Who is the Trinity to Christians & Muslims?

[Redeemed]

Salaam,

i cant beleive that this thread has gone so far..

Christian say 3 in 1
Muslim say 1

Simple right...there is a huge difference...and cannot be bridged

That has already been said

 

[Grace Seeker]

That was a pretty good explanation of the trinity bro. I might like to remind you that Muslims don't like when you associate father with the Allah. I am sure that was just an oversight.

Indeed I am aware that Muslims don't actually think of Allah as "Father", for that implies things about Allah that they do not believe. However, are you aware of where that comment in my post came from? I was having a conversation with MustafaMc, and these were his words, not mine.

In Islam, Allah is one "person" so to speak Who has only one "mode of being". We don't believe that Allah (Father) needs to be born as a human (Jesus) and we don't believe that Allah dwells within us (Holy Spirit).

And when I used them, I wasn't throwing them back in his face. At least I hope that he didn't perceive me as having done so. I believe he used them in an attempt to be clear with me how Islam sees the whole nature of God different than does Chrsitianity. At least that is what I get when I read not just a single phrase, but the whole of what he wrote. I attemtped to use them accordingly as well.

Thank-you for you other generous comments toward me.

Your bag/cup analogy is something I will have to give some thought to. I can see times when it would be useful and others where it might make matters more confusing. As always, when using analogies as a means of illustrating concepts, discernment is a key. But it is something to keep in mind.

 

[Redeemed]

Indeed I am aware that Muslims don't actually think of Allah as "Father", for that implies things about Allah that they do not believe. However, are you aware of where that comment in my post came from? I was having a conversation with MustafaMc, and these were his words, not mine.


And when I used them, I wasn't throwing them back in his face. At least I hope that he didn't perceive me as having done so. I believe he used them in an attempt to be clear with me how Islam sees the whole nature of God different than does Chrsitianity, and I attemtped to use them accordingly as well.

Thank-you for you other generous comments toward me.

Your bag/cup analogy is something I will have to give some thought to. I can see times when it would be useful and others where it might make matters more confusing. As always, when using analogies as a means of illustrating concepts, discernment is a key. But it is something to keep in mind.

Good point. I didn't realize that it was his own words. He probably said that because he was trying to relate to what we believe about God being Our Father in Heaven and Jesus being God's only begotten son. I am sure he wouldn't write a Muslim that way, because they don't precieve Allah as father or compare the two. I wish they did. This would make our discussions on the trinity or Jesus being God's son a little easier. I 'll be honest with you, I don't really see light at the end of the tunnel to convince them that we serve only one God; therefore, only the Lord can convince them. I only hope it is before the judgment day.

 

[Redeemed]

I think I understand why Muslims fight the trinity concept. They refuse to believe we serve one God, because if we are serving one God, than that makes the Koran questionable to them, so, they just won't have it. This is for the Mods, I think for those who are tired of this thread, they should stop posting to it, but I recommend leaving it open, because the trinity discussion will always be brought up sooner or later. Rather than reopenning a closed thread, it should still be available. Just for the record, we agree with Muslims that there is only one God!

 

[Balthasar21]

Trying one more time. It is NOT RELEVANT what language John spoke. The question is not about what langauge John spoke. Jesus and all of the disciples, John included, spoke Aramaic. No one cares. They could have all spoken Chinese and it wouldn't mean anything. The only thing that matters is what language John wrote his Gospel in.

And you seem to believe that you have proven something. You haven't. If you believe you have, then you have deceived yourself.




You don't use logic in your presentation. You use slander and ad hominem arguments. I have not been insulting to Islam, but you choose to keep being that way with me personally, with the Christian faith, and specifically with the Bible. I think you are rude with comments such as:
1) "OverStandIng Of The Ttinity" and "First overstand something" rather than "Understanding".
2) Also you insult our Holy Book with comments like, "when your so-called BY - Bill". I don't even call the Qur'an the Koran, out of desire to be respectful, but you show no such respect to our scriptures.
3) You seem to still doubt my own veractiy with statements such as "You claim to be a minister". I claim to be, because I am. I attended 4 years of university, 3 more years of seminary (i.e. theological school) where I earned a Masters in Divinity from an acreditted institution, Asbury Theological Seminary, subsequent to that I was ordained an elder in the United Methodist Church (the second largest protestant denomination in the world) and have served under appointment as a pastor since 1986 for all but 4 years when I took a leave of absence in order to serve on the bishop's staff in a synod of the Lutheran Church (ELCA).
4) You called me other names, which I am glad to see the mods have editted out so I will not repeat them here in respect for their work.
5) You attack leaders of the church accusing "Paul is the anti - christ of the By - Bill."


Now, here are the facts that I am asserting:
1) The Bible was written in more than one language.
2) The various human writers who penned the various different books of the Bible did so over an extend period of time, personlly spoke many different languages, many were multi-lingual in their daily life,
3) The majority of what Christians call the Old Testament was written in Hebrew.
4) Some significant parts of the book of Daniel where written in Babylonian Aramaic.
5) Some small sections of a few other later books also have some Aramaic.
6) The oldest extant physical copies of ALL of the New Testament books that we have today are ALL in Greek and from the 3rd century or before.
7) The oldest extant physical copies of any Syriac or Aramaic portions of the New Testament date from the lat 4th century.
8) All of the New Testament books are quoted by the early church fathers in Greek before the end of the 2nd century.
9) The only books that have ever had any serious question as to whether there might have been an Aramaic original are Matthew and Hebrews.
10) The Gospel of John, which you referred to in the post which started this exchange was originally written in Greek.
Please note-- I am not sayig that John did not speak Aramaic. And I have never said that he didn't. He did. But that he spoke Aramaic is NOT relevant to what I first asked you to show me that the Gospel of John was written in Greek:

Later John's Gospel (along with all other New Testament books) was translated into many languages, among them Syriac, but that is not what it was written in. It was written in Greek by an Aramaic-speaking Jew. And that is not crazy, because most all people of John's day spoke their first langauge (in John's case Aramaic) AND they spoke Greek (the lingua franca of the Mediterranean basin). Thus when you do a word study as you did: Such a word study has no more weight then if I was to grab a Spanish Bible and do a words study based on the opening line: "En el principio ya existía el Verbo, y el Verbo estaba con Dios, y el Verbo era Dios." And then I start talking about the similarities between "verbo" and "verb" and how then this defines Jesus as the "verb of God" who speaks and brings everything into creation. But John wasn't written in Spanish. John wasn't written in English. And John wasn't written in Aramaic or Syriac. Do a word study in those languages for devotional purposes, but if you are going to go in depth to create doctrine, one needs to do it in the original language that it was written in (NOT that which the author may have spoken, that is IRRELEVANT). And the language that we KNOW the Gospel of John was written is is Greek: "εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος."

For that very reason, your statement below is completely wrong: The only place we can go to get the meaning is to the Greek (Logos). We have to understand what Logos meant. Not word, not "verbo" and not any Galilean or Syretic Arabic. We have to understand λογος (Logos) because that is the Greek word that John used when he wrote his Gospel. Even if he may have been thinking in Aramaic, we actually wrote λογος because he was writting it in Greek.

You have said that I could not show you even one pastor, scholar, preacher who would say that it was originally written in Greek. Instead I have shown you dozens and could show you hundreds, even thousands. And despite your assertions that you have shown me verse by verse "proofs", you have shown me nothing. I could write the whole New Testament in Spanish, that would not prove that it was originally written in Spanish. I could likewise produce the whole New Testament in Syriac, that would prove nothing either. But I have not just provided for you the New Testament in Greek. I have referenced that the oldest texts of the New Testament are in Greek. And given explanation why the books would have been written in Greek and not in Aramaic. You have provided no scholarly points of any kind. You have merely continued to state your beliefs, and really nothing more.

As you said above: "Belief is to ignore the facts, intentionally or ignorantly. If one has to believe, it means he or she does not know, and if one does not know, that is ignorance. " Perhaps you should take your own advice on this matter.

First it does matter what language the scriptures were written How else would you know the real overstanding of what the disciple were teaching Duh
Only one of those store front minister would say the things your saying . You saying I haven't provided no scholarly points of any kind Yes . Are You Saying The Verse I provided from your By - Bill are fake Yes . Because the By - Bill show where the language come from . Any real minister would know these thing , You must have miss the language note in your mail order texts

 

[MustafaMc]

Actually, GraceSeeker, you got the intention of my use of the term "Father". Alapiana is correct in that Muslims generally don't equate "Father" with Allah because the term implies having a son or a daughter which does not apply to Allah. Another issue is that Father also implies that Allah is a part of the Trinity concept which is not correct either. Of course saying that Muslims worship God - the Allah, the Son and the Holy Spirit is absolutely absurd.

I used the term because I was talking to you, a Christian, and I wanted to communicate my understanding using terms that you could relate to. I personally do equate Allah with Father in the sense that this is the term that Jesus is quoted as having used in referring to the One God. In my opinion, no Muslim would deny that the one referred to as Father in the Lord's Prayer is actually the One God - Allah. Matthew 6:9-12 After this manner therefore pray ye. "Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so on earth.Give us this day our daily bread.And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil [one.]"

Indeed I am aware that Muslims don't actually think of Allah as "Father", for that implies things about Allah that they do not believe. However, are you aware of where that comment in my post came from? I was having a conversation with MustafaMc, and these were his words, not mine.

Yes, that is correct.

And when I used them, I wasn't throwing them back in his face. At least I hope that he didn't perceive me as having done so. I believe he used them in an attempt to be clear with me how Islam sees the whole nature of God different than does Chrsitianity. At least that is what I get when I read not just a single phrase, but the whole of what he wrote. I attemtped to use them accordingly as well.

On this point we reach mutual agreement - we actually communicated across religous barriers!:thumbs_up:statisfie

 

[MustafaMc]

Good point. I didn't realize that it was his own words. He probably said that because he was trying to relate to what we believe about God being Our Father in Heaven and Jesus being God's only begotten son. I am sure he wouldn't write a Muslim that way, because they don't precieve Allah as father or compare the two. I wish they did. This would make our discussions on the trinity or Jesus being God's son a little easier. I 'll be honest with you, I don't really see light at the end of the tunnel to convince them that we serve only one God; therefore, only the Lord can convince them. I only hope it is before the judgment day.

No you missed my point completely. Your comment above is EXACTLY the reason that Muslims don't like the term Father being applied to Allah!

 

[Grace Seeker]

First it does matter what language the scriptures were written

Which is exactly what I have been saying from the beginning.

How else would you know the real overstanding of what the disciple were teaching Duh
Only one of those store front minister would say the things your saying . You saying I haven't provided no scholarly points of any kind Yes . Are You Saying The Verse I provided from your By - Bill are fake Yes . Because the By - Bill show where the language come from . Any real minister would know these thing , You must have miss the language note in your mail order texts

The rest of this post is just more rude drivel unworthy of further response.

 

[Phil12123]

There have been others who have clearly belittled my Christian experience, but you haven't. Thank you. How is anyone (other than God) to really know what is in another's heart?

I'm sorry if you've viewed my comments about your Christian experience as belittling it. When you question any Christian's being able to say they KNOW they are saved and going to heaven, you show that either (1) you never could say that as a Christian yourself, or (2) you once did but no longer do. If (1) is the case, you were either a Christian and did not know your Bible, or you were not a Christian. If (2) is the case, then I do not understand why you would question those who are still Christians doing now what you once did, even if you no longer do it.

You are correct that only God really knows what's in another's heart. All we can go by is what that person says, and what you were saying to question how a Christian can say he knows he's saved and going to heaven, said to me what I have indicated in my first paragraph. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[MustafaMc]

I think I understand why Muslims fight the trinity concept. They refuse to believe we serve one God, because if we are serving one God, than that makes the Koran questionable to them, so, they just won't have it.

No we reject the Trinity concept because it is in direct conflict with our most fundamental belief as simply put in Quran 112:1-4 Say: He is Allah the One and Only; Allah is the Self-Sufficient (independent of all, while all are dependent on Him); He begets not, nor is He begotten; And there is none comparable to Him. We reject the divinity of Jesus because the Quran teaches us that this is disbelief in the Oneness of Allah: Quran 5:72 They surely disbelieve who say : Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah (himself) said : O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Lo! whoso ascribeth partners unto Allah, for him Allah hath forbidden Paradise. His abode is the Fire. For evildoers there will be no helpers.

 

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/peace;

I think I understand why Muslims fight the trinity concept. They refuse to believe we serve one God, because if we are serving one God, than that makes the Koran questionable to them, so, they just won't have it.

:rollseyes



can u understand Hindu's Trinity ? Do u believe they serve one God only ?

If u don't know about that Trinity , may i request u to read about that 3 in 1 God & let me know if it's clear to u ?

If u find it easy to understand Hindu's Trinity , then it's ok to condemn us for not understanding yours , but if u find that concept complicated , then may be u will realise why we Muslims can't understand Christians Trinity.


[FONT=&quot] verses for this life & the life hereafter :[/FONT]


God invites [man] unto the abode of peace, and guides him that wills onto a straight way. -Quran (10:25)


[FONT=&quot]"If any do transgress the limits ordained by God, such persons wrong themselves as well as others" (2:229) [/FONT]

 

[Grace Seeker]

As I understand it, a Muslim's rejection of the Trinity doesn't actually have anything to with Christians or Christianity. It has more to do with adherence to the teachings of their own faith, and then rejecting that which is not in harmony with the scriptures of Islam. We make too much of ourselves when we personalize it.

As a Christian, I reject the pantheist's view that God might exist in a rock or a tree, not because I have beliefs with regard to that rock or tree (though of course I do), but because what I do believe with regard to God does not allow me to conceive of God existing encapsulated in a rock or a tree.

In much the same way, I understand that while Islam definitely has disagreements with Christianity over the divine nature of Jesus, that it actually goes deeper to the very idea of God. For Islam, iit is as impossible for one to conceive of God' incarnating himself in any aspect of creation, and that would therefore include humanity as well, as it is for a Christian to conceive of God sinning. As holiness is indemic to Christian understandings of God, so the immaterialness of God is to Islam.

How am I doing?

 

[Redeemed]

No you missed my point completely. Your comment above is EXACTLY the reason that Muslims don't like the term Father being applied to Allah!

Then why did you write "Allah (father)?"

 

[Grace Seeker]

Then why did you write "Allah (father)?"

I think MustafaMc answered that for us in his post above http://www.islamicboard.com/785906-post846.html.

Good point. I didn't realize that it was his own words. He probably said that because he was trying to relate to what we believe about God being Our Father in Heaven and Jesus being God's only begotten son. I am sure he wouldn't write a Muslim that way, because they don't precieve Allah as father or compare the two.

Exactly.

I wish they did. This would make our discussions on the trinity or Jesus being God's son a little easier. I 'll be honest with you, I don't really see light at the end of the tunnel to convince them that we serve only one God; therefore, only the Lord can convince them. I only hope it is before the judgment day.

I wish it too. But, now I'll be honest with you, I think our discussions on the Trinity are not all that difficult unless we choose to make them so. It sounds like you are looking to convince someone of something. I turned that over to the Holy Spirit, whose job it is (John 16:8), some time ago. I realize that my responsibilities are limited to being where God has placed me, developing relationships that God can use, and not being afraid to share the Gospel when God calls me to do so. But I have also learned that God is NOT calling me to share the Gospel in every situation. Sometimes we are to plant seeds, sometimes to water them, sometimes to harvest. But it is God and God alone who gives the harvest. If I'm trying to harvest in a field that God wants someone else to do that in, then even though I am doing something that God wants done, I am still out of his will. In other words, I don't think you and I are on the same page with regard to this concern of convincing people. I'm going to trust God to do that as God sees fit.

Now if you know that is what God is calling you to do, that is one thing. Then go. But if you are finding that there doesn't appear to be any light in that tunnel you are headed into, then maybe that is a sign that God is not the one sending you. Given that God is light and in him is no darkness at all, I cannot imagine that God wouldn't provide you light wherever he sent you. Might I suggest that rather than assuming you know God's will and heading off to follow that assumption, that you back up and double check your basic assumption.

God does indeed send us (the church) out to share his Gospel, but not everyone is called to be a prophet or an evangelist:

Romans 12
3For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the measure of faith God has given you. 4Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, 5so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. 6We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man's gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to hisfaith. 7If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; 8if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully.

I sense a great deal of love of God within you and excitement for the faith. This is most highly commendable. But if you are not finding the light you would expect to see, maybe you are giving yourself to a task different than where God really needs you. Maybe he needs you less for winning the world, and more for securing those already won? Maybe he needs your great enthusiasm to encourage and build up those who already belong to Christ but are in danger of slipping away?

You might appreciate this story: Most people think of General George Washington as the hero of the revolution who commanded the Continental Army. And no doubt you have also heard of Valley Forge. But are you aware the without the service of Nathanael Greene and Baron Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben there would have been no army left or fit to fight after Valley Forge for Washington to win the war with? They were as much, or more, heros of the revolution as Washington. They both, as well, had other things they had thought they were called to do in life, but when they learned how they could serve where they were truly needed (rather than where they wanted to be needed) they gave themselves to that wholeheartedly. And the rest, as they say, is history.

Alapiana, only you can determine what God's call is in your life, but I can tell you that I have always found that God will confirm that call through the words of others. If you are not getting that confirmation presently, if God is calling you to use your talents in a different way than you are currently doing so, I hope you will be able to both hear and recognize his voice when it speaks to you. I'll be praying that you find the path which God has lighted for you to serve him in, whether this tunnel or another way, and that you will be able to do so there to the glory of God.

Peace, my brother.

 

[Redeemed]

Salaam/peace;




:rollseyes



can u understand Hindu's Trinity ? Do u believe they serve one God only ?

If u don't know about that Trinity , may i request u to read about that 3 in 1 God & let me know if it's clear to u ?

If u find it easy to understand Hindu's Trinity , then it's ok to condemn us for not understanding yours , but if u find that concept complicated , then may be u will realise why we Muslims can't understand Christians Trinity.


[FONT=&quot] verses for this life & the life hereafter :[/FONT]


God invites [man] unto the abode of peace, and guides him that wills onto a straight way. -Quran (10:25)


[FONT=&quot]"If any do transgress the limits ordained by God, such persons wrong themselves as well as others" (2:229) [/FONT]

I didn't know that they have a trinity. I will look into it, but before I do, please keep in mind the devil is a mocker, and he has no ability to create. He can only mock and imitate when it comes to the things of God. His mission is to confuse. He is called Oplexicon.
Peace to u

 

[Muslim Woman]

[FONT=&quot]With the name of ALLAH (God Almigthy) -The Bestower Of Unlimited Mercy, The Continously Merciful[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

salaam/peace :statisfie
[/FONT]

Then why did you write "Allah (father)?"

may be typo error ?????

may be the bro wanted to make Christians understand that we call our Creator as Allah whom u call father ?

 

[MustafaMc]

As I understand it, a Muslim's rejection of the Trinity doesn't actually have anything to with Christians or Christianity. It has more to do with adherence to the teachings of their own faith, and then rejecting that which is not in harmony with the scriptures of Islam. We make too much of ourselves when we personalize it.

As a Christian, I reject the pantheist's view that God might exist in a rock or a tree, not because I have beliefs with regard to that rock or tree (though of course I do), but because what I do believe with regard to God does not allow me to conceive of God existing encapsulated in a rock or a tree.

In much the same way, I understand that while Islam definitely has disagreements with Christianity over the divine nature of Jesus, that it actually goes deeper to the very idea of God. For Islam, iit is as impossible for one to conceive of God' incarnating himself in any aspect of creation, and that would therefore include humanity as well, as it is for a Christian to conceive of God sinning. As holiness is indemic to Christian understandings of God, so the immaterialness of God is to Islam.

How am I doing?

I would say that you were batting 1,000 until the end.

Main Entry: im·ma·te·ri·al
Pronunciation: "i-m&-'tir-E-&l
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English immaterial, from Late Latin immaterialis, from Latin in- + Late Latin materialis material
1 : not consisting of matter
2 : of no substantial consequence

As for my use of the word essence, I think that immaterialness is also a poor choice in this case. I believe that the greatest blessing in Paradise will be actually seeing Allah. This implies that Allah exists in form and substance, but not such that we can perceive Him in this life.

 

[Balthasar21]

As I understand it, a Muslim's rejection of the Trinity doesn't actually have anything to with Christians or Christianity. It has more to do with adherence to the teachings of their own faith, and then rejecting that which is not in harmony with the scriptures of Islam. We make too much of ourselves when we personalize it.

As a Christian, I reject the pantheist's view that God might exist in a rock or a tree, not because I have beliefs with regard to that rock or tree (though of course I do), but because what I do believe with regard to God does not allow me to conceive of God existing encapsulated in a rock or a tree.

In much the same way, I understand that while Islam definitely has disagreements with Christianity over the divine nature of Jesus, that it actually goes deeper to the very idea of God. For Islam, iit is as impossible for one to conceive of God' incarnating himself in any aspect of creation, and that would therefore include humanity as well, as it is for a Christian to conceive of God sinning. As holiness is indemic to Christian understandings of God, so the immaterialness of God is to Islam.

How am I doing?

The trinty is a fake

 

[Woodrow]

Then why did you write "Allah (father)?"

Abba is Father.

Allah(swt) should actually be spoken as 2 words Al Laah. It has no exact English meaning but carries the same thoughts as"The God" "The Highest" "The Supreme" etc. It is the Arabic word that is the equivalent of the English God(swt) spelled with a Capital G.

 

[Redeemed]

No you missed my point completely. Your comment above is EXACTLY the reason that Muslims don't like the term Father being applied to Allah!

Never mind, I see why you said I missed the point.