Why did Jesus allow demons to enter a herd of pigs?

realdanbreen

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think pretty well everyone who has grown older has a different faith or belief from the one they had as a youth; that comes with the territory of growing up.

And one of the things I notice - don't take this personally; it's not a dig at you or at anyone in particular - is that a lot of atheist critiques of faith are framed as critiques of a very childish, simplistic faith. This is partly because (a) it's easy to critique; it's like shooting fish in a barrel, but possibly also because (b) what they are actually critiquing is their own childish faith that they rejected when they stopped being children, because that's the form of faith they are most familiar with.

No doubt there are adult believers who still hold a very child-like, simple faith. I could name one or two. But it's not typical, or normal. Your question about vocations assumed that all the vocations in the 1950s were genuine spiritual vocations (and had nothing to do with, e.g., the social capital that priesthood represented at the time; the limited other opportunities that people had) and that the current lack of vocations is simply the result of God not calling people, and is not influenced by other factors. I doubt that many adult Christians believe either of those things, so your question doesn't really pose much of a challenge to their faith.

So can you explain what this "different " faith is and how it differs from the faith I grew up with. As for vocations you seem to be suggesting that there never was such a thing (BTW I'm inclined to agree with you ) and that chosing the priesthood was much like deciding to become a painter or a car salesman.

theological

Effects wrote: »

The problem is with the reporting of what Jesus' said. We have no way to corroborate what the bible tells us Jesus said.

It's odd that you say this and then go on to say what is more certain to you without any eyewitness testimony at all.

At the time the New Testament was disseminated there were hundreds of not thousands of people who could have openly contradicted the claims made in the gospels of they were to be false or even in the oral gospel spread by the first believers or in the written letters of the apostles. The Bible is the only religious text that I have come across that makes specific claims about specific people in specific places at specific times. This is particularly true of the gospels. If you wanted to avoid scrutiny you wouldn't go into specific details like the gospel writers did. You'd be vague and not make any claims about the temporal nature of the world.

Effects wrote: »

Mary was most certainly not a virgin, but this narrative fits the misogynistic views of the bible/catholic church.

Most certainly on what basis? You're not following your own rules on what counts as valid testimony here.

If you're interested in genuinely finding out more about Christianity great but if you're more interested in putting your own opinion above Scripture without basis I can't say I respect that a lot.

realdanbreen wrote: »

I've asked this question before but never got a straight answer.

Humans are on this planet for hundreds of thousands of years so therefore why would God only decide to send his son, Jesus, to earth only 2000 or so years ago? What became of the billions of humans who lived and died before God sent his son to spread the word?

Fortunately the Bible gives us an answer on both parts of your question.

Romans 4 tells us that Abraham who lived long before Jesus was justified by faith in God long before. The sacrifice of Jesus was sufficient even for him. I guess this is why in Genesis 22 God stops Abraham sacrificing Isaac the son of the promise by providing a ram. This points forward to the day when God's Son would die in our place for our sin.

Galatians 4 also looks to the example of Abraham. But in verse 4 it says "in the fullness of time" God sent His Son. In Romans 5 just a chapter on in verse 6 it says "at the right time Christ died for the ungodly". So Scripture tells us God decreed it was the right time. It doesn't spell out exactly why but I suspect if God had sent Jesus right at the Garden of Eden we wouldn't have understood the tension of his a holy God can deal with a sinful people and we wouldn't have understood the severity of our sin.

I point to the Bible first and foremost. It contains everything needed for life and godliness and it is written for our instruction. I'd recommend you read it for yourself rather than trusting me.

santana75

realdanbreen wrote: »

But the people who lived before Jesus arrival never heard the word of God so can't have been judged in the same way as those who did hear the word of God. So if you happen to believe in heaven and hell then the early humans got the better deal?

People who lived before Jesus did hear the word of God though. The scriptures were written long before Jesus walked the earth. I mean Jesus himself quoted the scriptures when he was being tempted by Satan in the wilderness. How could Jesus quote from something that didnt exist? The information was there, the pharisees were the religious leaders at the time and they lived by the "Law of Moses".
I'd second looking into the "Harrowing of hell" though. The idea is that after Jesus was laid in the tomb he went to Hades to preach to the dead so that it was an even playing field so to speak. I believe Paul mentions this, that in the 3 days after his death, Jesus preached to the dead.

santana75

realdanbreen wrote: »

I suppose I should cut to the chase. As a young fella growing up I had a faith/belief in the existence of God as most of my peers had. Now as I've grown older I am a little less inclined to have that faith/belief. Would you, or other posters here, feel much the same?

I'd have the opposite experience. I grew up catholic but turned away from it when I was a teenager. But I came back to faith by my own volition, gradually over time. I feel like my faith grows in proportion to how much of my time I devote to God on a daily basis. I used to just get up in the morning and set about the days tasks, and by the end of the day I wouldnt have given any time to God really. So I changed things in my life and made God number 1. In the morning I get up and I read the scriptures, I pray, I sit and meditate on the word of God. This has made a massive difference in my faith. Its simple, the more time I devote to God the more my faith and belief grows.

ChrisJ84

Peregrinus wrote: »

Oh, sure, I wouldn't disagree. But I think we have to acknowledge that it's a reading that is heavily influenced by (a) faith in Jesus Christ, and our reflections on the implication of that faith, and (b) reading the Jewish scriptures together with, and in the light of, the New Testament texts. And, obviously, these are factors which were not at work, cannot have been at work, when the OT scriptures were produced, and when they were first received as inspired scripture.

So, Christian readings of the OT texts are driven by something outside the OT texts themselves. Which doesn't in any way invalidate those readings, or make them incoherent or inconsistent. It just means we can't claim that the Christian readings reflect the texts' "own intent", which is the claim I came in to argue with. I think Jewish readings of the OT texts have a much better claim to reflect the "own intent" of those texts than Christian readings do.

My only problem with what you've said is that the Christian claim is more far reaching than that. Christianity doesn't claim to only re-interpret the OT or bring a new understanding to it, rather it claims to fulfil the OT, and bring into full focus things that were previously unclear or partial. In that sense, I would say that the Christian reading of the OT is the best way to understand it, and in fact is the way it is intended to be understood. And so Abraham, Isaac, King David and others would recognise in the new testament the fulfilment of everything they were longing for.

The other danger is that we drive too much of a wedge between the old testament and the new, whereas Christianity emphasises the unity of scripture, and teaches a continuity that runs through the history of redemption from creation to new creation.

The other thing I would way, and I said it in a reply to another post, is that all these claims hinge on the question of who Jesus is, and what he came to do.

realdanbreen

It's good to hear

santana75 wrote: »

realdanbreen wrote: »

I suppose I should cut to the chase. As a young fella growing up I had a faith/belief in the existence of God as most of my peers had. Now as I've grown older I am a little less inclined to have that faith/belief. Would you, or other posters here, feel much the same?

I'd have the opposite experience. I grew up catholic but turned away from it when I was a teenager. But I came back to faith by my own volition, gradually over time. I feel like my faith grows in proportion to how much of my time I devote to God on a daily basis. I used to just get up in the morning and set about the days tasks, and by the end of the day I wouldnt have given any time to God really. So I changed things in my life and made God number 1. In the morning I get up and I read the scriptures, I pray, I sit and meditate on the word of God. This has made a massive difference in my faith. Its simple, the more time I devote to God the more my faith and belief grows.

It's good to hear that you get such benefit from your faith. The God that you pray to, is that the same God that the 1.3 billion Muslims pray to? I'm not trying to be smart I just need someone to clarify these things.

Effects

gozunda wrote: »

Why would mary have been a 'fallen woman'?

She had sex outside of wedlock and became pregnant.
She was lucky that Joseph took her in.
She wouldn’t have been so lucky in 20th Century Ireland.

Effects

theological wrote: »

It's odd that you say this and then go on to say what is more certain to you without any eyewitness testimony at all.

You don’t need eye witness testimony when you have empirical evidence.

Most certainly on what basis? You're not following your own rules on what counts as valid testimony

Again, you don’t need eye witness accounts, when you have science to fall back on.

the dark phantom

Effects wrote: »

She had sex outside of wedlock and became pregnant.
She was lucky that Joseph took her in.
She wouldn’t have been so lucky in 20th Century Ireland.

According to this Facebook page Jesus did come back and he settled in Ireland.

https://www.facebook.com/Church-of-our-lords-son-Duncan-Sloan-143612859643961/?ref=bookmarks

santana75

realdanbreen wrote: »

It's good to hear
It's good to hear that you get such benefit from your faith. The God that you pray to, is that the same God that the 1.3 billion Muslims pray to? I'm not trying to be smart I just need someone to clarify these things.

But why do you need clarification? Its simple: Read the Bible, regularly. If you do that you wont even think about what other people worship. Its about you and your personal relationship with God.

theological

realdanbreen wrote: »

It's good to hear
It's good to hear that you get such benefit from your faith. The God that you pray to, is that the same God that the 1.3 billion Muslims pray to? I'm not trying to be smart I just need someone to clarify these things.

Muslims don't believe that Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of God or in the Trinity or in any other number of essential beliefs that Christians do. They deny the essential place of the cross in solving the problem of how a holy God dwells with a sinful people.

Despite popular belief the difference between Christianity and Islam is not small. Islamic teaching about Jesus deviates so far from Christianity that they cannot be said to be the same in this regard.

In fact that Qur'an is pretty revisionist in what it does share in common with Christianity, even in accounts from the Old Testament that feature it differs on important points.

In short - no they don't believe in the same God. If they believed in the same God, they would believe the same things about Jesus. That's basically the same approach Jesus took to explaining it in John 5 for example.

John 5:36-47 wrote:

For the works that the Father has given me to accomplish, the very works that I am doing, bear witness about me that the Father has sent me. And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen, and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe the one whom he has sent. You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life. I do not receive glory from people. But I know that you do not have the love of God within you. I have come in my Father's name, and you do not receive me. If another comes in his own name, you will receive him. How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God? Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you: Moses, on whom you have set your hope. For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?”

realdanbreen

theological wrote: »

Muslims don't believe that Jesus Christ is the eternal Son of God or in the Trinity or in any other number of essential beliefs that Christians do. They deny the essential place of the cross in solving the problem of how a holy God dwells with a sinful people.

Despite popular belief the difference between Christianity and Islam is not small. Islamic teaching about Jesus deviates so far from Christianity that they cannot be said to be the same in this regard.

In fact that Qur'an is pretty revisionist in what it does share in common with Christianity, even in accounts from the Old Testament that feature it differs on important points.

In short - no they don't believe in the same God. If they believed in the same God, they would believe the same things about Jesus. That's basically the same approach Jesus took to explaining it in John 5 for example.

So what you're saying is that 1.3billion people believe in one God and 2.3 billion people believe in a different God not to mention the other couple of billion who believe in a completely different assortment of Gods!
Is it any wonder that I along with many others are sceptical about the whole thing.

theological

realdanbreen wrote: »

So what you're saying is that 1.3billion people believe in one God and 2.3 billion people believe in a different God not to mention the other couple of billion who believe in a completely different assortment of Gods!
Is it any wonder that I along with many others are sceptical about the whole thing.

If I answered yes to your question would that have changed anything? If so what would it have changed?

If you're sceptical that's up to you. My job is simply to point you to Jesus and the Scriptures and encourage you to look at Him in them. Being sceptical doesn't make the question of who Jesus was and what He did in history go away.

If you wish to explore that further that's great. If not that's up to you. Go well and God bless you.

Effects

theological wrote: »

In short - no they don't believe in the same God. If they believed in the same God, they would believe the same things about Jesus.

Nah, same god. Just different stories about him.
You hardly think there’s two different gods in heaven do you?

realdanbreen

Originally Posted by realdanbreen View Post

So what you're saying is that 1.3billion people believe in one God and 2.3 billion people believe in a different God not to mention the other couple of billion who believe in a completely different assortment of Gods!
Is it any wonder that I along with many others are sceptical about the whole thing.

If I answered yes to your question would that have changed anything? If so what would it have changed?

If you're sceptical that's up to you. My job is simply to point you to Jesus and the Scriptures and encourage you to look at Him in them. Being sceptical doesn't make the question of who Jesus was and what He did in history go away.

If you wish to explore that further that's great. If not that's up to you. Go well and God bless you.
theological is online now Report Post

Answering yes would not have changed anything but not giving a straight answer to my post isn't much help either.
Do you think the 2.3billion Christians and the 1.3billion muslims are worshiping the same God?

theological

realdanbreen wrote: »

Answering yes would not have changed anything but not giving a straight answer to my post isn't much help either.
Do you think the 2.3billion Christians and the 1.3billion muslims are worshiping the same God?

What part of this isn't a straight answer? Did you read my post?

theological wrote: »

In short - no they don't believe in the same God.

Effects wrote: »

Nah, same god. Just different stories about him.
You hardly think there’s two different gods in heaven do you?

Quite.

I don't believe that there are two gods. That's why I don't believe that there can be two hugely contradictory ideas concerning who He is.

God has revealed Himself fully in His Word and through His Son Jesus.

Peregrinus

theological wrote: »

In short - no they don't believe in the same God. If they believed in the same God, they would believe the same things about Jesus. That's basically the same approach Jesus took to explaining it in John 5 for example.

Mmm. The same logic would lead to the conclusion that Jews and Christians don't believe in the same God. But the same Christians who tell you they worship a different God from Muslims would indignantly deny that they worship a differfent God from Jews.

Jews, Christians and Muslims all worship the same God - the One God, the omnipotentent, omniscient, all-loving God who created all things other than himself, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob. If there's an outlier among the three groups its the Christians, who believe that God is Trinity, and that God became incarnate in the person of Jesus. Jews and Muslims both deny this.

Whatever other differences they may have, Jews and Muslims are in absolutely no doubt, and never have been in any doubt, that they both worship the same God. And they agree that Christians also worship that God, albeit that Christians have some pretty odd ideas about him. This presents a real problem for those Christians who wish to claim that they worship the God of the Jews, but that Muslims worship a different God, because that's very hard to reconcile with the fact that Jewish and Muslim ideas about God have a lot more in common with one another than either of them do with Christian ideas.

realdanbreen

I think I must be forgiven for being sceptical and certainly confused when interested and knowledgeable guys like yourselves cannot even agree on how many God's there are!

theological

Peregrinus wrote: »

Mmm. The same logic would lead to the conclusion that Jews and Christians don't believe in the same God. But the same Christians who tell you they worship a different God from Muslims would indignantly deny that they worship a differfent God from Jews.

Jews, Christians and Muslims all worship the same God - the One God, the omnipotentent, omniscient, all-loving God who created all things other than himself, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob. If there's an outlier among the three groups its the Christians, who believe that God is Trinity, and that God became incarnate in the person of Jesus. Jews and Muslims both deny this.

Whatever other differences they may have, Jews and Muslims are in absolutely no doubt, and never have been in any doubt, that they both worship the same God. And they agree that Christians also worship that God, albeit that Christians have some pretty odd ideas about him. This presents a real problem for those Christians who wish to claim that they worship the God of the Jews, but that Muslims worship a different God, because that's very hard to reconcile with the fact that Jewish and Muslim ideas about God have a lot more in common with one another than either of them do with Christian ideas.

I'm not actually sure the Islamic view of God coheres as closely to the Jewish idea of God. There are also fundamental differences there too. For example, who is the child of the promise, and the nature of sin. I don't think the Jewish idea of God post-rejection of Jesus is actually the same God either.

In so far as they reject Him as coming from the Son of God, they don't believe in the same God as the God Moses spoke about. That's the point that He is labouring at the end of John 5.

Jesus is the one who makes God known (1:18). Jesus is the very word of God who spoke from creation (1:1-3).

If we say that Jews and Muslims believe in the same God, we are denying that belief in Jesus is essential to knowing God in His true form.

In one of the more heated exchanges Jesus has in John's gospel we see the following:

John 8:42-47 wrote:

Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.”

I don't worship the same God as Jews who have rejected Jesus, because believing in Jesus is essential to knowing God.

Shying away from the distinctives and the centrality of the Christian gospel namely that Jesus is fully God and fully man and that this is essential to God's character sells Jesus short.

That's why I reject the idea that Christians follow the same God as Muslims and Jews. We don't, we follow the God of the Bible who is revealed to us supremely in Jesus Christ (Hebrews 1:1).

sbsquarepants

santana75 wrote: »

What is this about? Why would Jesus allow any concession to demons? Why not just cast them out and throw them into the so called bottomless pit? It seems like a compassionate act by Jesus, but compassion for demons, why?

Sure they'd be family wouldn't they?

ChrisJ84 wrote: »

Finally, it shows Jesus' authority over all created things, including the demons - they can only do what he permits them to do.

Why doesn't he just tell them to behave themselves so? Or to stay in the bottomless pit?

Mango Joe

Could somebody please advise on the one true God?

- If it helps I'm deeply judgemental, hypocritical, misogynistic, homophobic and very small-minded...... I'm also ridiculously intolerant of the beliefs of others.

Thanks in advance.

Peregrinus

theological wrote: »

I'm not actually sure the Islamic view of God coheres as closely to the Jewish idea of God. There are also fundamental differences there too. For example, who is the child of the promise, and the nature of sin. I don't think the Jewish idea of God post-rejection of Jesus is actually the same God either.

In so far as they reject Him as coming from the Son of God, they don't believe in the same God as the God Moses spoke about. That's the point that He is labouring at the end of John 5.

Jesus is the one who makes God known (1:18). Jesus is the very word of God who spoke from creation (1:1-3).

If we say that Jews and Muslims believe in the same God, we are denying that belief in Jesus is essential to knowing God in His true form.

In one of the more heated exchanges Jesus has in John's gospel we see the following:


I don't worship the same God as Jews who have rejected Jesus, because believing in Jesus is essential to knowing God.

Shying away from the distinctives and the centrality of the Christian gospel namely that Jesus is fully God and fully man and that this is essential to God's character sells Jesus short.

That's why I reject the idea that Christians follow the same God as Muslims and Jews. We don't, we follow the God of the Bible who is revealed to us supremely in Jesus Christ (Hebrews 1:1).

Well, you're consistent, I'll say that for you.

But I think your position is too extreme, and is contradicted by scripture. If "believing in Jesus is essential to knowing God", as you say, then nobody who lived before the time of Jesus can be said to have known God - not the patriarchs, not the prophets, nobody. On your view, then, Jews have never worshipped God. But of course that view is abundantly contradicted in scripture.

I think your problem here is that you are equating "knowing God' and "worshipping God". This is wrong, if only because, with our limited understanding and our fallen humanity, we can never fully know God. To worship God it's not necessary to know him fully, or even to know him as fully as you might; it's enough to seek him. Those who never hear the message of Jesus, or who hear it but do not accept it, may perhaps be said to know God less than they otherwise would, but it can't be said that, as a result, they don't worship God.

Peregrinus

Mango Joe wrote: »

Could somebody please advise on the one true God?

- If it helps I'm deeply judgemental, hypocritical, misogynistic, homophobic and very small-minded...... I'm also ridiculously intolerant of the beliefs of others.

Thanks in advance.

Well, my advice would be that, if you want to get closer to the one true God, you need to be ready to let go of all these characteristics.

Mango Joe

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, my advice would be that, if you want to get closer to the one true God, you need to be ready to let go of all these characteristics.

Ok but it seems fair to say up front that I'll be looking for those within my chosen religion to lead by example.....

Ah...I'm sure that won't be an issue.

Peregrinus

Mango Joe wrote: »

Ok but it seems fair to say up front that I'll be looking for those within my chosen religion to lead by example.....

Ah...I'm sure that won't be an issue.

Ah, well that's another reason why you should let go of your hypocrisy, judgmentalism, intolerance, etc. Doing so will greatly simplify your quest. Whereas if you retain your commitment to those characteristics, you'll be bewildered by the wide choice of movements led by people who exemplify them. If you're not too hung up on the one true God thing you might even find a few nonreligious movements that will fit the bill.

realdanbreen

Mango Joe wrote: »

Could somebody please advise on the one true God?

- If it helps I'm deeply judgemental, hypocritical, misogynistic, homophobic and very small-minded...... I'm also ridiculously intolerant of the beliefs of others.

Thanks in advance.

Well for a start obviously you are not Catholic. ......Oh hang on..........never mind.

theological

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, you're consistent, I'll say that for you.

But I think your position is too extreme, and is contradicted by scripture. If "believing in Jesus is essential to knowing God", as you say, then nobody who lived before the time of Jesus can be said to have known God - not the patriarchs, not the prophets, nobody. On your view, then, Jews have never worshipped God. But of course that view is abundantly contradicted in scripture.

I think your problem here is that you are equating "knowing God' and "worshipping God". This is wrong, if only because, with our limited understanding and our fallen humanity, we can never fully know God. To worship God it's not necessary to know him fully, or even to know him as fully as you might; it's enough to seek him. Those who never hear the message of Jesus, or who hear it but do not accept it, may perhaps be said to know God less than they otherwise would, but it can't be said that, as a result, they don't worship God.

I appreciate this is a cheeky question, but if you think I'm "extreme" for quoting the words of Jesus verbatim from the gospel, then do you also think that Jesus was extreme? Surely you can see that that is problematic if so?

In order to worship, you need to be aware of who you are worshipping. Who you are worshipping is crucially important. The identity of the God we worship depends on what He has revealed to us about Himself. That isn't a minor detail.

I don't agree that the patriarchs didn't know God, or the prophets. They knew and acknowledged God as He revealed Himself to them. I believe Scripture is a progressive revelation.

Now about the patriarchs and the prophets, we know God in a much clearer way now than they did then in and through Christ. The Scriptures are clear about that we have in Christ what the prophets and what angels longed to see. (1 Peter 1:12).

But to continually deny the Son of God, after Christ, is a rejection of God's eternal nature based on what He has revealed about Himself.

The Son of God is an essential fundamental characteristic of who God is in His triune nature. In so far as Jews and Muslims don't honour Jesus as they should, I can't say they worship the same God, because Jesus Himself wouldn't.

ChrisJ84

theological wrote: »

The Son of God is an essential fundamental characteristic of who God is in His triune nature. In so far as Jews and Muslims don't honour Jesus as they should, I can't say they worship the same God, because Jesus Himself wouldn't.

You really can't over-emphasise the importance of this point. I would readily concede that there are similarities between the Christian, Jewish and Muslim ideas of God - they are all monotheistic religions after all, who see God as all powerful etc. etc.

The problem, as theological has pointed out, is that once we start to ask more specific questions like "What is God like?" "How has he revealed himself?" "How do we relate to him?" "What does he expect of us?" etc., the answers are radically different.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Jews, Christians and Muslims all worship the same God - the One God, the omnipotentent, omniscient, all-loving God who created all things other than himself, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob. If there's an outlier among the three groups its the Christians, who believe that God is Trinity, and that God became incarnate in the person of Jesus. Jews and Muslims both deny this.

The statement that Christians, Jews and Muslims all worship the same God is true only at the most superficial level. It is also a convenient way of denying that we need to take any of them too seriously if they all basically teach the same things - a very popular notion today. Not saying that you're doing this Peregrinus, but it is a common escape hatch for anyone who wants to dismiss specific Christian, Jewish or Muslim religious ideas that they aren't comfortable with. Christianity, Judaism and Islam all make exclusive claims that cannot be reconciled with one another - maybe none of them are right, but we shouldn't pretend that they can all be right at the same time.

Effects

theological wrote: »

That's why I reject the idea that Christians follow the same God as Muslims and Jews. We don't, we follow the God of the Bible who is revealed to us supremely in Jesus Christ (Hebrews 1:1).

It's still the same God, you just follow them in a different way to Muslims and Jews.

Peregrinus

ChrisJ84 wrote: »

The statement that Christians, Jews and Muslims all worship the same God is true only at the most superficial leve . . .

On the contrary, it's profoundly true, both theologically and historically.

I accept, of course, that Christians, Jews and Muslims have some different ideas about God. Indeed, that's true within each of those three religions as well as between them. But this doesn't mean that they worship different Gods. To claim that it does is to claim that the reality of the God we worship is determined by our conceptions about him - that God is, in the most literal sense, a creature of our imagination.

Peregrinus

theological wrote: »

I appreciate this is a cheeky question, but if you think I'm "extreme" for quoting the words of Jesus verbatim from the gospel, then do you also think that Jesus was extreme? Surely you can see that that is problematic if so?

It's not the words of scripture that I call extreme, but the interpretation you place on them.

theological wrote: »

In order to worship, you need to be aware of who you are worshipping. Who you are worshipping is crucially important. The identity of the God we worship depends on what He has revealed to us about Himself. That isn't a minor detail.

I don't agree that the patriarchs didn't know God, or the prophets. They knew and acknowledged God as He revealed Himself to them. I believe Scripture is a progressive revelation.

Now about the patriarchs and the prophets, we know God in a much clearer way now than they did then in and through Christ. The Scriptures are clear about that we have in Christ what the prophets and what angels longed to see. (1 Peter 1:12).

But to continually deny the Son of God, after Christ, is a rejection of God's eternal nature based on what He has revealed about Himself.

The Son of God is an essential fundamental characteristic of who God is in His triune nature. In so far as Jews and Muslims don't honour Jesus as they should, I can't say they worship the same God, because Jesus Himself wouldn't.

The logic of your position is that Jews who know God in exactly the same way that their forefathers did, who believe exactly what their forefathers believed, who worship in exactly the same way as their forefathers worshipped, and who are faithful to the covenant that their forefathers made with that God, are nevertheless worshipping a different and false God.

Indeed, you also imply that, in so far as Christians have different understandings of the way God has revealed himself in Christ, all but one of them - and quite possibly all of them - must also be worshipping different, false Gods.

I think your error is here:

The identity of the God we worship depends on what He has revealed to us about Himself. That isn't a minor detail.

In mainstream Christian (and Muslim, and Jewish) thinking, God is unchanging. His identity is what it is. It doesn't "depend" on anything (how can any aspect of God be dependent?) and it certainly doesn't depend on anything which varies over the course of human history, like revelation. God's identity is wholly unaffected by the progress of revelation.

What is affected by revelation is our understanding of God. But of course our understanding of God is also affected by our response to revelation (and by our limited capacity to understand the transcendant). It's clear at multiple points in the gospels that the disciples struggled with what what was revealed to them in Jesus Christ, and frequently failed to grasp it. But at no point is there any suggestion, either from Jesus himself or in anything any of the evangelists wrote, that this meant the disciples were worshipping a false god. And the same is true of the church as a beleving community; they spent centuries wrestling with the revelation of Jesus Christ, slowly coming to terms with it. Indeed, we're still at it.

None of this changes the identity or reality of God; how could it? And everyone who worships the God who reveals himself in this way is worshipping the same God, regardless of the historical point which revelation has reached or of the completeness or correctness of their understanding of that revelation.

ScottCapper

Why isn’t there an Islamic thread?

Peregrinus

ScottCapper wrote: »

Why isn’t there an Islamic thread?

World religions is the subforum which hosts threads on Islam.

ChrisJ84

Peregrinus wrote: »

On the contrary, it's profoundly true, both theologically and historically.

I accept, of course, that Christians, Jews and Muslims have some different ideas about God. Indeed, that's true within each of those three religions as well as between them. But this doesn't mean that they worship different Gods. To claim that it does is to claim that the reality of the God we worship is determined by our conceptions about him - that God is, in the most literal sense, a creature of our imagination.

We don't need to imagine anything, God has truly revealed himself in scripture and most supremely in the person of Jesus Christ. Our conceptions and ideas about God can therefore be more or less in line with reality. Imperfect of course, but nonetheless in line with reality. What we believe about Jesus is crucial and determines whether we are worshipping God as he is and as he has revealed himself, or not.

We can know many things about God apart from Jesus (his power and eternity can be seen by anyone who looks to the heavens, after all), and most religions contain some grain of truth about God, but Christianity makes an exclusive claim: unless we know Jesus then we don't really know God.

Christians, Jews and Muslims all believe contradictory things about God that simply cannot be reconciled. This is quite different to the differences in doctrine between groups of Christians, which are relatively unimportant.

When anyone says "Christians, Muslim and Jews all worship the same God" we really need to ask, "What do you mean by that, and what are you implying?" Usually it's something along the lines of all paths lead to truth, or the pluralistic notion that we all believe more or less the same things.

Peregrinus

ChrisJ84 wrote: »

. . . When anyone says "Christians, Muslim and Jews all worship the same God" we really need to ask, "What do you mean by that, and what are you implying?" Usually it's something along the lines of all paths lead to truth, or the pluralistic notion that we all believe more or less the same things.

That's nonsense, Chris. People who say that Christians, Jews and Muslims worship the same God justify this by pointing to (a) the common concept of God that is shared by all three religions, both as a theoligical construct and as an actor in human history, and (b) the undoubted historical fact that Christians and Muslims inherited their concept of God from Judaism.

Let me ask you this. If one Christian's understanding of God includes this characteristic: "is not the same God as Jews and Muslims worship", and another Christian's concept of God includes this characteristic "is the same God as Jews and Muslims worship", given that they have directly contradictory undstandings of God, one of which must be objectively wrong, are those two Christians worshipping the same God?

ChrisJ84

Peregrinus wrote: »

That's nonsense, Chris. People who say that Christians, Jews and Muslims worship the same God justify this by pointing to (a) the common concept of God that is shared by all three religions, both as a theoligical construct and as an actor in human history, and (b) the undoubted historical fact that Christians and Muslims inherited their concept of God from Judaism.

Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not implying that is what you were saying. But there are profound differences between what Christians, Jews and Muslims believe about God, what he is like, and the implications of that for us as human beings and how we relate to him. The idea of God as trinity and as revealed in Jesus Christ are uniquely Christian concepts that are offensive to both Jews and Muslims. They can't simply be minimised, flattened out or thought of as irrelevant.

That means that the Christian theological construct of God and how we see him as acting in human history, to take your (a), is profoundly different. On (b), it's truer to see Christianity as a fulfilment of what was revealed in the Old Testament which expands and completes our understanding of many things, including what God is like. Again, this looks very different to how Jews or Muslims would answer these questions.

Perhaps a more helpful way of phrasing it is to say that Christians, Jews and Muslims believe some similar things about God; that he is eternal, all powerful etc., and that they draw on some of the same traditions and sources. That's fine is so far as it goes, but Christianity is clear and unambiguous that the only way to really know God, to be known by him, and to be in relationship with him, is through faith in Jesus Christ.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Let me ask you this. If one Christian's understanding of God includes this characteristic: "is not the same God as Jews and Muslims worship", and another Christian's concept of God includes this characteristic "is the same God as Jews and Muslims worship", given that they have directly contradictory undstandings of God, one of which must be objectively wrong, are those two Christians worshipping the same God?

Christians can believe things about God that are incorrect, the same as anyone else. I'm quite sure I do. And I want to leave as much room as possible for grace, for differences of opinion, for dialogue, and for different expressions of faith. But what is decisive is faith in Jesus Christ.

This is one of the reason that creeds and confessions are so valuable. If someone can sincerely subscribe to (for example) the Apostles Creed then we are certainly worshipping the same God, whatever else we may disagree on. If they can't, then unfortunately we are not.

Effects

ChrisJ84 wrote: »

If someone can sincerely subscribe to (for example) the Apostles Creed then we are certainly worshipping the same God, whatever else we may disagree on. If they can't, then unfortunately we are not.

But by your own definition, are you saying there is more than one God?

Or just that your God must be the only one true god because you happen to believe so? Surely just because you believe something doesn't make it correct or true.

Prestonites

Effects wrote: »

ChrisJ84 wrote: »

If someone can sincerely subscribe to (for example) the Apostles Creed then we are certainly worshipping the same God, whatever else we may disagree on. If they can't, then unfortunately we are not.

But by your own definition, are you saying there is more than one God?

Or just that your God must be the only one true god because you happen to believe so? Surely just because you believe something doesn't make it correct or true.

If you read your word you will see it discussed that all religions worship the one God. They consider the same almighty and omnipresent God, they may have different perceptions or views on Jesus I.E Islam- Holy trinity

But to me as a Christian, I see the same Christ that Catholics see or muslims see. Our forms of worship may be different but end game is the same.

ChrisJ84

Effects wrote: »

But by your own definition, are you saying there is more than one God?

Or just that your God must be the only one true god because you happen to believe so? Surely just because you believe something doesn't make it correct or true.

Of course not, Christians, Jews and Muslims all believe that there is one God. However, our ideas of who that God is / what he is like are so different that they cannot be reconciled.

I believe that God has uniquely revealed himself in Jesus Christ, and that Jesus is the only way for us to relate to God, truly know God, or be known by him. That is either true or it isn't, the fact that I believe in it is neither here nor there.

Prestonites wrote: »

If you read your word you will see it discussed that all religions worship the one God. They consider the same almighty and omnipresent God, they may have different perceptions or views on Jesus I.E Islam- Holy trinity

But to me as a Christian, I see the same Christ that Catholics see or muslims see. Our forms of worship may be different but end game is the same.

Not quite. All religions are looking for or striving after God, but it is only through faith in Jesus that we find him. It really does matter what we believe about Jesus, and we simply cannot get away from the specific and exclusive claims that the bible makes. The bible claims very clearly that faith in Jesus Christ as saviour and lord is the only way to God and that there is no other way to him.

decky1

did Jesus not like pigs? not all the demons were destroyed one of them escaped and is living in my wife.

Prestonites

ChrisJ84 wrote: »

Effects wrote: »

But by your own definition, are you saying there is more than one God?

Or just that your God must be the only one true god because you happen to believe so? Surely just because you believe something doesn't make it correct or true.

Of course not, Christians, Jews and Muslims all believe that there is one God. Our ideas of who that God is / what he is like are so different that they cannot be reconciled.

I believe that God has uniquely revealed himself in Jesus Christ, and that Jesus is the only way for us to relate to God, truly know God, or be known by him. That is either true or it isn't, the fact that believe in it is neither here nor there.

Prestonites wrote: »

If you read your word you will see it discussed that all religions worship the one God. They consider the same almighty and omnipresent God, they may have different perceptions or views on Jesus I.E Islam- Holy trinity

But to me as a Christian, I see the same Christ that Catholics see or muslims see. Our forms of worship may be different but end game is the same.

Not quite. All religions are looking for or striving after God, but it is only through faith in Jesus that we find him. It really does matter what we believe about Jesus, and we simply cannot get away from the specific and exclusive claims that the bible makes. The bible claims very clearly that faith in Jesus Christ as saviour and lord is the only way to God and that there is no other way to him.

I am saying religions have perceptions of Jesus some as prophet, some as part of the trinity, some as the son of God solely.

Effects

ChrisJ84 wrote: »

Of course not, Christians, Jews and Muslims all believe that there is one God. However, our ideas of who that God is / what he is like are so different that they cannot be reconciled.

Do they need to be reconciled? God will be the same at the end of the day, when you die. It's arrogant to presume your God is the only correct one, based mainly on where you were born.

I believe that God has uniquely revealed himself in Jesus Christ, and that Jesus is the only way for us to relate to God, truly know God, or be known by him. That is either true or it isn't, the fact that I believe in it is neither here nor there.

That's fine, if that's what you choose to believe. But Jesus can't be the only way to relate to God. It's a very ignorant way to look at faith.

santana75

Effects wrote: »

That's fine, if that's what you choose to believe. But Jesus can't be the only way to relate to God. It's a very ignorant way to look at faith.

John 14:6

Jesus himself said........
"I am the way and the truth, and the life, no one can come to the father except through me"

These are the direct words of God, Theyre indisputable. Now if you are choosing not to believe in what Jesus is saying, thats your choice, God gave us all free will. But theres no denying that Jesus directly and unambiguously informed the world that the only way to come to God was through him.

Effects

santana75 wrote: »

John 14:6

Jesus himself said........
"I am the way and the truth, and the life, no one can come to the father except through me"

These are the direct words of God, Theyre indisputable. Now if you are choosing not to believe in what Jesus is saying, thats your choice, God gave us all free will. But theres no denying that Jesus directly and unambiguously informed the world that the only way to come to God was through him.

They aren't direct words from God though, are they? They are written down by someone else. They weren't even written down in English. Of course they can be disputed.

And do you really think that God will forsake the majority of the people in the world, purely because they don't worship Christ?

ScottCapper

Peregrinus wrote: »

World religions is the subforum which hosts threads on Islam.

Looks dead to me, surely Islam deserves its own forum instead of sub?

Effects

ScottCapper wrote: »

Looks dead to me, surely Islam deserves its own forum instead of sub?

Nah, there's not enough interest.

santana75

Effects wrote: »

They aren't direct words from God though, are they? They are written down by someone else. They weren't even written down in English. Of course they can be disputed.

And do you really think that God will forsake the majority of the people in the world, purely because they don't worship Christ?

No it cant. The word of God is eternal and indisputable. If you want to waste your time disputing the word of God then this again is your choice. But instead of engaging in debates about the scriptures, why not actually read them for yourself. Read them, meditate on them, then read them again.

Effects

santana75 wrote: »

No it cant. The word of God is eternal and indisputable.

You see that's where you are wrong. You can dispute anything.
And you let yourself down by being so doggedly closed minded.

theological

Peregrinus wrote: »

It's not the words of scripture that I call extreme, but the interpretation you place on them.

We need to play on the same pitch. I don't particularly mind that you regard my position as being extreme. I would argue that it doesn't significantly differ from the orthodox Christian gospel espoused by Jesus Himself and held throughout the ages by faithful Christians.

If you think my position deviates from that let's open the Scriptures and let's see why that is the case. Simply asserting this however doesn't progress the discussion very much.

Peregrinus wrote: »

The logic of your position is that Jews who know God in exactly the same way that their forefathers did, who believe exactly what their forefathers believed, who worship in exactly the same way as their forefathers worshipped, and who are faithful to the covenant that their forefathers made with that God, are nevertheless worshipping a different and false God.

The logic of my position is that the Jewish people post-Christ have rejected God as He has revealed Himself in history. That marks them as different from the patriarchs.

In the same way Islam deviates from what God has revealed about Himself in respect to the centrality of God's Son and His saving death for us.

Neither of which are insignificant matters from a Scriptural standpoint. In so far as both have deviated significantly from what God has revealed about Himself and His identity they cannot be said to be worshipping the same God.

Peregrinus wrote: »

Indeed, you also imply that, in so far as Christians have different understandings of the way God has revealed himself in Christ, all but one of them - and quite possibly all of them - must also be worshipping different, false Gods.

There are primary and secondary matters of disagreement. Primary matters are where Scripture has been clear, secondary and even tertiary matters are a matter of opinion. For example the virgin birth, the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the divinity of Jesus, the necessity of His role in salvation, the Trinity, the Lordship of Christ, The Holy Spirit and His work in believers are all primary issues.

All orthodox Christian confessions hold these things together.

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think your error is here:

The identity of the God we worship depends on what He has revealed to us about Himself. That isn't a minor detail.

Funnily enough, I think those lines are some of the most essential things I needed to stress in my post. I think that the Son of God is an essential matter of belief and is an essential characteristic of God as He has revealed Himself.

Peregrinus wrote: »

In mainstream Christian (and Muslim, and Jewish) thinking, God is unchanging. His identity is what it is. It doesn't "depend" on anything (how can any aspect of God be dependent?) and it certainly doesn't depend on anything which varies over the course of human history, like revelation. God's identity is wholly unaffected by the progress of revelation.

I'm not saying that God is chained. What I am saying is that Scripture is the record of how God has revealed Himself to us. As He has spoken in His Word, we learn of what He is like.

I don't agree that God's identity is "wholly unaffected" by what He has said in the same way as I don't think your position on this subject is "wholly unaffected" by what you have posted. What you have posted conveys your understanding, what God has spoken and what God has revealed to His people in His Word conveys what He is like and who He is to us. That's why we have the Scriptures to begin with.

Peregrinus wrote: »

What is affected by revelation is our understanding of God. But of course our understanding of God is also affected by our response to revelation (and by our limited capacity to understand the transcendant). It's clear at multiple points in the gospels that the disciples struggled with what what was revealed to them in Jesus Christ, and frequently failed to grasp it. But at no point is there any suggestion, either from Jesus himself or in anything any of the evangelists wrote, that this meant the disciples were worshipping a false god. And the same is true of the church as a beleving community; they spent centuries wrestling with the revelation of Jesus Christ, slowly coming to terms with it. Indeed, we're still at it.

I believe that words have significance and meaning in and of themselves in an objective way. I don't believe that all of God's words are subjective to us.

As for the disciples increasing in understanding I would happily admit that the disciples came to faith through the course of their time with Jesus. That however doesn't change who God is. God's identity is "wholly unaffected" by our understanding.

Peregrinus wrote: »

None of this changes the identity or reality of God; how could it? And everyone who worships the God who reveals himself in this way is worshipping the same God, regardless of the historical point which revelation has reached or of the completeness or correctness of their understanding of that revelation.

Here's the crux of the issue. Jews post-Christ, and Muslims do not worship the God who has revealed Himself to us in this way in Christ. That's precisely why I'm saying I don't believe that Jewish people who reject Jesus as the Christ, and Muslims who deny what He has said about Himself worship the same God as I do.

The Son of God is an essential part of who God is in His triune nature. It isn't a small or an insignificant matter, and I think the Scriptures are pretty clear on that.

santana75

Effects wrote: »

You see that's where you are wrong. You can dispute anything.
And you let yourself down by being so doggedly closed minded.

I would argue that it is you who is being closed minded. I mentioned in my previous point about reading the scriptures and being informed about the word of God and I get the impression from your own posts that you are not actually actively reading the bible and studying the word of God. If Im wrong about this and you are regularly studying and mediating on the bible, then I apologise. But if you're not then your commenting on and trying to dispute something you have no direct experience of, which is pretty closed minded. The bible is a living breathing work, its alive and when you read it(with an open heart and mind) it becomes alive in you. Paul said in 1 Corinthians 2:14:

"But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised"

and in Ezekiel 12:2

"Son of man, you live in the midst of the rebellious house, who have eyes to see but do not see, ears to hear but do not hear; for they are a rebellious house"

You can harden your own heart and mind and waste your time with arguments or you can read the scriptures and uncover the message thats been hidden in plain sight for thousands of years, its up to you.