Posted on 08/16/2019 7:35:04 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The Quran says that Christians and Muslims worship the same God (29:46), and so does the Catholic Church. The Irish Catholic newspaper recently considered this question and offered an argument from authority, which is the weakest of all arguments: Christians and Muslims worship the same God because the Catholic Churchs Second Vatican Council says so in the documents Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate. But a closer examination of the evidence shows this to be false.
Besides the obvious differences regarding the Trinity, the crucifixion, and the divinity of Christ, there are deeper differences that are often overlooked.
The issue of free will versus predestination has, of course, vexed Christians of various sects for centuries, as different biblical passages are given different weight in various traditions. Calvinism, of course, in its pure form is notorious for its doctrine of double predestination, the idea that God has destined people for hell as well as for salvation. But this position is largely unique to them in the Christian tradition, which generally holds that God desires all men and women to be saved, and gives them the means to attain this salvation. The idea that God would create men for hell is in total conflict with the proposition that God desires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4), and that he takes no pleasure in the death of anyone (Ezekiel 18:32).
The situation in Islam is, on first glance, even worse, with the Qurans testimony on this, as on other matters, appearing to be hopelessly contradictory. The Quran, says the Quran, is nothing but a reminder to all beings, for whoever of you who would go straight; but you will not do so unless Allah wills, the Lord of all Being (81:27-29). Those who would go straight follow Allahs straight path cannot do so unless Allah wills.
The Quran goes significantly further than that, into a more or less open determinism: If Allah had willed, he would have made you one nation; but he leads astray those whom he wills, and guides those whom he wills; and you will surely be questioned about the things you have done (16:93). Even though everything is in Allahs hands, even the decision of the individual to obey him or not for he leads astray those whom he wills, and guides to the truth whom he wills human beings will still be held accountable for the things they have done.
Allah even sends people to hell based not on their deeds, but solely upon his fiat: And if we had willed, We could have given every soul its guidance, but the word from me will come into effect: I will surely fill hell with jinn and people all together (32:13).
The Quran repeats this idea many times: Those who have rejected Allah do so because he made it possible for them to do nothing else. And indeed, given the fact that in the Islamic scheme of creation and salvation, human beings are the slaves of Allah, not his children, the rejection of free will is not altogether surprising. Allah tells Muhammad that some of them there are who listen to you, and we lay veils on their hearts so that they dont understand it, and in their ears heaviness; and if they see any sign whatever, they do not believe in it, so that when they come to you they dispute with you, the unbelievers saying, This is nothing but the fairy-tales of the ancient ones (6:25-6).
Elsewhere in the Quran Allah describes this veil as a seal and as a barrier, saying to his prophet: As for the unbelievers, it is all the same to them whether you have warned them or have not warned them, they do not believe. Allah has set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing, and on their eyes is a covering, and there awaits them a mighty chastisement (2:6-7). The medieval Islamic scholar Ibn Kathir (1301-1372), whose commentary on the Quran is still enormously influential among Muslims, says in his commentary on this Quranic passage: These Ayat [verses] indicate that whomever Allah has written to be miserable, they shall never find anyone to guide them to happiness, and whomever Allah directs to misguidance, he shall never find anyone to guide him.
At first glance, this may seem to be not far from Jesus words: This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. With them indeed is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah which says: `You shall indeed hear but never understand, and you shall indeed see but never perceive. For this peoples heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should perceive with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn for me to heal them (Matt. 13:13-15).
And indeed, Islamic tradition shares with Christian tradition the idea that repeated defiance of God can render ones soul insensitive to grace. That appears to be the case in many passages of the Quran, such as one recounting the reaction of hypocrites to a new revelation that Muhammad has delivered: And whenever a sura is sent down, they look one at another: Does anyone see you? Then they turn away. Allah has turned away their hearts, for they are a people who do not understand (9:127).
But in Islam there is more. Another Quran commentary explains Quran 36:9 as meaning that Allah has covered the insight of their hearts (so that they see not) the Truth and guidance. Ibn Kathir records that one early Muslim also ascribed unbelief to Allahs will: Allah placed this barrier between them and Islam and Iman [faith], so that they will never reach it.
Other Quran passages state this explicitly. We have created for hell, Allah says in a Quranic passage that directly echoes the statement of Jesus quoting Isaiah, many jinn and men: they have hearts, but do not understand with them; they have eyes, but do not perceive with them; they have ears, but they do not hear with them. They are like cattle; nay, rather they are further astray. Those they are the heedless (7:179).
Despite the superficial similarity of the eyes but see not and ears but hear not motif, there is an immense chasm between this and the statement of Jesus, which most exegetes throughout the ages have taken to mean that some people harden themselves so in unbelief that when they hear the truth of God, they do not recognize it as such. In the Quranic passage, by contrast, Allah says that he actually created some people (as well as the mysterious spirit beings known as jinn) for hell a doctrine that is hard to reconcile with the idea of a just and loving God.
In Islamic theological history, a party known as the Qadariyya tried to advance the concept of individual free will. The pioneering Islamic scholar Ignaz Goldziher explains that the Qadaryya were protesting against an unworthy conception of God, and yet they could not find a large body of supporters among Muslims. Their opponents battled them with the received interpretation of the sacred scriptures. And won. Ultimately, Muslim authorities declared the concept of human free will to be heretical. A twelfth-century Muslim jurist, Ibn Abi Yala, fulminated that the Qadariyya wrongly consider that they hold in their grasp the ability to do good and evil, avoid harm and obtain benefit, obey and disobey, and be guided or misguided. They claim that human beings retain full initiative, without any prior status within the will of Allah for their acts, nor even in His knowledge of them. Even worse, their doctrine is similar to that of Zoroastrians and Christians. It is the very root of heresy.
That means that Allah is ultimately responsible not just for the souls inclination toward good, but for its inclination toward evil as well. In other words, in sharp contrast to the Christian understanding that evil is the rejection of God, in Islam God is the source of evil. This is worlds apart from the proposition that God is light, and in Him there is no darkness at all (I John 1:5) for to place evil in the soul, Allah must have it to give, which would be utterly impossible and absurd in the Christian conception, since evil is the absence of God.
What could the Jews have possibly meant, if any Jews ever said it at all? It is possible that they meant that God, being good, would be consistent, and would operate the universe according to consistent and observable laws. This would not have been so much a limitation on what God could do, but upon what he would do. This proposition of divine consistency was all-important for the development of scientific inquiry. The rise of science, observes social scientist Rodney Stark, was not an extension of classical learning. It was the natural outgrowth of Christian doctrine: nature exists because it was created by God. In order to love and honor God, it is necessary to fully appreciate the wonders of his handiwork. Because God is perfect, that handiwork functions in accord with immutable principles. By the full use of our God-given powers of reason and observation, it ought to be possible to discover those principles. That process of discovery became the foundation of modern science. These were the crucial ideas, says Stark, that explain why science arose in Christian Europe and nowhere else.
Indeed, for an Islamic culture to have affirmed that Gods creation operates according to immutable principles would have been nothing short of blasphemy. Allahs hand is not chained by consistency or by anything else. Allah is absolutely free to do anything he wills to do, without any expectations or limitations deriving from logic, love, or anything else. This idea made sure that scientific exploration in the Islamic world would be stillborn.
So would philosophical investigation. The great Islamic theologian Al-Ghazali (1058-1111), although himself a philosopher, delivered what turned out to be the coup de grace to Islamic philosophy, at least as a vibrant mainstream force, in his monumental attack on the very idea of Islamic philosophy: Incoherence of the Philosophers. Muslim philosophers such as Avicenna and Averroes, according to al-Ghazali, were not intellectual trailblazers worthy of respect and careful consideration. In positing that there could be truth that was outside of or even contradicted what Allah had revealed in the Quran, they had shown themselves to be nothing more than heretics who should be put to death and their books burned.
And while Christians hold that God is unchanging, the Quran affirms Allahs changeability, even in what he reveals to mankind: We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent? (2:106).
These three points are hardly ever considered when this question comes up. But they show the affirmation of the Vatican II documents Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate to be wholly false.
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His new book is The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.
It seems to me that this issue can be boiled down to one major difference that proves the two are not worshiping the same god. All Orthodox Christians (whether Catholic or Protestant) worship a triune God with Jesus as the Second Person of that Godhead. Muslims dispute that to the point of executing as heretics those claim that triune God.
The God of the Bible is definitely not Allah, and Allah is definitely not the God of the Bible.
The God of the Bible is definitely not Allah, and Allah is definitely not the God of the Bible.
Christians worship God through Jesus. Jesus made it very clear the only way to his Father was through Him. Muslims worship a dead man lost in the desert and that is exactly what they will be when they die. Dead and gone.
We worship Jesus Christ who is God. (John 1:1)
If a group of people say they worship God and do not worship the Son, then they aren't worshipping God. The Bible calls these "antichrist".
22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. (1 John 2:22-23)
Jesus deniers do not have God.
uh......no.
Islam worships the God of Abraham as much as the Mormon’s do. Islam is a made-up religion. Mad Mo needed a way to control the people he conquered, so he created the cult and “scriptures”.
I would even say that Jews and Christians don’t worship the same God. I guess as a Christian I could say that Jewish people do worship “my” God - they just have it wrong. But I would guess they would believe I was worshiping a false God, much as Muslims do. Except that Jewish people don’t go hacking people’s heads off or blowing up buildings for worshiping a false God.
If you whittle Christianity down to its very crux, it is this:
God sent his only Son, Jesus Christ, to die on the cross for our sins. Those who believe and trust that Jesus died, defeated death, and rose from the dead, are saved.
Islam denies God had a son. In fact, the Koran specifically states Jesus did NOT die on the cross.
These two beliefs cannot be reconciled. To deny that Jesus died on the cross, and then rose from the dead, is to deny the very core of Christianity.
Nicely stated.
An atrocity is a wicked cruel act, which an omniscient omnipotent creator cannot be charged with, unless (that creator states that he is indeed evil), like Him, you are able to know what all the effects will be of even your smallest action or inaction, effects both in this life and for eternity. And make them all work out for the good of those who love God and thus the Good. And you have a superior proven transcendent moral standard by which to judge Him by.
Yet most of what you likely refer to as atrocities by God were done by Israel in the limited period of the Exodus and conquests. And rather than being the result of some dreams, in Scripture the nation of God was only commission to engage in extermination of established iniquitous nations after God had unmistakably made it manifest that He was real, and was commanding them.
And as for the imagination of (OT) Bad cop versus Good (NT) cop, I already explained to you .
If killing innocent people, ala the Flood and other acts, is not an atrocity, no matter who does it, I can’t help you.
As your premise is wrong so also is your conclusion. Why are you - like so many atheists - reading your own ideas into the Bible and then sitting in judgment upon God? If you are going to take issue with Divine judgments in the Bible, then go by the Bible.
Just what kind of people does the Bible say were executed by the Flood and conquests? Innocent morally cognizant souls, or,
And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. (Genesis 6:5-6)
But perhaps your argument is that innocent children were also slain. If so, then you must explain why it would be evil for the Giver of Life to take the life He gave, as if that would be a unfair and bad thing, especially in the light of eternity? Rather, it does not take a genius to see that this would actually be an act of mercy, saving the innocent from becoming like their fathers, and even taking them to Heaven.
Asking such souls now if they felt any injustice was wrong and what would they say? Only by assuming in your narrow finite scope that taking the life of such was wrong, or that again, you know what the effects would be of such, can you assert that what God did was evil.
What makes killing such wrong? Some abortionists argue that killing the innocent is justifiable since it is best for them and humanity and the universe, and if they could prove that then they would have a case. But they cannot, but God does know that and can make it work out for good. And even if you do not agree, then you must tell us why is must be wrong for omniscient and omnipotent giver of life to take life, as if He does not know what all the effects will be of even the smallest action/inaction of man, for time and for eternity, and make it work our for Good.
If you cannot accept then who can help you? Just what kind of God do you believe in, if any?
My comparison between Allah and Yahweh, while slightly tongue in cheek, is nevertheless true. Muslim murder for Allah is no different than Yahweh’s indiscriminate slaughter of the Flood. Killing innocents is killing innocents. Your justification of it is troubling. You have the last word.
It is indeed different in both warrant and motive, but it seems you could care care less why and how - as has been explained - in order for you to equate the two and justify your scornful agnosticism or atheism (which relates to another question you failed to answer). As if that was morally superior.
Killing innocents is killing innocents. Your justification of it is troubling. You have the last word.
Meaning that in order to rationally condemn God and justify yourself as morally superior, then as said, you must presume that you know what all the effects will be of such actions - and thus for all actions and inactions - in this life and for eternity, and make them all work out for good.
But you cannot, and not even interact with the refutation of your skeptic/atheistic mantra, and simply engage in more argument by assertion as you troll pro-God FR, repeatedly insulting the One believed in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.