'Christian'

[Unveiled Artist]

The church at Rome went astray and led the world astray. Marrying themselves with political power they conquered by force. They implemented their doctrine through force. It was not undisputed by other churches.

There were 3 main interpretations of who Jesus was. Modalism/Oneness, Trinity, and Arianism.

There were Oneness believers like myself before the trinity doctrine was even developed. It's more in line with Jewish thought and less in line with Greek philosophical thinking about a "divine logos". That's obviously not what John was talking about. John was Jewish; he was not trained in Greek philosophy so far as we know. He was a fisherman before he followed Christ. He was thoroughly Jewish. John chapter 1 is about Genesis 1:3. God said "Let there be Light". That's the Word that was with God and was God. It's not a distinct "divine logos person" separate from the person of the Father.

You get my point on differences?

 

[paarsurrey]

Sorry, one is wrong.
Abraham, Issac, Ishmael and Jacob none of them ever mentioned that they were Jews. If yes, then please quote from them.
Regards

Rather than being Jews which is a misnomer and does not fit on them, Abraham, Issac, Ishmael and Jacob submitted to the obedience of G-d, hence they were most fitted to be called Muslims or followers of Islam. It is, I understand, following in their footsteps that with Muhammad, G-d named religion as Islam and its followers as Muslims . Right, please?
Regards

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Rather than being Jews which is a misnomer and does not fit on them, Abraham, Issac, Ishmael and Jacob submitted to the obedience of G-d, hence they were most fitted to be called Muslims or followers of Islam. It is, I understand, following in their footsteps that with Muhammad, G-d named religion as Islam and its followers as Muslims . Right, please?
Regards

By the same sort of logic:

- they possessed true belief, therefore they were Orthodox.
- they belonged to the universal faith, therefore they were Catholics (and Universalists).
- they belonged to a group that was "of God", therefore they were Assemblies of God.
- they practiced (what you consider to be) the right view, intention, speech, conduct, livelihood, effort, concentration, and mindfulness, therefore they were Buddhists.

Right?

 

[paarsurrey]

paarsurrey said: ↑
Rather than being Jews which is a misnomer and does not fit on them, Abraham, Issac, Ishmael and Jacob submitted to the obedience of G-d, hence they were most fitted to be called Muslims or followers of Islam. It is, I understand, following in their footsteps that with Muhammad, G-d named religion as Islam and its followers as Muslims . Right, please?
Regards

By the same sort of logic:

- they possessed true belief, therefore they were Orthodox.
- they belonged to the universal faith, therefore they were Catholics (and Universalists).
- they belonged to a group that was "of God", therefore they were Assemblies of God.
- they practiced (what you consider to be) the right view, intention, speech, conduct, livelihood, effort, concentration, and mindfulness, therefore they were Buddhists.

Right?

"Abraham"

But they didn't belong to the Jews or Judaism, neither literally nor meaningfully.

Quran [3:68]
Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was ever inclined to God and obedient* to Him, and he was not of those who associate gods with God.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 3: Aal-e-`Imran

Regards

______
The Arabic word is Muslim translated as obedient

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

"Abraham"

But they didn't belong to the Jews or Judaism, neither literally nor meaningfully.

Quran [3:68]
Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was ever inclined to God and obedient* to Him, and he was not of those who associate gods with God.
The Holy Quran - Chapter: 3: Aal-e-`Imran

Regards

Well, that depends.

If Abraham is an invented myth, then he was first invented by Jews. What reason do we have to assume that Abraham literally existed?

 

[paarsurrey]

Well, that depends.

If Abraham is an invented myth, then he was first invented by Jews. What reason do we have to assume that Abraham literally existed?

Abraham/Ibrahim, I believe, was a real person, mentioned in Quran - the only pristine and secure Word revealed.

Others are welcome to believe differently with reasons and arguments if any, or without any.

Regards

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Abraham/Ibrahim, I believe, was a real person, mentioned in Quran - the only pristine and secure Word revealed.

I don’t share your confidence in the Quran.

Others are welcome to believe differently with reasons and arguments if any, or without any.

Regards

That isn’t how it works. Your religion isn’t some sort of default.

 

[paarsurrey]

I don’t share your confidence in the Quran.


That isn’t how it works. Your religion isn’t some sort of default.

It is OK with me, no compulsion.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

I don’t share your confidence in the Quran.


That isn’t how it works. Your religion isn’t some sort of default.

How does one know that, please?
Regards

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

How does one know that, please?
Regards

Because the only approach that is consistent and doesn’t end up with logical contradictions is to reserve judgement on claims until we have reason to believe them.

... but defaults only matter when a claim can’t be justified on its own merits. Do you think that Islam can be justified on its own merits?

 

[paarsurrey]

Because the only approach that is consistent and doesn’t end up with logical contradictions is to reserve judgement on claims until we have reason to believe them.

... but defaults only matter when a claim can’t be justified on its own merits. Do you think that Islam can be justified on its own merits?

"Do you think that Islam can be justified on its own merits?"
I believe Islam is justified on its own merits, certainly:

Quran [3:20]
Surely, the true religion with Allah is Islam (complete submission). And those who were given the Book did not disagree but after knowledge had come to them, out of mutual envy. And whoso denies the Signs of Allah, then surely, Allah is quick at reckoning.

The Holy Quran - Chapter: 3: Aal-e-`Imran
Others are welcome to differ with me with reasons and arguments if any or without them.
Regards

 

[rbj]

Yeah, it started out as a slur, but they adopted it.

that is what i have been taught also. that "Christian" meant something like "partisan for Christ" and was the term *other* people applied to followers of Jesus and subsequently Peter, and Paul.

i was also taught that the cross was not a symbol for the faith until Constantine (the little fish was) and i was also taught that Constantine was a great corrupter of the church, setting it up for power and corruption that lasted about a millennium (the dark ages). it was only until the reformation that new sects broke away not just from the corrupted Roman church, but also from other new sects that replaced the Roman church-state religion with a Protestant church-state religion.

it was groups like the Anabaptists that recognized this corruption and stood against it (and people died doing so).

 

[74x12]

You get my point on differences?

Abraham was about to offer Isaac because God told him to. (Genesis 2:21-22) That is a central story of Judaism and it's about human sacrifice. Then Jephthah actually offers his daughter as a human sacrifice because a foolish vow he made.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Abraham was about to offer Isaac because God told him to. (Genesis 2:21-22) That is a central story of Judaism and it's about human sacrifice. Then Jephthah actually offers his daughter as a human sacrifice because a foolish vow he made.

Do you understand my point?

 

[74x12]

Do you understand my point?

Maybe not. Not sure what you're referring to. Please elaborate.

 

[paarsurrey]

Abraham was about to offer Isaac because God told him to. (Genesis 2:21-22) That is a central story of Judaism and it's about human sacrifice. Then Jephthah actually offers his daughter as a human sacrifice because a foolish vow he made.

Bible (Genesis 2:21-22) is wrong, it was not Isaac, I believe it was Ishmael, please.

Regards

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Maybe not. Not sure what you're referring to. Please elaborate.

Christianity is not Judaism

I know christians say they believe in the same god, but from a jewish perspective (coming from here and class) they are totally different. I was just reading even some of the chapters and wordings of Torah and old testament are off. Especially being translated where the Torah (the actual one) was never translated but still in Hebrew.

But...

I forgot what I said since you went on about the history of the church. Christianity isn't a jewish faith. It's it's own religion. If it were still part of Judaism there would be a similarity in Judaism and Christianity. There would be a graduation between the two religions and Jews would have acknowledge that graduation. Unless the Jews are lying,

I don't see how the two relate when looking at what each religion teaches regardless their history.

My points

1. Christianity and Judaism are different
2. Judaism doesn't have human sacrifice
3. All other Abraham's worship God the Father. Only trinitarians worship Christ.

I have no clue how animal sacrifices justified human sacrifice. But that's totally Christian. No historical background within the Hebrew religion. Roman, most likely. Greek, yep. Hebrew, no.

I remember we were talking about the mesopotamians. The people had a ball game (a sport like Romans do) to which it was kinda like soccer. The team bet who would win and the person who won sacrificed the looses to their gods.

Lots of interesting history that lead up to christianity just having human sacrifice alone screams not-from-jewish god. Not Islam believes that for that matter.

Christianity is doing a thing or its own. By belief.

 

[74x12]

Christianity is not Judaism

I know christians say they believe in the same god, but from a jewish perspective (coming from here and class) they are totally different. I was just reading even some of the chapters and wordings of Torah and old testament are off. Especially being translated where the Torah (the actual one) was never translated but still in Hebrew.

But...

I forgot what I said since you went on about the history of the church. Christianity isn't a jewish faith. It's it's own religion. If it were still part of Judaism there would be a similarity in Judaism and Christianity. There would be a graduation between the two religions and Jews would have acknowledge that graduation. Unless the Jews are lying,

I don't see how the two relate when looking at what each religion teaches regardless their history.

My points

1. Christianity and Judaism are different
2. Judaism doesn't have human sacrifice
3. All other Abraham's worship God the Father. Only trinitarians worship Christ.

I have no clue how animal sacrifices justified human sacrifice. But that's totally Christian. No historical background within the Hebrew religion. Roman, most likely. Greek, yep. Hebrew, no.

I remember we were talking about the mesopotamians. The people had a ball game (a sport like Romans do) to which it was kinda like soccer. The team bet who would win and the person who won sacrificed the looses to their gods.

Lots of interesting history that lead up to christianity just having human sacrifice alone screams not-from-jewish god. Not Islam believes that for that matter.

Christianity is doing a thing or its own. By belief.

Well if you look only at the Catholic church and other Christians groups like it; then of course it won't seem very Jewish. But if you saw the book of Acts church then it would seem pretty Jewish.

As for translations that's another issue. Obviously it's best to know the Hebrew, the Greek etc.

You say Judaism doesn't have human sacrifice, but as I pointed out Abraham was tested to sacrifice Isaac. And Jephthah did sacrifice his daughter because of a vow he made.

When David repented of his sins(committing adultery, having a man murdered) he found himself wanting to give a sacrifice but he realized there was no sacrifice that could atone for what he had done. He realized that the best he could do is repent and be sorry for his sins. He believed that God would cleanse him of sins but he didn't know how.

Psalm 51
16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.
17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

Jews who don't accept Jesus can't explain one thing. That is how come God required animal sacrifices to forgive small sins but just forgives big sins without any sacrifice? It seems unfair to the sheep and cows. Why did they die when God forgives greater sins no blood required? The answer is clear to me. It is because Jesus is the sacrifice for greater sins. This is why God forgives king David for adultery and murder. This is why any one can be forgiven.

Jesus is the "ram in the bush". The sacrifice that only God could provide because we have nothing to offer. This is why God says He blots out transgressions "for mine own sake". We have no sacrifice to offer. God gave the sacrifice Himself because He loves us.

Isaiah 43:25 I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.

Not only trinitarians worship Christ. As I pointed out we Oneness/Modalists do also. Yet we believe in only One person of God. Not "three in one" like the trinitarians teach.

That's interesting about the Mesopotamians. It actually seems similar to the Mayan ball game where the losing team was sacrificed. If you study the scriptures you find that God gave the 1st sacrifice which was when He killed animals to make coats of skin for Adam and Eve. This is symbolic of how God provides us with righteousness. Righteousness is a covering for our shame. From there we find that Abel gave sacrifice and so on and so forth. It's only natural that people would pervert the concept of sacrifice and make up evil games like this to serve their idols.

 

[paarsurrey]

Well if you look only at the Catholic church and other Christians groups like it; then of course it won't seem very Jewish. But if you saw the book of Acts church then it would seem pretty Jewish.

As for translations that's another issue. Obviously it's best to know the Hebrew, the Greek etc.

You say Judaism doesn't have human sacrifice, but as I pointed out Abraham was tested to sacrifice Isaac. And Jephthah did sacrifice his daughter because of a vow he made.

When David repented of his sins(committing adultery, having a man murdered) he found himself wanting to give a sacrifice but he realized there was no sacrifice that could atone for what he had done. He realized that the best he could do is repent and be sorry for his sins. He believed that God would cleanse him of sins but he didn't know how.

Psalm 51
16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.
17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

Jews who don't accept Jesus can't explain one thing. That is how come God required animal sacrifices to forgive small sins but just forgives big sins without any sacrifice? It seems unfair to the sheep and cows. Why did they die when God forgives greater sins no blood required? The answer is clear to me. It is because Jesus is the sacrifice for greater sins. This is why God forgives king David for adultery and murder. This is why any one can be forgiven.

Jesus is the "ram in the bush". The sacrifice that only God could provide because we have nothing to offer. This is why God says He blots out transgressions "for mine own sake". We have no sacrifice to offer. God gave the sacrifice Himself because He loves us.

Isaiah 43:25 I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.

Not only trinitarians worship Christ. As I pointed out we Oneness/Modalists do also. Yet we believe in only One person of God. Not "three in one" like the trinitarians teach.

That's interesting about the Mesopotamians. It actually seems similar to the Mayan ball game where the losing team was sacrificed. If you study the scriptures you find that God gave the 1st sacrifice which was when He killed animals to make coats of skin for Adam and Eve. This is symbolic of how God provides us with righteousness. Righteousness is a covering for our shame. From there we find that Abel gave sacrifice and so on and so forth. It's only natural that people would pervert the concept of sacrifice and make up evil games like this to serve their idols.

That sacrifice never got accomplished, so no, there is no human sacrifice done by Abraham and his progeny from Ishmael or Isaac . Right, please?
Regards

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

"Do you think that Islam can be justified on its own merits?"
I believe Islam is justified on its own merits, certainly:

Quran [3:20]
Surely, the true religion with Allah is Islam (complete submission). And those who were given the Book did not disagree but after knowledge had come to them, out of mutual envy. And whoso denies the Signs of Allah, then surely, Allah is quick at reckoning.

The Holy Quran - Chapter: 3: Aal-e-`Imran
Others are welcome to differ with me with reasons and arguments if any or without them.
Regards

Then you agree that whether Islam is the default doesn’t matter?