Do christians worship God (not Jesus)?

[MustafaMc]

Peace, GraceSeeker, thank you for the thorough answer to my questions. You and several other Christians have put forth good explantions for the Christian perspective on the "unity of the Trinity".

 

[Armand]

Peace, GraceSeeker, thank you for the thorough answer to my questions. You and several other Christians have put forth good explantions for the Christian perspective on the "unity of the Trinity".

I was anticipating a response from Grace Seeker to the post I wrote last.

As far as I'm concerned, there are no Christian "hints" in the Tanakh. The Tanakh and New Testament are complete opposites. It doesn't really matter what the NT says about the OT -- it is the reverse that is important. Unfortunately, we find nothing in the scriptures about the trinity, a divine sonship, or vicarious atonement that the NT proclaims.

Finally:

As promised, allow me to expound on my questions regarding the nature of Christ. Jesus' physical body was created, I'm sure you would agree?

Your claim to salvation through the blood of Christ (pbuh) is most amusing when you consider the fact that his blood was created by God. On what grounds does the vicarious atonement stand in the light of this?

Blessings of abundance to anyone who can resolve this one.

Peace,

Armand

 

[Grace Seeker]

As far as I'm concerned, there are no Christian "hints" in the Tanakh. The Tanakh and New Testament are complete opposites. It doesn't really matter what the NT says about the OT -- it is the reverse that is important. Unfortunately, we find nothing in the scriptures about the trinity, a divine sonship, or vicarious atonement that the NT proclaims.

I didn't say that there were "Christian" hints in the Tanakh. I said that as a Christian, I see what I call "hints" of the monotheistic God existing as a being that is both multi-personal and relational in nature.

I if you read my above post you will also see that I didn't actually say that it did make a difference what the NT has to say about the OT. (Though I do think you dismiss it to lightly, perhaps it is a good standard you might use when considering the NT and the Qu'ran.) What I did was examine what in the OT might have had an impact on those who came to faith in Jesus in the first century preparing them for the development of a trinitarian faith even within monotheistic Judaism.


As for the rest of what you write and sought of me. You have presented a number conclusions as if they were fact. What they really are opinions; opinions I don't happen to agree with. I have given some of the reasons for the opinion I hold to. You are certainly entitled to think otherwise if you so desire. If you really are interested in learning about what I think and believe or why I do so, I will be glad to engage in that sort of discussion, but I have no desire to enter into endless debate simply for the purpose of trying to prove myself right and you wrong, nor to engage with anyone who desires to do the opposite with regard to me. As I find most differences beginning with apriori assumptions regarding the nature of what God must be like, can or cannot do, be or cannot be, I find little value in simply refuting another's position. Whereas Mustafa sought to understand where I was coming from and how Christians think about these things, you appear to be more interested in proving your own or challenging another's point of view. The problem is you begin with assumptions about the Tanakh, the New Testament, and the very nature of atonement that are foreign to my understanding for these things just as my views would be to you. Hence, I though might make an argument that is beyond refutation, but it would be pointless as our respective starting places would be so different that the very concepts I would present would probably be meaningless to you. And as it does not appear that you seek to actually see things from another point of view, but merely engage in some sort of verbal jousting match I prefer to decline. So, beyond answering your question as to what I meant by "hints", which I thoroughly covered above, there really was nothing more to discuss.

 

[MustafaMc]

I didn't say that there were "Christian" hints in the Tanakh. I said that as a Christian, I see what I call "hints" of the monotheistic God existing as a being that is both multi-personal and relational in nature.

This is an example of reading a religous text through the lenses of our own personal faith. Just as you see hints of a "multi-person" God in the OT, so also we see prophesy about Prophet Muhammad (saaws) in the NT gospels. However, just as you don't see what we see regarding the "Spirit of Truth", so also the Jew doesn't see what you do in the OT regarding God's triune nature. I suppose when we read something of another's scripture we assume that our own beliefs and preconceived ideas of what the Truth is, actually is the Truth, and it flavors the interpretation of that other text to support our own personal faith.

 

[Armand]

Salaam,

As for the rest of what you write and sought of me. You have presented a number conclusions as if they were fact. What they really are opinions; opinions I don't happen to agree with. I have given some of the reasons for the opinion I hold to. You are certainly entitled to think otherwise if you so desire. If you really are interested in learning about what I think and believe or why I do so, I will be glad to engage in that sort of discussion, but I have no desire to enter into endless debate simply for the purpose of trying to prove myself right and you wrong, nor to engage with anyone who desires to do the opposite with regard to me. As I find most differences beginning with apriori assumptions regarding the nature of what God must be like, can or cannot do, be or cannot be, I find little value in simply refuting another's position. Whereas Mustafa sought to understand where I was coming from and how Christians think about these things, you appear to be more interested in proving your own or challenging another's point of view. The problem is you begin with assumptions about the Tanakh, the New Testament, and the very nature of atonement that are foreign to my understanding for these things just as my views would be to you. Hence, I though might make an argument that is beyond refutation, but it would be pointless as our respective starting places would be so different that the very concepts I would present would probably be meaningless to you. And as it does not appear that you seek to actually see things from another point of view, but merely engage in some sort of verbal jousting match I prefer to decline. So, beyond answering your question as to what I meant by "hints", which I thoroughly covered above, there really was nothing more to discuss.

I'm sorry if my words sounded the least bit harsh to you, Grace Seeker. By no means was it my intent to provoke any negative or uneasy feelings on your part. Forgive me if it appeared as such.

After replying to one of your replies, I waited a few days to give you time to respond, knowing that it is tough to deal with members of other faiths on their own message board. I've been there. All I asked for was brief and simple answer to a question that has puzzled me as of recent. I quickly recognized you were definitely a Christian well-versed in your theology hence I picked you to offer us a reasonable explanation regarding what seems to me as the deification of created substance. Rest assured, with several years of experience in my research on Christian thought and various other theosophies, I am very understanding of and attentive to different ethereal concepts regardless of what religion they may be. Quite honestly, I am excited to receive your argument, which you say is beyond refutation, that might shed some light on the topic. If you are able to resolve the issue then I will back off and move on.

I believe all of us present would enjoy a continued discussion on this particular subject. I shall put aside my Islamic doctrine and open my mind as I examine your postulation. Remember, there is no hostility in true inter-faith discourse or aggressive argumentation involved.

Again, I thank you for your time and contributing some of your knowledge to our forum, which is well appreciated. I will look forward to your answers in hope for a peaceful resolution.

God bless,

Armand

 

[Grace Seeker]

This is an example of reading a religous text through the lenses of our own personal faith. Just as you see hints of a "multi-person" God in the OT, so also we see prophesy about Prophet Muhammad (saaws) in the NT gospels. However, just as you don't see what we see regarding the "Spirit of Truth", so also the Jew doesn't see what you do in the OT regarding God's triune nature. I suppose when we read something of another's scripture we assume that our own beliefs and preconceived ideas of what the Truth is, actually is the Truth, and it flavors the interpretation of that other text to support our own personal faith.

I agree. I think I even said most of the same above in my own post:

And just as I think that Muslims are reading things into the Bible that are not there when they make those great leaps, no doubt Jewish readers of the Tanakh would say the same to me.

Of course, only part of my post dealt with where it is that I see "hints" of the Trinity in the OT. Another aspect of it that I hope readers picked up on was how it is that those nonotheistic Jews who became followers of Jesus, might have been more predisposed to accept the idea of a tripersonal God than we usually allow for them to have so considered.

Salaam,
I'm sorry if my words sounded the least bit harsh to you, Grace Seeker. By no means was it my intent to provoke any negative or uneasy feelings on your part. Forgive me if it appeared as such.

Reading your post today, I might have over-reacted yesterday. In general I'm not seeking to engage in debate, but only to add clarification where one is seeking understanding or correction if something in Christianity is just patently misrepresented.

Since, it appears that I misconstrued your request, I shall attempt to respond as best I can, but be mindful that I can only give my personal view and that no doubt there would be others who would respond differently than I. Also, I hope you didn't hear me say that I had an argument "beyond refutation." Please, take a second look at what I actually said:

Hence, I though [sic] might make an argument that is beyond refutation...

First, you will see that my grammar is atrocious. Second, that I wrote in the conditional tense, not claiming that I either possessed or could produce any such argument, only that even if I did, it probably wouldn't solve anything for ultimately people (all of us, me included) tend to believe what they want to believe or at least what they are predisposed to believe. That is what makes it so hard, even when one is trying, to put one's self in another's shoes and understand their religion, political philosophy, or even views on child raising.

Now, as to when I get around to your question, I don't know. My plate is rather full this week, I have a conference to attend next week, and my daughter is flying in from Hong Kong to spend a couple of weeks of vacation with us. So, I've got to get a few other things done first, and then we'll see if you're still interested in and I'm capable of a reply.

 

[Armand]

Peace GS,

Reading your post today, I might have over-reacted yesterday. In general I'm not seeking to engage in debate, but only to add clarification where one is seeking understanding or correction if something in Christianity is just patently misrepresented.

I doubt you had over-reacted. The fault is mine for failing to express myself in a clearer manner. Like you, I also do not favour a debate at the moment due to years of pointless disputation on various forums, so I have come to learn that debate certainly is not always the right approach.

Since, it appears that I misconstrued your request, I shall attempt to respond as best I can, but be mindful that I can only give my personal view and that no doubt there would be others who would respond differently than I. - Also, I hope you didn't hear me say that I had an argument "beyond refutation." Please, take a second look at what I actually said: First, you will see that my grammar is atrocious. Second, that I wrote in the conditional tense, not claiming that I either possessed or could produce any such argument, only that even if I did, it probably wouldn't solve anything for ultimately people (all of us, me included) tend to believe what they want to believe or at least what they are predisposed to believe. That is what makes it so hard, even when one is trying, to put one's self in another's shoes and understand their religion, political philosophy, or even views on child raising.

Understandable. I guess I did misread your statement.

My view is that disbelief in certain theological doctrines doesn't necessarily denote a lack of comprehension. I may disagree with and assume that a particular concept is untrue, but not outside the realm of possibility. One thing Islam frequently calls upon humanity to reflect on is the unparalleled majesty and grandeur of God which, according to the Qur'an, exalts God above and beyond theanthropism, which of course doesn't detract an atom from His omnipotence. So, for Muslims, it isn't really matter of what the Creator could or could not do but what He would and would not do.

Now, as to when I get around to your question, I don't know. My plate is rather full this week, I have a conference to attend next week, and my daughter is flying in from Hong Kong to spend a couple of weeks of vacation with us. So, I've got to get a few other things done first, and then we'll see if you're still interested in and I'm capable of a reply.

Absolutely. Feel free to return when time allows and write back when you are able. I'm pretty sure I'll stay interested and I welcome any response from you.

Take good care and God bless.

 

[Grace Seeker]

So, for Muslims, it isn't really matter of what the Creator could or could not do but what He would and would not do.

Yeah, I've picked up on that over time. And that is one of the things I was referring to when saying that we begin with different apriori assumptions. Just a couple of illustrations:
1) The current thread about jokes not meant to be an offense. Because of different beginning points, not because we have different senses of humor, it seems that some things might be offensive to Muslims that would not be offensive to Christians. (And though it wasn't identified, I'm sure vice-versa as well.) It isn't that we don't both seek to honor and serve God or that we don't both highly value our resepctive scriptures. Rather it is the underlying assumptions about what is and isn't acceptable that are completely different.
2) On a Christian website someone mentioned about a prayer in a bathroom. (Trust me you don't want details.) It made me think back to a conversation on here several months ago in which the idea of a Muslim doing such a thing was out of the question. It was seen by some as tantamount to "soiling" God. Which I thought was equally strange, because I don't see how God could be soiled by any thing in creation as he is the author of it all.

Again, I'm not saying one is right and another is wrong. It is just that our underlaying differences begin to shape us and how we emotionally hear each other before the logic (or illogic) of a particular point is even intellectually considered.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Your claim to salvation through the blood of Christ (pbuh) is most amusing when you consider the fact that his blood was created by God. On what grounds does the vicarious atonement stand in the light of this?

[Can you] offer us a reasonable explanation regarding what seems to me as the deification of created substance?

When you speak of the deification of a created substance, I have to guess as to what you are referencing. Do you mean Jesus' physical body? Do you mean (looking at the other comment) Jesus' blood? Or perhaps something else entirely?

I'm not sure, so I'm stumbling around in the dark a bit. If you could clear that up first it would be helpful. Is this all there is to your question, or have I left some other parts out?

Then, as this doesn't really have as much to do with whether or not Christians worship God (not Jesus), as with a specific understanding of our worship of (I'm assuming) Jesus, I'm going to suggest posting this in another thread: Questions About Christians, Requesting Answers From Christians.

 

[Armand]

Well it's worth a shot I suppose. As you know, it would be worse if I was of those who argue that such and such is "impossible" or "cannot be done", without elaborating. My beliefs are not in the way of my ability to comprehend Christian theology even if I refuse to accept that something in the Bible did not really occur. Therefore I do not allow emotion to interfere with my analysis of your beliefs.

The point is to understand and not to refute.

I will kindly leave you alone for now and possibly take some time off the boards myself.

All the best my friend,

Armand

 

[Armand]

When you speak of the deification of a created substance, I have to guess as to what you are referencing. Do you mean Jesus' physical body? Do you mean (looking at the other comment) Jesus' blood? Or perhaps something else entirely?

I'm not sure, so I'm stumbling around in the dark a bit. If you could clear that up first it would be helpful. Is this all there is to your question, or have I left some other parts out?

Then, as this doesn't really have as much to do with whether or not Christians worship God (not Jesus), as with a specific understanding of our worship of (I'm assuming) Jesus, I'm going to suggest posting this in another thread: Questions About Christians, Requesting Answers From Christians.

Very well, we'll take it from there then.

 

[YusufNoor]

This is an example of reading a religous text through the lenses of our own personal faith. Just as you see hints of a "multi-person" God in the OT, so also we see prophesy about Prophet Muhammad (saaws) in the NT gospels. However, just as you don't see what we see regarding the "Spirit of Truth", so also the Jew doesn't see what you do in the OT regarding God's triune nature. I suppose when we read something of another's scripture we assume that our own beliefs and preconceived ideas of what the Truth is, actually is the Truth, and it flavors the interpretation of that other text to support our own personal faith.

Peace be upon those who follow the guidance,

i stumbled upon this a while back:

http://orthodoxstudybible.com/samples/genesis/P2/

it may or may not answer some of your questions MustafaMc. i would have PM'ed it to you, but i thought that Gene might actually order one once he saw/read it.

go ahead and read the whole Genesis sample. it's Eastern Orthodox, but it appears to incorporate the "Trinity" into Genesis. kinda eerie actually!

 

[silkworm]

Christians should worship the Creator (the God) and not the creature (Jesus Christ), cause nobody can simply 'associate' a human with God and cannot make him 'consider' a God with God like qualities.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Christians should worship the Creator (the God) and not the creature (Jesus Christ), cause nobody can simply 'associate' a human with God and cannot make him 'consider' a God with God like qualities.

Thanks for you opinion on what we Christians SHOULD do. Now, as to the question at hand, whe do you think it is that we actually DO do? Do we worship God or not?

 

[AntiKarateKid]

Thanks for you opinion on what we Christians SHOULD do. Now, as to the question at hand, whe do you think it is that we actually DO do? Do we worship God or not?

Haven't responded here for a while. Using intermediaries such as idols, the cross, statues etc is acknowledging gods beside God. Worship is not a narrow term, it is somewhat broad. If you say, Saint Thomas/Jesus can you help me? You are considered worshiping other than God. If you say Allah can you help me, you are worshiping God. Now it does not matter whether you THINK Isa (pbuh) or Krushna or what have you is God, from the Islamic standpoint only God is God and Isa(pbuh) was a prophet so you are committing shirk. Thats what it boils down to I guess.

 

[john316]

I know of no sin or error that Jesus commited; however, I am in no position to judge whether any human being (including Jesus) was, is, or will be absolutely good.

What exactly according to you is absolutely good. If a person commits no sin as a human being and he cannot be absolutely good then what exactly is yor point?

 

[john316]

I am waiting for MustafaMC's response. What according to him is absolutely good?

 

[MustafaMc]

What exactly according to you is absolutely good. If a person commits no sin as a human being and he cannot be absolutely good then what exactly is yor point?

I refuse to answer the question that you ask, "Is Jesus good."

If I answer, "Yes", then you will put forth an argument that Jesus is Allah incarnate which is directly contradictory to my fundamental belief that Allah is the One God without father, mother, son, daughter, or equal. If I answer, "No", then I would be at risk of defaming a Servant, Prophet, and Messenger of Allah - which I refuse to do.

This is the last time that I will respond to this matter.

 

[john316]

I refuse to answer the question that you ask, "Is Jesus good."

If I answer, "Yes", then you will put forth an argument that Jesus is Allah incarnate which is directly contradictory to my fundamental belief that Allah is the One God without father, mother, son, daughter, or equal. If I answer, "No", then I would be at risk of defaming a Servant, Prophet, and Messenger of Allah - which I refuse to do.

This is the last time that I will respond to this matter.

So I guess that should be the last time you use the Bible to justify your fundamental beliefs. My beliefs will be from scriptures alone(sola scriptura).
The Bible as God's written word is self-authenticating, clear (perspicuous) to the rational reader, its own interpreter ("Scripture interprets Scripture"), and sufficient of itself to be the final authority of Christian doctrine.

This is what the BIBLE may stand for.

Basic
Instructions
Before
Leaving
Earth

 

[MustafaMc]

Do christians worship God (not Jesus)?

The indisputable answer to this question is that Christians undeniably worship Jesus, who they believe is God incarnate. Sometimes they pray to "the Father" and end the prayer "in the name of your son, Jesus, amen". Sometimes they pray to Jesus and end the prayer "in your name, amen". There is no disagreement that the Christian focal point is on Jesus, more specifically, on the ultimate sacrifice that he made on the cross for their personal salvation.