine perogatives that we are so familiar

with ascribing to God:

* omnipresence -- dwelling in the flesh, Jesus cannot be in more than one place at a time
* omniscience -- dwelling in the flesh, there are things that Jesus doesn't know, things that he reports are only known by the Father or only
known by him as the Father reveals them to him
* omnipotence -- the one who once had by the power of his word simply spoken world into being, is now going to be subject to the actions of cruel evil mean

Hardly sounds like God, does it? And it shouldn't. Jesus may be God the creator, but he dwells on earth just as every other created being does, so much has he humbled himself in order to identify with his creation. And so, while his spiritual, divine nature is eternal, his human, earthly nature actually has a beginning

yes, hardly!
Isnt he supposed to be the God and the human at the same time? how can there are some things that he doesn't know except the father reveal them to him?




* As for God to speak to Jesus, I didn't mean normal speech its either you misunderstood me or me misunderstood you. I mean if God can answer his son's prayer as the bible stated in many places, and since they are both are equal, then why the father cant ask the son to grant him something? that seems to be illogical actually "astaghfiralluah" but anyways.


* You have provided the communication or praying this way:
from Son to Father
from Son to Spirit "something like Spirit is powered Jesus, as I understand"

but not:
from God to son
from Spirit to Son

I hope you really get what I mean when I tried to differentiate between normal conversation or communication AND praying "asking for something"

Are you sure? I can't imagine you expected a response this long. You asked a lot of good, but involved, questions that deserved as full of an answer as I could provide right now. My apologies if overwhelms more than addresses what you were seeking to know.

Yup, I expected such length for such topics, its a confusing matter and even pages and pages won't be enough to explain it. Even though I found it hard to read it all in one day because of exams I am having these days so even if I got a reply I doubt it that I will post again in the next couple of weeks or we may even continue this through PMs but not now.

thanks for your reply again, even though I did notice that you went a little off topic that's why your reply was very long...but thanks anyways. I appreciate your time.

[Danah]

Talking about Danah...

thanks for notifying me about that.......I thought he was talking to sis marriyah

if im not wrong, ur that girl who said one of the qualities u will be looking for in ur husband is interest in other religions...y would u even care about exploring other religions?

you should direct this to me bro instead of sis marryiah to avoid confusion. Anyways, I just remembered now where did I say such thing here in LI, hence I went to the thread I said that in and was surprised that you quoted me there 2 weeks ago. Sorry it has been ages since I read any new posts in that thread. I will reply to you there inshaAllah

[Grace Seeker]

Ur bible is not clear...let me tell u why...does ur bible mention heaven and hell? it does right? i have heard of it...my bro-in-law is a catholic...just confirm with me...it mentions heaven and hell right?

The English word "heaven" is found 404 times in the translation known as the NIV. ("Heavens" is found 167 times and "heavenly" 35 times.

The word English word "hell" is found 14 times.

The exact phrase you ask about "heaven and hell" is never used.

Similar, but not identical, counts would be found in other English translations.


Of course the words which are translated as either "heaven" or "hell" in these English translations are from a number of different terms in the original languages, with connotations that vary widely from one usage with its particular context, to a different context and hence completely different meaning in another passage. Just as one should learn to read Arabic is one seeks to fully understand the Qur'an, it is also advisable to read Hebrew and Greek if one is going to have a nuanced discussion of the Bible.

[MSalman]

As to the other part of your statement: To me this sounds like a human dictating to God what God can and cannot do.

well, what can we say about you when you believe that your god was tempted by satan, ate, slept, cried, went to washroom, humiliated and died on the cross by the hands of his creation, etc. etc. I do no think anyone want such a powerless god. However, since your are sort of advertising the idea that god can do anything: can your god lie, can he have sex with his creation, can he give birth? get my drift

For myself, I don't see how it necessarily makes God less than God to enter into humanity

because god entering into creation is a pagan idea and not prophetic idea. what is the point of test if god is going to roam around in his creation? you are telling us to not limit god yet you believe he was limited by time and creation laws and boundaries. Why was your god raised up and to who? is he now inside of his creation or outside of it?

[Grace Seeker]

lol, I already read and agreed to what naidamar said before you even post your reply, the God definition is very confusing in the Christianity I must admit.

Definition? Our definition is probably not that much different than your own. We define God as that being who reveals God's self to us as the one and only supreme being of the universe, the creator of the world, sustainer of all the lives, and pro-active redeemer of a humanity that has turned its collective back on God but whom God has nevertheless not turned aside from seeking to be reconciled with for God's own name's sake, because it is in the nature of God who loves us and to bring peace and justice to our lives. But as this is only fully available in a right relationship with God, God makes the way for us and shows us the path back to God's self, yet ultimately God gives us the freedom to follow God's guidance to life or not follow it to the natural consequences of life apart from God.

So, I don't think it is our definition of who God is and what God does that is so different from Islam. I think it is more our experience and understanding of how it is that God interacts with human kind that is so different. It is out of that different experience of meeting God revealed in the person of Jesus that arise all our theological differences.

okay so you said there are two distinct beings, they didn't start at the same time? Jesus "the human" was created by God. Jesus "the son" wasn't created since he is uncreated.

No. I would never say "two distinct beings".

Yes, the human body of Jesus was created by God just like every other human body was/is.

True, the Son was not created.

The physical human body known as Jesus is a manifestation of the incarnation of the one and only God. That God is one being (not two or three), but known in three persons: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, three persons, but still just one being. And that being is the one and only God.

The one eternal divine being entered into time and space and became incarnated in the body of Jesus. He was made known to us as the Son of God, which I indicated earlier in this thread needs to be discussed as to whether it was just a title or if it has signficance beyond that. I believe it has significance beyond just being a title. And, when speaking of Jesus (and not everyone else of whom it is sometimes casually used in a different way), I believe the term "Son of God" should be understood as being synonymous with saying "God the Son", the second person of the triune God.

I think you mean that for a certain time, there was a time where the son God identity was not known yet?

Precisely. From before the creation of the world till the birth of Jesus, God was still God. And as God, God's nature was still that of a triune being. (That is why I spent some time talking about how even the Jews personified God's spirit and God's Word prior to the time of Jesus' birth. I think this shows that holding to the idea of a monotheistic faith such as the Jews are known to possess does not mean that one has to reject the idea of the one singular God being known in a plurality of persons.) But the distinct personages of Father, Son, and Spirit were not immediately revealed. By the time of Jesus God was already spoken of by Jews as "Father" and it was known that God's Spirit was active in the lives of humankind. But it would not be till Jesus himself that the revelation of God the Son would be experienced by humanity.

yes, hardly!
Isnt he supposed to be the God and the human at the same time? how can there are some things that he doesn't know except the father reveal them to him?

He is God, but not "the God". I don't mean to be belittling, but this has to do with some of the eccentricities of the English language. To say "the God" would be to imply that Jesus is 100% of God, and eliminate the idea of the Father and the Spirit.

The way that Patrick explained this to the Celts in Ireland was by the use of a shamrock. It has a single leaf with three distinct lobes. Each lobe is 100% shamrock, but no lobe by itself is 100% of the leaf. Now, this is physical illustration of a spiritual truth, so don't expect that there aren't flaws in the comparison, there are. But look to that which it is capable of presenting and you will see why I can't say that Jesus is "the God". That would be like saying that just one of the three lobes of the leaf is the shamrock. It is only the shamrock in part.

And so, Jesus is not the Father. There are things that are unknown to Jesus that are known only to the Father. Likewise, though we don't talk about it much, there are things known to Jesus that are completely unknown by the Father -- things like hunger, thirst, blistered feet, human things. The Father (not even your concept of Allah) can known these things, for they are known only through experience.

My second langauge is Spanish. And in Spanish we have many different ways of expressing knowledge of something. There is the more general word "saber" which means simply "to know". And then there is knowing about, and knowing through acquaintance, and knowledge that is actual comprehension, and then understanding that is more than just head knowledg but heart as well, and my favorite word "cachar" which means "to get", like in grasping an idea.

Well if you grasp what I am talking about, there are different ways of knowing and being known. I've known my kids all of their lives. But I know them different than there mother does. Sometimes my kids would say that I don't understand them at all. It is at times like these that my wife comes alongside me and helps me to know them differently, as perhaps she knows them. And when I begin to see them through her eyes, they appear completely differently to me than I perceived them before. Now, none of us has changed. But the way I know my kids has changed. That is because there is a different part of me (for I and my wife are really one) by which I have come to know them. Again, this is just a very human way of presenting an idea. It likewise may not be any good in explaining that part which you are struggling with regarding how the Father and the Son might not know all things equally if they are one and the same being. But then again, it might. So, if my analogy does speak to you, great. If it doesn't, then discard it and don't dwell on it. It is after all my attempt to paint a picture with regard to God, and not the real God that we are talking about.

And that is the way it is with what is called the doctrine of the Trinity itself. It is just a word picture. It attempts to be descriptive of God. But it is not God. God is God. And there is none like him. So, all of our word pictures and descriptions will come up short. Don't worry about them if they don't help you. While I do believe that Jesus is God incarnate, I don't know that you need to believe exactly as I do in order to be saved. A heretical view to some Christians no doubt, but I'll have that conversation with them later.

* As for God to speak to Jesus, I didn't mean normal speech its either you misunderstood me or me misunderstood you. I mean if God can answer his son's prayer as the bible stated in many places, and since they are both are equal, then why the father cant ask the son to grant him something?

Well, there is no reason that the Father can't ask the son to grant him something. In fact, I believe he did just that. I believe that the Father and the son, agreed that the Son would voluntarily give his life as an atoning sacrifice to reconcile humankind back to God. This conversation took place before "the foundation of the world". And it was again that conversation which we hear the one side of as Jesus prays in the garden of Gethsemane. Beyond this, there is nothing that the Father needs to ask of the Son, for not confined to the limitations of human flesh there is nothing that the Father needs that he does not already contain in himself.

Try this on for size. When Muhammed prays to Allah, is that a one-way or two-way conversation? Is it just Muhammed asking things of Allah, or might Allah ever ask anything of Muhammaed. At first one might think that there is nothing that Muhammed can provide to Allah that he doesn't already have. But there is. Allah seeks an obedient servant. Allah seeks a voice. Allah seeks one to go forth in Allah's name. Muhammed can provide that. And so Allah does actually ask these things of Muhammad. And in the Christian understanding the Father asks these things of Jesus. Jesus is carrying out his Father's will. How does he know it? He asks, and the Father speaks to Jesus and asks his Son to carry out the Father's will.

that seems to be illogical actually "astaghfiralluah" but anyways.

No more so than Allah speaking to Muhammed.

* You have provided the communication or praying this way:
from Son to Father
from Son to Spirit "something like Spirit is powered Jesus, as I understand"

but not:
from God to son
from Spirit to Son

I hope you really get what I mean when I tried to differentiate between normal conversation or communication AND praying "asking for something"

Well, I get that you think that they are different. I'm not sure that I agree that they are. Yes, I do understand that we use the word "to pray" as a synonym for "to ask" or "to entreat". But, I've already tried to show how it is that some of this conversation you ask about has taken place even before the world began. And how, beyond reconciling humanity to God's self, which the Son was indeed asked to do, the Father and the Spirit had no needs that needed to be met by anyone, not even themselves.

Yup, I expected such length for such topics, its a confusing matter and even pages and pages won't be enough to explain it. Even though I found it hard to read it all in one day because of exams I am having these days so even if I got a reply I doubt it that I will post again in the next couple of weeks or we may even continue this through PMs but not now.

thanks for your reply again, even though I did notice that you went a little off topic that's why your reply was very long...but thanks anyways. I appreciate your time.

Well, good luck with your exams. May I ask what you are studying? I appreciate the manner in which you ask your questions, for it seems that you are serious in seeking to understand another's point of view without having to enter into unharmonious disputes. For your inquisitiveness I thank you. May Allah continue to guide you in all your steps and endeavors.

Peace.

[Grace Seeker]

well, what can we say about you when you believe that your god was tempted by satan, ate, slept, cried, went to washroom, humiliated and died on the cross by the hands of his creation, etc. etc. I do no think anyone want such a powerless god. However, since your are sort of advertising the idea that god can do anything: can your god lie, can he have sex with his creation, can he give birth? get my drift

I'm not advertising the idea that God can do anything. I'm saying that nothing is impossible with God. Those really are two different statments.

Since God is a "God of truth" (see Ps. 35:5 and Is. 65:16) then I find it highly improbable that he would lie. But could he? That is the same sort fo question as "Could God make a rock so big that God could not move it?" It is a question that asks God to deny himself, and God who is faithful and steadfast simply will not deny himself. So the question become irrelevant.

because god entering into creation is a pagan idea and not prophetic idea. what is the point of test if god is going to roam around in his creation?

God speaking to human kind is also a pagan idea. But that doesn't mean that it couldn't or hasn't happened.

It is a Muslim idea that the point of life is a test. It is not an idea that I believe properly reflects the character of God, nor does it deal with the problem of evil and human sin in the world. For it implies that it is possible to be good enough to pass the test. And that if one passes the test that God then has to grant you something for you have earned it with your passing grade. The reality is that not even Muslims believe that they earn heaven, it is always a gift from God, one that is a result not of their endeavors but of the heart directed toward God. So, the whole idea of life being about a test falls short of the mark of how we relate to God, not just in the Christian world, but ultimately in the Muslim world as well. God does seek our obedience, but this is not a test, this is a response of faith in the one in whom we put our trust to ultimately save us.

And so whether Christian or Muslim we offer our lives in obedience as a sort of spiritual worship, a type of sacrifice that harkens all the way back to Abraham's own obedience which God counted as a righteous act. Life is not a test as much as it is a demonstration of faith in God.

you are telling us to not limit god yet you believe he was limited by time and creation laws and boundaries. Why was your god raised up and to who? is he now inside of his creation or outside of it?

That last one is a good question. And I don't have a definitive answer for you, just my own personal opinion on the matter. But I believe that Jesus is now outside of time and space.

[Supreme]

Grace Seeker, may I say, you've cast a doubt out of my mind the other day when you said that the Son has always existed but Jesus hasn't. I was always struggling with that point of theology, but you strengthened my faith by your post. So thanks.

[Abdul Qadir]

The English word "heaven" is found 404 times in the translation known as the NIV. ("Heavens" is found 167 times and "heavenly" 35 times.

The word English word "hell" is found 14 times.

The exact phrase you ask about "heaven and hell" is never used.

Similar, but not identical, counts would be found in other English translations.


Of course the words which are translated as either "heaven" or "hell" in these English translations are from a number of different terms in the original languages, with connotations that vary widely from one usage with its particular context, to a different context and hence completely different meaning in another passage. Just as one should learn to read Arabic is one seeks to fully understand the Qur'an, it is also advisable to read Hebrew and Greek if one is going to have a nuanced discussion of the Bible.

So according to the bible, what is the hell for? its only mention 14 times btw...

[MSalman]

I'm not advertising the idea that God can do anything. I'm saying that nothing is impossible with God. Those really are two different statments.

and when did Muslims deny the concept of nothing is impossible for God? However, we deny ideas which do not befit Him: for example, having the attributes of humans and entering into His creation

so from your preservative, where do we stop and draw the line of what your god would do or not? since you believe your god was 100 % human and 100 % god then every attribute of human should be applied to him and not only few.

God speaking to human kind is also a pagan idea. But that doesn't mean that it couldn't or hasn't happened.

i'm sorry that is wrong...were there any pagans before Prophet Adam (peace be upon him)? The idea of revelation and Allah directly speaking to His Prophets (peace be upon them) is Prophetic idea. However, none of the Prophets (peace be upon them) preached that Allah Azza wa Jal can enter into His creation.

It is a Muslim idea that the point of life is a test. It is not an idea that I believe properly reflects the character of God, nor does it deal with the problem of evil and human sin in the world. For it implies that it is possible to be good enough to pass the test. And that if one passes the test that God then has to grant you something for you have earned it with your passing grade. The reality is that not even Muslims believe that they earn heaven, it is always a gift from God, one that is a result not of their endeavors but of the heart directed toward God. So, the whole idea of life being about a test falls short of the mark of how we relate to God, not just in the Christian world, but ultimately in the Muslim world as well. God does seek our obedience, but this is not a test, this is a response of faith in the one in whom we put our trust to ultimately save us.

Allhamdulillah, at least you admit that the idea of test is Muslims' idea and you kuffaar reject it. Your alien beliefs do not come from any Prophetic revelation so it has no value and plus it is only your opinion.

And so whether Christian or Muslim we offer our lives in obedience as a sort of spiritual worship, a type of sacrifice that harkens all the way back to Abraham's own obedience which God counted as a righteous act. Life is not a test as much as it is a demonstration of faith in God.

you are simply playing with words --- sacrifice itself alludes to the fact something has been set for you and in order to overcome or achieve it you need to sacrifice somethings. and that is called a test, checking whether you will choose and do A or B. however, because your whole idea and understanding is corrupt, you do not want to admit it and picking straws to construct your point.

So we have faith in God by lip service and holding onto blampsheous beliefs and practices? The belief in the heart is completed with affirming it with speech of the tongue and speech of the tongue is completed with actions of the limbs. All of this is compounded and faith and righteous deeds are not complete if any one of them is missing. You are only focusing on spirtual part because that's all you got in your history book but for rest of things you believe your god was so unjust that he gave you no rules and laws to live by. Hence, you make up your own laws, whatever you feel is good, or depend on humans. Ever wondered, why many of Christians are turning into secularists and liberalists?

That last one is a good question. And I don't have a definitive answer for you, just my own personal opinion on the matter. But I believe that Jesus is now outside of time and space.

I understand but crux of the matter is that you people are not certain about where is your god now! My other question was still stands: why was you god raised up? To who was he raised up? what was he gonna do up?

[Grace Seeker]

So according to the bible, what is the hell for? its only mention 14 times btw...

Yeah, thanks for tell me what I just told you about hell being mentioned by name only 14 times....I fail to see how this connects to the topic of the thread -- Christian worship of Jesus.

[Grace Seeker]

My other question was still stands: why was you god raised up? To who was he raised up? what was he gonna do up?

Jesus' resurrection serves as vindication of his life and sacrifice. Those who had him crucified thought that they had won the day, but obviously they hadn't. Even more importantly it shows that death and the devil don't win the day either. The resurrection is as strong of a proclamation as one could make that Christ is victor or all the sources and powers of evil in this world. The devil may have thought that he could lay claim to people who don't pass the test of life (I mention that because it seems to be important to you), death rather than life being the wages of sin. But Christ entered death and then like a time bomb going off in the very depths of hell itself he destroyed death. We will still experience physical death because our mortal bodies die, but we need never experience spiritual death because we have been claimed by and made alive forever in Jesus Christ.

The death and the devil no longer have any power to claim us, for Christ as already won that victory for us, one we could never win if it merely depended on our ability to pass the test of life where one slip and you die. That's the good news of the Gospel message, it no longer is one slip and you die. And that's always way the concept of the Injil that Muslims like to talk about is NOT what Jesus came for. He didn't come as much to tell us how to live, not even to be our example, he came to actually win life back for us. He didn't do that with words, but with action.

[mkh4JC]

Allhamdulillah, at least you admit that the idea of test is Muslims' idea and you kuffaar reject it. Your alien beliefs do not come from any Prophetic revelation so it has no value and plus it is only your opinion.
you are simply playing with words --- sacrifice itself alludes to the fact something has been set for you and in order to overcome or achieve it you need to sacrifice somethings. and that is called a test, checking whether you will choose and do A or B. however, because your whole idea and understanding is corrupt, you do not want to admit it and picking straws to construct your point.

From the Christian perspective, God has set life and death in front of us, and it is up to us to choose life:

'I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.' Deutoronomy 30: 19.

The things is, you can only choose life by accepting Christ as your savior and allowing him to live his life through you, being adopted into the family of God and beginning to live a life that is holy (yes I said holy), and pleasing in the sight of the Lord.

And the Christian life is one of hardship and suffering, so in that case there ARE tests, or the Lord putting you through things to prove you, so that you might come out as gold tried by fire. You don't go through things as a Christian so the Lord can see if you'll make it through, he already knows what you are going to do when you are in a mess or say, being oppressed of the devil, engaged in spiritual warfare, or when you are being persecuted; rather, you go through so God can show you what you are capable of enduring. And the more you go through, the stronger you get.

So we have faith in God by lip service and holding onto blampsheous beliefs and practices? The belief in the heart is completed with affirming it with speech of the tongue and speech of the tongue is completed with actions of the limbs. All of this is compounded and faith and righteous deeds are not complete if any one of them is missing. You are only focusing on spirtual part because that's all you got in your history book but for rest of things you believe your god was so unjust that he gave you no rules and laws to live by. Hence, you make up your own laws, whatever you feel is good, or depend on humans. Ever wondered, why many of Christians are turning into secularists and liberalists?

Christians are to emulate the life of Christ. Please be aware, that no one can completely emulate Christ, because he was perfect in all things. But by accepting Jesus into your life you then begin a journey towards perfection, and in fact, this is the only way you can begin that journey, other paths will get you no where. Why?

Because we are all born in sin and with sin nature, a natural inclination to do that which is wrong. When you accept Christ, God changes your nature, you are allowed to partake of his divine nature and you can begin to live a supernatural life. It is natural to life a life a slave to sin, it is supernatural to be able to live above it. And that is what you have in all other faith based systems with the exception of the Christian faith, people trying to live a spiritual life in the wholly corrupted flesh, and trying to please God with their own will power, when they are altogether alienated from God, unregenerated and born in sins, and need the Spirit of God living inside of them.

And it's true that someone who is really Christian can become an apostate, but in many of those cases I question whether they were truly saved (ie born again) to begin with. The Bible does say that during the last days there will be a Great Apostasy in the Church, one can see that happening before our eyes in the form of the Emergent Church. But I believe those who turn their backs on the Lord will be brought back into the fold so to speak, I don't think if you're truly Christian and you become an apostate that God won't bring you back into the fold.

I understand but crux of the matter is that you people are not certain about where is your god now! My other question was still stands: why was you god raised up? To who was he raised up? what was he gonna do up?

The Lord Jesus Christ sits at the right hand of the Father, interceding for us, and waiting until all enemies of the Gospel are put under his feet. Here's a good Pslam concerning that:

'The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou at my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.' Psalm 110: 1.

[Abdul Qadir]

Yeah, thanks for tell me what I just told you about hell being mentioned by name only 14 times....I fail to see how this connects to the topic of the thread -- Christian worship of Jesus.

Because i feel that the bible does not warn the ppl enuff..if there is such a thing like Hell, ppl need warning...especially those who disbelieve in Jesus Christ..but the bible seems to lack that...but the Quran says, whoever doesnt believe in monotheism, Allah will burn him in the hell-fire forever...many, many, many, many times...just like how Allah gives good news about the heavens in that same Quran...I feel that the bible has been changed too many a times from the original version to suit different ppl...

[mkh4JC]

Because i feel that the bible does not warn the ppl enuff..if there is such a thing like Hell, ppl need warning...especially those who disbelieve in Jesus Christ..but the bible seems to lack that...but the Quran says, whoever doesnt believe in monotheism, Allah will burn him in the hell-fire forever...many, many, many, many times...just like how Allah gives good news about the heavens in that same Quran...I feel that the bible has been changed too many a times from the original version to suit different ppl...

Maybe this will help:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_t...d_in_the_Bible

And in Revelation the apostle John says that both death and hell at the end of the age will be cast into the lake of fire, which is the second death.

[Abdul Qadir]

Maybe this will help:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_t...d_in_the_Bible

And in Revelation the apostle John says that both death and hell at the end of the age will be cast into the lake of fire, which is the second death.

Okay, thanks for the link Fedos. The hell seems to be mentioned as grave or pits...in islam, we have a "little" hell in the grave too...likewise, a little heaven in the grave...

[Grace Seeker]

Because i feel that the bible does not warn the ppl enuff..if there is such a thing like Hell, ppl need warning...especially those who disbelieve in Jesus Christ..but the bible seems to lack that...but the Quran says, whoever doesnt believe in monotheism, Allah will burn him in the hell-fire forever...many, many, many, many times...just like how Allah gives good news about the heavens in that same Quran...I feel that the bible has been changed too many a times from the original version to suit different ppl...

You seem to want to talk about the whole system of Christian and Islamic thought with regard to God/Allah. I've no objection to that idea. It would be a fine topic, just waaaaayyyy beyond the scope of this particular thread.

[Abdul Qadir]

You seem to want to talk about the whole system of Christian and Islamic thought with regard to God/Allah. I've no objection to that idea. It would be a fine topic, just waaaaayyyy beyond the scope of this particular thread.

well, im too lazy to search for the best appropriate thread...Sorry!!! anyway, its not really that waaaaayyy off the topic isn't it? lol...

[Grace Seeker]

well, im too lazy to search for the best appropriate thread...Sorry!!! anyway, its not really that waaaaayyy off the topic isn't it? lol...

I can make a connection between discussing Christian worship of Jesus and hell in the Christus Victor idea. But, seriously, is that what you had in mind? I would be curious how you connect the two topics?

[Insecured soul]

I remember ahmed deedats lecture in which he said our mind make pictures of whatever u say, so when u say jesus (pbuh), the father, the holy ghost are not 3 but one? how??? how can u picturised 3 into 1???? :)

when u say the father sitting in the heaven on his throne, what picture comes into ur mind? then u say jesus pbuh lived amonged men did so and so things what picture comes to ur mind? then u say holy ghost, what pictures u imagine?

and u can try it right now, try to make those pictures into 1.... and i find it impossible

salaam to all

[Abdul Qadir]

I can make a connection between discussing Christian worship of Jesus and hell in the Christus Victor idea. But, seriously, is that what you had in mind? I would be curious how you connect the two topics?

How i can connect those two topics? lol..i have no answer to that...just like that..random..ur not too offended aren't you?

[Grace Seeker]

How i can connected those two topics? lol..i have no answer to that...just like that..random..ur not too offended arn't you?

Nope, but I'll probably wait till another thread to talk about Hell and your question "according to the bible, what is the hell for?" unless someone else wants to ask the question in terms of Christian worship of Jesus.

[Grace Seeker]

I remember ahmed deedats lecture in which he said our mind make pictures of whatever u say,

Interesting, so whenever someone mentions Muhammad (pbuh), do you draw a picture of him in your mind?

[Abdul Qadir]

Interesting, so whenever someone mentions Muhammad (pbuh), do you draw a picture of him in your mind?

Whenever we think of Allah, are we allowed to "picture" Him? Ahmed Deedat oh Ahmed Deedat...

[mkh4JC]

I remember ahmed deedats lecture in which he said our mind make pictures of whatever u say, so when u say jesus (pbuh), the father, the holy ghost are not 3 but one? how??? how can u picturised 3 into 1???? :)

when u say the father sitting in the heaven on his throne, what picture comes into ur mind? then u say jesus pbuh lived amonged men did so and so things what picture comes to ur mind? then u say holy ghost, what pictures u imagine?

and u can try it right now, try to make those pictures into 1.... and i find it impossible

salaam to all

Well, the best way I can describe the Trinity is to say that we are made in the image of God (as described in the book of Genesis) and as God is Triune or a three-fold being and is still one so too are we: as it goes; God=The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; human beings=the spirit, the soul, and the body.

[Danah]

Interesting, so whenever someone mentions Muhammad (pbuh), do you draw a picture of him in your mind?

There is an authenticated Hadeeth Actually describing the prophet Mohammed image in details (his length, skin color, hair, eyes.....etc).
He is a human after all man!!
Seriously Grace Seeker!! I don't understand how can someone like you with your knowledge about Islam put Mohammed peace be upon him (the human) in comparison with God!!

[tango92]

Nope, but I'll probably wait till another thread to talk about Hell and your question "according to the bible, what is the hell for?" unless someone else wants to ask the question in terms of Christian worship of Jesus.

christ is supposed to have died for all human sins, but what about the people before jesus? how could they belive in his crucifixion when it hadnt taken place?

[mkh4JC]

christ is supposed to have died for all human sins, but what about the people before jesus? how could they belive in his crucifixion when it hadnt taken place?

The Old Testament saints were awaiting the promise of the Messiah. God judged people during the Old Testament by their response to that promise, and by keeping the law. But he also made provision for those who didn't live in the Jewish state:

'For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themsevles:

Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;' Romans 2: 14-15.

I don't believe this is saying that you can hear the Gospel many, many times and consider it hogwash and still go to heaven. I think this is saying for people who never hear the name of Jesus, God has still made a way available for even them. And of course many Missionaries attest to going throughout all the world and preaching the Gospel and the people who have never heard of Jesus confess that they've had dreams of him.

To further expound upon this concept, where did the Old Testament saints go upon death? They didn't go to heaven:

'Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.' Ephesians 4: 9-10.


'And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptously every day: And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.

Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.' Luke 16: 19-31.

Last few scriptures is here and then I'll make my point: 'Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.' Ephesians 4: 8

And here: 'And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,

And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.' Matthew 27: 52-53.

So then hell as we know it from the Christian perspective is actually at this moment in time in the center of the Earth. But before Jesus died to save man from his sins, paradise was also in the center of the earth. There was between the two areas a great gulf fixed, so that no man could travel from here to there. When Jesus ascended, he delivered those who were in the center of the Earth who were the Lord's people out of the Earth. Some of them went on to be with the Lord in the third heaven (where God is), and some of them walked among men.

[Grace Seeker]

There is an authenticated Hadeeth Actually describing the prophet Mohammed image in details (his length, skin color, hair, eyes.....etc).
He is a human after all man!!
Seriously Grace Seeker!! I don't understand how can someone like you with your knowledge about Islam put Mohammed peace be upon him (the human) in comparison with God!!

I'm not putting Muhammad in comparison with God. I'm questioning adib1234's process by which he is evaluating the Trinity. He rejects the concept of the Trinity on the grounds that he has been told that one automatically creates a picture of whatever one things about and he cannot create a picture in his mind of the Trinity that is not shirk. Yet, according to the knowledge of Islam that I have, one is not even allowed to create a picture of Muhammad in any medium -- seems to me that would include the pictures of one's mind. But if we accept the premise that adib1234 has with regard to mental constructs being formed of anything one speaks about, then to speak about Muhammad, who indeed is a human after all, would create a picture of him in one's mind. So, if Ahmed Deet and adib1234 are to be believed, the very process of thinking about Muhammad (pbuh) would (intentional or not) violate the tenents of Islam.

Now, personally, I don't there is anything wrong with coming up with a picture of Muhammad in one's mind. But abid1234 would not want to for it would violate his beliefs. My guess is that in reality it is possible for him to think about Muhammad without having to form a specific picture in his mind. Thus, by example from his own practice, I am trying to show abid1234 that Ahmed Deedat's claim that "our mind make pictures of whatever u say" simply isn't so. And just as adib1234 is able to think of Muhammad without forming a specific picture in his mind, I am capable of thinking of the Trinity without forming a specific picture in my mind. However, the fact that I don't have a specific picture doesn't make the Trinity any less real than the fact that adib1234 doesn't have a specific picture in his mind makes Muhammad not real.

[Grace Seeker]

christ is supposed to have died for all human sins, but what about the people before jesus? how could they belive in his crucifixion when it hadnt taken place?

Good question. But it presupposes an assumption that you might be surprised to find is not a necessary part of Christian theology. It presupposes that a person has to know the Biblical story about Jesus to receive the benefits of his acts. The NT itself says that this isn't so. Rather, Hebrews has a whole chapter, Hebrews 11, that discusses that there is a whole list of people who lived and died generations before the time of Christ that simply put their faith in God knowing that he would accomplish their salvation. And this list is not exhaustive, but simply representative of how God works through faith in the lives of those who trust him. Jesus' life, death, and resurrection are still the means of one's reconciliation with God, but the faith we need doesn't have to be articulated around that particular story, but simply in God himself.

[Uthman]

Greetings Grace Seeker,

Now, personally, I don't there is anything wrong with coming up with a picture of Muhammad in one's mind.

Neither does Islam. :) There is no prohibition on picturing Prophet Muhammad (:saws:) in one's mind. If you are interested, you can find very detailed descriptions of his physical appearance here.

Also, if I may, I think you may have misunderstood Brother adib's argument (which I don't necessarily endorse myself). If I understood correctly, he was arguing that, although it might be possible for the human mind to form a mental image of the three separate entities of the trinity individually, it isn't possible for the mind to picture them all as one. He rejects the concept as illogical on that basis. Again, I'm just saying this for the sake of clarification. I'm not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with the argument.

Regards

[Grace Seeker]

Greetings Grace Seeker, Neither does Islam. :) There is no prohibition on picturing Prophet Muhammad (:saws:) in one's mind. If you are interested, you can find very detailed descriptions of his physical appearance here.

Thank-you for the edification. I had read differently in other places. Maybe there isn't universal agreement on this point. So, can I put down on paper that which I see in my mind's eye?

Also, if I may, I think you may have misunderstood Brother adib's argument (which I don't necessarily endorse myself). If I understood correctly, he was arguing that, although it might be possible for the human mind to form a mental image of the three separate entities of the trinity individually, it isn't possible for the mind to picture them all as one. He rejects the concept as illogical on that basis. Again, I'm just saying this for the sake of clarification. I'm not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with the argument.

Regards

I'll grant that may have been what was intended to be said, but if so this is just another way of saying that if a human mind can't conceive of something that it therefore cannot be. No human mind conceived of the Qur'an, therefore it cannot be. I trust you see the fallacy of that argument without further comment.

[Uthman]

Greetings,

Thanks for the reply.

Thank-you for the edification. I had read differently in other places. Maybe there isn't universal agreement on this point. So, can I put down on paper that which I see in my mind's eye?

Well I'm certainly not aware of any difference of opinion amongst mainstream/orthodox scholarship on this issue. The answer to your question, as far as (I believe all) mainstream Islamic scholars are concerned, is no. See this.

But we now digress from the topic. Feel free to continue discussing this elsewhere.

Regards

[MSalman]

Jesus' resurrection serves as vindication of his life and sacrifice.

what was the point of sacrifice if he was resurrected after three days? Is that how the sacrifice was defined and understood in Torah?

Those who had him crucified thought that they had won the day, but obviously they hadn't. Even more importantly it shows that death and the devil don't win the day either. The resurrection is as strong of a proclamation as one could make that Christ is victor or all the sources and powers of evil in this world. The devil may have thought that he could lay claim to people who don't pass the test of life (I mention that because it seems to be important to you), death rather than life being the wages of sin. But Christ entered death and then like a time bomb going off in the very depths of hell itself he destroyed death. We will still experience physical death because our mortal bodies die, but we need never experience spiritual death because we have been claimed by and made alive forever in Jesus Christ.

completely irrelevant to what is being discussed. So resurrection was the way to show that the day was won by your god? Why did he not save himself from being murdered at the hands of his creation? What was he doing then by humiliating himself? Did he lost on that day? did he also lose on the day when he was tempted by satan?

The death and the devil no longer have any power to claim us

oh really, yet more than half of the population is not christian

for Christ as already won that victory for us

if the victory is already claimed then what is the point of life continuing. why didn't your god just end the world right there? if everyone is going to go to heaven by just saying "i believe in the god who was killed by his creation", what is the point?

one we could never win if it merely depended on our ability to pass the test of life where one slip and you die.

neither one could win by disobeying the Lord. I do not know which religion say that we get the heaven only due to our ability or there is death afterlife, at least not Islam.

That's the good news of the Gospel message, it no longer is one slip and you die. And that's always way the concept of the Injil that Muslims like to talk about is NOT what Jesus came for. He didn't come as much to tell us how to live, not even to be our example, he came to actually win life back for us. He didn't do that with words, but with action.

well, maybe in your pseudo christian world but not in Prophetic world. In Prophetic world, God does not enter into His creation neither gets humiliated and killed by His creation nor screams to Himself for forsaking Himself.

[MSalman]

From the Christian perspective, God has set life and death in front of us, and it is up to us to choose life:

'I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.' Deutoronomy 30: 19.

The things is, you can only choose life by accepting Christ as your savior and allowing him to live his life through you, being adopted into the family of God and beginning to live a life that is holy (yes I said holy), and pleasing in the sight of the Lord.

And the Christian life is one of hardship and suffering, so in that case there ARE tests, or the Lord putting you through things to prove you, so that you might come out as gold tried by fire. You don't go through things as a Christian so the Lord can see if you'll make it through, he already knows what you are going to do when you are in a mess or say, being oppressed of the devil, engaged in spiritual warfare, or when you are being persecuted; rather, you go through so God can show you what you are capable of enduring. And the more you go through, the stronger you get.

my friend that is fine but some of your fellow brothers try to play around with words and you have seen the example of grace seeker.

Christians are to emulate the life of Christ. Please be aware, that no one can completely emulate Christ, because he was perfect in all things. But by accepting Jesus into your life you then begin a journey towards perfection, and in fact, this is the only way you can begin that journey, other paths will get you no where. Why?

Because we are all born in sin and with sin nature, a natural inclination to do that which is wrong. When you accept Christ, God changes your nature, you are allowed to partake of his divine nature and you can begin to live a supernatural life. It is natural to life a life a slave to sin, it is supernatural to be able to live above it. And that is what you have in all other faith based systems with the exception of the Christian faith, people trying to live a spiritual life in the wholly corrupted flesh, and trying to please God with their own will power, when they are altogether alienated from God, unregenerated and born in sins, and need the Spirit of God living inside of them.

And it's true that someone who is really Christian can become an apostate, but in many of those cases I question whether they were truly saved (ie born again) to begin with. The Bible does say that during the last days there will be a Great Apostasy in the Church, one can see that happening before our eyes in the form of the Emergent Church. But I believe those who turn their backs on the Lord will be brought back into the fold so to speak, I don't think if you're truly Christian and you become an apostate that God won't bring you back into the fold.

this does not address any of my points. see the problem with you people is that your boat does not move away from spiritual concept. Life is not all about spiritual laws but this is all you got in your history book. Everything else is left to humans: either relaying on group of people or your own reasoning.

Grace Seeker claimed that day has won and all that yet you people are fighting non-believers day and night. in addition, you are left in chaos because you have to relay on humans to governor rules in your life.

The Lord Jesus Christ sits at the right hand of the Father, interceding for us, and waiting until all enemies of the Gospel are put under his feet. Here's a good Pslam concerning that:

'The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou at my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.' Psalm 110: 1.

and where is that exactly? so the jesus god is sitting at the right hand of father god? so we have two gods now?

[Grace Seeker]

and where is that exactly? so the jesus god is sitting at the right hand of father god? so we have two gods now?

You repeatedly have much trouble with Biblical metaphor. Do you interpret the Qu'ran so literally?

[Supreme]

if the victory is already claimed then what is the point of life continuing. why didn't your god just end the world right there? if everyone is going to go to heaven by just saying "i believe in the god who was killed by his creation", what is the point?

Because 'our' God wanted the Good news (Gospel in Old English) to reach every person in every nation, otherwise such a victory is futile. Moreover, if everyone goes to heaven by just saying 'I believe in Allah and Muhammed is his messenger', what is the point?

[Grace Seeker]

well, maybe in your pseudo christian world but not in Prophetic world. In Prophetic world, God does not enter into His creation neither gets humiliated and killed by His creation nor screams to Himself for forsaking Himself.

There is not a Prophetic world and a pseudo Christian world or even a merely Christian world. There is just the one world that God made and you and I with our different worldviews both live in it. You might think my worldview is wrong, but I see that as your problem, not mine.

As to the what is the Gospel, it certainly is not what you mean when you speak of the Injil. They are so different in concept you shouldn't even translate the word Injil into English if the best you can do is Gospel, because you just confuse the issue.

Mark begins, "The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God" (Mark 1:1), which shows it is not just a record of facts, but a message based on them. This Gospel message is based not on the words of Jesus, but on the events of Jesus' life. At least this is what Christians mean by the term. It is what we have always meant by the term since it was first coined as a euangelion, a message of good news. That good news is in the reconciling work of Christ. If you are not talking about that, but a series of rules and regulations, then you are still talking about Law. And Jesus made it clear in his own preaching, that his gospel was about a new kingdom that is founded on a new order. A message that in essence says, "he knows when you've been bad or good, so be good for goodness sakes" isn't really any thing new, it's just Law repackaged, and it certainly isn't a gospel message.

[Grace Seeker]

completely irrelevant to what is being discussed.

If you think the Chirstus victor idea is not relevant to the discussion it only shows you don't understand issues at the heart of this discussion.

So resurrection was the way to show that the day was won by your god?

It showed that the devil had not won. This goes all the way back to dealing with questions like the problem of pain, why do bad things happen to good people, and where does sin come from in a perfect world created by a God who declares it to be good. Even in Islamic thought, there is a neutral world, why does it go downhill from there? If God created Iblis, then is God the author of evil? How does simply commanding people to do right by God accomplish anything? We still see that even those who claim to be followers of Islam still sin and don't follow. Is God suppose to just overlook this? The honor of Allah is so important to Muslims, and yet they don't seem to mind that in the end God simply accepts that people are imperfect and without any upholding of his own divine character, one sullied by those who should have been obedient to him but are (some a little bit disobedient, some a lot, but none who are never disobey, so that all dishonor Allah at some point). Without rectifiying this situation what we have is a God who stand impotent in the face of his belligerent children that can sin breaking his rules and not living in complete submission and he just has to take it. He can either justly condemn us all to hell in which case Ibilis has won a victory over Allah in stealing all of Allah's creation from him. Or, Allah can deny his own honor and grant acceptance into paradise with him to those who have dishonored him.

So, which is it? You decide. Does Allah lose to Ibilis? Or does Allah stoop to allowing those who have dishonored him to be accepted? Both of our respective faiths have concluded that it is the later. Islam does not put forth a mechanism by which Allah accomplishes this other than to accept the dishonor. Christianity proposes that in Jesus Christ there is a means by which God's honor is perserved and imperfect people saved at the same time. The Christus victor idea is very relevant to that discussion. And if you understood it, you would have your answer to all the other question that you continue to meaninglessly repeat thread after thread:

Why did he not save himself from being murdered at the hands of his creation?

What was he doing then by humiliating himself?

Did he lost on that day? did he also lose on the day when he was tempted by satan?

if the victory is already claimed then what is the point of life continuing. why didn't your god just end the world right there? if everyone is going to go to heaven by just saying "i believe in the god who was killed by his creation", what is the point?

I say meaninglessly repeat because I have seen these or similar ones possessed by you before. I and other Christians have addressed them. You continue to return to them as if they have not be addressed. Even if you don't accept our answers, if you actually were serious in asking your questions you would do more than to continue to pose them time and time again as a serious of nothing more than rhetorical questions, for which I don't believe even care to read for understanding, but only to get your next post.

When I sense that you actually care to listen I'll respond, but until then I've said all that I need to say with regard to your "questions".

[mkh4JC]

this does not address any of my points. see the problem with you people is that your boat does not move away from spiritual concept. Life is not all about spiritual laws but this is all you got in your history book. Everything else is left to humans: either relaying on group of people or your own reasoning.

This is what I highlighted in your post and endeavored to respond to:

you believe your god was so unjust that he gave you no rules and laws to live by. Hence, you make up your own laws, whatever you feel is good, or depend on humans. Ever wondered, why many of Christians are turning into secularists and liberalists?

We as Christians are under a better Covenant than the Old Testament laws that the Jews had to live by, a more perfect Covenant. It is impossible for a human being to try to live out the law of the Old Testament perfectly. Christ did away with the law. He came into the world, lived a life perfectly under the law, gave his life for sinners, and was raised the third day, conquering death and sin for us.

When you accept him, you receive his perfect righteousness (remember he lived perfectly under the law) and you are then delivered from all the things that you were bound with while you were in your sins, so that you can begin to live a life of holiness. The message of the Gospel is that we can never do anything of our own power to appease a God who demands perfection. God gave the law to the Jewish people so they could see just how far short they came from meeting the mark, so they could see that they desperately needed a Savior.

Grace Seeker claimed that day has won and all that yet you people are fighting non-believers day and night. in addition, you are left in chaos because you have to relay on humans to governor rules in your life.

Christ rests, rules, and abides with each and every believer. He rules our lives. He watches over us. God will establish his earthly rule and kingdom in this world, but this is a time of grace that we are all under. You don't see fire raining down from heaven like in the Old Testament. God is giving man a chance to come to him. Once God wraps up this age, then he will usher in his kingdom, and all those who have accepted Christ throughout the ages will enter in.

and where is that exactly? so the jesus god is sitting at the right hand of father god? so we have two gods now?

The best way that I can explain the Trinity is to say that we are made in the image and likeness of God (as it is described in Genesis) and as God is a Triune or three-fold being and still one so too are we three-fold beings: as it goes; God=The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit; human beings=the spirit, the soul, and the body.

[Grace Seeker]

Christ rests, rules, and abides with each and every believer. He rules our lives. He watches over us. God will establish his earthly rule and kingdom in this world, but this is a time of grace that we are all under. You don't see fire raining down from heaven like in the Old Testament. God is giving man a chance to come to him. Once God wraps up this age, then he will usher in his kingdom, and all those who have accepted Christ throughout the ages will enter in.

And let us not forget that the created world is more than just a material world. The spiritual world is a also a part of this created world and there is an existential level to it in which God reconciles us to himself. The eschataological end times that so many people look forward to as the resolution of all things is not where the issue is resolved. Rather, it has already been settled. Jesus' offering of himself on the cross is not just an event that took place in time and space, the resultant acts of sinful men. It was a cosmic event so that by his stripes we are healed. And his resurrection was likewise a cosmic event, destroying the power of not just the devil but of sin and even death itself. As recipients of God's grace, we don't have to await some eschatalogical end time to know that we have been redeemed, we experience such presence of God in our lives in the here and now through the presence of God's Holy Spirit which is given as an assurance (a seal) of an already realized hope in our own lives even now, not just in the end. And this same victory has been won even for those who reject it, "for God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him [Christ], and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross" (Colossians 1:19-20). Sadly, not everyone appropriates for themselves that which has already been made available to them, and that is what the time of grace is for. Not awaiting a final victory, for it is finished. The present is a time of prevenient grace that all might come to knowledge of and accept this already available saving grace.

[Insecured soul]

Whenever we think of Allah, are we allowed to "picture" Him? Ahmed Deedat oh Ahmed Deedat...

its not about allowing or allowing its how we are made its how our brain works

if i tell u that im 5.8 wheatesh, thin, and have long hair would u not imagine how i look?

there is no physical discription of allah swt in quran so u can never imagine him as it is we can never imagine him or else if there was one then im sure even we would have idols symbolizing god

what ahmed deedat actually meant was that when christian say that 3 are 1 our mind doesnt accept that and it aint logical

i dont know if someone else finds this logical but i do.

[Abdul Qadir]

its not about allowing or allowing its how we are made its how our brain works

if i tell u that im 5.8 wheatesh, thin, and have long hair would u not imagine how i look?

there is no physical discription of allah swt in quran so u can never imagine him as it is we can never imagine him or else if there was one then im sure even we would have idols symbolizing god

what ahmed deedat actually meant was that when christian say that 3 are 1 our mind doesnt accept that and it aint logical

i dont know if someone else finds this logical but i do.

Brother Adib, i was being ignorant when i said that. May Allah bless the soul of Ahmed Deedat...and may Allah forgive me..

[Grace Seeker]

what ahmed deedat actually meant was that when christian say that 3 are 1 our mind doesnt accept that and it aint logical

i dont know if someone else finds this logical but i do.

No, I actually find it not a logical response, but an emotional one. Simply because one is not able to understand the logic of something does not mean that it is illogical. There is much in this world that I don't understand. I don't understand the inner workings of an atom, but I don't assume that atomic theory is illogical for that reason. I've read and understood some Plato and Aristotle, but not everything they wrote. Does that mean that because I fail to understand the logic of some of the world's greatest philosophers that they are illogical? I don't think so. I read the Qur'an and find it saying things that to me simply don't make sense. Would I therefore be correct in saying that the Qur'an is therefore illogical? Or do these things simply illustrate my own deficiencies? Sometimes we need to be willing to admit that just because something doesn't make sense to me, that it doesn't mean that it is automatically wrong. Does it make sense that a holy Allah would allow sinful people to be admitted to paradise simply because they've done more good than evil as if life was all about balancing a scale, so that Allah would actually admit into his holy and perfect world, people that while good are also at the same time guilty of sins against both Allah and Allah's creation? It doesn't make sense to me, but I'm sure it does to you. Should I therefore say that your understanding of the ways of Allah are illogical simply because they don't fit my worldview? I believe to do that would be not a logical decision, but an emotional one. And I suggest that your response to the ideas of the Trinity which you fail to understand is similarly more of an emotional reaction to your own deficient understanding than the "logical" process you project it to be.

[anatolian]

Now, could we say that human worship is a part of Christianity inevitably or would it be an irrevelant statement?

[Grace Seeker]

Now, could we say that human worship is a part of Christianity inevitably or would it be an irrevelant statement?

I don't know. I'm not sure what you mean by it?

[anatolian]

Maybe my bad English.

Can we say that human worship exists in Christianity as a result or is it an irrevelant statement?

[Grace Seeker]

Can we say that human worship exists in Christianity as a result or is it an irrevelant statement?

Can you say that human worship exists in Christianity as a result of what? Because Jesus was both God and man?

Maybe my bad English.

O zaman Türkçe konuşunuz. Belki anlayayım. :D

[anatolian]

Can you say that human worship exists in Christianity as a result of what? Because Jesus was both God and man?



O zaman Türkçe konuşunuz. Belki anlayayım. :D

Tamam, sen istedin. Nihayetinde doğru anladınız, İsa'nın Hristiyanlıkta hem Tanrı hem insan olması sebebiyle.

I can translate or erase it if mods want so.

[Grace Seeker]

Still trying to understand the question: "Did I finally understand Jesus and God in Christianity because of the human being?"


Taken alongside your previous question: "Can we say that human worship exists in Christianity as a result or is it an irrevelant statement?" I'm going to try to answer, and then you let me know if I'm addressing the question you are actually asking or not.



At one level I can understand why one might think that Christians worship a human being. We do worship Jesus, and we acknowledge that he was a human being. But it is not his humanness that we worship. We worship Jesus because we believe him to actually be the one and only God of the universe, the creator of all things, the Lord God himself. We believe that though God exists completely outside of time and space and the created world, that he chose to enter into it and identify himself with fleshly humanity and did so specifically in the person of Jesus who has two natures in his one person being both 100% God and 100% man at the same time.

Now, I can see in scripture why those assertions with regard to Jesus are made. I will also readily confess that while I can see why the claims are made, I still have a hard time understanding exactly how it works as it is described as working. It is one of those things where scripture tells you what is true, without telling us exactly how it is possible for it to be true.

The Apostle Paul who when we first meet him in the book Acts is actually attacking Christians speciifically because they are promoting this Jesus as God becomes the biggest convert and takes up the cause with more zeal than perhaps anyone else in history. He seems to find vindication of the idea that Jesus is God in the proclamation of his death and resurrection. Obviously, that was something experienced by the human being Jesus. And it is for this that Paul declares that Jesus is elevated to a position of glory.

But really, the resurrection itself is presented as a two-fold event. Partly it is because of Jesus' complete and utter obedience. Since he willing submitted even to death -- and here we have the archetype of the sacrifice of Abraham's son who was willing to be submissive to God's commands, but was spared by the offering of a ram. But Jesus is not spared; rather, he is declared to be "the Lamb of God". And because of of this willingness to fulfill all that was asked of him by God, God rewards Jesus with resurrection and glorification. In this sense Jesus is just the perfect human being, who God then glorifies with the glory that is normally reserved for himself. My concern with this is that then I think Christianity is guilty of having a form of polytheism. The other way that the resurrection is presented is that in giving his life up as an offering for sin, and taking on the consequences of that in his own life, those consequence being death, that Jesus suffered and died as a human and (in accordance with the first century Jewish understanding of what happens to all men at the point of death) he descended to the region of the dead. The devil, who is understood to be God's adversary and seeks to claim all people, felt that he had finally won a vicotry. But the reality is that he had no legitimate claim to Jesus, for Jesus had committed no sin and was not deserving of death. Thus, he burst the bonds of hell and death and led those who had been captive there to new and eternal life. This he did because of the power and nature of God that was within him. Some of the oldest Christian stories of explaining this resurrection of all the dead, tell of it as if death were like a fish swallowing the bait but there was a hook (the eternal life of God that was present within Jesus), and so death swallowed that as well and was defeated by it. In this way Jesus is presented as God who actually submits himself to take on all that is wrong with humanity upon himself in order to do away with it and rid us of it. He is not himself stained by it, but he does endure its pain in order to free us.

In either way of thinking, it is in the humanity of Jesus that God accomplishes for us what is necessary to bring about our salvation. And for that we celebrate what Jesus did. But I don't think we would worship him, if we understood him to be nothing more than a great man. It is because it was really God who did this in the person of Jesus and that we understand God and Jesus to be one and the same being that we worship him. For to worship God is to, at least in part, give thanks for what he did in Jesus. And to worship Jesus is to worship the God who made himself known by coming to dwell among us in the flesh. We don't draw a distinction between the two. (Which, btw, is why the whole problem of ascribing partners to God never makes sense to us Christians. We don't imagine Jesus being a partner with God at all, since we understand him to actually be God.)

[abu salaahudeen]

Nope. What happened is that in reading the scriptures as they talked about Jesus, Christians realized that in some places it talked about Jesus as just an ordinary man -- he wept, was hungry, bled and died, he had limited knowledge, he was clearly uniquely not God the Father; yet in those same scriptures, often in the same context, he exhibited traits that are known to be uniquely divine in nature -- he did miracles, he claimed the power to forgive sins, he was describe as existing before time and outside of creation, even being the one who did the act of creating, he was one with the Father.

The first century Christians never seemed to question these things, they just accepted them as all being true of Jesus. But in later centuries questions arose about whether one set of traits meant that Jesus ought to be understood as divine and then another that Jesus ought to be understood as merely human, and then some came up with all sorts of hybrid options -- a human body with a divine soul for instance or that his body was just an illusion. The church wrestled with it for about 300 years till the forumula called the hypostatic union was articulated and that idea seems to have stuck, at least with the majority.

But while the idea as you hear us talk about it has its roots in the Bible it is never specifically spelled out in the Bible. If it had been, it would have saved us a few hundred years of reading and wrestling with the idea to understand how it was that the Bible presented Jesus both ways at the same time.

So let me get this straight it does not mention of Jesus' divinity specifically but it speaks of his human self? So how is it that you derive this in such great length?

Beacause a person performs miracles it does not this person a god incarnate

[anatolian]

Still trying to understand the question: "Did I finally understand Jesus and God in Christianity because of the human being?"


Taken alongside your previous question: "Can we say that human worship exists in Christianity as a result or is it an irrevelant statement?" I'm going to try to answer, and then you let me know if I'm addressing the question you are actually asking or not.

OK. I understand your explanation. The human nature of Jesus is irrevelant when you worship him so you don't worship human.

[Grace Seeker]

OK. I understand your explanation. The human nature of Jesus is irrevelant when you worship him so you don't worship human.

Çok iyi. Bu tam olarak olduğuna.

So let me get this straight it does not mention of Jesus' divinity specifically but it speaks of his human self? So how is it that you derive this in such great length?

It is the concept of the hypostatic union that is only inferred and not specifically spelled out in the Bible. I didn't say that Jesus' divinity isn't spelled out in the Bible. It is most certainly mentioned in statements as simple as Matthew's recounting of Jesus being called Immanuel "which means 'God with us'." Or Paul's statement that Jesus "being in very nature God."

Beacause a person performs miracles it does not this person a god incarnate

Not in and by themselves. Taken together with the other things I listed and you have a clear presentation of Jesus as not only being understood to be divine by the Gospel writers but as understanding himself to be God as well. For no good teacher would claim to forgive sins -- something that Jesus' Jewish contemporaries understood only God has the authority to do -- unless he actually had the power and authority to do so. So, if Jesus is not God, then he is most certainly not the good teacher or prophet of God that others make him out to be, but rather a man who falsely claimed divine perogatives for himself. For, Jesus most certainly did claim to forgive sins and then later would confer this to his disciples through the giving of the Holy Spirit (God present in their lives). Such a claim if true means that he is God, and if false means that he is as antithetical to the ways of God as the devil himself. There is no inbetween ground.

[Getoffmyback]

You know , a good believer in christianity will say : Ok muslim sis bro you are right and i'm convinced in your point of view ... But we have the nukes.

[Italianguy]

You know , a good believer in christianity will say : Ok muslim sis bro you are right and i'm convinced in your point of view ... But we have the nukes.

Our nukes are bigger than yours..naa ..na...na..na..naaaaaa;D

I'm only kidding.......

[Grace Seeker]

You know , a good believer in christianity will say : Ok muslim sis bro you are right and i'm convinced in your point of view ... But we have the nukes.

Your "way of life" may be undisclosed, but your cynicism is now out there for all to see.

[Getoffmyback]

Your "way of life" may be undisclosed, but your cynicism is now out there for all to see.

What do you say to director of mounty python and the life of brian ? And the holy grail? What cynicism exactly you see here?

[Grace Seeker]

What do you say to director of mounty python and the life of brian ? And the holy grail? What cynicism exactly you see here?

I do see them as cynics, and sarcastic cynics to boot, lampooning everything in sight.

Also, I don't like their stuff and find it generally more repulsive than comedic in nature. So, as a rule, I don't watch them. If you're post was a take off from their work, it would have gone completely over my head.

[Getoffmyback]

I do see them as cynics, and sarcastic cynics to boot, lampooning everything in sight.

Also, I don't like their stuff and find it generally more repulsive than comedic in nature. So, as a rule, I don't watch them. If you're post was a take off from their work, it would have gone completely over my head.

Well i'm lebanese and i do believe in the american constitution of liberties. Are you american?

[Grace Seeker]

Well i'm lebanese and i do believe in the american constitution of liberties. Are you american?

Yes, though that could be said of people from many different countries in the Americas over an area extremely geographically diverse ranging from Canada to Chile. More specifically I was born and raised in the United States of America and am a citizen of the same.

Now, how is that relevant to any of the present conversation?

[Getoffmyback]

Yes, though that could be said of people from many different countries in the Americas over an area extremely geographically diverse ranging from Canada to Chile. More specifically I was born and raised in the United States of America and am a citizen of the same.

Now, how is that relevant to any of the present conversation?

you accusing me of cynicism, you are violating my rights of freedom of speach...:)

by the way do you always use scriptures in your answers , why not logic?

[Grace Seeker]

you accusing me of cynicism, you are violating my rights of freedom of speach...:)

You're free to be a cynic and present yourself that way, and I'm free to label your comments as being cynical.

by the way do you always use scriptures in your answers , why not logic?

Interesting question, but not well founded in actual facts as it seems to presuppose things that aren't even close to being true, namely: that I "always" use scriptures in my answers, and that I object to the use of logic.

[Getoffmyback]

You're free to be a cynic and present yourself that way, and I'm free to label your comments as being cynical.




Interesting question, but not well founded in actual facts as it seems to presuppose things that aren't even close to being true, names: that I "always" use scriptures in my answers, and that I object to the use of logic.

if its for you..... you are to make Bible-obeying disciples of anybody that gets in your way!
i'm a logic guy. thx anyway

[Grace Seeker]

you are to make Bible-obeying disciples of anybody that gets in your way!

That's not actually what the Bible says.

[Getoffmyback]

That's not actually what the Bible says.

its not written in the bible its just a sentence to discribe you ...i didnt say its written in the bible or "the bible says", and i'll say it again ..."if its for you.....you are to make Bible-obeying disciples of anybody that gets in your way"
freedom of speach...u say i'm a cynic "well good" ...but its way much better of bein a Fundamentalist like you.

[Grace Seeker]

ibut its way much better of bein a Fundamentalist like you.

What is it about your perception of me that leads you to believe that I am a fundamentalist?

[Getoffmyback]

What is it about your perception of me that leads you to believe that I am a fundamentalist?

your reply below makes me believe that

I "always" use scriptures in my answers, and that I object to the use of logic.

[Grace Seeker]

your reply below makes me believe that

The quote you provide is so highly editted that it distorts what I actually said. You are the one that asserted that I did those things. I said that such an assertion was false and yet you use still use them as justification for your view with regard to me. Your claim with regard to yourself is "I'm a logic guy", but I don't see it evidenced in this thread yet.

[Getoffmyback]

The quote you provide is so highly editted that it distorts what I actually said. You are the one that asserted that I did those things. I said that such an assertion was false and yet you use still use them as justification for your view with regard to me. Your claim with regard to yourself is "I'm a logic guy", but I don't see it evidenced in this thread yet.

"All is fair in love (and war)";D;D

carry on...


but remember freedom of speech. ok grace

[Grace Seeker]

"All is fair in love (and war)";D;D

Do you really believe that? And which do you perceive yourself to be engaged in presently?

but remember freedom of speech. ok grace

Which is still restricted when it comes to yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theather or committing slander. You've labelled me a "fundamentalist", you've also said that I "always" quote scripture and don't utilize logic. What evidence do you have for such statements that doesn't include egregious editing of my posts and misrepresentation of what I've actually said and believe?

[tango92]

guys chill. and mr grace seeker i believe it was you who sugested we stay on topic in a different thread.

you wanna bash each other, then take it outside!! lol

[Grace Seeker]

guys chill. and mr grace seeker i believe it was you who sugested we stay on topic in a different thread.

Agreed! :statisfie

[Getoffmyback]

Do you really believe that? And which do you perceive yourself to be engaged in presently?




Which is still restricted when it comes to yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theather or committing slander. You've labelled me a "fundamentalist", you've also said that I "always" quote scripture and don't utilize logic. What evidence do you have for such statements that doesn't include egregious editing of my posts and misrepresentation of what I've actually said and believe?

what am i supposed to expect from a guy that forced himself not to watch the monty python.

carry on..

[Uthman]

Let's get back on topic and be respectful now. :)