Evidence for God from Science

PaulS wrote:
Is it Allah that is the deception or is it the writings of the "prophet" Mohammed?

I think this is the $1,000,000 question.
Does anyone want to get into this?

RickD wrote:

PaulS wrote:
Is it Allah that is the deception or is it the writings of the "prophet" Mohammed?

I think this is the $1,000,000 question.
Does anyone want to get into this?

I think this is what Jac is addressing. God is one, there is no other. It is our (or more to the point: their) perception of who God is that's the subject of deception. It makes no sense to argue someone worships a different god as if a different god is even a possibility.

Byblos, a god(small g) is a false god, or idol. People worship them all the time.
Who or what is Baal? An idol? A false god? Was Baal worshiped?

RickD wrote:

PaulS wrote:
Is it Allah that is the deception or is it the writings of the "prophet" Mohammed?

I think this is the $1,000,000 question.
Does anyone want to get into this?

Mohammed's interpretation of HIS divine revelation is what the Koran is all about.
Think of what the bible would be if we only had Paul's letters.
While Mohammed claimed that Allah was the God of Abraham and all muslims descendents of Abe, he also claimed that HIS special revelation is the TRUE one.
What we know of Allah as per Islam is what we have from Mohammed and those that came after him.
So, if we are to stated that Allah is simply the Muslim name for Yahweh and that Allah is Yahweh, then what we have in Islam is simply a separate interpretation of Who and What Allah is based on the divine revelation of One Man.

RickD wrote:Byblos, a god(small g) is a false god, or idol. People worship them all the time.
Who or what is Baal? An idol? A false god? Was Baal worshiped?

I agree that Baal was a false god and that he was worshiped. But the subject is not about false gods, it's about whether or not the 3 monotheistic religions worship the same God. All 3 agree that there is one God so there is no reference to false gods anywhere. Since we're all talking about the same God, but worship Him, and more importantly perceive him, differently, then those differences necessarily are inherent in the perceptions and not in who God is.

Byblos wrote:

RickD wrote:

PaulS wrote:
Is it Allah that is the deception or is it the writings of the "prophet" Mohammed?

I think this is the $1,000,000 question.
Does anyone want to get into this?

I think this is what Jac is addressing. God is one, there is no other. It is our (or more to the point: their) perception of who God is that's the subject of deception. It makes no sense to argue someone worships a different god as if a different god is even a possibility.

Yep and that was my point too BUT we took it beyond that simple question of the OP and that question was quite simply " Is the Christian God (Triune and as revealed and incarnate in Christ) the same as the Islamic God ( As revealed by Mohammed in the Koran) and the answer is No.

RickD wrote:Let's get back to the OP, and the original question, which is the title of this thread:Is the Christian God the same as the Islamic god? As that question is written, the answer is no.

If the question was written like this: Do Christians and Muslims have the same God?

Then I would have to answer yes.

Are you happy with that, Jac?

Yes, I am, if by "the same" you mean "having all the same attributes and characteristics of" (e.g., "I am not the same person I was ten years ago")

RickD wrote:Byblos, a god(small g) is a false god, or idol. People worship them all the time.
Who or what is Baal? An idol? A false god? Was Baal worshiped?

The question is what the idol refers to. Ancient idolaters did not think that they were referring to the Supreme Creator of the Universe. The idols referred to supernatural beings, for sure, but being a supernatural being does not mean you are referring to God. It's also worth noting generic Semitic words for "God" can even refer to angels (see Gen 28:12, where elohim refers to angels). Further, polytheists usually saw creatures (e.g., the Sun) as a god, so in worshiping that "god," they were actually worshiping the creature, not the Creator. The Ba'al referred to in the OT, for instance, was most likely Hadad, the sky god. We can't, then, say that Ba'al (Hadad) is the same as Yahweh, since they fundamentally refer to different things: they sky (a creature) vs. the Creator of the sky. All of this gets into the nature of Canaanite polytheism and especially their mythology. Suffice it to say here that the gods were identified with creation rather than as the Creator. The same, however, can't be said about God as the Muslims understand Him.

Byblos wrote:

RickD wrote:Byblos, a god(small g) is a false god, or idol. People worship them all the time.
Who or what is Baal? An idol? A false god? Was Baal worshiped?

I agree that Baal was a false god and that he was worshiped. But the subject is not about false gods, it's about whether or not the 3 monotheistic religions worship the same God. All 3 agree that there is one God so there is no reference to false gods anywhere. Since we're all talking about the same God, but worship Him, and more importantly perceive him, differently, then those differences necessarily are inherent in the perceptions and not in who God is.

Byblos, the question that the OP asked, as I see it, is: Is the Christian God as described in the bible, the same as the Muslim god, as described in the Koran.
Now, I'm assuming the OP meant the Muslim god as described in the Koran. If my assumption is wrong, then I'm arguing a point that the OP didn't intend.

The question is what the idol refers to. Ancient idolaters did not think that they were referring to the Supreme Creator of the Universe. The idols referred to supernatural beings, for sure, but being a supernatural being does not mean you are referring to God. It's also worth noting generic Semitic words for "God" can even refer to angels (see Gen 28:12, where elohim refers to angels). Further, polytheists usually saw creatures (e.g., the Sun) as a god, so in worshiping that "god," they were actually worshiping the creature, not the Creator. The Ba'al referred to in the OT, for instance, was most likely Hadad, the sky god. We can't, then, say that Ba'al (Hadad) is the same as Yahweh, since they fundamentally refer to different things: they sky (a creature) vs. the Creator of the sky. All of this gets into the nature of Canaanite polytheism and especially their mythology. Suffice it to say here that the gods were identified with creation rather than as the Creator. The same, however, can't be said about God as the Muslims understand Him.

Jac, Muhammad claimed he got a revelation from God, and that's what the Koran is about, right? Now, either the Koran is the revelation from God, or the bible is God's written word. Or, neither is. -They both can't be from God, because they both point to a different God. is it possible that Muhammad, Joseph Smith, etc. got their revelation from someone other than God?

RickD wrote:

The question is what the idol refers to. Ancient idolaters did not think that they were referring to the Supreme Creator of the Universe. The idols referred to supernatural beings, for sure, but being a supernatural being does not mean you are referring to God. It's also worth noting generic Semitic words for "God" can even refer to angels (see Gen 28:12, where elohim refers to angels). Further, polytheists usually saw creatures (e.g., the Sun) as a god, so in worshiping that "god," they were actually worshiping the creature, not the Creator. The Ba'al referred to in the OT, for instance, was most likely Hadad, the sky god. We can't, then, say that Ba'al (Hadad) is the same as Yahweh, since they fundamentally refer to different things: they sky (a creature) vs. the Creator of the sky. All of this gets into the nature of Canaanite polytheism and especially their mythology. Suffice it to say here that the gods were identified with creation rather than as the Creator. The same, however, can't be said about God as the Muslims understand Him.

Jac, Muhammad claimed he got a revelation from God, and that's what the Koran is about, right? Now, either the Koran is the revelation from God, or the bible is God's written word. Or, neither is. -They both can't be from God, because they both point to a different God. is it possible that Muhammad, Joseph Smith, etc. got their revelation from someone other than God?

Mohammed got his revelation from Gabriel, no?

While it is quite possible that the fallen ones did and do pass themselves off as "angels of light" and even "gods", I don't know how it is possible to convince any believer of that.
Personally I believe that is the case, that many of the fallen angels did just that, pass themselves off as "gods" or "sons of God" and that they drove many away from God, myths like Zeuz and Thor and Baal and Huitzlopochtl and Itzamná and Quetzacoatal (SP?) are all base don the fallen ones coming to societies and impressing them with their powers and becoming thier Gods.

RickD wrote:Jac, Muhammad claimed he got a revelation from God, and that's what the Koran is about, right? Now, either the Koran is the revelation from God, or the bible is God's written word. Or, neither is. -They both can't be from God, because they both point to a different God. is it possible that Muhammad, Joseph Smith, etc. got their revelation from someone other than God?

It's more complicated than that. If we grant (and I don't) that Muhammad and smith received supernatural revelation, then the obvious Christian response is that they did not get their revelation from God, but from some demonic force. But I don't see much reason to accept the idea that there ever was any such revelation in the first place. We could talk about the history and transmission of the BoM and the Koran, but I don't want to distract from your point by arguing illustrations. I'll just answer your question with a question: can a demon not teach false things about God? Why is it that if someone says something is true about God that contradicts Scripture, we must accuse them of having a different God? Why can't we just say that they are speaking wrongly of God--especially if they claim they are talking about the God of Abraham, the Creator of the Universe?

can a demon not teach false things about God? Why is it that if someone says something is true about God that contradicts Scripture, we must accuse them of having a different God? Why can't we just say that they are speaking wrongly of God--especially if they claim they are talking about the God of Abraham, the Creator of the Universe?

The tricky part is "contradicts scripture" because what we really mean is "contradicts orthodox interpretations of scripture".
One can argue that Christian Trinity doctrine contradicts Hebrew Bible scripture and most Jews would say just that, but what they are really saying is < We don't agree on how you are interpreting those verses to mean".
So we get into a tricky area it seems.
Now, for a Christian we have a "way out" and that is the NT, Our Lord Jesus and the Holy spirit ( and we can add to that also have God reveals to us Himself in the universe he created).
BUT, as the various Christian doctrines and denominations can attest, even that is "subject to interpretation".

Jac wrote:
Why is it that if someone says something is true about God that contradicts Scripture, we must accuse them of having a different God? Why can't we just say that they are speaking wrongly of God--especially if they claim they are talking about the God of Abraham, the Creator of the Universe?

I don't think we must accuse everyone. I think we need to take each case on its own.

It's more complicated than that. If we grant (and I don't) that Muhammad and smith received supernatural revelation, then the obvious Christian response is that they did not get their revelation from God, but from some demonic force.

Where do you think they got the information then?

can a demon not teach false things about God?

Absolutely. And, a demon can masquerade as an angel of light, to deceive. And, we know from scripture that Satan wants to be in the place of God. So why couldn't he masquerade as God, to deceive, and gain man's worship?

PaulS wrote:
While it is quite possible that the fallen ones did and do pass themselves off as "angels of light" and even "gods", I don't know how it is possible to convince any believer of that.

Don't you mean, convince any unbeliever?