Evidence for God from Science

bizzt wrote: Then you are saying Jesus never was but I say to you JOHN 1:1.

Where'd you get that from?

bizzt wrote: As I said Before the Same God rules both Past Present and Future my Friend.

If accepting only God the Father while rejecting Jesus Christ or the Holy Spirit were acceptable, then Jews would go to heaven.

OC

If the Word ALWAYS was then the Jews already knew him. He has not changed any from them knowing him then to Christians knowing him. The only thing that Changed was that Jesus fulfilled the Prophecy that many Jews knew about. God has never changed from ONE God to Triune God he was always God and Still is GOD!!!

Mal 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mar 12:32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rom 3:30 Seeing [it is] one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1Cr 8:6 But to us [there is but] one God, the Father, of whom [are] all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom [are] all things, and we by him.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who [is] above all, and through all, and in you all.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1Ti 2:5 For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jam 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

bizzt wrote:OC

God has never changed from ONE God to Triune God he was always God and Still is GOD!!!

.

The discussion was about whether or not the Islamic or Jewish God is the same as our God. The answer is no.

The original post to this thread suggested that God and Allah are one.

I have been arguing that this is not the case, although I am aware that Arabic speaking Christians and Jews do use the word Allah to mean God.

The name Allah is derived from an old Semitic root refering to the Divine and used in the Canaanite El, the Mesopotamian ilu, and the biblical Elohim.

During the early Mecca period of the Qur'anic revelations, Muhammad took considerable care to expunge the pre-Islamic history of the name Allah from its pantheistic attachments (the 3 daughter goddesses of the original god Allah, these being al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat) and align Allah with the One God and Creator of the Jews and Christians.
He started off well, describing Allah as a monotheistic deity, creator of all and existing before time and beyond time. Indeed, the 99 names of Allah are certainly superlatives which would also apply to God, our Father.

On the issue of trinitarianism and the Jewish representation of God, I see no difficulty at all in accepting that Christians and Jews worship the same God.
If the Jews were to remove their spiritual blinkers, they would see that they have been worshipping the triune God all along without really knowing it. Because they do not recognize and accept Jesus as the Messiah does not make Him any less the Messiah. It is as though they have safeguarded God's revelation up to that point and stopped short, but God has not changed despite their lack of belief in the claims of our Saviour.
The problem here is not of God as the "object" of devotion, but of the beliefs of the devotees themselves.

But I come back to a point I made earlier, and a question which arises from it. When does a false representation of God become that of a true representation of a false god?

This is my answer.

I believe that Judaism offers a true representation of God which stops short, but is not that of a false god as nothing that exists in their scriptures, our Old Testament, is false of God. It is simply an incomplete representation of God, but the same God none-the-less.

On the other hand, I see that Muhammad attempted to represent God by his Qur'anic revelations of Allah, and in some respects got it right although seriously damaged the credibility of Allah as God by introducing a considerable amount of Scriptual distortion.
Many Qur'anic accounts of Biblical events present a substantial deviation from their record in the Old and New Testaments, and Muhammad also accused Jews and Christians of rewriting the Scriptures to omit the non-existent references to himself.
In the later Medina period in particular, Muhammad got it very wrong indeed. This is when I would say that he came up with a false representation of God which became a true representation of a false god.

As I understand from my reading of Dr Mark Gabriel's writings (whose credentials are quite thoroughly referenced elsewhere, and they are substantial and weighty), the Qur'an is correctly interpreted using the principle of abrogation (nasikh) whereby earlier surahs are canceled by contradictory later ones. This principle is widely accepted in Islam - both Sunni and Shias accept this principle.
Therefore, the Allah that originally looked more like our God eventually became increasingly a god of hatred and violence, his message a far cry from the message of the God of both Jews and Christians.

At this point I am not talking about names and their etymology, but of the character of both Allah and God.
To my knowledge and understanding, I do not see one and the same deity when I look at the kind of message flowing from their respective characters.

Therefore I cannot (as neither can Dr Gabriel) accept that Allah is God.

Judah wrote:
I believe that Judaism offers a true representation of God which stops short

.

Yes, that's what I've been saying all along. The Jews worship an incomplete version of God, so they stop short of salvation.

On the other hand, I see that Muhammad attempted to represent God by his Qur'anic revelations of Allah, and in some respects got it right although seriously damaged the credibility of Allah as God by introducing a considerable amount of Scriptual distortion.

I saw a minister lecture about how Muhammad most likely heard a demon talking to him, not God. Any thoughts?

Muhammad's own claim was that the angel Gabriel revealed the Qur'anic messages to him from Allah.

I would greatly doubt that any of the messages were inspired by the Holy Spirit as they do not appear to be of God at all, especially where they are complete contradictions and distortions of existing Scriptures (the Bible) and contrary to the character of God.

Some of it is probably his own spirit, and his own political manouverings and conspiracy to deceive the Jews to convert them to Islam.

And what is not purely of his own invention, it could well be said was inspired by demons or Satan.

Well, that's what I think, Ocho.

The Jews worship an incomplete version of God, so they stop short of salvation.

By the way, there is a difference between saying it this way, and saying that their beliefs were incomplete.
God is not incomplete... they were not worshipping an incomplete version of Him... it was their beliefs that were incomplete.
God stays the same regardless.
Can you see the difference?

Judah wrote: Muhammad's own claim was that the angel Gabriel revealed the Qur'anic messages to him from Allah.

I would greatly doubt that any of the messages were inspired by the Holy Spirit as they do not appear to be of God at all, especially where they are complete contradictions and distortions of existing Scriptures (the Bible) and contrary to the character of God.

Some of it is probably his own spirit, and his own political manouverings and conspiracy to deceive the Jews to convert them to Islam.

And what is not purely of his own invention, it could well be said was inspired by demons or Satan.

Well, that's what I think, Ocho.

Or it could have been completely one or the other.

God stays the same regardless.
Can you see the difference?

I understand what you're saying, but God did come to our world in another form: a human form called Jesus. Obviously, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are the same god, but those are different aspects of God. The Jews believe that the Messiah has not come yet, because Jesus was a mortal teacher (to them). I've heard some unbelievers refer to Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary as frauds. *shakes head*

Abrogation, to me, is one of the strongest arguments against Islam. Both as a valid religion in the first place, and as a religion of peace.

I've also noticed a trend among Islamic apologists to quote earlier surahs to prove that their religion is peaceful, completely ignoring later surahs and the concept of abrogation. I have to wonder if they're unaware of abrogation, or if they're being intentionally deceitful. Or if they're simply desperate.

That's also one of the strengths of Christianity. We don't have to claim abrogation to make our Bible fit together. I've seen people claim that the character of God changed between the OT and NT, and that the method of salvation changed, but neither claim holds up under scrutiny.

As for the Jews, they reject Jesus as the Christ. The NT makes it clear that whoever rejects the Son has rejected the Father, so their worship is in vain and they remain under God's wrath like everyone else who doesn't believe in the Son. He will of course provide them with sufficient knowledge and opportunity to accept Christ, but like other peoples many of them will not accept.

LittleShepherd wrote:I've also noticed a trend among Islamic apologists to quote earlier surahs to prove that their religion is peaceful, completely ignoring later surahs and the concept of abrogation. I have to wonder if they're unaware of abrogation, or if they're being intentionally deceitful. Or if they're simply desperate.

There is the Ordinary Muslim, the peace preferring people who just want to live normally, enjoying their work and families, and are also very upset by terrorist acts, who could be likened to our "nominal Christians"... in other words, they are Islamic by culture more so than by religion.
These people are usually living by the earlier Mecca surahs and quite possibly do not properly understand the principle of abrogation.

But an Islamic apologist? Someone who is able to mount a knowledgeable defence of his faith is far more likely to be perfectly aware of the principle of abrogation, and it is these types who are using the principle of kitman in their argument.
These are the types who are being intentionally deceitful rather than just unaware.

Kitman means "holy hypocracy" whereby true malevolent intentions can be kept hidden and disguised.

This is the thing that scares me.
How can I trust the more learned Muslims who are busy assuring the West that they are peaceful types, and that the terrorists are just fanatics?
The Qur'an, correctly interpreted, compells all true believers of Islam to push for conversion of the entire world... all must convert or else fall to the sword of Islam.

LittleShepherd wrote:Abrogation, to me, is one of the strongest arguments against Islam. Both as a valid religion in the first place, and as a religion of peace.
.

Islam can be turned into a peaceful religion if the moderates speak out and the followers ignore the pugnacious passages and fatwas.
Fortunately, for Christianity, most fundamentalist Christians are peaceful.

the original post to this thread suggested that God and Allah are one...

sweet. just about the best explanation i've heard.

Yay. Are we done now?

Prodigal Son wrote: sweet. just about the best explanation i've heard.

Who said that?

ochotseat wrote:

LittleShepherd wrote:Abrogation, to me, is one of the strongest arguments against Islam. Both as a valid religion in the first place, and as a religion of peace.
.

Islam can be turned into a peaceful religion if the moderates speak out and the followers ignore the pugnacious passages and fatwas.
Fortunately, for Christianity, most fundamentalist Christians are peaceful.

The difference, of course, is that Christian fundamentalists (if they are violent) have no Biblical support for their violence. With Islam, though, the extremists are actually the moderates-they're following all the verses in the Koran, and I believe that they call the "moderates" apostates.

ochotseat wrote:

bizzt wrote:OC

God has never changed from ONE God to Triune God he was always God and Still is GOD!!!

.

The discussion was about whether or not the Islamic or Jewish God is the same as our God. The answer is no.

See I don't have a problem with the Islamic part of your Argument. It is the Jewish God that you proclaim is different from the Christian one. Jesus said he was the Alpha and the Omega! Jesus always was and always will be. The Jews may not have recognized the Triune God but Indeed Worshiped the Same God that we do.