Is it possible to be a Christian and a believer in Islam?

reply to post by FlyersFan

Scripture states that Jesus is God Incarnate.

That is your bizarre reading of scripture, because there is no verse that states Jesus is God incarnate.
However there are plenty of verses that states Jesus was a firstborn of a human woman.... a man approved of God who submitted to God.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

Scripture states that Jesus is God Incarnate.

That is your bizarre reading of scripture, because there is no verse that states Jesus is God incarnate.

Dude .. you've been shown them over and over.
Problem is .. it clashes with your religion and you don't want to see it.
Jesus being God Incarnate makes Islam obsolete.
Why follow Muhammads tales when you could instead follow God Himself?

It's all there.

reply to post by FlyersFan

Dude .. you've been shown them over and over.

Shown what over and over?Your skewed reading of scripture?

And you didn't address the points about Jesus, who you say was God incarnate being describe as a man who was approved by God and as a man who had submitted to God. Because thats what the Bible says.

Forget theology, this is basic logic.. Jesus can't be the God he submitted to.

Jesus being God Incarnate makes Islam obsolete. Why follow Muhammads tales when you could instead follow God Himself?

Why don't you follow God Himself instead of worshiping a man who himself said only God is to be worshiped?

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
Shown what over and over?Your skewed reading of scripture?

You are in desperate denial.

And you didn't address the points about Jesus, who you say was God incarnate being describe as a man who was approved by God and as a man who had submitted to God. Because thats what the Bible says.

Already been discussed. Holy Trinity. One God .. three 'persons' or aspects.
Jesus was fully God and fully human. THAT is what the bible says.

Forget theology, this is basic logic.. Jesus can't be the God he submitted to.

Tell that to the angels of heaven who adored Him as God.
They'll be shocked to learn that they were wrong.
Tell that to Jesus Himself .. since HE claimed that He came down from heaven ...
I'm sure He'll be shocked to hear that He didn't ...
Tell that to 'before Moses I AM' ...
That would be Jesus claiming the title of God .. (just in case you forgot).

Why don't you follow God Himself instead of worshiping a man who himself said only God is to be worshiped?

I follow and worship God. Why don't you follow God Himself instead of some caravan thief who denied the Jesus of Sacred Scripture and who made up stories 600+ years after Jesus walked the earth ??

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Tell that to the angels of heaven who adored Him as God.
They'll be shocked to learn that they were wrong.
Tell that to Jesus Himself .. since HE claimed that He came down from heaven ...
I'm sure He'll be shocked to hear that He didn't ...
Tell that to 'before Moses I AM' ...
That would be Jesus claiming the title of God .. (just in case you forgot).

I would tell him if he didn't die.. But he did and therefore, god must of died also.. So no god for anyone?

Originally posted by DarknStormy
I would tell him if he didn't die.. But he did and therefore, god must of died also.. So no god for anyone?

God the Father didn't die. God the Son died and rose from the dead.
Jesus soul never stopped ceasing to be. It has been there from the beginning and will be forever.
(See John 1 .. in the beginning .. etc)
One clover leaf and yet three leaves.

reply to post by FlyersFan



Again, I ask...
How can Jesus be God incarnate if he was described as a man approved by God and as a man who had submitted to God.

Also, where in the Bible does Jesus say he was God incarnate? The answer is that he never claimed to be God incarnate.

Christianity = Jesus fan-fiction.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

Again, I ask...
How can Jesus be God incarnate if he was described as a man approved by God and as a man who had submitted to God.

Also, where in the Bible does Jesus say he was God incarnate? The answer is that he never claimed to be God incarnate.

Both of those questions have been answered in this thread.

We get it. You don't like Christianity, and you think Islam is the bomb. But you don't have to agree with Christianity to understand it, so either stop playing the fool, or if you truly do not understand why Christians believe in the Doctrine of the Trinity or the Doctrine of the Incarnation, do some reading and educate yourself.

I have provided links there -- go read them and make an attempt to understand what they say even if you do not agree with them. You will never be able to hold an intelligent conversation regarding Christianity if you don't understand two of the most important basic tenets of the faith.

reply to post by adjensen

JESUS - NOT A DEITY

1.The Trinity
The Christian idea of a trinity contradicts the most basic tenet of Judaism - that G-d is One. Jews have declared their belief in a single unified G-d twice daily ever since the giving of the Torah at Sinai - almost two thousand years before Christianity.

The trinity suggests a three part deity: The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost (Matthew 28:19).

In Jewish law, worship of a three-part god is considered idolatry; one of the three cardinal sins for which a person should rather give up his life than transgress. The idea of the trinity is absolutely incompatible with Judaism.


1.Physical Manifestation
Christianity believes that G-d came down to earth in human form, as Jesus said: "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30).

The Torah states that G-d cannot not take any form.:

"You will not be able to see My face, for no human can see my face and live" (Exodus 33:18-20)

"You did not see any form on the day G-d spoke to you at Horeb from the midst of fire" (Deuteronomy 4:15)

As little as we may know about G-d's nature, Judaism has always believed that G-d is Incorporeal, meaning that He assumes no physical form. G-d is Eternal, He is Infinite; above time and beyond space. He cannot be born, and cannot die.

So how can we use the Torah though it has also been mis-translated in parts yet believe in a trinity God? Who ever invented this concept was not following religious teachings to begin with... It is a sin to worship a 3 part God.

reply to post by DarknStormy


What part of "you don't have to agree with it to understand it" do you not understand?

reply to post by adjensen

The problem here being that while it is true that the "Doctrine of Incarnation" and the "Doctrine of Trinity" CAN perhaps be derived from the the Bible, the Bible also has many statements that contradict these doctrines, and there are implications inherent in these doctrines that many so-called Christians disagree with (such as polytheism) and no, that isn't down to me (or anyone else) "not understanding the Bible", or trying to "insert muslimness where it doesn't belong" or whatever. These statements in the Bible exist independent of the faith of the person relaying them to you. A very pertinent example, where Jesus himself defines the relation between himself, God, and his followers is:

John 20:17 (Young's Literal)
"Be not touching me, for I have not yet ascended unto my Father; and be going on to my brethren, and say to them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and to my God, and to your God."

And sure, while you may draw yourself a neat little box of insulation by stating "A Christian is defined by what I define a Christian as" (Nicene Creed or whatever), I'm sorry to tell you this, but a Catholic meeting 300 years after the death of Christ with political motivations of a suspect pagan emperor has no moral, etymological, or theological authority to define what a Christian is for anyone except a Catholic. The fact is, before this point and after this point (even up to this day today) existed many who called themselves Christians (and were were called Christians) who have nothing to do with the Nicene Creed, may not share your exact understanding of what Christ is, and may not consider consubstantiality to be a necessary part of Christianity.

As an aside, and not directed to you or anything, but I do find it funny that in this thread, where people are attempting to school muslims on Islam, Shariah and Muhammad (while having almost no understanding on these subjects), you make a plea for understanding, even if disagreement exists. Still, I agree: Even if one disagrees with the other, understanding their point of view is important.

Originally posted by babloyi
As an aside, and not directed to you or anything, but I do find it funny that in this thread, where people are attempting to school muslims on Islam, Shariah and Muhammad (while having almost no understanding on these subjects), you make a plea for understanding, even if disagreement exists.

I'm not sure that I've attempted to "school" anyone on Islam -- I'm pretty open to admitting that I know next to nothing about it, because it is of little interest.

My point, at least as regards my last few posts, is that it is pointless to say "You Christians are polytheists", simply because one doesn't understand the core Christian theology which is the basis for our belief that we are not polytheists. It is one thing to say "I understand the Doctrine of the Trinity, but I disagree, so I think that you're polytheists", quite another to claim that the Doctrine, in itself, represents a polytheistic theology, which is not true, and that view would come from a basic lack of understanding.

In other words, I respect others' right to disagree with me, but I do not respect their right to misrepresent what I believe, in order to disagree with me.

babloyi

These statements in the Bible exist independent of the faith of the person relaying them to you. A very pertinent example, where Jesus himself defines the relation between himself, God, and his followers is: [John 20: 17]

So, Jesus quotes Ruth 1: 16 in his message to the disciples to be relayed by Mary. This contradicts the Trinity how? This contradicts the Incarnation how?

reply to post by adjensen

Originally posted by adjensen
I'm not sure that I've attempted to "school" anyone on Islam -- I'm pretty open to admitting that I know next to nothing about it, because it is of little interest.

Indeed you have not, which is why I said I wasn't directing that comment at you, really.

Originally posted by adjensen
My point, at least as regards my last few posts, is that it is pointless to say "You Christians are polytheists", simply because one doesn't understand the core Christian theology which is the basis for our belief that we are not polytheists.

I suppose "polytheism" might be a bit vague and inexact in this case, as most Christians, at least theologically, believe in "the Father" being the part of the trinity that is "greater" than the Son and the Holy Ghost (even the names imply this). I suppose I was using it as a sort of short form for the Christian belief. Because the Bible indicates that Jesus was a separate personality from the other members of the trinity, with his own will, separate knowledge, and acknowledgement of the Father as his God (and our God, as mentioned by the verse I just quoted). But then you get into the realm of demi-gods and sub-gods and such, which while might not be polytheism, it isn't exactly an exclusive monotheism (sort of like a pluriform monotheism, with worshipping and praying to the Father THROUGH the Son).

My point being that claiming a monolithic and uniform definition of Jesus Christ's position (that of him being "God Incarnate", for example) with respect to Christianity and the Trinity is a bit disingenuous when whenever this topic comes up on these forums (and it has hundreds of times), there are a dozen different answers, and that many interpretations or understandings of the Bible can lead to different answers.
I understand and acknowledge your understanding and definition of Jesus, but you have to understand that in the course of my (or anyone else's) disagreeing with it, when engaged in such related discussions, people are going to bring up verses that contradict it (like what I just quoted). After all, God is ONE (as says the Bible). But then...God is Three? (not in the Bible)

Originally posted by babloyi
people are going to bring up verses that contradict it (like what I just quoted).

And if you do a little digging, you'll find all sorts of explanations, such as John Wesley's:

To my Father and your Father, to my God and your God - This uncommon expression shows that the only - begotten Son has all kind of fellowship with God. And a fellowship with God the Father, some way resembling his own, he bestows upon his brethren. Yet he does not say, Our God: for no creature can be raised to an equality with him: but my God and your God: intimating that the Father is his in a singular and incommunicable manner; and ours through him, in such a kind as a creature is capable of. (Wesley's Notes on the Bible: John 20:17)

The God that raised him is that God that will raise them -- the Father that Jesus has been on about for three years is their Father, as well. It's an inclusive statement, not one that denies Christ's divinity (taken in the context of John, that would be pretty much impossible to assume... he didn't spend the first 19 chapters setting that out, only to yank it back at the end.)

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by babloyi
people are going to bring up verses that contradict it (like what I just quoted).

And if you do a little digging, you'll find all sorts of explanations, such as John Wesley's:

To my Father and your Father, to my God and your God - This uncommon expression shows that the only - begotten Son has all kind of fellowship with God. And a fellowship with God the Father, some way resembling his own, he bestows upon his brethren. Yet he does not say, Our God: for no creature can be raised to an equality with him: but my God and your God: intimating that the Father is his in a singular and incommunicable manner; and ours through him, in such a kind as a creature is capable of. (Wesley's Notes on the Bible: John 20:17)

i see almost a pattern in your arguements, whenever it comes to divinity of Jesus pbuh it depends on what he did not say!

Not our God rather my God and your God

Its an interpretation given to prove an already set belief.
In other words nobody will reach a conclusion of his divinity after reading that verse but somebody who already believes it may find a validation of it in the verse if he tries very hard! Especially when over time people question and point that verse as inconsistence for the said belief.

The God that raised him is that God that will raise them -- the Father that Jesus has been on about for three years is their Father, as well. It's an inclusive statement, not one that denies Christ's divinity (taken in the context of John, that would be pretty much impossible to assume... he didn't spend the first 19 chapters setting that out, only to yank it back at the end.)

hmm..
So Father of Jesus pbuh is my Father too, but a metaphorical one for me and literal for him? Just because he was born of a virgin, The Creator of all becomes his biological Father!

When the only thing God did was give/say a WORD "BE" and he was!

When he always addressed himself as 'son of man.'

When he does not have authority as to who sits with him in Heaven and only God can do that.

When he does not know when the 'Hour' (judgement day) will come.

When his will is to 'pass the cup' but he submits to Will of God, indicating his seperate and insignificant will as compared with God's

all the above show a very different picture.

Originally posted by logical7
Its an interpretation given to prove an already set belief.
In other words nobody will reach a conclusion of his divinity after reading that verse but somebody who already believes it may find a validation of it in the verse if he tries very hard! Especially when over time people question and point that verse as inconsistence for the said belief.

Close, but not quite. As you have likely seen me say before, it is important that the Bible be read holistically -- if one just picks a passage here or there, they will likely come up with a radically different conclusion than someone who reads the whole thing, and treats it as a single object.

Yes, if all someone read was that line, they'd be unlikely to read it as "oh, Jesus is saying it that way because he is God", but if it is read in the context of the Gospel of John and, on a larger scale, the whole New Testament, then it's obvious that Jesus is saying it that way because he is God.

When he always addressed himself as 'son of man.'

Again, holistic reading. Son of Man is a reference to the prophecy in Daniel.

When he does not have authority as to who sits with him in Heaven and only God can do that.

When he does not know when the 'Hour' (judgement day) will come.

When his will is to 'pass the cup' but he submits to Will of God, indicating his seperate and insignificant will as compared with God's

Though you would prefer them not to be, these are all evidence of the Trinity. If you understand (again, understanding is not agreeing,) that Christians, since the time of Christ, consider him to be God, these instances that you cite are examples of the different hypostases of God.

What you see as being evidence of him not being God is not evidence that he is God, but rather if he is God, these passages indicate that God has at least two hypostases.

reply to post by adjensen

Yes, if all someone read was that line, they'd be unlikely to read it as "oh, Jesus is saying it that way because he is God", but if it is read in the context of the Gospel of John and, on a larger scale, the whole New Testament, then it's obvious that Jesus is saying it that way because he is God.

well, ok, but the parts of NT that points in the direction you suggest are written by unknown authors and compiled by an agenda holding church. They are not "quotes" by Jesus but more like commentaries, like the start of John, "In the beginning there was the WORD.." who said that? Jesus? God?
Its definitely not John and i don't even have to tell you the conclusions of Bible scholars.

Though you would prefer them not to
be, these are all evidence of the Trinity.
If you understand (again,
understanding is not agreeing,) that
Christians, since the time of Christ, consider him to be God, these
instances that you cite are examples of
the different hypostases of God. What you see as being evidence of him
not being God is not evidence that he
is God, but rather if he is God, these
passages indicate that God has at least
two hypostases.

i do understand christian theology.

You claim my points are evidence of Trinity. Ok
Now let me point out my objection to that,
1) a claim that Jesus pbuh is god is made.
2) he now has to be integrated into The Father yet monotheism is to be preserved so Trinity is proposed
3) some verses show too much human-ness of Jesus pbuh so idea of different 'hypostases' of God is put.

Point 3 becomes evidence for 2, point 3 and 2 becomes evidence of 1.
But 2 was proposed to justify 1 and 3 was proposed to justify 2.
Its a circle.
All the proposals are just conjectures.
My question would be, would you please point out the beginning of the circle and evidence for it in scripture (preferably the Gospels)?

reply to post by adjensen

We get it. You don't like Christianity, and you think Islam is the bomb. But you don't have to agree with Christianity to understand it, so either stop playing the fool, or if you truly do not understand why Christians believe in the Doctrine of the Trinity or the Doctrine of the Incarnation, do some reading and educate yourself.

I have provided links there -- go read them and make an attempt to understand what they say even if you do not agree with them. You will never be able to hold an intelligent conversation regarding Christianity if you don't understand two of the most important basic tenets of the faith.

I know what Christians believe about the trinity. I have done enough reading in my life to know exactly what Christians believe. Now why don't you go read up and educate yourself on the Israelite religion that Jesus was born into.... you will find that it did NOT have concepts of a triune God or of God becoming a man or vice versa.

I am assessing what the Bible says and it is clear that Christian doctrine is not exactly in line with the words of the Bible. Christians try and separate Jesus from his Israelite religion that he was born into and lived by. Jesus' Israelite religion did NOT have concepts of a triune God and man being God etc.

Jesus directly addresses these very issues and makes it clear that only God is to be worshiped... and that his God is also the God of the people. Jesus himself never spoke anything of a trinity and he never claimed he was God incarnate... so Christian doctrines regarding the trinity and Jesus' divinity have zero basis in the Bible.... its simply fan-fiction.

reply to post by logical7

They are not "quotes" by Jesus but more like commentaries, like the start of John, "In the beginning there was the WORD.." who said that? Jesus? God?

The Christian approach to it is If its in the Bible, its got to be true.
They never stop to discern between the words of God, Jesus, the prophets, Paul and commentaries by mostly authors. Its all the same to them.