Did God......

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,122
Obviously I misunderstood the point you made because my post was on an individual basis not a religious one.
Yeah I was actually speaking more broadly about religions in general... not individuals.
However the point I was trying to make is that its arrogant no matter what one's beliefs are to think "everyone but themselves is going to hell."
My point is that you are thinking this exact thing when you say that Christians are the only ones who will go to heaven... everyone else (but Christians who accept Jesus) is going to hell.
 

TempestOfTempo

Superstar
Joined
Jan 29, 2018
Messages
8,076
Not quite.
There are those who were with the Prophets peace be upon all of them as believers. However we would characterize them as submitters (Muslim) so those who were with Jesus or Moses peace be upon them, are called Muslim.
However, many people are excused because the message did not reach them.
As for those who are not excused they are the ones who had access to the message and they chose disbelief for themselves.

“And We never punish until We have sent a Messenger (to give warning.)
[al-Isra’ 17:15]

We only say about the Creator what the The Creator says about himself:

“If you disbelieve, then verily, Allaah is not in need of you; He likes not disbelief for His slaves. And if you are grateful (by being believers), He is pleased therewith for you”

[az-Zumar 39:7].

"This is a clear statement that Allah, may He be exalted, does not like disbelief for His slaves; rather He likes Tawheed (affirmation of the Oneness of Allah) and Islam for them. Rather they are the ones who like disbelief as a religion for themselves, and they refused to join the ranks of those who affirm the Oneness of Allah. Allah, may He be exalted, does not force anyone to become a Muslim or to become a disbeliever; rather He, may He be glorified and exalted, has explained the paths of truth and falsehood, right and wrong, Islam and disbelief, then He has given people the choice, along with His promise to the Muslims of reward and His warning to the disbelievers of Hell."
for more on this:


18: 30. Verily, as for those who believed and did righteous deeds, certainly We shall not make the reward of anyone who does his (righteous) deeds in the most perfect manner to be lost.

https://islamqa.info/en/answers/159301/he-is-asking-why-are-most-of-the-people-on-earth-disbelievers-and-why-does-allah-want-them-to-enter-hell[/
Islamic theology also holds that Allah will place some Muslims into hell and some non-Muslims in heaven right? I always thought that was beautiful because its fair and provides for balance. So long as we dont have shirk, we can be forgiven, but that doesn't mean we wont still suffer for the wrongs we do. At least this is my understanding.....
 

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,122
Not quite.
There are those who were with the Prophets peace be upon all of them as believers. However we would characterize them as submitters (Muslim) so those who were with Jesus or Moses peace be upon them, are called Muslim.
However, many people are excused because the message did not reach them.
As for those who are not excused they are the ones who had access to the message and they chose disbelief for themselves.

“And We never punish until We have sent a Messenger (to give warning.)
[al-Isra’ 17:15]

We only say about the Creator what the The Creator says about himself:

“If you disbelieve, then verily, Allaah is not in need of you; He likes not disbelief for His slaves. And if you are grateful (by being believers), He is pleased therewith for you”

[az-Zumar 39:7].

"This is a clear statement that Allah, may He be exalted, does not like disbelief for His slaves; rather He likes Tawheed (affirmation of the Oneness of Allah) and Islam for them. Rather they are the ones who like disbelief as a religion for themselves, and they refused to join the ranks of those who affirm the Oneness of Allah. Allah, may He be exalted, does not force anyone to become a Muslim or to become a disbeliever; rather He, may He be glorified and exalted, has explained the paths of truth and falsehood, right and wrong, Islam and disbelief, then He has given people the choice, along with His promise to the Muslims of reward and His warning to the disbelievers of Hell."
for more on this:


18: 30. Verily, as for those who believed and did righteous deeds, certainly We shall not make the reward of anyone who does his (righteous) deeds in the most perfect manner to be lost.

https://islamqa.info/en/answers/159301/he-is-asking-why-are-most-of-the-people-on-earth-disbelievers-and-why-does-allah-want-them-to-enter-hell[/
I know there're exceptions.
 

Dalit

Star
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
1,911
Christian view 1x1x1=1. The "dimensionality" of God does not diminish Him.
Yes! You say it so much better than I did. That's why I think YHVH Echad and Trinity, while not exactly described the same way, leave it open for a triune nature of One God. If it's totally oneness (and yes, I've been to a Pentecostal Oneness church), then was Jesus praying to Himself in the Garden of Gethsemane? That just doesn't make sense. Maybe I'm the only one, but I don't think Jews and Christians are that far apart. They'll see Yeshua/Jesus as Mashiach. It's not my job to convert anyone, just to love them. So I love them. They have the foundations of my faith.
 

Dalit

Star
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
1,911
Jesus PBUH was a Prophet. I invite you to read a translation of the Quran (I recommend the Yusuf Ali translation) and learn about the true religion.
I see you have respect for Jesus. That is good.

I'll consider it. My mentor was considering reading it for informational purposes and that would be my rationale, too. However, I'm not giving up on YHVH because He's never given up on me even when I ran from Him. I've felt His love and it's immense.
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2018
Messages
3,259
I don’t know the nature of God, God can manifest in three ways or one or a million if God so desires.

I do know God is not the wrathful being on high as depicted in the Old Testament

“Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.”

Psalm 137:9
 

elsbet

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
5,122
"Did God use the bathroom"

I'd be pretty disappointed if he did...I mean "God" using the bathroom? Even as a Catholic, I never really believed in the trinity. It's an Hindu concept that translates badly into Christianity. At least Hindus talk about Avatars who have God's immanence in them, not that the Avatars are God himself. A body is made of various parts, but without the head (the Father) there can't be an action in the body. A hand for example is not the body itself, just like Jesus is not the Father.

And Catholics usually believe that the Pope is God's (Jesus) representative on Earth. And the Pope does go to the bathroom...on a gold plated toilet no less. That is just a form of idolatry that was perpetuated by the RCC ever since they took control of Christianity. The Jesus as God worship comes from there.
What do you think of Mary as the Mother o' God? That's bizarre to me.. no offense.
 

phipps

Star
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
4,193
Yeah I was actually speaking more broadly about religions in general... not individuals.

My point is that you are thinking this exact thing when you say that Christians are the only ones who will go to heaven... everyone else (but Christians who accept Jesus) is going to hell.
No one is going to heaven unless they accept Jesus as their personal Saviour, live by His precepts as He showed us when He was here on earth. So you're right about that. There are no different ways to get to heaven. There is only one way to heaven and that is through Jesus Christ. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" John 14:6.

God bless.
 

phipps

Star
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
4,193
Is Allah the same god as Jehovah?

The God of Christianity and the Allah of Islam share some titles and characteristics in common, and many people believe that God and Allah are one and the same. Reasoning that God and Allah are the same, some have suggested that Christians should call Jehovah God by the name “Allah” to ease Christian/Muslim tensions. But are they one person? Is the God of the Bible the Allah of the Qu’ran?


Commonalities

Consider what Muslims say about the name Allah. “Allah is the personal name of the One true God,” says the Institute of Islamic Information and Education. Christians also believe the same thing about their God. In the Bible, Moses says, “The LORD our God is one LORD” (Deuteronomy 6:4). Recording God’s own words, Isaiah writes, Thus saith the LORD…I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me…” (Isaiah 45:1,5). Either these verses refer to the same deity or else these verses identify one exclusive divinity. Which is it?

Muslims believe that Allah is the creator, that he is eternal, the first and the last, and that he is merciful and compassionate. Christians believe the same things about the God of the Bible.

From these examples, we might conclude that God and Allah indeed could be the same deity. But there is more.


Jesus: God’s Son

The God of the Bible has a Son. The Old Testament refers numerous times to God’s Son, both literally and figuratively. Psalm 2:7 prophecies this: “I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.”

Proverbs 30:4 says, “who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son’s name, if thou canst tell?” Many other Old Testament Scriptures confirm that God has a Son. And of course, the New Testament is all about God’s Son, Jesus.

God also revealed His Son figuratively through the lives of His people as recorded in the Old Testament. For instance, Abraham and Isaac enacted the Son’s sacrifice when Abraham laid Isaac on the altar. Jesus declared that this incident was a revelation of Himself, the Son of God, when He told the Jews, “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad” (John 8:56).

The Bible makes it clear that salvation comes through God’s Son, Jesus Christ. Jesus prayed,“And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent” (John 17:3).

However, the Qu’ran says, “God forbid that He Himself should beget a son!…Those who say: ‘The Lord of Mercy has begotten a son,’ preach a monstrous falsehood.”

Allah cannot be the Christian’s God, because the God of the Bible definitely has a Son.

The Bible is inflexible on this point: “Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father” (1 John 2:23). To call God Allah,” then, would be to deny the Son and the Father, too.

Jesus plainly says, “No man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). It is by the death of God’s Son that we are saved. There would be no salvation without Him.

Paul declares, “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh” (1 Timothy 3:16). The whole plan of salvation hinges on this very point: God came in the person of His Son Jesus Christ to redeem humanity for Himself. Allah did no such thing. For Christians to call God Allah negates the very plan of salvation.


Different Entities

A comparison of the Qu’ran and the Bible gives irrefutable evidence that the God of the Bible and Allah are two very different entities. God declared in Isaiah 42:8, “I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another…”

God commanded reverence for His holy name. The third commandment which protects the holiness of God’s name comes with a warning: “Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain” (Exodus 20:7). To think that we can call the God of the BibleAllah” would not only be a mistake, it would be blasphemous because the names “God” and “Allah” refer to two different entities.

It’s true that some Christians, when working for the salvation of Muslims, use the name Allah in reference to the God of the Bible when they first connect with Muslims so they can talk about the Deity. When it has been established that the God of the Bible is different from Allah, however, to continue referring to the God of the Bible as Allah” would only be confusing, since the God of the Bible is a very different character from Allah. God, the Father of Adam, Abraham, Jesus and of all Christians is not Allah of the Qu’ran.

https://amazingdiscoveries.org/blog/allah-god-jehovah/
 

elsbet

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
5,122
I think saying things like “God works in mysterious ways”...
I didn't say that. Anywhere.

And you didn't say anything different-- so that's an impasse.

I think it should make logical sense though, God gave us reason.
He did-- but it isn't unreasonable or illogical to believe that God can and does defy both. In fact, I expect it. I have a very hard time believing a religion that doesn't recognize, or even believe in, the Miraculous.

It’s not really about you though.
That was the point, mecca.

Thanks I think it’s a good thing. It’s healthy to think about things and not just write everything off without thinking about it first.
You're welcome. But I didn't mean this thread. You (and this is not intended as an insult) use the same arguments as everyone else.
 

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,122
I didn't say that. Anywhere.
I didn't say you did... But I brought it up because I thought you were leading into saying that God is beyond logic and can be illogical. And I think that's kind of a cop out because it means that the argument doesn't have to make sense and people can go on to believe things that make no sense in reality.
He did-- but it isn't unreasonable or illogical to believe that God can and does defy both. In fact, I expect it. I have a very hard time believing a religion that doesn't recognize, or even believe in, the Miraculous.
Yeah... but saying it's possible for God to do something impossible is just a paradox.
That was the point, mecca.
I'm not really sure what you're getting at. Why should Christianity be defined differently and held to a different standard compared to other religions? When something that looks like and functions similarly to polytheism arises in Christianity, why can't it be described as a form of polytheism?
You're welcome. But I didn't mean this thread. You (and this is not intended as an insult) use the same arguments as everyone else.
Ok, I see the same arguments in favor of the trinity as well but no one has really made it connect in a coherent way... and I don't think it's possible to. Everyone always just ultimately gives up and says that we are incapable of understanding God's nature.
 
Joined
Sep 5, 2018
Messages
3,259
I didn't say you did... But I brought it up because I thought you were leading into saying that God is beyond logic and can be illogical. And I think that's kind of a cop out because it means that the argument doesn't have to make sense and people can go on to believe things that make no sense in reality.

Yeah... but saying it's possible for God to do something impossible is just a paradox.

I'm not really sure what you're getting at. Why should Christianity be defined differently and held to a different standard compared to other religions? When something that looks like and functions similarly to polytheism arises in Christianity, why can't it be described as a form of polytheism?

Ok, I see the same arguments in favor of the trinity as well but no one has really made it connect in a coherent way... and I don't think it's possible to. Everyone always just ultimately gives up and says that we are incapable of understanding God's nature.

Napoleon said his favorite religion was Islam because it relied the least on the supernatural and the miraculous ( that’s not to say it doesn’t include both of those elements). I think we can all be honest here and historically speaking Islamic culture was much more advanced than its European contemporaries. This is not to to imply perfection as the ancient societies were not great and we should all be thankful not to live in them.

I think there has been a reversal of sorts in the modern era, I think it’s a valid criticism to say that modern Islamic societies are to an extent stuck in the past, and there are clearly issues with violence and radicalism ( as there is still with Christianity)

Point being I think the superstitious elements of the worlds religions detract from the truths they speak to us.

I personally have found a path to personal redemption and a purpose in life through a logical interpretation of the Gospel of Christ and the doctrine of non restitance to evil by force which I believe holds the key to banishing evil both internally and externally.

One thing I will say is that ultimately the nature of God is impossible to fully understand. Science takes us a step to it.

I didn’t want to disrupt your conversation with Elsbet or go wildly off-topic but I salute you Mecca for being the Voice of Reason at VC.


I’d also like to add for the sake of adding it, I never want to hear a pro-life political argument from people that literally endorse ( and worship ) a book that proclaims righteousness to bashing babies against rocks.
 
Last edited:

elsbet

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
5,122
Yeah... but saying it's possible for God to do something impossible is just a paradox.
.
Now you're getting somewhere... good.

Some of the most important truths are, in fact, paradoxical. You have to give it away to keep it. That is one of the best, and it applies to the good things in life. Luke 6:38, Proverbs 11:24-25.

Unless you dont believe you reap what you sow. If that's the case, then we're back to square one.
 

TokiEl

Superstar
Joined
Dec 13, 2017
Messages
7,239
I’d also like to add for the sake of adding it, I never want to hear a pro-life political argument from people that literally endorse ( and worship ) a book that proclaims righteousness to bashing babies against rocks.
It's a prophecy about Babylon and how her enemies will repay her inhabitants for their sins against God... the men of Babylon will be slaughtered and the women raped and their children dashed to pieces.

Now if you live in Babylon...
 

Serveto

Star
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
1,043
Is Allah the same god as Jehovah?
[snip]

God commanded reverence for His holy name. The third commandment which protects the holiness of God’s name comes with a warning: “Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain” (Exodus 20:7). To think that we can call the God of the BibleAllah” would not only be a mistake, it would be blasphemous because the names “God” and “Allah” refer to two different entities.

Well, again, if you go to non-Christian Jews with your above-listed criteria, they will tell you that, though you think you are worshiping YHVH, or Jehovah, you are not, at least not properly, because you are idolizing Jesus Christ as part of a Trinity (if you are an "orthodox" Christian, that is). The Jehovah's Witnesses, even if they are considered false witnesses, will tell you the same. Therefore, I conclude either that Jehovah is not the same god, or God, as Jehovah, or that his followers and worshipers are somewhat given to spiritual schizophrenia, at worst, and perpetual argumentation at best. Still, they do some impressive charity work by establishing hospitals, missions, and such, so I am acknowledging some of their many and fine traits as well.


To your above statement, and leaving aside the "same entity" argument for a moment, as it relates to etymology, or the word, "Allah," how do you account for the fact that when Jesus was on the cross, quoting the Psalmist (David), the translators of the KJV, in the gospel of Mark, left his words in Aramaic in tact:

"And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"
Mark 15:34

I am no linguist, but ^ that Aramaic "Eloi," is first, let it be noticed, apparently not the plural Hebrew "Elohim," or "gods," but rather is singular, "God," and, what is more, looks very much like the Arabic, also singular, "Allah." This, then, is my question: should native speakers of Aramaic, even if there aren't many these days, say "God," or "Jehovah," instead of "Eloi?"
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
1,367
"Did God use the bathroom"

I'd be pretty disappointed if he did...I mean "God" using the bathroom? Even as a Catholic, I never really believed in the trinity. It's an Hindu concept that translates badly into Christianity. At least Hindus talk about Avatars who have God's immanence in them, not that the Avatars are God himself. A body is made of various parts, but without the head (the Father) there can't be an action in the body. A hand for example is not the body itself, just like Jesus is not the Father.

And Catholics usually believe that the Pope is God's (Jesus) representative on Earth. And the Pope does go to the bathroom...on a gold plated toilet no less. That is just a form of idolatry that was perpetuated by the RCC ever since they took control of Christianity. The Jesus as God worship comes from there.
Catholicism has no basis in Christianity or vice versa—-though from the outside, the unaware always accuse Catholics & Christians of sharing a religion when we are as different as night & day.

Catholics ARE idolaters . They wrongfully elevate Mary to the status of deity, bow before her statues/graven images & even remove God’s 2nd Commandment that forbids it.

Jesus IS divine.....Mary is NOT.
THAT is polytheism. Then they throw the “Pope” (which means “Papa”) into their custom, deified mix, make confessions to priests whom they call “Father”, despite God’s clear command against it, and think the priest can absolve them of sin when he CANNOT.

On top of that, they believe in unbiblical nonsense like purgatory, praying for/to the dead, prayer beads/rosaries (which ARE Hindu in origin), relics, bells, incense, rituals, etc.

NONE of this stuff is permitted in the Bible, therefore it is NOT Christian.
 

Todd

Star
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,525
Well, again, if you go to non-Christian Jews with your above-listed criteria, they will tell you that, though you think you are worshiping YHVH, or Jehovah, you are not, at least not properly, because you are idolizing Jesus Christ as part of a Trinity (if you are an "orthodox" Christian, that is). The Jehovah's Witnesses, even if they are false witnesses, will tell you the same. Therefore I conclude either that Jehovah is not the same god, or God, as Jehovah, or that his followers and worshipers are somewhat given to spiritual schizophrenia, at worst, and perpetual argumentation at best. Still, they do some impressive charity work by establishing hospitals, missions, and such, so I am acknowledging some of their many and fine traits as well.

To your above statement, and leaving aside the "same entity" argument for a moment, as it relates to etymology, or the word, "Allah," how do you account for the fact that when Jesus was on the cross, quoting the Psalmist (David), the translators of the KJV, in the gospel of Mark, left his words in Aramaic in tact:

"And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"


Now again I am no linguist, but ^ that Aramaic "Eloi," is first, let it be noticed, apparently not the plural Hebrew "Elohim," but rather is singular, and, what is more, looks very much like the Arabic, also singular, "Allah." This, then, is my question: should native speakers of Aramaic, even if there aren't many these days, say "God," or "Jehovah," instead of "Eloi?"
What is the spirit behind the 3rd commandment? I do not believe it is about what God's name is.

The Hebrew word that is translated "take" is "Nasa" and literally means "carry". The word translated vain is:
שָׁוְא shâvᵉʼ, shawv; or שַׁו shav; from the same as H7722 in the sense of desolating; evil (as destructive), literally (ruin) or morally (especially guile); figuratively idolatry (as false, subjective), uselessness (as deceptive, objective; also adverbially, in vain):—false(-ly), lie, lying, vain, vanity.

So, if we read the commandment as "Thou shalt not carry the name of the LORD thy God destructively, in uselessness, or for when lying; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that carry his name in vain” it is referring to what we do in the name of God. If our actions mis-represent who God is because we do evil in his name, then we are breaking the 3rd commandment.

Is God so petty that he cares more about whether we are speaking the correct name for him or does he care more about our actions and how they represent him? In reality "God", "Allah", "Elohim", "El-Shaddai", "I AM" and "Lord" are titles or descriptions and not the actual name of God. As far as I know (I don't know if Islam purports to have a personal name for God) the only true personal name for God amongst the Abrahamic faiths is the Tertragrammaton or "Yahweh."

I think it is safer and more respectful to call someone by a title than their actual name, yet titles can be just as endearing and special as one's actual name. For example, my grand-daughter does not call me "Todd". She refers to me as "Papa". Papa is a title, yet it is a very personal and endearing title. She knows my actual name is "Todd”, but she never speaks my actual name. Perhaps this is a similar concept to why the Hebrews thought it inappropriate to speak the actual name of God.

When someone approaches the creator of the universe, do you think "God" is more concerned with what title or name we refer him as, or how our actions and attitude represent him before others? In the New Testament we are told to pray in the "name" of the messiah. The messiah's actual name is not "Jesus" but "Yahushau" which literally means "Yah saves". But I have seen the actual power of God invoked by using the name of "Jesus”, so I would again contend that the actions and heart attitude of the person speaking the name is more important than the actual name used.
 

Todd

Star
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,525
Catholicism has no basis in Christianity or vice versa—-though from the outside, the unaware always accuse Catholics & Christians of sharing a religion when we are as different as night & day.
.
You should really read about the history of Christianity and it's orgins and evolution. The majority of protestant/orthodox doctrine and dogma come directly from the Roman Catholic Church including the doctrine of Eternal Torment, the Trinity and Sunday worship. Also many rites of the Catholic Church have been maintained by protestant chruches including the rite of ordination and matrimony. Obviously there is much about the Roman Catholic Church that Bible believing Christians ought to object with and Protestantims has rightly rejected many un-biblical Catholic doctrines and dogma. Protestantism didn't begin as movement to create a new religion or faith. It began as an effort to reform and correct the errors of Catholicism. To say modern Christianity has no basis in Catholicism is plainly absurd.
 

Helioform

Star
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
3,195
Top