Why is anyone amazed that others don't believe your religion when you don't believe others?
How is that even a thing?
How is that even a thing?
All's Quiet on the Western Front
- Thread starter muhammad_isa
- Start date
I'm not so sure we can claim that.
God can't be indisputably proved by reason, nor is there irrefutable evidence of the Divine, ergo, a belief in God is in effect 'a leap', no matter how much we can reason and rationalise that to ourselves.
Not in the material / scientific sense of the word "prove", probably not.
I reason along the following lines.
I think, therefore I am, I think.
I don't believe that everything is just a "coincidence". I reason that that is next to impossible.
I simply don't agree.
..but when it comes to a man called Jesus who prays to "his Father" [ as in the Lord's prayer ],
being the only "Divine man"
The members of the Trinity are co-equal and co-eternal, one in essence, nature, power, action, and will.
..so why would Jesus who is co-equal need to pray to the Father who is also co-equal.
What does co-equal mean then?
Does "the Father" also pray to Jesus?
I see no evidence for that.
I'm sorry that you think that I'm just attacking Christian belief, but I have to say, that I sense that is a form of defence,
so as not to answer my objections.
Your objections to what? That not everyone believes as you do? Let me remind you that this is not a forum for debate about the one true faith.
There are scientists who reason that all the gazillions of electrons all over the universe, are really just one electron manifesting everywhere backwards and forwards in time. Is that simple or logical? It's not possible to reduce God to simple yes/no equations.
But the first thing, again to repeat, is that 'God' is not really a Father: it is a human anthropomorphic term used to try to express a process between God/Spirit and nature/man.
If I cannot simplify the electron, how can I simplify God?
But the first thing, again to repeat, is that 'God' is not really a Father: it is a human anthropomorphic term used to try to express a process between God/Spirit and nature/man.
If I cannot simplify the electron, how can I simplify God?
Last edited:
..obviously..
We all have different interests.
I'm on an interfaith forum because I like to discuss religion.
Naturally, I like discussing what I, myself, have discovered, and how it relates to others.
God is God is God.
..perhaps objections is the wrong word.
I'm referring to why I find certain things irrational.
If somebody can show me why those things are NOT irrational..
..but that doesn't answer my questions, though.
..so why would Jesus who is co-equal need to pray to the Father who is also co-equal?
What does co-equal mean then?
Does "the Father" also pray to Jesus, and if not, why not if they are co-equal?
The trick is not to come across as condescending when demanding that from believers of other religions on an interfaith dialogue forum.
Can you do that?
I can try.
I don't really feel superior, so I'm not sure why I come across like that.
If I add humour, then it seems some people think I'm being sarcastic.
I think it's more about what I'm saying .. I could be wrong.
With all respect, the Quran Jesus does very little and speaks really just to make assurances that he is not God and that all he does is only by Allah's permission.
https://www.interfaith.org/community/threads/19889/
A large part of the Quran seems directed against the idea that God has a son, or that Jesus is God. A large part of the Quran is concerned with condemning what Christians believe. I suspect a large part of the dialogue in the mosques is also?
But Christians pray to the resurrected, ascended and living Christ. They did not pray to the man Jesus walking around in his time.
Christians do not burden themselves with what Islam thinks of their belief. It does not concern them to conform to what others want them to believe.
They don't devote a lot of thought against other religions. They don't think they need to keep trying to defend their faith to those whose knowledge of their beliefs is thin and have not read their scriptures, and yet who devote a large part of their own energy into condemning it.
https://www.interfaith.org/community/threads/19889/
A large part of the Quran seems directed against the idea that God has a son, or that Jesus is God. A large part of the Quran is concerned with condemning what Christians believe. I suspect a large part of the dialogue in the mosques is also?
But Christians pray to the resurrected, ascended and living Christ. They did not pray to the man Jesus walking around in his time.
Christians do not burden themselves with what Islam thinks of their belief. It does not concern them to conform to what others want them to believe.
They don't devote a lot of thought against other religions. They don't think they need to keep trying to defend their faith to those whose knowledge of their beliefs is thin and have not read their scriptures, and yet who devote a large part of their own energy into condemning it.
Last edited:
Would it be fair to generalize and say that religions which grew out of a reform tend to expend energy and effort in pointing out the points of doctrine they reformed?
For example, considerable parts of the Gospels are directed against other Jewish currents of the time.
Large parts of the Hebrew Bible are directed against polytheist worship and other practices which the Law of Moses reformed.
Early Buddhist texts are full if polemics against the then-current Vedic religion, as well as other contemporary groups.
Protestant and Reformed Christians spilled a lot of ink arguing against Roman Catholic positions, and established new theologies from the texts, which they carefully guarded.
So, I think this is not really a unique feature of the Quran.
Last edited:
Your "explanation" is not clear.
..perhaps I can answer for you?
All three members (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) are essentially equal; i.e., they are all divine in nature.
However, in the grand plan of redemption, they play certain roles, and these roles define authority and subservience. The Father commands the Son, and the Father and the Son command the Holy Spirit.
I'm not certain as to why you didn't want to clarify yourself
For me, the above theory derives from circular reasoning.
Given: they are equally divine [ decided at Nicea ]
Exactly. Why would I bother to discuss my beliefs with others if I didn't care about others?
I would say that all three of us [ @RJM, @Thomas and I ] care a lot about others.
Our fundamental beliefs differ on the subject of tawhid [ the Oneness of God ].
This, in turn, leads us to different understanding of what the path to paradise actually IS.
It is all about "appeal to authority".
An atheist, for example, does not accept a divine authority at all.
The East and the West have diverged from the one authority,
and we have ended up with a world that makes its own laws.
It is swiftly becoming more materialistic, and rushing towards disaster.
eg. social inequality and climate catastrophes.
Only one thing can prevent "hell on earth", and that is spiritual truth .. imho.
Given: they are equally divine [ decided at Nicea ]
Exactly. Why would I bother to discuss my beliefs with others if I didn't care about others?
I would say that all three of us [ @RJM, @Thomas and I ] care a lot about others.
Our fundamental beliefs differ on the subject of tawhid [ the Oneness of God ].
This, in turn, leads us to different understanding of what the path to paradise actually IS.
It is all about "appeal to authority".
An atheist, for example, does not accept a divine authority at all.
The East and the West have diverged from the one authority,
and we have ended up with a world that makes its own laws.
It is swiftly becoming more materialistic, and rushing towards disaster.
eg. social inequality and climate catastrophes.
Only one thing can prevent "hell on earth", and that is spiritual truth .. imho.
I disagree. The countries implementing religious laws don't seem to be better off at all. My country (Germany) has legislature tailored to religious institutions, which is causing no end of problems: you can get fired from health care jobs for belonging to the wrong religion, or not having a religion, for example. Other countries which make provisions for "spiritual truth" in their laws end up criminalizing women who seek abortions, or even implementing the death penalty for certain sexual orientations.
That seems pretty hellish to me. No more spiritual truths in my legislation, please.
The problem is @muhammad_isa ignores responding to the points he's uncomfortable with and keeps banging on and on about the Trinity and Jesus isn't God without considering what others say. Only thing that matters to him is the Quran says it's so, therefore it must be true and that everyone else is a bit retarded not to understand just how simple cut-and-dried it all really is. Nor has he ever responded directly to the question of when he last read the New Testament.
So, for the last time:
1) God is not really a Father. The Trinity is a symbolic way of explaining the relationship between God and man, expressed through the life of Jesus Christ. It is about the interweaving of Spirit and nature. The electron cannot be pinned down. God is still one.
2) Christians do not pray to the man Jesus walking around Judea in the first century. They pray to/through the resurrected, ascended and living Christ, but also directly to God the Father as in the Lord's Prayer.
3) Lastly: it's none of my business to tell anyone else they must believe the same as I do.
If I don't like something, I don't have to do it. If I don't want to eat pork -- for example -- no-one is forcing me. That's my right. That doesn't give me the right to spend all my time and energy around restaurants shouting at people who do eat pork as sinners bound for hell etc, and insisting they too should not eat it -- because of what my book says about it -- and Jesus coming back to break the cross and kill all the pigs.
I have made plenty of points about the spiritual understanding of Christian belief. If someone wants to clonk along on a purely material level about Jesus isn't God and the Trinity is bull**** that's their right. But it's not a discussion, imo.
No doubt the reply to this post will be to accuse me of some completely unrelated issue, and to tell me I'm saying this or that -- which I am not saying -- and try to make me respond to red herrings. In the event, I will try to wait for proper responses to the several points I have already made in this thread.
So, for the last time:
1) God is not really a Father. The Trinity is a symbolic way of explaining the relationship between God and man, expressed through the life of Jesus Christ. It is about the interweaving of Spirit and nature. The electron cannot be pinned down. God is still one.
2) Christians do not pray to the man Jesus walking around Judea in the first century. They pray to/through the resurrected, ascended and living Christ, but also directly to God the Father as in the Lord's Prayer.
3) Lastly: it's none of my business to tell anyone else they must believe the same as I do.
If I don't like something, I don't have to do it. If I don't want to eat pork -- for example -- no-one is forcing me. That's my right. That doesn't give me the right to spend all my time and energy around restaurants shouting at people who do eat pork as sinners bound for hell etc, and insisting they too should not eat it -- because of what my book says about it -- and Jesus coming back to break the cross and kill all the pigs.
I have made plenty of points about the spiritual understanding of Christian belief. If someone wants to clonk along on a purely material level about Jesus isn't God and the Trinity is bull**** that's their right. But it's not a discussion, imo.
No doubt the reply to this post will be to accuse me of some completely unrelated issue, and to tell me I'm saying this or that -- which I am not saying -- and try to make me respond to red herrings. In the event, I will try to wait for proper responses to the several points I have already made in this thread.
Last edited:
The central hotel tower, the Makkah Clock Royal Tower, has the world's largest clock face and is the third-tallest building and fifth-tallest freestanding structure in the world
...
The building complex is metres away from the world's largest mosque and Islam's most sacred site, the Great Mosque of Mecca. The developer and contractor of the complex is the Saudi Binladin Group, the Kingdom's largest construction company. It is the world's second most expensive building, with the total cost of construction totalling US$15 billion.
Macca in 1887 and today
Is today's world a product of religious law?
I think not.
I don't consider what is happening in this world today as "red-herrings"..
People "bang-on" about climate-change .. and rightly so .. but ignore the underlying reasons of what is causing it.
If we don't address the underlying causes, then any attempts to reverse it will fail.
Climate-change deniers have their reasons, and it is connected to their philosophy of life.
Religion is important. What people believe affects all of us.
“And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”
- Matthew 19:24-
Religion is not just a sport or pastime. The youth of today are fed up with politicians.
They are not addressing the root cause. They care more about money.
Last edited:
Ok. But several people have gone to lengths to explain their understanding of the Trinity and the Divinity of Christ. It is exhausting to keep having them brushed aside, and hear the same question repeated yet again, that has already been addressed.
You do not have to accept the explanations, but that is the Christian understanding. It’s not about the dictionary meanings of words. It's exhausting, imo
I apologise if I have sounded rude or abrupt
You do not have to accept the explanations, but that is the Christian understanding. It’s not about the dictionary meanings of words. It's exhausting, imo
I apologise if I have sounded rude or abrupt