Absolute Truth

[Faithfulservant]

I think not.
Naturally, I believe that the Qur'an is an authentic scripture from G-d..

And you can believe that. That's your choice.

..but putting that aside, there are many Christians who do not think that Jesus is "fully God".

And there are Christians that would not agree with their claim to Christianity. That's their choice.

One has to study the background and understand how Christianity evolved in a non-Aramaic
speaking population.
There are many verses in the Gospels that point to the Jewishness of Jesus, and that He worshipped G-d and not Himself!

Why can't the Son worship His Father? He also claims to share the Glory with His Father and He Himself received worship.

Any Jew or Muslim realises that human beings are G-d's creation.
They know through the scriptures, that He sent prophets and pious Kings,
in order to guide mankind.
Why would G-d send "Himself" to apparently die on a cross?
[Of course, G-d cannot die, as He is eternal]

G-d allowed John the Baptist to die, he was beheaded.
..and G-d knows best.

Just as He raised Lazarus and Jairus's daughter from the dead. God knows best.

By merely putting it down to God merely sending Himself to die on the cross shows ignorance of Christianity either willing or unwilling so your claims are another attempt to belittle our faith and claim it's not valid. Stick to the Quran as that is your book and quit stomping all over ours to make yours seem more True. I get that you have the need to justify your religion is the more absolute truth and the bible has to be wrong for that to be the case but why try so hard?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Why can't the Son worship His Father?

Is there "One God", or two?

 

[Faithfulservant]

Is there "One God", or two?

Again your ignorance of what Christians believe is rearing it's ugly head. How many times have you been told by even myself? It's really not worth entering this cycle of defending my faith as you refuse to understand.

 

[Modesty]

It might be convenient to avoid what Jesus said about those people who will
not directly enter the Kingdom of G-d, but is it reality?

I'm not Christian, so my statement on the afterlife wasn't based on anything Jesus did or didn't say.

 

[Modesty]

..but putting that aside, there are many Christians who do not think that Jesus is "fully God".

The vast, vast majority do. I was talking about mainstream, orthodox Christianity.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I'm not Christian, so my statement on the afterlife wasn't based on anything Jesus did or didn't say.

So what, if you are a Christian or not?
You were speaking on behalf of Christians [ as a lapsed Catholic ],
when you said "Sorry, Tony, we're going to have to agree to disagree. Jesus claimed to be God Himself. Fully God."

..so why do you still believe in an afterlife?
..and do we all go there?
..and will we all be in the "same boat" etc. ?

 

[Aupmanyav]

and G-d, in His guidance, teaches us what we must do to avoid it in the life hereafter.

God, his guidance, life hereafter - not for me.

Why can't the Son worship His Father? He also claims to share the Glory with His Father and He Himself received worship.

Sure, that is correct. Shiva is the Supreme God for many Hindus, but his sons, Ganesha and Kartikeya also are Gods in their own right and are worshiped.

Is there "One God", or two?

There are a few thousand, and Goddesses too.

 

[Modesty]

So what, if you are a Christian or not?
You were speaking on behalf of Christians [ as a lapsed Catholic ],
when you said "Sorry, Tony, we're going to have to agree to disagree. Jesus claimed to be God Himself. Fully God."

..so why do you still believe in an afterlife?
..and do we all go there?
..and will we all be in the "same boat" etc. ?

Because you were directly responding to my statement "I believe in an afterlife but not hell" (which didn't mention Jesus) with justifications of hell by quoting Jesus.

I was speaking on behalf of Christians in other statements, but clearly not that one. Yes, I believe in one afterlife where we all go.

 

[TheLightWithin]

Oh, I answered, indirectly.

I'm no good with indirect answers. Anything indirect is = to not being said at all.
Clients don't always like that, but it's clinically right.
I loved class discussions as an English major, but my non recognition of anything obliquely stated probably drove everyone to distraction. I couldn't tell. But it's in the same lines as my objection to anybody answering simply with lines from scripture. To me, anything said obliquely just -- isn't actually said.

 

[TheLightWithin]

..but putting that aside, there are many Christians who do not think that Jesus is "fully God".

Correct. But the argument comes up "oh, you aren't really Christians"

 

[juantoo3]

I'm no good with indirect answers. Anything indirect is = to not being said at all.
Clients don't always like that, but it's clinically right.
I loved class discussions as an English major, but my non recognition of anything obliquely stated probably drove everyone to distraction. I couldn't tell. But it's in the same lines as my objection to anybody answering simply with lines from scripture. To me, anything said obliquely just -- isn't actually said.

I replied to a series of victim statements with a victim answer.


You really, REALLY, don't want me to answer directly. I deleted several answers before I settled on what I finally posted.

 

[TheLightWithin]

I replied to a series of victim statements with a victim answer.


You really, REALLY, don't want me to answer directly. I deleted several answers before I settled on what I finally posted.

Interesting...

 

[TheLightWithin]

I replied to a series of victim statements with a victim answer.


You really, REALLY, don't want me to answer directly. I deleted several answers before I settled on what I finally posted.

In other words, maybe too rude? hmm...
Perhaps being direct while also being tactful or simply objective and/or neutral is not as straightforwards as all that...

 

[TheLightWithin]

I replied to a series of victim statements with a victim answer.

victim statements eh? interesting take

 

[TheLightWithin]

I replied to a series of victim statements with a victim answer.


You really, REALLY, don't want me to answer directly. I deleted several answers before I settled on what I finally posted.

plus I'm still not getting the connection between the irateness towards some educated people, with something you later stated about bigotry...

 

[muhammad_isa]

Yes, I believe in one afterlife where we all go..

I'm not trying to pry, but why do you say there is an afterlife for all,
but no hell?
I mean, there sure is hell for many in this life..

 

[muhammad_isa]

Correct. But the argument comes up "oh, you aren't really Christians"

Mmm .. we believe in Christ, but we are not Christians

 

[juantoo3]

In other words, maybe too rude? hmm...
Perhaps being direct while also being tactful or simply objective and/or neutral is not as straightforwards as all that...

Correct. Intent is so very difficult to convey with only words.

So it is no wonder at all to me how religious texts can have multiple interpretations.

 

[juantoo3]

plus I'm still not getting the connection between the irateness towards some educated people, with something you later stated about bigotry...

I never was any good at walking on eggshells.

Not everyone will always agree. I don't personally care if anyone agrees with me. I am where I am because I earned it, I sought it, I made my choices and I own it.

In the current zeitgeist, too many people refuse to own their lives and their choices, it is always "someone else's fault." No skin off my nose, until it affects me. If the shoe fits...

 

[Modesty]

You really, REALLY, don't want me to answer directly. I deleted several answers before I settled on what I finally posted.

This seems a bit unnecessarily aggressive?