well if they do one side or the other is in for a surpriseEmpCom
Lets be fair, they are all in for a surprise.
Do Christians and Muslims worship the same god?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="EmpCom"]well if they do one side or the other is in for a surprisetenaka2
Lets be fair, they are all in for a surprise.
we get it bud, you are atheist. no need to shout it all day long.
[QUOTE="GIJames248"]
The doctrine of the Trinity pretty clearly separates the Christian God from any other religion's view of God (if you understand the Trinity as a metaphysical reality).
tenaka2
Yeah but the trinity came 300 years after christ and was only included to unite the splintering factions of christianity, it was a compromise.
The doctrine of the Trinity is established by the New Testament (enough in Christ's own words so that the Jews wanted to stone him for blasphemy). The philosophical and theological language of the Trinity is what came three hundred years later to deal with heresy and the encrouchment of neoplatonic philosophy.
[QUOTE="tenaka2"]
[QUOTE="GIJames248"]
The doctrine of the Trinity pretty clearly separates the Christian God from any other religion's view of God (if you understand the Trinity as a metaphysical reality).
GIJames248
Yeah but the trinity came 300 years after christ and was only included to unite the splintering factions of christianity, it was a compromise.
The doctrine of the Trinity is established by the New Testament (enough in Christ's own words so that the Jews wanted to stone him for blasphemy). The philosophical and theological language of the Trinity is what came three hundred years later to deal with heresy and the encrouchment of neoplatonic philosophy.
Christ did not preach a Trinity. And that was not why he was Crucified. Try Again.Christ did not preach a Trinity. And that was not why he was Crucified. Try Again.Nuck81
When he defined his name as being a unique name only shared with him and the father and the spirit (Mathew 28:19) as well has his name being the name of God, he taught inherently trinity. Plus we have John saying that every created thing was created by Christ, directly implying the eternality of the word which was made incarnate.
[QUOTE="GIJames248"][QUOTE="tenaka2"]
Yeah but the trinity came 300 years after christ and was only included to unite the splintering factions of christianity, it was a compromise.
Nuck81
The doctrine of the Trinity is established by the New Testament (enough in Christ's own words so that the Jews wanted to stone him for blasphemy). The philosophical and theological language of the Trinity is what came three hundred years later to deal with heresy and the encrouchment of neoplatonic philosophy.
Christ did not preach a Trinity. And that was not why he was Crucified. Try Again. I agree that he did not preach a trinity, but I believe that he did teach that he is the Unique Son of God, who existed In the heavens with God before he came in the flesh. As God's first creation and the instrument through which all other things were created, he shares a unique relationship with God and is a perfect reflection of God's grace and righteousness.[QUOTE="Nuck81"] Christ did not preach a Trinity. And that was not why he was Crucified. Try Again.Philokalia
When he defined his name as being a unique name only shared with him and the father and the spirit (Mathew 28:19) as well has his name being the name of God, he taught inherently trinity. Plus we have John saying that every created thing was created by Christ, directly implying the eternality of the word which was made incarnate.
He taught that he was the essence of God, not God himself. It wasn't until 300 years later that Christians decided to make Jesus actually God. It's a man made Fabirication, partially inspired by the adoption of Pagan Ideals and rituals into the Christian Doctrine.He taught that he was the essence of God, not God himself. It wasn't until 300 years later that Christians decided to make Jesus actually God. It's a man made Fabirication, partially inspired by the adoption of Pagan Ideals and rituals into the Christian Doctrine.Nuck81
You cannot distinguish between the essence of God and God himself. If Christ possesses all the chariteristics of divinity, IE God's essence then he is God. And no as I said to Tenaka this is not the case. The earliest Christians after the apostles called Christ God, I gave a minor list on the last page. BUt they are nothing compare to what scripture says on the subject, that Christ has the name of God and that this is unique to him (none of the other prophets had this name) and he is the one that created everything which began to exist, tells us he is God. The name of God in the Jewish context was a serious thing and to claim that name for oneself is making them on ontological par with Christ. And to be the creator of everything (Which you as a bahai must accept he created Mirza Al hussain) directly ties back to Genesis 1.1 that God period is the one that created the heavens and the earth.
But maybe you can do a better job than Tenaka did. Give one example of a pre Christian pagan trinity. And primary sources establishing this point.
Of course you can.You cannot distinguish between the essence of God and God himself. Philokalia
I can't look directly at the sun because it would burn out my eyes, but If I reflect the sun in a mirror I can study the sun as I have captured it's essence through reflection.
Christ was a perfect being, the Son of Man, but he was not God, nor did he claim to be.
One of the most common beliefs among Pagan cultures was in a trinity of gods. We find this among the Egyptians, Indians (of India), Japanese, Sumarians, Chaldeans, and of course, the Babylonians, to where historians trace the roots of trinitarism.
Church history shows a gradual assimilation of Pagan ideas into Christianity, brought about mostly by the Roman or Western Church, which became a political/religious extension of the Roman Empire. Foremost among the pagan ideas was the adoption of the trinity doctrine into the dogma of the church. Pagan holidays (holy days) were also incorporated into tradition by Christianizing them, thus we end up with Christmas being celebrated on Dec 25th; Easter, which combined the resurrection of Christ with the pagan goddess Ester, and Halloween combined with All Saints Day.
In time, the political power of the Roman Popes and the wealth they controlled exceeded that of the Emperors, and the Church became a Monarchy with power over kings and nations. Religious tolerance went out the door, and the Church embarked on crusades and inquisitions to purge out by ex-communication, torture, war, and murder, all those who disagreed with official Church doctrine or resisted the authority of the Pope. Christ-like behavior became a thing of the past, and Jesus teachings neglected and changed.
The Trinity doctrine was by no means adopted unanimously by church leaders of the day. Bitter battles ensued, and three versions of the trinity debated, as well as the non-trinity belief, until the present one was adopted. It was a vote of men that established it, not revelation from God or scriptures. Christianity had rejected the God of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, and replaced Him with a Pagan invention.
[QUOTE="Philokalia"][QUOTE="Nuck81"] Christ did not preach a Trinity. And that was not why he was Crucified. Try Again.Nuck81
When he defined his name as being a unique name only shared with him and the father and the spirit (Mathew 28:19) as well has his name being the name of God, he taught inherently trinity. Plus we have John saying that every created thing was created by Christ, directly implying the eternality of the word which was made incarnate.
He taught that he was the essence of God, not God himself. It wasn't until 300 years later that Christians decided to make Jesus actually God. It's a man made Fabirication, partially inspired by the adoption of Pagan Ideals and rituals into the Christian Doctrine.Dont waste your time, Philok will ignore anything presented, he doesnt even agree that easter and christmas are originally pagan. His faith is very weak.
Of course you can.[QUOTE="Philokalia"]
You cannot distinguish between the essence of God and God himself. Nuck81
I can't look directly at the sun because it would burn out my eyes, but If I reflect the sun in a mirror I can study the sun as I have captured it's essence through reflection.
Christ was a perfect being, the Son of Man, but he was not God, nor did he claim to be.
One of the most common beliefs among Pagan cultures was in a trinity of gods. We find this among the Egyptians, Indians (of India), Japanese, Sumarians, Chaldeans, and of course, the Babylonians, to where historians trace the roots of trinitarism.
Church history shows a gradual assimilation of Pagan ideas into Christianity, brought about mostly by the Roman or Western Church, which became a political/religious extension of the Roman Empire. Foremost among the pagan ideas was the adoption of the trinity doctrine into the dogma of the church. Pagan holidays (holy days) were also incorporated into tradition by Christianizing them, thus we end up with Christmas being celebrated on Dec 25th; Easter, which combined the resurrection of Christ with the pagan goddess Ester, and Halloween combined with All Saints Day.
In time, the political power of the Roman Popes and the wealth they controlled exceeded that of the Emperors, and the Church became a Monarchy with power over kings and nations. Religious tolerance went out the door, and the Church embarked on crusades and inquisitions to purge out by ex-communication, torture, war, and murder, all those who disagreed with official Church doctrine or resisted the authority of the Pope. Christ-like behavior became a thing of the past, and Jesus teachings neglected and changed.
The Trinity doctrine was by no means adopted unanimously by church leaders of the day. Bitter battles ensued, and three versions of the trinity debated, as well as the non-trinity belief, until the present one was adopted. It was a vote of men that established it, not revelation from God or scriptures. Christianity had rejected the God of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, and replaced Him with a Pagan invention.
good post, phil ia right, you are much better at this then I am.
No. Christians believe God revealed himself through Jesus, Muslims don't. I don't think Muslims believe in the trinity either.imaps3fanboy
Still the same god, both split off from judaism, Gods dont change into something else or suddenly appear when a group splits off.
[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]No. Christians believe God revealed himself through Jesus, Muslims don't. I don't think Muslims believe in the trinity either.tenaka2
Still the same god, both split off from judaism, Gods dont change into something else or suddenly appear when a group splits off.
Not the same God. Gods can and do change into different identities once interpretations have been made.[QUOTE="tenaka2"][QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]No. Christians believe God revealed himself through Jesus, Muslims don't. I don't think Muslims believe in the trinity either.imaps3fanboy
Still the same god, both split off from judaism, Gods dont change into something else or suddenly appear when a group splits off.
Not the same God. Gods can and do change into different identities once interpretations have been made.Are you suggesting that there are no gods or that gods transform as belief changes?
Not the same God. Gods can and do change into different identities once interpretations have been made.[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"][QUOTE="tenaka2"]
Still the same god, both split off from judaism, Gods dont change into something else or suddenly appear when a group splits off.
tenaka2
Are you suggesting that there are no gods or that gods transform as belief changes?
Depends if the interpretations contradict the original or differ from the original meaning of said god. I could start a new religion and claim it to be derived from the God of Abraham, describing him as an orange tyrannosaurus rex. Doesn't mean that it's the same God.[QUOTE="tenaka2"][QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"] Not the same God. Gods can and do change into different identities once interpretations have been made.imaps3fanboy
Are you suggesting that there are no gods or that gods transform as belief changes?
Depends if the interpretations contradict the original or differ from the original meaning of said god. I could start a new religion and claim it to be derived from the God of Abraham, describing him as an orange tyrannosaurus rex. Doesn't mean that it's the same God.Yet if you did and were successful the followers of your religion would believe that god was indeed an orange t-rex, would that mean that the christian god would have never existed?
Depends if the interpretations contradict the original or differ from the original meaning of said god. I could start a new religion and claim it to be derived from the God of Abraham, describing him as an orange tyrannosaurus rex. Doesn't mean that it's the same God.[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"][QUOTE="tenaka2"]
Are you suggesting that there are no gods or that gods transform as belief changes?
tenaka2
Yet if you did and were successful the followers of your religion would believe that god was indeed an orange t-rex, would that mean that the christian god would have never existed?
Yes. All other religions would be rendered irrelevant. That's kinda the point of religion...[QUOTE="tenaka2"][QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"] Depends if the interpretations contradict the original or differ from the original meaning of said god. I could start a new religion and claim it to be derived from the God of Abraham, describing him as an orange tyrannosaurus rex. Doesn't mean that it's the same God.imaps3fanboy
Yet if you did and were successful the followers of your religion would believe that god was indeed an orange t-rex, would that mean that the christian god would have never existed?
Yes. All other religions would be rendered irrelevant. That's kinda the point of religion...So you don't believe in god then, or at least not in the standard interpretation?
He taught that he was the essence of God, not God himself. It wasn't until 300 years later that Christians decided to make Jesus actually God. It's a man made Fabirication, partially inspired by the adoption of Pagan Ideals and rituals into the Christian Doctrine.[QUOTE="Nuck81"][QUOTE="Philokalia"]
When he defined his name as being a unique name only shared with him and the father and the spirit (Mathew 28:19) as well has his name being the name of God, he taught inherently trinity. Plus we have John saying that every created thing was created by Christ, directly implying the eternality of the word which was made incarnate.
tenaka2
Dont waste your time, Philok will ignore anything presented, he doesnt even agree that easter and christmas are originally pagan. His faith is very weak.
I've dealt with him before on another forum. Now that I've shut him down, he won't be back. And if he is it will be in response to someone else. He will conveniently ignore what I wrote, or simply dismiss everything it says. Orthodox is simply the product of indoctrination and brainwashing. That's what happens when you spend your whole life being told what to believe instead of finding out for yourself.Yes. All other religions would be rendered irrelevant. That's kinda the point of religion...[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"][QUOTE="tenaka2"]
Yet if you did and were successful the followers of your religion would believe that god was indeed an orange t-rex, would that mean that the christian god would have never existed?
tenaka2
So you don't believe in god then, or at least not in the standard interpretation?
No, I don't believe in any God(s)
[QUOTE="tenaka2"][QUOTE="Nuck81"] He taught that he was the essence of God, not God himself. It wasn't until 300 years later that Christians decided to make Jesus actually God. It's a man made Fabirication, partially inspired by the adoption of Pagan Ideals and rituals into the Christian Doctrine.Nuck81
Dont waste your time, Philok will ignore anything presented, he doesnt even agree that easter and christmas are originally pagan. His faith is very weak.
I've dealt with him before on another forum. Now that I've shut him down, he won't be back. And if he is it will be in response to someone else. He will conveniently ignore what I wrote, or simply dismiss everything it says. Orthodox is simply the product of indoctrination and brainwashing. That's what happens when you spend your whole life being told what to believe instead of finding out for yourself.Yeah I noticed he ran away, I can appreciate religious people but never have I seen a person so scared by facts about their religion, imo religion should not be about a book, it should be about a personal relationship with god.
[QUOTE="Philokalia"][QUOTE="Nuck81"] Christ did not preach a Trinity. And that was not why he was Crucified. Try Again.Nuck81
When he defined his name as being a unique name only shared with him and the father and the spirit (Mathew 28:19) as well has his name being the name of God, he taught inherently trinity. Plus we have John saying that every created thing was created by Christ, directly implying the eternality of the word which was made incarnate.
He taught that he was the essence of God, not God himself. It wasn't until 300 years later that Christians decided to make Jesus actually God. It's a man made Fabirication, partially inspired by the adoption of Pagan Ideals and rituals into the Christian Doctrine. Here's a question and answer for you.... Quote Question: "Is Jesus God? Did Jesus ever claim to be God?" Answer: Jesus is never recorded in the Bible as saying the precise words, I am God. That does not mean, however, that He did not proclaim that He is God. Take for example Jesus words in John 10:30, I and the Father are one. We need only to look at the Jews reaction to His statement to know He was claiming to be God. They tried to stone Him for this very reason. you, a mere man, claim to be God (John 10:33). The Jews understood exactly what Jesus was claimingdeity. Notice that Jesus does not deny His claim to be God. When Jesus declared, I and the Father are one (John 10:30), He was saying that He and the Father are of one nature and essence. John 8:58 is another example. Jesus declared, I tell you the truth, before Abraham was born, I am! The response of the Jews who heard this statement was to take up stones to kill Him for blasphemy, as the Mosaic Law commanded them to do (Leviticus 24:15). It's rather silly to argue over the word essence but in short it means....noun the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something, especially something abstract, that determines its character: conflict is the essence of drama Philosophy a property or group of properties of something without which it would not exist or be what it is.[QUOTE="Nuck81"][QUOTE="Philokalia"]He taught that he was the essence of God, not God himself. It wasn't until 300 years later that Christians decided to make Jesus actually God. It's a man made Fabirication, partially inspired by the adoption of Pagan Ideals and rituals into the Christian Doctrine. Here's a question and answer for you.... Quote Question: "Is Jesus God? Did Jesus ever claim to be God?" Answer: Jesus is never recorded in the Bible as saying the precise words, I am God. That does not mean, however, that He did not proclaim that He is God. Take for example Jesus words in John 10:30, I and the Father are one. We need only to look at the Jews reaction to His statement to know He was claiming to be God. They tried to stone Him for this very reason. you, a mere man, claim to be God (John 10:33). The Jews understood exactly what Jesus was claimingdeity. Notice that Jesus does not deny His claim to be God. When Jesus declared, I and the Father are one (John 10:30), He was saying that He and the Father are of one nature and essence. John 8:58 is another example. Jesus declared, I tell you the truth, before Abraham was born, I am! The response of the Jews who heard this statement was to take up stones to kill Him for blasphemy, as the Mosaic Law commanded them to do (Leviticus 24:15). It's rather silly to argue over the word essence but in short it means....noun the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something, especially something abstract, that determines its character: conflict is the essence of drama Philosophy a property or group of properties of something without which it would not exist or be what it is. Thanks for helping me prove my point. Jesus was the personification of the Essence of God. He however was not God in flesh, merely the Son of Man.When he defined his name as being a unique name only shared with him and the father and the spirit (Mathew 28:19) as well has his name being the name of God, he taught inherently trinity. Plus we have John saying that every created thing was created by Christ, directly implying the eternality of the word which was made incarnate.
LJS9502_basic
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Nuck81"] He taught that he was the essence of God, not God himself. It wasn't until 300 years later that Christians decided to make Jesus actually God. It's a man made Fabirication, partially inspired by the adoption of Pagan Ideals and rituals into the Christian Doctrine.Nuck81Here's a question and answer for you.... Quote Question: "Is Jesus God? Did Jesus ever claim to be God?" Answer: Jesus is never recorded in the Bible as saying the precise words, I am God. That does not mean, however, that He did not proclaim that He is God. Take for example Jesus words in John 10:30, I and the Father are one. We need only to look at the Jews reaction to His statement to know He was claiming to be God. They tried to stone Him for this very reason. you, a mere man, claim to be God (John 10:33). The Jews understood exactly what Jesus was claimingdeity. Notice that Jesus does not deny His claim to be God. When Jesus declared, I and the Father are one (John 10:30), He was saying that He and the Father are of one nature and essence. John 8:58 is another example. Jesus declared, I tell you the truth, before Abraham was born, I am! The response of the Jews who heard this statement was to take up stones to kill Him for blasphemy, as the Mosaic Law commanded them to do (Leviticus 24:15). It's rather silly to argue over the word essence but in short it means....noun the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something, especially something abstract, that determines its character: conflict is the essence of drama Philosophy a property or group of properties of something without which it would not exist or be what it is. Thanks for helping me prove my point. Jesus was the personification of the Essence of God. He however was not God in flesh, merely the Son of Man. Next time read....
Thanks for helping me prove my point. Jesus was the personification of the Essence of God. He however was not God in flesh, merely the Son of Man. Next time read....[QUOTE="Nuck81"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Here's a question and answer for you.... Quote Question: "Is Jesus God? Did Jesus ever claim to be God?" Answer: Jesus is never recorded in the Bible as saying the precise words, I am God. That does not mean, however, that He did not proclaim that He is God. Take for example Jesus words in John 10:30, I and the Father are one. We need only to look at the Jews reaction to His statement to know He was claiming to be God. They tried to stone Him for this very reason. you, a mere man, claim to be God (John 10:33). The Jews understood exactly what Jesus was claimingdeity. Notice that Jesus does not deny His claim to be God. When Jesus declared, I and the Father are one (John 10:30), He was saying that He and the Father are of one nature and essence. John 8:58 is another example. Jesus declared, I tell you the truth, before Abraham was born, I am! The response of the Jews who heard this statement was to take up stones to kill Him for blasphemy, as the Mosaic Law commanded them to do (Leviticus 24:15). It's rather silly to argue over the word essence but in short it means....noun the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something, especially something abstract, that determines its character: conflict is the essence of drama Philosophy a property or group of properties of something without which it would not exist or be what it is. LJS9502_basic
If the trinity was true amd jesus thought so, wouldn't the scriptuires be more explicit rather then the guesses and fragments you are trying to put together?
its all very much clutching at straws.
Thanks for helping me prove my point. Jesus was the personification of the Essence of God. He however was not God in flesh, merely the Son of Man. Next time read.... Sigh..... some excerpts from your post. Jesus is never recorded in the Bible as saying the precise words, I am God- then why is the very next sentence about how Jesus and God are one? Because he wasn't claiming to be God, he was (again a sentence taken from your post) " He was saying that He and the Father are of one nature and essence." Jesus is not God. As far as john 8:58 goes, the Word (as in John 1:1) is the expression of the divine perfections of God in the Reality of the Manifestation of God. This has nothing to do with the physical body of Jesus which is finite and connected with time. The Word is not restrained by time. It has to do with the divine virtues present in the Christ.[QUOTE="Nuck81"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Here's a question and answer for you.... Quote Question: "Is Jesus God? Did Jesus ever claim to be God?" Answer: Jesus is never recorded in the Bible as saying the precise words, I am God. That does not mean, however, that He did not proclaim that He is God. Take for example Jesus words in John 10:30, I and the Father are one. We need only to look at the Jews reaction to His statement to know He was claiming to be God. They tried to stone Him for this very reason. you, a mere man, claim to be God (John 10:33). The Jews understood exactly what Jesus was claimingdeity. Notice that Jesus does not deny His claim to be God. When Jesus declared, I and the Father are one (John 10:30), He was saying that He and the Father are of one nature and essence. John 8:58 is another example. Jesus declared, I tell you the truth, before Abraham was born, I am! The response of the Jews who heard this statement was to take up stones to kill Him for blasphemy, as the Mosaic Law commanded them to do (Leviticus 24:15). It's rather silly to argue over the word essence but in short it means....noun the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something, especially something abstract, that determines its character: conflict is the essence of drama Philosophy a property or group of properties of something without which it would not exist or be what it is. LJS9502_basic
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Next time read.... Sigh..... some excerpts from your post. Jesus is never recorded in the Bible as saying the precise words, I am God- then why is the very next sentence about how Jesus and God are one? Because he wasn't claiming to be God, he was (again a sentence taken from your post) " He was saying that He and the Father are of one nature and essence." Jesus is not God. As far as john 8:58 goes, the Word (as in John 1:1) is the expression of the divine perfections of God in the Reality of the Manifestation of God. This has nothing to do with the physical body of Jesus which is finite and connected with time. The Word is not restrained by time. It has to do with the divine virtues present in the Christ.[QUOTE="Nuck81"] Thanks for helping me prove my point. Jesus was the personification of the Essence of God. He however was not God in flesh, merely the Son of Man. Nuck81
ohhh you got both LJS and Philok to back off kudos, well done, ill bumb your stuff, thanks.
ohhh you got both LJS and Philok to back off kudos, well done, ill bumb your stuff, thanks.
tenaka2
Great, perhaps you can explain exactly what a "personification of the Essence of God" is, and why "Jesus was not God in flesh", based on him being "personification of the Essence of God". Please explain also what "merely the Son of Man" means too, while you're at it - cheers.
See Nuck you are distinguishing between the Son and the father in that example, the rays are not the sun itself, the suns essence is distinct from the rays despite the fact they flow from the sun they are not the sun itself. Perhaps its our terminology in which we differ on this case but if essence is be thought of substance, as that which composes the entity which exists even you must admit Christ does not have that according to bahai. Though To Christians since the beginning this has always been the case.
Now I see the same basic claim that a trinity existed in pagan times I would like a positive example of this. Note that merely giving a triad, or three specific gods that are together does not constitute a trinity. The trinity has been defined by Christians for 1700 years pretty much and I have yet to see a Pre Christian source match the definition of Constantinople or Athanasius. So if you want to make this claim I simply demand the evidence not the claims.
As for Christianity adapting Paganism, to a certain extent we see that Christians have transformed pagan images, icons, thoughts and ideas into Christian concepts. Or at a more accurate level, made use of them in order to explain Christian concepts, this is even the case within the scripture itself. Saint Paul used the unknown God to demonstrate that the Athenians were worshipping the true God and that they could know this unknown God. Saint John uses the word, the Logos concept in Detailing who Christ is and goes on to elaborate the word is personal, that he is Christ and that he has been made eternal.
Now as for Easter, you truly do not think that a day which revolves around the Jewish calander day of Pascha could have any relation to paganism do you? You realise that Easter is a term which is only found in the English and the old claim for this derivation is from Bede almost 600 years after the term and he is the only one to claim knowledge of this Goddess and lets not suggest that from this we get a coherent idea of where Easter comes from. No that would only trace to the English use of the word, so its entirely etymological, not historical in tersm of the feast itself which is definitely very much early Christian and was called by a different name. In fact most people today call it Pascha in non English speaking countries.
As for the crusades, you think they were not justified at all? Muhammad influenced Muslims to invade countless Christian lands and while the muslims generally at least put Christians under a protected Class its to be remembered that the initial first crusade was against the tyranny of Muslims In Jeruselum which pretty much banned Christians from having pilgrimages there and there was a lot of persecuation because of this and this is what caused the first crusade. But yeah there is such a thing as excommunication in the church, the need to recognise truth as we see it. There have been divisions in the church, at least five major ones from what I know of history. But dont act as if the bahai wont excommunicate they certaintly will if that member openly contradicts the universal house of justice, so I think its a bit hypocritical for you to use that against the church.
So you need to do some things, establish a pre Christian pagan trinity. Establish a Holiday called Pascha practiced by pagans which revolved around the Jewish day of Pasach. And you basically need to back up everything you say with reason and evidence.
Sigh..... some excerpts from your post. Jesus is never recorded in the Bible as saying the precise words, I am God- then why is the very next sentence about how Jesus and God are one? Because he wasn't claiming to be God, he was (again a sentence taken from your post) " He was saying that He and the Father are of one nature and essence." Jesus is not God. As far as john 8:58 goes, the Word (as in John 1:1) is the expression of the divine perfections of God in the Reality of the Manifestation of God. This has nothing to do with the physical body of Jesus which is finite and connected with time. The Word is not restrained by time. It has to do with the divine virtues present in the Christ. Nuck81
Yet Mirza Al hussain said he was God, but you understand that there is an ontological difference between God and Mirza Al hussain based on the wider context of his entire words. The same is true of Christ, but in the opposite direction. Even if Christ were to say this you would not accept this of Christ and find some other way to interpret it other than Christ being God so that really disengenious and you haven't addressed any of the scripture I quoted or talked about. Consider the words of John that everything which began to exist-
"All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made."
The implication is quite clear on this ground that the mere fact aht if Jesus was created we have a statement of contradict. "And without him was made nothing that was made". Jesus could not make himself so he certaintly on the most arrian reading of this verse the first of all creation. That means he is greater than Moses, Mirza Al hussain and Muhammad because he created them. ANd I think implicit to this and indeed throuhgout the entire gospel of John as Christians who have inherited and read the new testament in the language it was written in and spoken for 2000 years cannot be so easily dismissed in their interpretation of this verse.
Now As for the incarnation the gospel of JOhn is quite clear, conside thtat the word was made man.
"And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us (and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth."
So yes the word was in some sense contained or rather inhabited the physical plane, a body as it were and we know from the context who this word is. it is Christ. John explains the ministry of the word at the very begining.
"He was not the light, but was to give testimony of the light. 9That was the true light, which enlightens every man that comes into this world. 10He was in the world: and the world was made by him: and the world knew him not. 11He came unto his own: and his own received him not. 12But as many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name."
Whose name shall we be made sons of God under? That is the name of Christ? And heres the interesting thing about the name of Christ which I brought up earler, the name of Christ is unique in that he shares his name with the father and the son and the spirit.
"Going therefore, teach all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost."
None of the other prophets are included here, not even the great Moses, so there is something here as to the meaning of the name of Christ. That it is a name by which people are baptised under. We are not baptised in Moses's name nor in the name of Muhammad, nor especially in Mirza Al hussain, but Christ's name whose name is the name of the father and hte son and the spirit. So what name could they possibly share that is unique tot hese three alone?
And it should be noted based on acts, that hte Holy spirit is a person as a person is only capable of speech.
I think the final solution to the so called problem is JOhn 17:12
"And now I am not in the world, and these are in the world, and I come to you. Holy Father, keep them in your name whom you have given me: that they may be one, as we also are."
Notice here the directly said and stated that the name of the father is the name which was given to Christ. What could this name be? Can God share his name with his creation? What name is this? I cannot see it being any other name, than YHWH, because even Moses was called Elohim to Pharoah. Even attributes of God can be found in the creation but his name is unique. and this distinction of a unique name shared by the father and the son and the spirit is to me postive evidence of the deity of Christ in the Scriptures.
Glory to the father and to the son and to the holy spirit, both now and forever amern.
So you need to do some things
Philokalia
Nobody 'needs' to do anything, you continually make outragous demands when anyone posts anything that shows that christianity is a mix of different older beliefs.
You demand proof and when its provided you dismiss it with utmost arrogance.
There's a few arguments that seems to debate this fact even though they do and it has been proven many times. What do you think? Is there a reason these debates keep popping up?Mr-bombNo. Christians and Muslims do not worship the same God.
but catholics and muslims do.
Nobody 'needs' to do anything, you continually make outragous demands when anyone posts anything that shows that christianity is a mix of different older beliefs.
You demand proof and when its provided you dismiss it with utmost arrogance.
tenaka2
You wouldn't last long at university would you? Oh and I dismiss things which have no good reason for being believed. Give me a good reason instead of your word.
No, you dismiss anything that fails to fit into your predetermined dogma.
tenaka2
I can dismiss the da vinci code and its claims about Nicea because it never happened and there is no evidence for it. If you are going to claim something of historical signifficance like a pre Christian pagan trinity, give evidence for it Tenaka. Why is that atheists such as yourself are so big on demanding evidence of theists but when you make claims like this surprisingly you give none whatsoever. I can't think of a single time in any of our conversations where you have demonstrated a position you hold to Tenaka. Someone said that the trinity or the diety of Christ was invented 300 years later, I gave documents from the second century and I gave a robust interpretation and defence from the bible on this subject demonstrating that point to be wrong. You simply say I am ignorant and lol you don't have enough faith.
I think I don't need to say this tenaka, but everyone here sees how badly you are failing in these discussions. Stop it tenaka, learn restraint. Read some ancient history then talk about this subject. Otherwise take the adivce of the saints and learn how to be silent.
[QUOTE="tenaka2"]
No, you dismiss anything that fails to fit into your predetermined dogma.
Philokalia
I can dismiss the da vinci code and its claims about Nicea because it never happened and there is no evidence for it. If you are going to claim something of historical signifficance like a pre Christian pagan trinity, give evidence for it Tenaka. Why is that atheists such as yourself are so big on demanding evidence of theists but when you make claims like this surprisingly you give none whatsoever. I can't think of a single time in any of our conversations where you have demonstrated a position you hold to Tenaka. Someone said that the trinity or the diety of Christ was invented 300 years later, I gave documents from the second century and I gave a robust interpretation and defence from the bible on this subject demonstrating that point to be wrong. You simply say I am ignorant and lol you don't have enough faith.
I think I don't need to say this tenaka, but everyone here sees how badly you are failing in these discussions. Stop it tenaka, learn restraint. Read some ancient history then talk about this subject. Otherwise take the adivce of the saints and learn how to be silent.
+1
[QUOTE="tenaka2"]
No, you dismiss anything that fails to fit into your predetermined dogma.
Philokalia
take the adivce of the saints and learn how to be silent.
You are very full of pride and arrogance. You have been provided with much evidance and you dismiss it all. You would ignore any and all proof provided regardless of validity because it does not fit with your dogma. perhaps that nick poster will show up and scare you off again, he certainly knows more them me on the subject.
[QUOTE="Philokalia"]
[QUOTE="tenaka2"]
No, you dismiss anything that fails to fit into your predetermined dogma.
tenaka2
take the adivce of the saints and learn how to be silent.
You are very full of pride and arrogance. You have been provided with much evidance and you dismiss it all. You would ignore any and all proof provided regardless of validity because it does not fit with your dogma. perhaps that nick poster will show up and scare you off again, he certainly knows more them me on the subject.
When are you joining the Bahai? I hope your saviour arrives soon, since this is a long way past embarassing.
You are very full of pride and arrogance. You have been provided with much evidance and you dismiss it all. You would ignore any and all proof provided regardless of validity because it does not fit with your dogma. perhaps that nick poster will show up and scare you off again, he certainly knows more them me on the subject.
tenaka2
You have provided a fundamentalist website on easter. You provided website which gave no citations or any specific concerning the timutri in hinduism and you've insulted me alot.
The only attempt at a semi primary source was Bede which I believe I demonstrated is simply not enough. He is the only one to make reference of this being the reason why easter is called easter or why its at this time of the month. He is seven hundred years after the very earliest celebrations of Pascha. It doesn't take into account that actually the reason why Pascha is celebrated is because its related to the Jewish holiday Pasach hence why it is a moveable feast. It doesn't take into account this particular word for the Christian feast of the ressurection of Christ only occurs in english and I believe theres a german varient.
You have given nothing pre chrisitan establishing any of your claims on a level which is beyond dispute. You have only but hurled insults and accused me of lying when I am simply asking you to provide the evidence.
Now I'm not scared of Bahai, the universalist muslims of the world, but I do worry about a future where so much misinformation about religion is spread and if Bahai were to ever become prominent their one world government idea scares me.
[QUOTE="tenaka2"]
[QUOTE="Philokalia"]
take the adivce of the saints and learn how to be silent.
RationalAtheist
You are very full of pride and arrogance. You have been provided with much evidance and you dismiss it all. You would ignore any and all proof provided regardless of validity because it does not fit with your dogma. perhaps that nick poster will show up and scare you off again, he certainly knows more them me on the subject.
When are you joining the Bahai? I hope your saviour arrives soon, since this is a long way past embarassing.
I have no idea why you are following my comments across the board.
I have no idea why you are following my comments across the board.
tenaka2
I follow religious threads on here. do you object?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment