Hi Dave,
Indeed, it could not possibly be equating Allah and Yahweh, because we believe God is a Trinity, and Muslims (and Jews) do not.
I was wondering if I could get you to comment a little more on the above statement. It seems as though you are implying that the Jews, although they do not believe God is a Trinity, do not worship the same God as Christians? But how can this be; isn't the God of the Old Testament the same God as the New?
Thanks,
Chris
They do in the sense that I described in my paper. They are worshiping essentially what we would say is God the Father in Christian theology. That is the same as One Person in our trinitarian God. But the Jewish theology of God is not, of course, trinitarian, which is an essential part of our theology.
In the particular statement above, all I said was that the Jews do not believe in the Trinity. not that they necessarily worship a different God. The relationship of the Jewish conception of God from the Christian is a vastly different discussion from a comparison of Allah and the Christian God, which was the subject of my post.
Not that I am not willing to discuss it. That's fine.
Dave,
The official translations of both CCC 841 and Nostra Aetate 3 include the word "the" where it is missing from your post - so that the CCC 841 reads: "[Muslims] adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day" and NA 3 reads: "They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth" (emphasis added to both).
Latin of course lacks a definite article, and I'm no Latin scholar to be able to judge whether one is is required for these passages. Can you tell me why this reading of yours - which lacks the article - is to be preferred to the official translations on the Vatican website? Thanks.
FWIW I'm not sure that even with the definite article this is such a big deal. We say that Jews worship the same God as we do, but they deny the Trinity just as the Muslims do. If they claim Abraham's God, I'm not sure that's a big deal, even though they get things terribly wrong in many/most respects.
My comments and two dollars will get you an overpriced cup of coffee 
Oh, and thanks for blogrolling me!
You're welcome!
What real difference would "the" make? To say "the one God" or simply "God" (in a context that makes it clear that monotheism is involved) are both asserting monotheism.
The fallacy in the thinking of some that the Catholic Church is somehow compromising lies in the notion that the Church is presupposing that the Unitarian Muslim Allah and the trinitarian Christian Yahweh are the same. That's ludicrous.
The translation of Vatican II that I use is the edition edited by Austin Flannery, O.P. It was personally recommended to me as the best one by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J. Nostra Aetate was translated by Fr. Killian, O.C.S.O. More than that I could not tell you about the translation.
The more common Walter Abbott, S.J. edition reads:
"They adore one God, living and enduring, merciful and all-powerful, Maker of heaven and earth."
That ain't that different from my translation. As for CCC 841, that, too, is best understood in context. Thus we must also take into consideration the following entries:
843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."
844 In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them: . . .
I think that the main reason that this issue is a burr under the saddle of some (not all) Protestant onlookers is the underlying and too oft unspoken presupposition on their part that DOCTRINE is the one true king worthy of all submission and adoration.
In other words, the Muslim cannot possibly be worshipping our God because of their mistaken theology. Their prayers cannot possibly be looked on with any credit whatsoever by God because they've screwed up the doctrinal details so much that they've closed the ears of our God toward them! Some of these same doctrine-worshippers of course put Catholics beyond the pale with Muslims because of all of our "mistakes" and "false teachings" as well.
At the end of the day, the real rub is that the Catholic Church is not "supposed to be" the more charitable party in general. We're the "excluding, divisive, uncatholic" church supposedly, and somehow on this issue we've achieved the more charitable position. So how can they deal with it? Accuse us of being too charitable and catholic.
Fascinating, Mike. Thanks!
Mike,
It is possible to be too charitable. If the pope invited a group of Masons to the Vatican and prayed with them based on the idea that the "grand architect of the universe" is the God of the Bible, would it be "worshipping doctrine" to say this is going a bit too far.
I do think the Catholic Church is a bit to charitable: look at what is taught at Catholic universities and seminaries.
Of course it is possible to be "too charitable", but on this matter, it is not an appropriate charge. Take a few moments to read the very short Vatican document from which this exerpt was extracted, "Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non Christian Religions".
I'll try to post the link here.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hi...-
aetate_en.html
Dave,
I understand what you are saying; but the problem is that the RCC Catechism does not say, “we respect their monotheism”, or merely “The Muslims are monotheists and believe in a concept of God, Allah, as the one creator God”.
You are interpreting the Catechism in a way that does not seem to be what it says. It says, “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst those are the Muslims, who profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us the adore the one merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.” (Paragraph 841 of the official Roman Catholic Catechism, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Paulist Press, 1994, p. 223) Your analogy and the Catechism both seem to be saying that monotheists and Muslims are saved based on belief in “one God” who is creator.
Two problems are in this wording:
1. “together with us”
2. “adore the one merciful God”
“Together with us” implies the same God and some sort of joint fellowship. It does correctly say that the “profess to hold the faith of Abraham”.
It does not say, “Muslims seek to worship one God” or “claim to worship the one God”, but that they actually do adore (worship) the one true God.
It would be better to just say, “they claim to adore the one merciful God”; “they are monotheists”, “they have the same referent or concept of an object of “one God”; “they believe in only one God, called Allah”, “they seek to worship the one creator God, but cannot reach the true God without Jesus Christ as their Savior and Mediator, ( I Timothy 2:5, John 14:6, Acts 4:12, John 3:18.)
Monotheism is not enough; the demons believe that God is one, and tremble, and yet “the plan of salvation” does not include the devil and demons.
The plan of salvation includes the Muslims in that God desires that they repent and believe the gospel of Christ, and calls us to preach the gospel to them; but they are not already saved just because they are monotheists. And your analogy of the birth/adopted mother/daughter implies that if they never hear the message of the true God, God will have mercy on them because they were grateful to some concept of “one creator God”.
Islam claims to worship the one true God, but the nature and characteristics of the doctrine of God in Islam is not the God of the Bible.
Allah is the Arabic word; also the best translation for Elohim in the Arabic OT and Theos in the NT; (In other words, it is not a problem to use the word “Allah” as God when communicating with Muslims. In fact it is a necessary starting point. And Muslim converts who their language is Arabic will continue to use Allah for Elohim and Theos, no problem.)
But the doctrine of who God is; is not only not complete, in that Allah is a monad, rather than a Tri-unity; Allah also has some character flaws.
Allah is able to sin if he wants to.
One cannot call “Allah” “He” – I have had Muslims object to me in calling Allah “He” because they think I am saying God is a physical male!
Allah is unknowable and impersonal in Islamic theology. Allah is more of a transcendent force; and the goal of life is just to obey the external commands of the will of Allah rather than knowing God in a personal relationship through His Son Jesus Christ.
Allah is the "kheir Ol Makkareen" - "the very best deceiver" -- 3 times in the Quran –
3:54
8:30
10:22
In English translations of the Quran, this is usually translated, “the best plotter” or “the best planner” or, better, “the best schemer”; seeking to hide the very clear idea of deception in the Arabic word “Makkar”, coming from “makr”, deception, trickery, guile.
This is why lying and trickery and dissimulation is no problem in Islam. As the famous saying goes; “you become like what you worship or focus on”. Psalm 115 (all who worship idols will become like them) and 2 Cor. 3:18
Allah is also “Al Jabbar”, which can be translated “Almighty”, but it also means, “tyrant”, “dictator”, “forceful one”, “irresistible one”, “enforcer”, “the one who forces you to do what He wants”. Comes from the Arabic word, “Jabr” which means “force”, “destiny”, and is usually thought of in very fatalistic terms. Sometimes Jabr is even translated as “fatalism”. Quran Surah 59:23
This is also why force and fear is prevalent in Islamic cultures and there are many dictators and lots of male chauvinism.
Allah is also “Al Motakabir” (The Proud one). Quran Surah 59:23 In English translations, they have to supply the word, “justly” to make “justly proud”.
Thanks for the info. Ken.
Do you think that all Muslims will automatically go to hell if they don't accept the Trinity and Jesus as Lord and Savior before they die (IOW, become Christians)?
Or can God save some people through Jesus Christ, even though (for whatever reason) they did not come to a knowledge of the Christian gospel, and were ignorant of some things, basically through no fault of their own, or relatively less fault than something like outright rejection?
The plan of salvation includes the Muslims in that God desires that they repent and believe the gospel of Christ, and calls us to preach the gospel to them; but they are not already saved just because they are monotheists.
In this, you agree with the Catholic faith.
By the way, the Arabic title for God, Jabr, is cognate of the Hebrew word geber or gibbor. Isaiah chapter 9 gives the name of the Messiah as Pele-yoez-El-gibbor-Abi-ad-Sar-shalom, Wonderful-Counselor-God the Mighty-Father Everlasting-Prince of Peace. The same word "gibbor" is used in Gen. 10 to describe the wicked idolatrous tyrant Nimrod. So, if your argument about Allah being Jabr proves anything, then it proves the same thing about Jesus.
I rather doubt you know Arabic, Ken.
Ken, I have been wondering where you have been.
Monotheism is not enough; the demons believe that God is one, and tremble, and yet “the plan of salvation” does not include the devil and demons.
Of course the plan of salvation doesn’t include the devil or demons. It doesn’t even include the good angles either as far as I understand it.
But the doctrine of who God is; is not only not complete, in that Allah is a monad, rather than a Tri-unity;
I would say that the Jews worship the one true God, even though they reject His triune nature. If this is true, could we not accept the idea that Muslims do worship the one true God even though they have an incorrect understanding of Him?
Allah is also “Al Jabbar”, which can be translated “Almighty”, but it also means, “tyrant”, “dictator”, “forceful one”, “irresistible one”, “enforcer”,. Comes from the Arabic word, “Jabr” which means “force”, “destiny”, and is usually thought of in very fatalistic terms. Sometimes Jabr is even translated as “fatalism”. Quran Surah 59:23
Ken, do you believe, then, that human beings have free will? I sometimes feel that some brands of Protestantism have a concept of God that seems more Muslim than Christian. Hyper- Calvinists come to mind here who give me the impression that God creates living beings only to predestine them to hell through no fault of their own.
The Bible teaches that all are condemned already -- John 3:18
You loose most motivation for evangelism if you say that those without Christ are going to heaven, because if you do go and preach to them, then you have really made them accountable. If you leave them alone; then (in your system), there is hope for them to be saved.
I don't know Arabic fluently, but I do know Farsi fluently, and Farsi has 40% Arabic words in it. I can read the script and pick out words and use sources.
The first thing an Iranian says when you ask him or her, "what do you think of when you then of Jabbar?" is, "dictator', "tyrant", "cruel leader"
Your point about the Hebrew Gibbor as a cousin language cognate is a good one; that is why I pointed out that it is also translated "Almighty".
By the way, that is also part of the word for Algebra -- Al-Jabr - which is a mathematical formula -- if you plug in the right numbers, you always get the same results. This is the way the Muslims believe about God; Allah is an impersonal mathematical formula. If you obey, Allah will have mercy on you (maybe, Enshallah, if God wills); if you don't, you will be zapped.
There is no such thing as "through no fault of their own" -- John 3:18 -- they are already condemned, because they have not believed in the only Son of God.
Romans 1:19-21 "they are without excuse"
General revelation, creation, conscience, culture does not save people, it makes them accountable and without excuse; it condemns them.
Peter,
It depends on what you mean by "free will".
Do you know what the formal definition of a "hyper-Calvinist" is?
The Jewish people need Christ, the Messiah also. It is the height of anti-antisemitism to not share the gospel with them (in culturally appropriate ways).
A good book of a Jewish man's testimony of coming to Christ is "Betrayed" by Stan Telchin.
When he read Daniel 9:24-27, that Messiah comes first, then is cut off, then the temple is destroyed; that was a key factor in his conversion.
The plan of salvation includes the Muslims in that God desires that they repent and believe the gospel of Christ, and calls us to preach the gospel to them; but they are not already saved just because they are monotheists.
Ken
In this, you agree with the Catholic faith.
Jordan Potter
But you are in contradiction to paragraph 841 of the Catechism and with Dave.
Jesus said,
"Unless you believe that I am, you shall die in your sins." John 8:24
From an Iraqi Arab from Baghdad on the Arabic word, Jabbar -- (I told you so)
Fatima - Thoughts From Baghdad:
How do I feel about it? I remember watching Saddam on TV when he was still in power, and to me he epitomized the Arabic word jabbar- arrogant, powerful tyrant- more than any other dictator ruler out there. Seeing him when he was caught and through out his trials, and today, was just so humbling. Going from so high up, from such power and arrogance and jabaroot to such an end, subhanaAllah, very humbling.
http://www.healingiraq.com/archives/6
Arabic - English dictionary online:
http://tabs-online.com/TABS/Lane/
pp. 374-375 explain the words Jabr (force, compulsion, coersion, reparation, algebra, might) and Al Jabbar (mighty one, compeller, enforcer, arrogant one who exalts himself, dictator, tyrant, etc.).
So, I was right.
The greatest difference in the concept of God in Islam and Christianity is that the god of Islam created sin and can sin; but the God of the Bible did not create sin, and He cannot sin; He is not able to sin, because it goes against His nature. Titus 1:2, Hab. 1:13, I John 1:5
God's sovereignty in the Bible and in Calvinism seems similar to Islam on the surface; but as Samuel Zwemer (A Reformed, Presbyterian missionary, with the Christian Reformed Church, and famous "apostle to Islam", served for over 40 years in areas like Basra (Iraq), Bahrain, Egypt, etc.) has written, "the Fatherhood of God, the love of God, and His purposes in redemption balance and soften the (predestination/election/providence/sovereignty) decrees of God." (I paraphrase, see www.answering-islam.org
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Bo...r/God/
chap7.htm
(see discussion on pages 100-102)
In Christianity, God loves sinners (Romans 5:8, I Timothy 1:15); in Islam, Allah hates sinners.(Quran 3:31-32 "If you love Allah, . . . Allah will love you" . . . Allah does not love the disbelievers."
God's predestination and election are based on His love -- Ephesians 1:4-5, 2:4-6
There is no "God is love" ( I John 4:8.) in Islam.
Ken, I'm glad that you agree with me that Jabr doesn't necessarily mean what you claim it means -- you have provided evidence that your favored definition of Jabr is not necessarily the only one or the right one, so I accept your retraction of your misrepresentation of Muslim theology.
But you are in contradiction to paragraph 841 of the Catechism and with Dave.
No, I'm not -- you're just giving a tendentious misreading of the Catechism and Dave's words. You're doing the same to the words of the Quran, choosing the most offensive possible senses of the Arabic words and dismissing the broad of array of meanings that Arabic words can have.
In Christianity, God loves sinners (Romans 5:8, I Timothy 1:15); in Islam, Allah hates sinners.
Anybody can play the game you're playing, Ken. Obadiah quotes God as saying "Jacob I loved and Esau I hated." In the Psalms we read that God is angry with the wicked every day. Jesus commands His disciples to hate their parents and their loved ones. So the Christian God is just as much a God of hate as the Muslim God, if we treat the Bible the way you treat the Quran and other Muslim writings.
No "God is love" in Islam? Sure. But there is a God in Islam whose chief characteristics are that He is merciful and compassionate. Sounds not unlike "God is love," don't you think?
Your problem is that, just as most Christians do not believe and have never believed in the Calvinist God (thank God for that!), many Muslims do not believe in the kind of God you say they believe in. You're broadbrushing things, applying to all Muslims what is true only of some (or many, or even most).
And the differences between the Calvinist God, who intentionally wills that most people be damned, and the God that many Muslims believe in are not as far apart as you would like us to believe.
General revelation, creation, conscience, culture does not save people, it makes them accountable and without excuse; it condemns them.
It also makes it possible for them to be saved -- for only those who are convicted of sin can be forgiven. The sinless are not qualified to be saved.
No, those things don't save them, but God's omnipotence means He can reach any soul. No one is beyond His reach, not even Jews and Muslims.
St. Paul's words in Romans 1-2 no more mean that all will be damned who do not make an explicit Christian confession than his words "all have sinned" mean Jesus is a sinner. It's the height of arrogance (speaking of Jabr) to categorically declare that all those who haven't confessed Christ in this life will certainly be damned. Sorry, but that's way above anybody's pay scale here on earth -- only God decides those things, not mere humans.
Mr. Potter,
Who has said that God cannot save Jews or Muhamaddens or that salvation is anything other than God's perogative? No Calvinist denies this.
Anyone who says that an explicit confession of Christ prior to death is absolutely necessary for a soul to be saved is someone who says God cannot save Jews or Muslims (I note your quaint use of the term Mohammedans, misspelled Muhamaddens). I'm pretty sure there are, and have been, plenty of Calvinists who deny that God can save Jews and Muslims, to the extent that they deny that anyone can be saved without confessing in this life, "Jesus is Lord."
There is no "God is love" ( I John 4:8.) in Islam.
Ken, do you feel that in order to love authentically, a person must be free to love?
I don't at all agree.
If you worship God, you worship God. You may have mistaken ideas about God, but you can still worship God.
People are not believing in another God just because they don't believe He is Three while at the same time One.
People are not believing in another God just because they don't believe that Jesus was God Incarnate.
They just don't know some things about God.
Now, we Catholics must believe that one can know God by reason alone. That was defined by the First Vatican Council. That God that we know by reason alone is the God that Catholics worship, for there is no other True God.
But we also believe that no one can believe in either the Trinity or the Incarnation without supernatural Faith. Reason alone cannot establish these truths and we would not have known them had God not chose to reveal them to us.
That God--the one that reason alone can detect--is One, Almighty, Eternal, Omniscient, the Creator of all that is, the Merciful One.
In Arabic and Maltese, Catholics call Him "Allah." So do Muslims who most assuredly worship the same God that we do.
There may be some who so deface and distort the image of God that they end up worshipping an Idol or even Satan, the Great Imposter. But that can be true of Catholics as well.
Now as a close friend of Robert Spencer, who is a Catholic clergyman, I can do the Negative Dance on Islam all you like.
But Allah is the God that you and I worship. No doubt about it.
Peter,
God created us free, but when Adam and Eve sinned, they (and we all after them) lost their freedom of power to choose good over evil -- even Augustine agreed with that.
But we are still free to choose what we want. God does not coerce us.
There is a difference between free will to choose what we want vs. free will to choose what we ought.
Until a person is born again by grace, he or she is in bondage to sin. John 8:34, Ephesians 2:1-3, Gen. 6:5
Jeff,
The doctrine of who Allah is in Islam is not the God of the Bible -- since,
He is not Tri-une (Father, Son, and Spirit)
Allah is not "father" (Surah 112 -- it is a blasphemy to call God, "Father" in Islam).
Jesus is not God nor the eternal Son of God. (in Islam)
Allah is the "very best deceiver"; (see the three times in Quran Allah is called this -- see above) - whereas the God of the Bible cannot lie ( Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18, I John 1:5)
the God of the Bible loves sinners (Romans 5:8.); the god of Islam, does not.
But, in evangelism with Arabic speakers, the best word in their language for the one creator God is Allah -- that communicates monotheism, one God, creator, Spirit, invisible, eternal.
We must go in love and truth and share the message of the true God; and the word of God (Kalimat'allah) who became flesh and dwelt among us; (John 1:1-5; 1:14) -- we must patiently teach and fill in the correct doctrines of who Allah really is, according to the Bible.
"A person's free will, indeed, avails for nothing except to sin, if he does not know the way of truth. And even after his duty and his true goal begin to become known to him, he still fails to do his duty, or to set about it, or to live rightly, unless he also takes delight in it and feels a love for it. Now, in order to win our affections to what is right, God's "love is shed abroad in our hearts", not through the free-will which arises from ourselves, but "through the Holy Spirit Who is given to us." (Romans 5:5)
Augustine, On the Spirit and the Letter, 5
See also Enchiridion, 32
On the Predestination of the saints, 41
Against the Two Letters of the Pelagians, 1:7
so the human will is free -- to do evil, because it takes pleasure in evil. But it not free to do good, because is has not been set free. No one wills anything good unless he is helped by Him Who cannot will anything evil -- that is, by the grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord. For whatever is not from faith is sin. Romans 14:23 And so the good will with withdraws itself from sin is the believing will; for, The just shall live by faith (Romans 1:17). And the function of faith is to believe in Christ. And no one can believe in Christ -- that is, come to Him -- unless this is given to him. (John 6:65) No one, therefore, can have a righteous will, unless he has received the true gratuitous grace from above, without any virtue of his own going beforehand."
Against the Two Letters of the Pelagians, 1:7
"Let us, then, understand the calling by which the elect become elected -- not those who are elected because they have believed, but elected in order that they may believe. For the Lord Himself also sufficiently explains this calling when He says, "You did not choose Me, but I chose you." John 15:16
Augustine
On the Predestination of the Saints, 30
A good synopsis of the free will issue:
http://theologica.blogspot.com/2...-free-
will.html
From Justin Taylor’s blog, “Between Two Worlds”
Peterson on Free Will
44 comments | Permalink
I recently received a copy of Robert Peterson's new book, Election and Free Will: God's Gracious choice and Our Responsibility . It is the first book P&R's new series, Explorations in Biblical Theology, edited by Peterson, who is professor of systematic theology at Covenant Theological Seminary.
The book looks excellent--a combination of exegetically grounded and pastorally sensitive theology.
I thought it might be helpful to provide an outline of Peterson's chapter on "free will." John Piper always used to say that the first task of a good theologian is to make distinctions, and Peterson makes a number of helpful ones in this chapter:
Free Will and the Bible's Story
1. Human beings as created had true freedom and freedom of choice.
2. Human being as fallen lost true freedom and retained freedom of choice.
3. Human beings as redeemed have regained a measure of true freedom and retained freedom of choice.
4. Human beings as glorified will be perfected in true freedom and will retain freedom of choice.
True freedom = "the ability to love and serve God unhindered by sin" (p. 131)
Freedom of choice or spontaneity = "the ability of human beings to do as they wish" (p. 126)
Free Will and Reasons Why People Are Saved and Condemned
1. Reasons why people are saved
a. People are saved because they trust Christ as Lord and Savior.
b. People are saved because the Holy Spirit opens their hearts to the Gospel.
c. People are saved because Christ died and rose to save them.
d. People are saved because the Father chose them for salvation before creation.
2. Reasons why people are condemned
a. People are condemned because of their actual sin.
b. People are condemned because of Adam's original sin.
c. People are condemned because God passed over them (reprobation).
Free Will and Its Relation to God's Sovereignty
1. The Bible affirms both divine sovereignty and genuine human responsibility.
a. The Bible affirms divine sovereignty.
b. The Bible affirms genuine human responsibility.
c. The Bible affirms divine sovereignty and human responsibility together.
2. Parameters for sovereignty and responsibility.
a. Fatalism must be rejected as an error.
b. Absolute power to the contrary must be rejected as an error.
3. To emphasize either sovereignty or responsibility at the expense of the other is to fall into the error of rationalism.
a. Hyper-Calvinism is an error.
b. Arminianism is an error.
Of course, to see these defended, explained, and synthesized, you'll have to read the whole thing!
posted by JT at Tuesday, November 20, 2007
John 14:6
. . . no one comes to the Father except through Me."
Jesus
there is only one God and one mediator between God and man, Jesus Christ . . . I Timothy 2:5
What you worship in ignorance I now proclaim to you . . . Acts 17:23 and see context, 17:16-34.
They are seeking to worship the one true God, but sin and ignorance and false teaching about Jesus is blocking them from actually really truly worshiping the true God. "Your sins have separated you from your God . . . Isaiah 59:2
no one [really purely] seeks God, no not one, no one is good, no one is righteous -- Romans 3:9-23
Until a person is born again by grace, he or she is in bondage to sin. John 8:34, Ephesians 2:1-3, Gen. 6:5
Does God provide this grace to every one or only to a certain few? If intentionally only to a certain few, then God creates only to condemn.
There is a difference between free will to choose what we want vs. free will to choose what we ought.
Would you elaborate please?
The doctrine of who Allah is in Islam is not the God of the Bible -- since,
He is not Tri-une (Father, Son, and Spirit)
Allah is not "father" (Surah 112 -- it is a blasphemy to call God, "Father" in Islam).
Jesus is not God nor the eternal Son of God. (in Islam)
This can apply to the Jews as well. Are you saying that they do (did not) worship the One True God?
God created us free, but when Adam and Eve sinned, they (and we all after them) lost their freedom of power to choose good over evil -- even Augustine agreed with that.
No, he did not agree with that. That's Calvinism, not Augustinianism. Your own quote from St. Augustine shows that he did not agree that we completely lost the freedom to choose good over evil, or that the human will is "free" only to do evil (meaning the human will is not free at all) unless God gives a special grace. Original sin has weakened the will, not disabled it altogether. As St. Augustine said:
"A person's free will, indeed, avails for nothing except to sin, *if he does not know the way of truth*. And even after his duty and his true goal begin to become known to him, he still fails to do his duty, or to set about it, or to live rightly, unless he also takes delight in it and feels a love for it. Now, in order to win our affections to what is right, God's "love is shed abroad in our hearts", not through the free-will which arises from ourselves, but "through the Holy Spirit Who is given to us." (Romans 5:5)
Allah is the "very best deceiver"
You previously said:
In English translations of the Quran, this is usually translated, “the best plotter” or “the best planner” or, better, “the best schemer”; seeking to hide the very clear idea of deception in the Arabic word “Makkar”, coming from “makr”, deception, trickery, guile.
Ah, so you are such an expert in classical Arabic that you know that all those English translations of the Quran are erroneous and deceptive, trying to hide the fact that the Muslim God is a liar and deceiver.
It's interesting that the word in question is Makr. That's actually related to our words "make" and "magic." It's also related to the Sanskrit word "maya," illusion, deceptively tricky, or something that is easily mistaken or misunderstood. These words don't necessarily involve deliberate deceit or falsehood, but describe a quality of something that is hard for our senses to accurately grasp. The translation "very best deceiver" is tendentious and spurious -- the Muslims should be allowed to tell us what their own words mean, and there's no doubt that the Muslim idea of Allah is of a God of truth, not a God of deception.
In Christianity, God loves sinners (Romans 5:8, I Timothy 1:15); in Islam, Allah hates sinners.(Quran 3:31-32 "If you love Allah, . . . Allah will love you" . . . Allah does not love the disbelievers."
"Was not Esau Jacob's brother?" the Lord says. "yet I have loved Jacob, but Esau I have hated, and I have turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals." Malachi 1:3
Ken, does the Christian God hate or not?
I also want to re-ask you: "Do you feel that in order to love God authentically, we must have free will to love God?"
If God demands that all people obey his laws, why would he not give all the ability to do so (eventhough the may still choose to disobey)?
Does it seem loving or just to demand something from someone that they cannot give unless they are made able to by grace. Does it seem loving or just to punish someone for failing to deliver that which they were made totally incpable of delivering in the first place.?
You missed the point, Ken.
The Trinity can only be known through Faith. If known through reason, only the unity of God can be descried.
But we are taught by the First Vatican Council that God--the true God--can be known by reason alone.
Those who believe in one God who is not a Trinity are MISTAKEN about the nature of God in this respect.
But they still believe in God.
As far as the mercy of God is concerned, why not ask a Muslim? And the New Oxford Review has repeatedly run pieces by its Catholic editor insisting that God does NOT love sinners.
He is foolish and mistaken, of course. But he believes in God.
What you don't get is that one can believe in God--the true God--and yet be mistaken about some of His characteristics. Especially where those characteristics involve matters of faith which cannot be perceived or even properly understood by the reason, their lack cannot vitiate the basic soundness of the belief.
How about a God who deliberately creates people in order to damn them as in the Calvinist idea of double predestination? Pretty sour stuff. But do you want to say Calvinists are not just seriously mistaken about God but that they do not BELIEVE in God AT ALL?
I think your position--and Dave's as far as I understand it--makes no sense.
What you don't get is that one can believe in God--the true God--and yet be mistaken about some of His characteristics.
Actually, I do get that and understand that.
Especially where those characteristics involve matters of faith which cannot be perceived or even properly understood by the reason, their lack cannot vitiate the basic soundness of the belief.
Yes, that is why they need people who know the truth and have the revelation (OT and NT) to show them the deficiencies of the characteristics of the Monotheism in Islam. This is called evangelism.
Jordan,
What source are you using that says that the Arabic term "Makr" is related to the English term "make" and "magic" ?
Actually "magic" came to us from the Farsi word for the Magi = Majoosian, through Greek, then later into English; during the time when the Greeks, under Alexander the Great, conquered Persia, and then Herodotus wrote his histories. The Greeks saw the Persian Magi standing over fire as part of their worship, and the mysteriousness of it informed the idea of magic, but that developed much later.
Jordan,
All of the quotes I provided from Augustine DO indeed show that he taught this; that free will or moral liberty (power to choose good over evil) was lost; but free will (without coercion, or free to choose what one wants, or according to one's nature) is not lost.
We are free to choose, but until one is born again or made alive by grace; the choices are freely chosen and always tainted with sin and evil. ("free will avails to nothing but evil").
There is no need to keep arguing that; it seems really clear from Augustine that he distinquished between liberty (free will or power to choose good over evil) and free will (freedom to choose what you want, according to your nature and desires).
We still have the second kind of free will; that is the freedom to choose according to our nature and desires. (which is without coercion from without, but is according to the nature of desires within; the sinful nature.)
Ken, does the Christian God hate or not?
Yes, God hates sin; and if sinners don't repent, they will bear the brunt of God's hatred and wrath against sin in hell. Revelation 14:10 "in the presence of the lamb" they will burn in hell forever. In that sense, "God hates sinners" (Psalm 5:5; 139:19-22)
The difference is that the God of the Bible, by love and grace seeks to save some sinners from all nations and tribes and tongues and peoples and cultures. (Rev. 5:9, Ephesians 2:4-10, 1:4-5)
Yes, God hated Esau and loved Jacob. God chose Jacob and did not choose Esau. God is just in His hatred of sin and chose to save Jacob, but justly passed over Esau in His hatred and wrath against sin. Romans 9 explains this, in its quote from Malachi.
How about a God who deliberately creates people in order to damn them as in the Calvinist idea of double predestination?
This is a caricature of Calvinism. What is says is that all are justly condemned in their sin. (And even RCs agree that God did not create sin; Reformed, Calvinists and RCs are in agreement on this.) God could justly and righteously condemn all human beings to hell forever. There is no injustice with God. People are already condemned. They are vessels of wrath prepared for destruction(Romans 9:23). But the vessels of mercy are prepared beforehand for glory. Romans 9:24. Notice the Greek word for the positive side of predestination, for mercy and glory -- "beforehand" (pro). This word is deliberately there for the vessels of mercy, but not for the vessels of wrath. The vessels of wrath are not predestined by God, so there is no completely equal "double predestination" as you are asserting. God chooses to save and love some from all nations out of the mass humanity that is already condemned as vessels of wrath. He elects some from all nations for salvation; but He passes over the others in justice for condemnation and that is their own fault because of their own sin.
I also want to re-ask you: "Do you feel that in order to love God authentically, we must have free will to love God?"
Peter, I tried to answer that by showing from Augustine that there is a difference between free will before the fall and free will after the fall. Everyone is free to love God or not to. But without grace, they will not love God. That is why Christ came and commissioned His people to do evangelism and reach out to people.
The problem is that everyone's nature is corrupt and sinful and no one will love God if given the choice, without grace. Only God's grace can awaken the soul to truly love God. Adam and Eve had complete free will to love and obey God, but they lost it by the wrong use of their free will; and plunged the whole human race into bondage into sin. Jesus said, "he who commits sin is the slave of sin." John 8:34
Excerpt from Sam Shamoun,
The Quran, Bible Preservation and the Crucifixion
Sam Shamoun
http://www.answering-islam.org/
S...crucifixion.htm
And, who made it appear that Christ had been crucified? The answer can only be Allah, which poses a major theological problem on how this position reflects on the nature of God.
What does this say about the character of Allah, seeing that he deceived mankind into thinking that Jesus was crucified when in fact he wasn’t?
Interestingly, the Quran boasts about Allah being the best deceiver in connection with his foiling the Jews’ plot to kill Jesus:
But they (the Jews) were crafty, and God was crafty, for God is the best of crafty ones! When God said, 'O Jesus! I will make Thee die and take Thee up again to me and will clear thee of those who misbelieve, and will make those who follow thee above those who misbelieve, at the day of judgment, then to me is your return. I will decide between you concerning that wherein ye disagree. S. 3:54-55 Palmer
And:
Are they then secure from Allah's scheme (makra Allahi)? None deemeth himself secure from Allah's scheme (makra Allahi) save folk that perish. S. 7:99 Pickthall
And when those who misbelieve were crafty with thee to detain thee a prisoner, or kill thee, or drive thee forth; they were crafty, but God was crafty too, for God is best of crafty ones! S. 8:30 Palmer
And when We make people taste of mercy after an affliction touches them, lo! they devise schemes (makrun) against Our communication. Say: Allah is quicker to scheme (makran); surely Our apostles write down what you plan. S. 10:21
And those before them did indeed scheme (makara), but all scheming (al-makru) is Allah's; He knows what every soul earns, and the unbelievers shall come to know for whom is the (better) issue of the abode. S. 13:42
So they schemed a scheme: and We schemed a scheme, while they perceived not. S. 27:50
The word for crafty is makr. Dr. Mahmoud M. Ayoub in his book, The Quran and Its Interpreters, Vol. II, The House of Imran, brings up the question of "how the word makr (scheming or plotting), which implies deceitfulness or dishonesty, could be attributed to God." (Ibid. [1992 State University of New York Press, Albany], p. 165; bold emphasis ours)
After listing several Muslim sources, he quotes ar-Razi as saying that "scheming (makr) is actually an act of deception aiming at causing evil. It is not possible to attribute deception to God. Thus the word is one of the muttashabihat [multivalent words of the Quran]." (Ibid., p. 166; bold and italic emphasis ours)
According to Ayoub, there was one Muslim who actually boasted in Allah being the best conniver, deceiver, schemer etc.:
Qurtubi observes that some scholars have considered the words "best of schemers" to be one of God’s beautiful names. Thus one would pray, "O Best of Schemers, scheme for me!" Qurtubi also reports that the Prophet used to pray, "O God, scheme for me, and do not scheme against me!" (Qurtubi, IV, pp. 98-99; cf. Zamakhshari, I, p. 366). (Ibid., p. 166)
Moreover, here is how one of the earliest sources on the life of Muhammad interpreted Q. 8:30:
Then he reminds the apostle of His favour towards him when the people plotted against him 'to kill him, or to wound him, or to drive him out; and they plotted and God plotted, and is the best of plotters.' i.e. I DECEIVED them with My firm GUILE so that I delivered you from them. (The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, with introduction and notes by Alfred Guillaume [Oxford University Press, Karachi, Tenth impression 1995], p. 323; capital emphasis ours)
A Muslim may argue that specific words such as makr do not have their normal meaning when used of Allah. The problem with this explanation is that it ignores the fact that Allah deceived mankind into thinking that Jesus was crucified.
The Muslim may respond by saying that Allah didn’t deceive mankind, since he has clearly informed believers what actually transpired during Jesus’ final moments on earth. The problem with this argument is that Allah’s so-called "revelation" is approximately 600 years too late. Christians, Jews and pagans had to wait for the advent of Muhammad before being told by Allah that Jesus was not crucified.
And in addition, this "correction" was made in such an untrustworthy way, and given with such ambiguous language, that today there are still billions of Christians, Jews and atheists who believe in Christ’s crucifixion, due to the Quran failing to make a credible and clear case for its position.
Now the Muslims may try to argue that there were early Christian groups which denied the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ, which means that Allah had already informed people about Jesus’ final hours. The problem with appealing to these so-called Christian sects is that these groups denied the real humanity of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Groups such as the Gnostics and Docetists did not believe that Jesus had a real human body, but only appeared as if he did. It is therefore not surprising that they ended up denying the crucifixion since Jesus did not have a tangible body which could be crucified! It needs to also be stressed that these groups wholeheartedly embraced Jesus’ divinity, and believed that deity cannot "incarnate" just as the Muslims do, but with the opposite conclusion, that Jesus is only deity and not human. This is certainly not a belief that Muslims can refer to in order to support their position.
A Muslim may also claim that Allah only tricks unbelievers, which isn’t evil since they deserve what they get. For instance, Allah was right in tricking the Jews since this is what they deserved for trying to kill his messenger.
There are several problems with this claim. First, irrespective of the circumstances, it is beneath an infinitely holy God to adopt the same deceptive tactics of evildoers. Also, it wasn’t simply those who sought to crucify Jesus who were tricked, but all his followers and friends were as well. They all thought he was crucified. In addition, generations of Christian believers afterwards are punished into this unbelief for no fault of their own. It doesn’t only affect the evildoers.
This leads me to my next point. Allah doesn’t simply deceive unbelievers; he also deceives believers.
The Quran provides an example of Allah deceiving the Muslims:
When Allah showed them to you in your dream as few; and if He had shown them to you as many you would certainly have become weak-hearted and you would have disputed about the matter, but Allah saved (you); surely He is the Knower of what is in the breasts. And when He showed them to you, when you met, as few in your eyes and He made you to appear little in their eyes, in order that Allah might bring about a matter which was to be done, and to Allah are all affairs returned. S. 8:43-44 Shakir
Allah is said to have shown the opposing fighting forces as few to Muhammad since, if he had shown him their actual numbers, the Muslims would have been afraid to fight. Hence, Allah had to use deception in order to encourage Muslims to fight in his cause.
The late Abdullah Yusuf Ali notes:
The Muslim army, though they knew their worldly disadvantage, did not realize the full odds against them. The Meccans came exulting in any case, and they despised the contemptible little force opposed to them. Even though they thought the Muslim force was twice as great as it was (iii. 13), still this number was contemptible, when taken with its poor equipment. Both these psychological mistakes subserved the main Plan, which was to bring the matter to a decisive issue, whether the Pagans of Mecca were to continue their arrogant oppression, of the religion of God was to be established in freedom and honour. (Ali, The Holy Qur’an, Translation and Commentary, p. 426, fn. 1214; underlined emphasis ours)
Augustine:
". . . when man by his own free will sinned, then sin being victorious over him, the freedom of his will was lost." Enchiridion, chapter 30
". . . it was by the evil use of his free will that man destroyed both it and himself." Ibid., Enchiridion, 30
Cited in R. C. Sproul, Willing to Believe, p. 63-64
Peter, I tried to answer that by showing from Augustine that there is a difference between free will before the fall and free will after the fall. Everyone is free to love God or not to. But without grace, they will not love God. That is why Christ came and commissioned His people to do evangelism and reach out to people.
I agree that we need God's grace to love Him. This is the Catholic position, Does God give this grace to all men? Are men free to reject or accept this grace? Christ commands that we love one another as God loves us. If certain people are made unable to love in this way because God does not make it possible then it is unjust to expect it from them.
Yes, God hates sin; and if sinners don't repent, they will bear the brunt of God's hatred and wrath against sin in hell. Revelation 14:10 "in the presence of the lamb" they will burn in hell forever. In that sense, "God hates sinners" (Psalm 5:5; 139:19-22)
God said He hated Esau, not Esau's sins, but we understand it to mean that He hated Esau's sin because we know God does not hate humanity, but loves it so much that He sent His only son to die for us. Is it possible that you are not allowing for the same interpretational licence for Muslims? This is why I brought up the quote from Malachi.
Yes, that is why they need people who know the truth and have the revelation (OT and NT) to show them the deficiencies of the characteristics of the Monotheism in Islam. This is called evangelism.
Big honking deal if God has created you for eternal condemnation.
God could justly and righteously condemn all human beings to hell forever. There is no injustice with God. People are already condemned. They are vessels of wrath prepared for destruction(Romans 9:23).
Prepared? Prepared for condemnation by whom? God?
But the vessels of mercy are prepared beforehand for glory. Romans 9:24. Notice the Greek word for the positive side of predestination, for mercy and glory -- "beforehand" (pro). This word is deliberately there for the vessels of mercy, but not for the vessels of wrath. The vessels of wrath are not predestined by God, so there is no completely equal "double predestination" as you are asserting. God chooses to save and love some from all nations out of the mass humanity that is already condemned as vessels of wrath. He elects some from all nations for salvation; but He passes over the others in justice for condemnation and that is their own fault because of their own sin.
I can't see how this squares with the notion that "God wishes that all men be saved." Better hope you are one of the elect, Ken, because we all no that you don't know that you are. You could be just another Francis Beckwith in waiting who did not receive the grace to remain faithful to the end.
Ken, you have cut yourself off from the Church and as such your private interpretations have given you an erroneous interpretation of scripture. As I said to Grubb, I don't know how you can sleep at night without worrying that you might not be one of God's chosen few.
Jeff said: I think your position--and Dave's as far as I understand it--makes no sense.
Yes, Ken's position makes no sense, but what you said in your post is in agreement with Dave's position, so if Dave's position makes no sense then you must also say that your position makes no sense either.
Ken, I learned about the linguistic kinship of the words "make," "machen," "magic," "Magi," "maya," and "makr" several years ago in a college course. I don't have the reference handy, but there's little doubt that those words are distantly related.
As for your various examples of Allah "deceiving" unbelievers and believers, there's no essential difference between those examples you cite and the various examples in Holy Scripture in which God "deceives" unbelievers and believers and Satan himself. Think about it: don't you think it was pretty crafty of God the way He "disguised" Himself as a baby and maneuvered Satan into doing the very thing that would destroy Satan's dominion?
Or what about the holy prophet Jeremiah's declaration (Jer. 20), "You deceived me, O Lord, and I let myself be deceived"? If God can be said in Holy Scripture to pull the wool over the eyes of His elect, then there could hardly be anything wrong with the Muslim tradition of describing Allah as the very best schemer/plotter/deceiver. You are trying too hard to show that Islam is a false religion, opting for the least charitable and most inaccurate representations of Islam, so you opt for the tendentious rendering of "very best deceiver," unwilling to consider what Muslims actually mean when they say that God is al-Makr. I repeat what I said above, that if you approached the Scriptures and Christian theology the way you approach the Quran and Muslim theology, you would have to conclude that the God revealed in Holy Scripture is just as much a God of hate and a God of lies as you say the Muslim God is. There is a lot wrong with Islam, but telling lies about Islam as you have been doing is not an appropriate apologetic.
Jordan,
I tried to find some quotes from the Muslims themselves on line, on the nature of Allah and Al Jabbar and Kheir Ol Makarreen". Cannot find anything significant yet, except for the article by Sam Shamoun. (admittedly, he is Evangelical. even so, he makes sense.) Read the whole thing.
I have asked Iranians over the years what they think of when they hear the word, Jabbar; and they always say, "dictator", "cruel, mean, tyrannt".
I have talked to Muslims and related to them for 24 years. Their psyche and culture is affected by the world view and doctrine of God; that is why there are so many dictators, the male chauvinism, the fatalism, the deception, etc. All of this comes from their basic world view about Allah and who He is. As Psalm 115 says, "we become like what we worship."
Many have confirmed to me in ministry about their understanding of Allah in Islam. Iranians do really feel that Allah is a dictator, a male chauvinist, a deceiver, trickster, and very fatalistic as to their own ability to do anything in this life. Official leaders, sheikhs an Imams have told me and others at the Mosques I have visited that Allah is able to sin; you cannot say that Allah cannot do anything, even sin.
Many of the former Muslims I have discipled in Christ have said, "we were taught that Allah could sin if He want to; but he just chooses not to." Also, "He is tricky and deceptive; that is why trickery and getting away with lying and sneakiness is an honored trait."
they are very excited when they learn that the God of the Bible not only does not lie, but cannot lie. He cannot do anything that is against His holy nature. Titus 1:2, I John 1:5, Heb. 6:18 That is one of the freeing truths that former Muslims say is very liberating and joy -inspiring.
Because of Islam and the nature of Allah as a trickster --
That is why Arafat, Saddam, Hafez Al Assad, Qadaffi, and Ahmadi-nijad are generally admired, until they are defeated.
Difficulty is that is very hard to compile all the Muslim theologians comments on "Allah is the very best deciever " and "Al Jabbar", etc.
1. Because most is in Arabic and not translated yet.
2. So many different Muslim views, modernate, liberal, conservative, orthodox, Sufi, Sunni, Shiite, radical, Salafin, Jihadists, etc.
3. there is no more "Caliphate" (similar to the RCC magisterium and pope in a sense) that speaks with one voice for the Muslim world. They have fiqh; but difficult to know who are official and
4. They put their nicest foot forward in English in seeking to look peaceful and sweet and valid for the west.
I don't think I am putting it in the worst possible light; I know the people and have lived among them for 24 years and know how the worldview and society is affected by their theology.
I don't see how the incarnation was a deception, etc.
Jer. 20:7, on first blush, seems like Jeremiah's assessment, which is not necessarily a truthful statement. He is complaining at God; doesn't mean that God is actually guilty of deception. It could be God's record of Jeremiah's feelings.
Ken, you have cut yourself off from the Church
Obviously by "Church" you mean the Roman Catholic Church, but I was never a member of that church anyway. But I am a member of the Church, the invisible body of Christ(Ephesians 1:1-23; Galatians 3:6-29; Ephesians 2:11-22; 3:1-21; 5:27, and a member and servant of several local evangelical visible churches. (Heb. 10:25, Acts 13-1-4)
and as such your private interpretations have given you an erroneous interpretation of scripture.
Just because they are different that the RCCs interpretation doesn't mean they are erroneous. It is the church of Rome that is wrong about so many things.
As I said to Grubb, I don't know how you can sleep at night without worrying that you might not be one of God's chosen few.
I sleep very peacefully, being in Christ and justified by faith alone, through grace alone; which gives me great peace.
Romans 8, (the whole chapter), Phil. 4:6-9
But I also strive for holiness and godliness by the power that works within me. Colossians 1:28-29, and I seek to confess and repent anytime I know I have a wrong attitude or evil thought or actions.
I John 1:5-2:2
2 Peter 1:10 --" be diligent to make your calling and election sure". Colossians 3:12 "As God's chosen ones, holy, and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, gentleness, kindness, humility, . . . etc.
I John 5:13 "I write these things to you that you may know that you have eternal life, you who believe in the name of the only Son of God."
Galatians 4:6 and Romans 8:16 The Spirit testifies with our spirit that we are children of God."
Who will bring a charge against God's elect? God is the one who justifies." Romans 8:33
The whole chapter of Romans 8, just don't have the time or space to type the whole thing out.
Romans 5:1 "having been justified by faith, we have peace with God . . . "
Ken, you keep making my points for me -- you claim Islam teaches that Allah is a Deceiver, then quote a Muslim who says deceit is contrary to Allah's nature. You say that many Muslims think God could sin if He wanted to, that right and wrong are arbitrarily determined by Allah's supreme will -- I've met many Protestants who think the same thing about God. You say the Quran says something about Allah, and when I show the Bible saying the same thing about God, you correctly point out that the Bible is to be interpreted in a way that comports with God's true nature . . . but don't seem willing to give the Quran the same benefit of the doubt. But then you point out that there is no central interpretive authority in Islam (the same problem Protestantism has), so we can't actually say that Islam teaches this or that, we can only say that some Muslims teach this, many other Muslims teach that, and some other Muslims teach something else. Since that is true, you can't fairly characterise Allah in ways that not all brands of Islam would characterise Him.
Your disucssion began with your insistence that Muslims do not worship the one merciful God, but only claim to worship Him. You then set out to prove that the one true God and Allah are two different deities, setting your somewhat faulty (because it is Calvinistic) understanding of God against your faulty understanding of Allah. I then demonstrated that the unpleasant characteristics you attribute to Allah are also attributed to God in Holy Scripture, and that if you were to treat the Bible the way you treat the Quran, you would logically have to reject the biblical God. To salvage the biblical God, you rightly insist on interpretation of what the Bible says about God. Godo for you -- now be just as fair to the Quran.
I sleep very peacefully, being in Christ and justified by faith alone, through grace alone; which gives me great peace.
Well, at least you hope you are in Christ and are justified -- but you can't actually be sure. For now, you assume that you are among the elect, but someday you may fall away, thereby proving that you were fooling yourself all along and were never justified at all, but had been predestined by God from all eternity to suffer eternal torments in hell.
Who will bring a charge against God's elect? God is the one who justifies." Romans 8:33
Who says you are indeed one of the elect?
It is the church of Rome that is wrong about so many things.
We disagree, and with great peace of mind I dismiss many of your personal opinions as heretical. Furthermore, with equal peace of mind I do not recognize your authority as it is obvious that you are cut off form the Catholic Church that Christ established on Peter and the apostles. If it weren't for the fact that Chirst did establish a preaching Church, a church that I can visibly see and know were she resides during times of doctrinal confusion sown by all kinds of well meaning heretics then, I would toss and turn at night wondering which brand of Christianity teaches the entire truth. Heck, I would even be considering whether or not Christianity could make the claims that it does.
Ken, you have not come into the fold through the main gate. You came in another way. You sow confusion and twist the scriputres into saying what they did not intend to mean. Quite sincerely and without malice, you have done this. You are mistaken nonetheless.
Christ set up his church with a physically, visible head, just for simple minded men like me as a protection against highly educated, biblically well versed men like you. Indeed, what foresight the Lord has shown.
Jesus prayed, to whom he prayed to Abba the true God. Abba the true God is Allah.
Muslims pray to Abba alone or to the true God alone, and muslims call the true God Allah.
Dear Sumawiganda,
Greetings!
I hope you come back to read this.
Did you know "Abba" means "father", "daddy" in Aramaic, and that is anathema to the doctrine of Allah in Islam?
Qur'an, Surah 112
Did you read the whole thread and all the comments?
The issue is not words or phonetics sounds, or different languages. There is no problem with calling the true God, "Allah" when speaking Arabic or any culture or language where the best equivalent to the Hebrew word "Elohim" or "El" in the OT or "Theos" in the New Testament.
The issue is the doctrine and character of who God (Allah, Elohim, El, Khoda, Theos) is. What is His character and nature?
That is the question you must answer. I hope you will read the gospels and see the character of Jesus, that He was more than a man, that He was the eternal Word of Allah ( Kalamat'allah) that became flesh, born of the virgin Mary.
And that He loves and loved the world, all cultures and peoples; us humans from all nations (Revelation 5:9; John 3:16) so much that He came to earth and became flesh and allowed Himself to be killed as the final sacrifice, substitute for sin. (even the Quran affirms the idea of substitutionary sacrifice -- Quran Surah 37:107 or 108 "We have ransomed you with a mighty sacrifice". (Allah substituted an innocent ram, who did no sin; in the place of the sinful human (the son of Abraham). The son of Abraham was saved by the substitutionary atonement of the innocent victim.
Jesus voluntarily out of love laid His life down -- John 10:18 and by His power raised Himself up from the dead.
Please investigate His life and claims in the gospel , the Injeel.
Sincerely,
Commenting by HaloScan
