Genesis 14 and Psalm 110

[Pancho Frijoles]

Jesus is the pathway to God / Yahweh. He doesn’t assert that he is the pathway to any other deity, nor does he say that there is another pathway to Yahweh. He is a Jew. His creed is the Shema. There is no room for other deities in the Shema. There is no room for any God besides his God and Father, Yahweh, in his religion.

I totally agree.

 

[Matthias]

Both things are correct, if the title "Son of God" is interpreted within the context in which was used and written in the Bible and the Quran.

In my conversations with Muslims they have been insistent that it cannot be reconciled. I agree with the Muslims that it can’t be reconciled and acknowledge your belief is that they can be and are.

But that would take us to a topic that is not allowed in the Forum.

It doesn’t have to but if trinitarians and binitarians (as well as some unitarians) were to become involved it would.

By the way, I am glad the topic is not allowed, because in the forum where I was, it was a source not just of heated arguing, but of division, mutual insults and unnecessary emotional distress to people.

I’m opposed to the ban. It tackles the behavior issue but at too steep of a price. Nicene Christians, imo, should be allowed to speak favor and in defense of their deity.

I’m not particularly interested in discussing that which by policy is not to be discussed here -> the doctrine isn’t about my God. If the doctrine was about my God, I couldn’t in good conscience be silent. I feel for the trinitarians but have no authority to alter the policy. I would do it for them if I could.

Perhaps we can discuss this privately by email.

I’ve had a couple of bad experiences communicating by email and pm’s. I’m not saying or suggesting that would be the case with you but because of my ministerial occupation (even though I’m retired) I prefer to communicate with members of the forum transparently for all to see.

 

[Matthias]

They prayed to the single deity they thought existed and could help them.
Since almost all of them had been raised as Catholics or Evangelicals, I assume they were thinking in God, the Father.

So none, or few, of them were praying to Allah, or Vishnu, or others. They were praying to the first person of their deity.

 

[Matthias]

I can see why you think that some people will not surrender. They look too wicked in this life, don't they?

However, I believe God's grace and power is greater than the greatest stubbornness of rebel men.
Think it this way: if there are people who in the end of the day will not surrender, that will mean that God did not win.
From a devil's perspective, those wicked people would look like heroes, like martyrs of their cause: "I preferred to be killed than to surrender to God".

True victory means to win your enemies over... particularly if that was your plan to begin with.

A year ago I had a friendly debate with an Uruguayan Calvinist... a senior person who I appreciate a lot, about this topic.
At some point of the conversation, he had to resort to the argument that God does not LOVE everyone, and that is why He has chosen not to save everyone, even if He could. He supported his view with some biblical verses that say that God hates the wrongdoers, the wicked.
The point is that... God sent Jesus precisely because He loves the wrongdoers, the wicked.
So, to me that argument was not convincing.

What do you think?

I understand your position but I don’t see in the Bible that Yahweh and Jesus - the one God and the human Messiah - view it as you do.

Free will has to allow for people to turn away and stay away, as well as to repent and return. For those whose will it is to turn away and stay away, a solution is required. What is to be done with them? They aren’t promised immortality.

We have a real choice, and all choices have consequences.

For universalism to prevail, all of mankind (and perhaps even Satan and the demons) will have to make the same choice. I don’t see that scenario playing out in the Bible.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

In my conversations with Muslims they have been insistent that it cannot be reconciled. I agree with the Muslims that it can’t be reconciled and acknowledge your belief is that they can be and are.

Unitarian Christians would have no problem with Muslims in this regard.
Let me try to explain, without discussing the Trinity, how two different approaches to the matter were necessary at different times, but they do not opose each other.

In the Bible, the title "Son of God" defines the intimate relationship between Jesus and His Father, and his authority as ambassador who speaks and acts on behalf of his Father. (The title is also used in the Bible for angels and Adam. If I recall correctly from my readings, it was also used for kings). It was very important in the New Testament to emphasize this relationship so that we could take Jesus words and acts seriously. We can refer to Jesus parable of the messengers that the owner of a vineyard sent to his workers, sending as the last resort his own son. Why? Because the vineyard's owner thought "This time they will pay heed. They have to respect my son!"
God himself, while declaring Jesus his Beloved Son, adds "Listen to Him!" (Matthew 17:5)


Now, six centuries later, by the time of the Quran, people from the Nicean creed and other christians had fought bloody wars and excommunicated mutually over the topic of the nature of Jesus. It was important, then, for the Quranic revelation to let the topic clear once and for all about the Oneness of God and the Uniqueness of God. Interestingly enough, you will find that the Quran goes all the way to avoid talking about God as a Father or about us as His children. So there was nothing especial in the Quran against Jesus as Son: it is just a deliberate attempt to place God as a unique being, free from any kinship to any other being or thing, in the context of a widespread enforcement of the Nicean creed.

So, in summary, the Biblical approach and the Quranic approach were important to address different needs at different times.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

They were praying to the first person of their deity.

You couldn't tell if they were praying to either the first person, or the only person of their deity.
If a Catholic and a Jehova's witness were together during that earthquake in Mexico, you couldn't have told one from the other.
By the same token, if in an Arab-speaking country, say Lebanon, a Muslim and a Catholic were praying for their lives, you coudln't have told the difference. Both would have uttered "Allah" (the Arabic word for God) thinking in a single entity that could save them from that earthquake.

That is my point.
When we are suddenly aware that our lives are in peril, theological differences tend to disappear.
Theological differences tend to reappear when we are back at home, sitting comfortably with a cup of coffee at hand, posting in an Internet Forum while our freezer is full and our bank accounts look healthy. :)

 

[Matthias]

Unitarian Christians would have no problem with Muslims in this regard.

There is variability in the doctrine of unitarian Christians. The majority of them believe that Jesus of Nazareth is himself God; a minority of them don’t believes that Jesus of Nazareth is himself God (and there is still further differences in belief about Jesus within this minority - divided, for example, over the issue of literal vs. notional preexistense). The majority of unitarian Christians have a problem with Muslims in this regard. Even the minority of unitarian Christians have a problem with Muslims in this regard.

I’ve gotten along fairly well with Muslims (because I neither believe that Jesus is himself God nor that he literally preexisted before he was begotten / conceived) but I’ve still had a problem with them (because I believe in the virgin birth of Jesus).

I‘ve told the story here of an encounter I had with an Imam in Atlanta, Georgia. In a brief and private meeting he told me that Allah had a message for me. It was an offer of refugee when (not if) Christians persecuted me. The message was a simple one: flee to the mosque when it happens; we Muslims will defend you.

Let me try to explain, without discussing the Trinity, how two different approaches to the matter were necessary at different times, but they do not opose each other.

In the Bible, the title "Son of God" defines the intimate relationship between Jesus and His Father, and his authority as ambassador who speaks and acts on behalf of his Father. (The title is also used in the Bible for angels and Adam. If I recall correctly from my readings, it was also used for kings). It was very important in the New Testament to emphasize this relationship so that we could take Jesus words and acts seriously. We can refer to Jesus parable of the messengers that the owner of a vineyard sent to his workers, sending as the last resort his own son. Why? Because the vineyard's owner thought "This time they will pay heed. They have to respect my son!"
God himself, while declaring Jesus his Beloved Son, adds "Listen to Him!" (Matthew 17:5)


Now, by the time of the Quran, people from the Nicean creed and other christians had fought bloody wars and excommunicated mutually over the topic of the nature of Jesus. It was important, then, for the Quranic revelation to let the topic clear once and for all about the Oneness of God and the Uniqueness of God. Interestingly enough, you will find that the Quran goes all the way to avoid talking about God as a Father or about us as His children. So there was nothing especial in the Quran against Jesus as Son: it is just a deliberate attempt to place God as a unique being, free from any kinship to any other being or thing, in the context of a widespread enforcement of the Nicean creed.

So, in summary, the Biblical approach and the Quranic approach were important to address different needs at different times.

 

[Matthias]

You couldn't tell if they were praying to either the first person, or the only person of their deity.
If a Catholic and a Jehova's witness were together during that earthquake in Mexico, you couldn't have told one from the other.

The difference between them, however, remains.

By the same token, if in an Arab-speaking country, say Lebanon, a Muslim and a Catholic were praying for their lives, you coudln't have told the difference. Both would have uttered "Allah" (the Arabic word for God) thinking in a single entity that could save them from that earthquake.

That is my point.

A deity that is three in one by definition isn’t a deity who is strictly and only one.

While a generic word may be used by both religions, neither the Muslim nor the Catholic believe in the same deity.

When we are suddenly aware that our lives are in peril, theological differences tend to disappear.
Theological differences tend to reappear when we are back at home, sitting comfortably with a cup of coffee at hand, posting in an Internet Forum while our freezer is full and our bank accounts look healthy. :)

I don’t have that tendency. I haven’t personally observed the tendency in Muslims and Catholics.

There is no experience I can imagine, no matter how terrible it might be, where I would cry out to Allah, or the Trinity, or Vishnu, or any other deity besides Yahweh.

I will die with the Shema on my lips or, if I cannot speak, in my mind.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I’ve gotten along fairly well with Muslims (because I neither believe that Jesus is himself God nor that he literally preexisted before he was begotten / conceived) but I’ve still had a problem with them (because I believe in the virgin birth of Jesus).

But Muslims do believe in the virginal birth of Jesus, don't they?
I have also had very pleasant experiences interacting with Muslims at work.
My visit to a mosque to pray was also a wonderful experience that I will always treasure.

****

Just as an anecdote, I was expulsed a month ago from the forum where I had participated for 3-4 years... a forum where I had enjoyed the appreciation of several members. This is because I called "stupid" the position of some Evangelical fundamentalists (fanatics of prophecies about Armagedon as the fight between Israel and Islam) that systematically referred to Muslims, in general, as "terrorists". One of these fanatics accused me of having called "stupid" my Evangelical brothers. Sometimes people who feel strongly identified with an idea cannot bear their idea to be called "stupid" because they feel that they are being called stupid. Why did the administrator allow that accusation to prosper? I don't know and probably I will never know.
Would I call again "stupid" the habit of speaking of Muslims (or any other religious group) as "terrorists"? Yes, I would do it again.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

I will die with the Shema on my lips or, if I cannot speak, in my mind.

Beautiful.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

While a generic word may be used by both religions, neither the Muslim nor the Catholic believe in the same deity.

What could I say to convince you that the God of Muslims and Catholics is the same? This time, I do want to persuade you

Let's take the statement of the Pope Francis. What could he say about it?
Well, he said that "Muslims, together with us, adore the One, Merciful God"
You can read it here:
5 lessons from Pope Francis’ commitment to Muslim-Catholic dialogue

 

[Matthias]

What could I say to convince you that the God of Muslims and Catholics is the same?

I don’t know but I’ll try to keep an open mind as you proceed.

This time, I do want to persuade you

You may know something that I’ve overlooked or haven’t considered before. Thanks for caring enough about me to make the effort. I’m listening.

Let's take the statement of the Pope Francis. What could he say about it?
Well, he said that "Muslims, together with us, adore the One, Merciful God"
You can read it here:
5 lessons from Pope Francis’ commitment to Muslim-Catholic dialogue

Are Roman Catholics persuaded by what he said? Are Muslims?

 

[Matthias]

But Muslims do believe in the virginal birth of Jesus, don't they?

The Muslims I’ve spoke with and the Muslim writers I’ve read didn’t.

I have also had very pleasant experiences interacting with Muslims at work.
My visit to a mosque to pray was also a wonderful experience that I will always treasure.

****

Just as an anecdote, I was expulsed a month ago from the forum where I had participated for 3-4 years... a forum where I had enjoyed the appreciation of several members. This is because I called "stupid" the position of some Evangelical fundamentalists (fanatics of prophecies about Armagedon as the fight between Israel and Islam) that systematically referred to Muslims, in general, as "terrorists". One of these fanatics accused me of having called "stupid" my Evangelical brothers. Sometimes people who feel strongly identified with an idea cannot bear their idea to be called "stupid" because they feel that they are being called stupid. Why did the administrator allow that accusation to prosper? I don't know and probably I will never know.
Would I call again "stupid" the habit of speaking of Muslims (or any other religious group) as "terrorists"? Yes, I would do it again.

Thanks for sharing your story.

One of my co-workers was a Muslim from Nigeria. He was extremely intelligent (had a PhD in computer science) and very devout. I overheard him speaking one day about religion with another co-worker, who was an agnostic. I listened patiently and didn’t say anything while they were talking. After the agnostic left, the Muslim asked me if I was a Christian. I told him that I was and that the God I worship is the God of Abraham and Jesus. A big smile came over his face and then he said something surprising which I still remember to this day: “I’ve been looking for you; you’re one of the people of the book.”

We had many enjoyable conversations before I retired and he is the one who arranged a visit for me at the mosque he attended and introduced me to the Imam that I mentioned. He purchased an English translation of the Quran and gave it to me, along with several other beautiful gifts (two made wood, one of brass) fashioned by Islamic craftsmen. I still have them and think about him fondly whenever I see them. He was surprised when I read the book from cover to cover within a couple of days and asked him questions about it. The man was a scholar and a teacher. We got along splendidly.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Are Roman Catholics persuaded by what he said? Are Muslims?

I hope they are. I hope you are.
At least, there was no objection at all from neither side. Nobody protested, as has been protested many other times where Francis makes a statement, for example, regarding gay people.

Lets remember that one thing is to honor the One and Only God in our lives, and a very different thing to build a theological framework around God. The same applies to honoring Jesus, honoring the Bible, etc. Two persons can have a different theological framework around Jesus (ie, preexistent vs not preexistent, physically resurrected vs not physically resurrected, etc.) and yet be followers of Jesus, the two of them.

One person may think God created the Universe in 6 days of 24 hours, and another person may think He did it in 4 billion years, and both honor that God as their Creator.

I was raised a devout Catholic until the age of 12. My dear mother (now 86) taught me that Allah was God, the same I prayed to. At home we never prayed to Jesus or to the Holy Spirit. So, at least three people in the world believe that Allah is the same God of the catholics: My mom, Pope Francis, and me. Join the club!

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

The Muslims I’ve spoke with and the Muslim writers I’ve read didn’t.

Matthias: the Holy Quran itself presents an angel appearing to Mary and announcing that she would be mother by the mere will of God. You can read it in Surah Al-Imran, verse 47.
She said, ‘My Lord, how will I have a child when no man has touched me?’ [The angel] said, ‘Such is Allah; He creates what He wills. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, “Be,” and it is.

So you have now another reason to get along well with Muslims and Baha’is.;)

 

[Matthias]

I hope they are. I hope you are.
At least, there was no objection at all from neither side. Nobody protested, as has been protested many other times where Francis makes a statement, for example, regarding gay people.

Lets remember that one thing is to honor the One and Only God in our lives, and a very different thing to build a theological framework around God. The same applies to honoring Jesus, honoring the Bible, etc. Two persons can have a different theological framework around Jesus (ie, preexistent vs not preexistent, physically resurrected vs not physically resurrected, etc.) and yet be followers of Jesus, the two of them.

One person may think God created the Universe in 6 days of 24 hours, and another person may think He did it in 4 billion years, and both honor that God as their Creator.

I was raised a devout Catholic until the age of 12. My dear mother (now 86) taught me that Allah was God, the same I prayed to. At home we never prayed to Jesus or to the Holy Spirit. So, at least three people in the world believe that Allah is the same God of the catholics: My mom, Pope Francis, and me. Join the club!

View attachment 45823

Muslims haven’t been unclear on what they think about the Trinity.

 

[Matthias]

Matthias: the Holy Quran itself presents an angel appearing to Mary and announcing that she would be mother by the mere will of God. You can read it in Surah Al-Imran, verse 47.
She said, ‘My Lord, how will I have a child when no man has touched me?’ [The angel] said, ‘Such is Allah; He creates what He wills. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, “Be,” and it is.

So you have now another reason to get along well with Muslims and Baha’is.;)

View attachment 45825

Allah has not begotten a son.

The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Translation

corpus.quran.com

Yahweh has.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Allah has not begotten a son.

The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Translation

corpus.quran.com

Yahweh has.

Well, these are two different views humans have on God.

Some think Jesus got married.
Some think Jesus did not.
It is still the same Jesus.

Some think Mary delivered other children after Jesus.
Some think She did not.
It is still the same Mary.

Some think God keeps the wrongdoers in torment forever.
Some think God anhiliates them.
Some think God saves them in the end.
It is still the same God.

We can choose what to believe: that every human mind has created its own God, and therefore there are billions of gods, or that God is One, but He is aprehended differently by each human mind.

 

[Matthias]

“ALL ABOUT MONOTHEISM

When the Church has referred to Muslims worshipping the one God, it is meant in the sense of both Christians and Muslims being monotheists. Monotheism includes Christians, Jews, Muslims, and more vague ‘philosophical theists’ (for example, heretical, anti-trinitarian sects like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, with their Arian God, and belief in a created, non-divine Jesus).

Thus, the Second Vatican Council, in its document, Nostra Aetate, states:

They [Muslims] worship God, who is one, living, and subsistent, merciful and almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth.

If you read closely, the council isn’t saying that ‘the Muslim God [Allah] and the Christian God are exactly the same.’

Rather, the common bond is monotheism. Indeed, the document could not possibly be equating Allah and Yahweh, because we Catholics believe God is a Trinity (One God in Three Persons) and Muslims (and Jews) do not.

Vatican II is using ‘diplomatic language’ in its ecumenical statements. …”

Does the Catholic Church Equate Allah and Yahweh (God)?

by Dave Armstrong | When the Church has referred to Muslims worshiping the one God, it is meant in the sense of both Christians and Muslims being monotheists.

www.setonmagazine.com

(Bold is mine.)

 

[Matthias]

Well, these are two different views humans have on God.

Some think Jesus got married.
Some think Jesus did not.
It is still the same Jesus.

A Jesus who got married isn’t the Jesus of the New Testament who did not get married.

A Jesus who was not crucified (Islam) is not the Jesus who was crucified (the New Testament).

Some think God keeps the wrongdoers in torment forever.
Some think God anhiliates them.
Some think God punishes them to save them in the end.
It is still the same God.

The general principle seems to be that there is only one God so Yahweh is just one of many names for the one God. Is that a fair statement? If not, please let me know.

How far are you prepared to take it? Would you, for example, say that Yahweh and Moloch are the same God? Yahweh and Dagon the same God? Yahweh and Baal the same God?