Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
October 01, 2014, 11:30:27 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Christianity that is being preached is not monotheistic at all it is pantheistic  (Read 1693 times)
a_ahmed
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5784


Team Nasser


« on: November 02, 2012, 02:01:36 PM »

Let us for a moment accept the claims that it is monotheistic with 'three persons' (really polytheistic), if we observe the reality it is in fact pantheism that is being preached.

God being in everyone, in a human being, even as some locals have allured God can even become a video game character, satan, a tree that can be chopped up and burned.

Doesn't sound like monotheism at all.

http://www.pantheism.net/paul/history/gospel.htm

An interesting read about Paul's introduction of pantheism and polytheism to the message of Jesus:

Quote
Most versions of Christianity are panentheistic. They believe in a God who is present and active in this world, a God who can dwell in each person if they accept the grace of the Holy Spirit. Yet he is also a God who transcends the world, who passes far beyond the material universe and far beyond our comprehension.
It is very doubtful whether Jesus himself had any pantheistic leanings. In all probability he accepted the prevalent Jewish millenarianism of his day. God lived in heaven apart from the world, though he could act in the world whenever he chose. One day He would destroy the present earth and replace it with a transformed earth in which the Jewish nation would be resurrected and restored.

Christian pantheism derives from two gospel roots.

The first is St Paul.

Paul's famous statement to the Athenians:

For in him we live, and move, and have our being

is strongly pantheistic, though it appears to be not a statement of his own, but a quotation from a Greek poet, Aratus, probably influenced by the Stoic Cleanthes, who was a pantheist. In his own words Paul implies something similar when he says of Christ-God: "For by him all things were created … He is before all things and in him all things hold together. [Colossians 1.16-17]

Paul's position might be called selective panentheism. God is active in the world, sustains the world, and in the case of those who follow Christ he enters into their mind and body and in some sense becomes one with them. Paul uses the expression "in Christ" no less than 165 times in his letters (if we include "in the Lord" and "in him.") Sometimes "in Christ" refers to people who belong to the Christian community of believers, or who died as Christians. Sometimes it refers to the afterlife in which they will be with Christ, or surrounded by Christ. But almost always it means that Christ is in some way inside Paul or the believer; or they are inside Christ; or both. At times Paul implies that there is almost a bodily incorporation of Christians into Christ.

The second root of Christian pantheism lies in the idea of the Holy Spirit. In Acts (ii.1-3), this fills the apostles and gives them the power to speak in tongues. The Gospel of John and the Epistle of John both extend the idea of the Holy Spirit, so that it will fill all Christian believers and guide them. Later theology identified the Holy Spirit as an integral part of the Trinity, and therefore part of God. If the Holy Spirit entered each believer, this meant that God entered. Like Paul's position this too was a form of selective panentheism.

In these cases we are not talking about an expansive, world-affirming kind of pantheism - quite the opposite. Both Paul and the Johannine material regard this earth and the physical body as inferior dross. When Paul speaks of the body as God's temple, he does not mean that the body should be worshipped and indulged - but rather that its "base" instincts and desires like sex and gluttony should be suppressed so as not to defile the temple.

Paul explicitly places the flesh in direct conflict with the spirit. He seeks to mortify the flesh - perhaps out of guilt for the physical suffering he caused while persecuting the Christians. Indeed it may be Paul's desire to mortify his own flesh that explains his attraction to the crucified Jesus.
Report to moderator   Logged
Thick Nick
Competitors
Getbig IV
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 2207


"Some want to look good, others want to do good."


« Reply #1 on: November 03, 2012, 10:21:23 AM »

Let us for a moment accept the claims that it is monotheistic with 'three persons' (really polytheistic), if we observe the reality it is in fact pantheism that is being preached.

God being in everyone, in a human being, even as some locals have allured God can even become a video game character, satan, a tree that can be chopped up and burned.

Doesn't sound like monotheism at all.

http://www.pantheism.net/paul/history/gospel.htm

An interesting read about Paul's introduction of pantheism and polytheism to the message of Jesus:


Seriously... Who gives a shit? Really why do you care what Christians believe? Your right and they are wrong... right? Let it THE FUCK go. You sound like you are trying to convince yourself not anyone else. One more time... WHO FUCKING CARES WHAT ANYONE ELSE BELIEVES. Leave people to thier beliefs you Pedo following sympathizer.
Report to moderator   Logged

$
a_ahmed
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5784


Team Nasser


« Reply #2 on: November 03, 2012, 12:29:59 PM »

The truth stands clear from error.

What is being preached is not monotheism nor the message of Jesus.

If you don't care maybe you should take your angry personality out of this section.
Report to moderator   Logged
a_ahmed
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5784


Team Nasser


« Reply #3 on: November 03, 2012, 02:32:18 PM »

#Invalid YouTube Link#
Report to moderator   Logged
Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15081


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 04, 2012, 02:39:15 PM »

Seriously... Who gives a shit? Really why do you care what Christians believe? Your right and they are wrong... right? Let it THE FUCK go. You sound like you are trying to convince yourself not anyone else. One more time... WHO FUCKING CARES WHAT ANYONE ELSE BELIEVES. Leave people to thier beliefs you Pedo following sympathizer.

It's vastly important to Islam because Islamic theology cannot stand on its own.  It's backwards in the sense that it must....MUST....deny Christianity and all of its tenets at all costs.  If the divinity of Christ, Christ resurrection and the trinity are all affirmed then Islam crumbles.  That's why it's so vital for Islam to attack Christianity.  It's a one way attack because Christianity does and did exist on it's own merits 500-600 years before Islam existed.  Notice within this single religious board that the Christians expend no time attacking Islam.  We may choose to defend against Islamic attacks, but there isn't any initiation.

And the whole "pantheism" bit gets all of this  Roll Eyes from me and it doesn't deserve even that much attention.
Report to moderator   Logged

a_ahmed
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5784


Team Nasser


« Reply #5 on: November 04, 2012, 02:50:26 PM »

Well I am just exposing what you are preaching ontimehard is one level above you in preaching pantheism.

You claimed in another tread that you are totally monotheistic when clearly this is not the case.

The establishment of trinitarianism and "Jesus is God" was fought over and not agreed upon for quite some time so to say 500-600 years is being dishonest. The early non trinitarian christians were killed off.

Islam doesn't crumble, but the church and pauline christianity crumbles when faced with the facts.

The church combined paganism of the roman empire with the teachings of paul.

The early christians were not trinitarianists.

You yourself said God dwells in you, that is pantheism. God in everything, in his creation, etc...

These are just the facts. People should be made aware of what you are preaching for. It is not Jesus' teachings but Paul's teachings.

Besides if you claim Islam 'crumbles' then so would Judaism, is that your idea?

Judaism is monotheistic and so was Jesus, a Jew, who throughout the bible was also called a rabbi. Jesus never preached pantheism or polytheism.
Report to moderator   Logged
Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15081


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 05, 2012, 02:55:52 PM »

Well I am just exposing what you are preaching ontimehard is one level above you in preaching pantheism.

You claimed in another tread that you are totally monotheistic when clearly this is not the case.

The establishment of trinitarianism and "Jesus is God" was fought over and not agreed upon for quite some time so to say 500-600 years is being dishonest. The early non trinitarian christians were killed off.

Islam doesn't crumble, but the church and pauline christianity crumbles when faced with the facts.

The church combined paganism of the roman empire with the teachings of paul.

The early christians were not trinitarianists.

You yourself said God dwells in you, that is pantheism. God in everything, in his creation, etc...

These are just the facts. People should be made aware of what you are preaching for. It is not Jesus' teachings but Paul's teachings.

Besides if you claim Islam 'crumbles' then so would Judaism, is that your idea?

Judaism is monotheistic and so was Jesus, a Jew, who throughout the bible was also called a rabbi. Jesus never preached pantheism or polytheism.

Which pagan religion did Paul and the Roman church blend into Christianity?  Was is that of Osiris, Mithras, Dionysis, Adonis, Attis or Marduk?  The prominent mystery religion in Rome around that period was that of Mithra...is that it?  Primary Mithraic influences in Rome occurred in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th centuries (AD).  That said, the canon of Christianity (actually, the entire biblical canon) was already in place at that point. Or was it Zeus, Zoroaster, Horus?  There were many pagan religions so you'll need to be more specific.  FYI ~ all of the mediterrenean/mystery/pagan religions/religious figures I just noted that were ever once "tied to Christianity thereby corrupting it" have long since been debunked by scholarship.

And again, Christianity is about trinitarian monotheism....one God....one divine nature....three persons.....three distinct purposes.....all supported by scripture.  I know Islam is seriously troubled by the the validity of these supported tenets, but that's just not MOS' fault and calling me a "pantheistic, pagan supporter that twists scripture to my own end" doesn't change the validity of the scripture....that's just meaningless name calling.  
Report to moderator   Logged

a_ahmed
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5784


Team Nasser


« Reply #7 on: November 05, 2012, 05:24:11 PM »

Based on your quotations of verses and interpretations you are propagating that either God is bipolar or that you have to be bipolar as it goes against common sense and rationally acceptable logic.

Absolute monotheism would mean God is one, unchanging, eternal and that there is nothing in the heavens or earth or beneath that can resemble God (as is in the commandments in the verses of OT).

Pantheism on the other hand is the idea that God can dwell in animate and inanimate things. As was demonstrated by certain writings of Paul, what you and onetimehard have said (his sayings that God can even become satan, can be a tree that can be chopped up and burnt, become a human or 'anything').

Polytheism is that there is more than one God. Now you dwell a fine line between that, you claim that God is 'three persons'. You have concluded that based on Pauline teachings. Apocrypha books lack this and teach of a Jesus as a servant of God but these are 'unofficial' and therefore unacceptable, but since the NT is mostly Paul's letters and writings you base your teachings on this.

Remember Jesus' disciplines didn't accept Paul, they rejected him and doubted his intentions as he was a pharisees Jew and a servant of the Romans, persecuting Jesus' followers.

Jesus' followers held the law, while Paul like the Romans wanted to rid themselves of Jews and the law.

As I mentioned in the first paragraph, your interpretations of verses basically make God out as bipolar or you have to be bipolar to accept these claims.

Such as:

-'god' praying to God; as in one example three times with the companions falling asleep the third.
-'god' sitting at the right hand of God.
-'god' not knowing but God only knows the time of the hour
-'god' crying out to God for help
-'god' saying that he cannot do anything but without God
-not 'god' 's will but God's will be done?

Etc...

There doesn't need to be a specific pagan belief to be identified although Mithraic paganism was accepted between the 1st and 4th century, not 'later' it was a 'rival' to the christian faith. And as we know much of christianity blended with paganism.

Jesus was not born on december 25th and christmas has nothing to do with Jesus. Easter has nothing to do with Jesus. Although something quite later, but it should be acknowledged.

Nor the traditions revolving around christmas with the tree, shoe, door decorations, star, etc... all pagan things. Although again later pagan additions, none the less shows the nature how christianity has moulded through paganism.

The faith of the Jews was not accepted by Romans, they wanted to destroy the Jews and their law. Hence it is quite convinient for Paul to try to lead the early followers including disciples of Jesus to abandon the law. An almost early conspiracy to do away with the holders of the law, the jews and their law and replace it with something acceptable to the roman empire.

Why do you think the Pope is called the 'holy father'?
Report to moderator   Logged
a_ahmed
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5784


Team Nasser


« Reply #8 on: November 05, 2012, 05:55:35 PM »

An interesting read from the Jewish encyclopaedia:

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13912-son-of-god#3111

Quote
The Pious as Sons of God.
The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha contain a few passages in which the title "son of God" is given to the Messiah (see Enoch, cv. 2; IV Esdras vii. 28-29; xiii. 32, 37, 52; xiv. 9); but the title belongs also to any one whose piety has placed him in a filial relation to God (see Wisdom ii. 13, 16, 18; v. 5, where "the sons of God" are identical with "the saints"; comp. Ecclus. [Sirach] iv. 10). It is through such personal relations that the individual becomes conscious of God's fatherhood, and gradually in Hellenistic and rabbinical literature "sonship to God" was ascribed first to every Israelite and then to every member of the human race (Abot iii. 15, v. 20; Ber. v. 1; see Abba). The God-childship of man has been especially accentuated in modern Jewish theology, in sharp contradistinction to the Christian God-sonship of Jesus. The application of the term "son of God" to the Messiah rests chiefly on Ps. ii. 7, and the other Messianic passages quoted above.

The phrase "the only begotten son" (John iii. 16) is merely another rendering for "the beloved son." The Septuagint translates  ("thine only son") of Gen. xxii. 2 by "thy beloved son." But in this translation there is apparent a special use of the root , of frequent occurrence in rabbinical literature, as a synonym of  ("choose," "elect"; see Bacher, "Die Aelteste Terminologie der Jüdischen Schriftauslegung," s.v.); the "only begotten" thus reverts to the attribute of the "servant" who is the "chosen" one.

It has been noted that the Gospel of John and the First Epistle of John have given the term a meta-physical and dogmatic significance. Undoubtedly the Alexandrian Logos concept has had a formative and dominant influence on the presentation of the doctrine of Jesus' sonship in the Johannean writings. The Logos in Philo is designated as the "son of God"; the Logos is the first-born; God is the father of the Logos ("De Agricultura Noe," § 12 [ed. Mangey, i. 308]; "De Profugis," § 20 [ed. Mangey, i. 562]). In all probability these terms, while implying the distinct personality of the Logos, carry only a figurative meaning. The Torah also is said to be God's "daughter" (Lev. R. xx.). At all events, the data of the Synoptic Gospels show that Jesus never styled himself the son of God in a sense other than that in which the righteous might call themselves "sons" or "children" of God.

The parable of the faithless husbandmen and the vineyard (Mark xii. 1 et seq.) certainly does not bear out the assumption that Jesus described himself as the "son of God" in a specific theological sense. The parable recalls the numerous "son" stories in the Midrash, in which "son" is employed just as it is here, and generally in similar contrast to servants. If these considerations create a strong presumption in favor of the view that the original gospel did not contain the title, the other Synoptics do not veil the fact that all men are destined to be God's children (Matt. v. 45; Luke vi. 35). The term is applied in Matt. v. 9 to the peacemakers. God is referred to as the "Father" of the disciples in Matt. x. 29, xxiii. 9, and Luke xii. 32. Several parables illustrate this thought (Luke xv. 11 et seq. and Matt. xxi. 28 et seq.). Much has been made of the distinction said to appear in the pronouns connected with "Father," "our" and "your" appearing when the disciples are addressed, while "my" is exclusively reserved to express the relation with Jesus, and then, too, without the further qualification "who art [or "is"] in heaven" (see Dalman, "Worte Jesu," pp. 157, 230). But in the Aramaic this distinction is certainly not pronounced enough to warrant the conclusion that a different degree or kind of sonship is conveyed by the singular pronoun from what would be expressed by the plural. In the Aramaic the pronoun would not appear at all, "Abba" indiscriminately serving for the apostrophe both in the prayer of a single individual and in the prayer of several.

The title occurs with a distinct theological significance in Rev. ii. 18 and xxii. 13, as it does in the Pauline documents (Rom. i. 3, 4; viii. 3, 4, 32 [Jesus is God's ἴδιος, i.e., own son]; and in Heb. i. 2, 3, 6; v. 5, Cool. These writings indicate that the rise of the dogma was subsequent to the decades marked by the ministry of Jesus and his immediate disciples. See Fall of Angels; God, Children of.

Pretty sure bigbobs mentioned this before about servants of God.

Since the romans had no problem with gods and gods having children, it is understandable how something figurative would be turned literal to appeal to the pagan romans.
Report to moderator   Logged
Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15081


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #9 on: November 06, 2012, 08:15:15 AM »

Based on your quotations of verses and interpretations you are propagating that either God is bipolar or that you have to be bipolar as it goes against common sense and rationally acceptable logic.

Absolute monotheism would mean God is one, unchanging, eternal and that there is nothing in the heavens or earth or beneath that can resemble God (as is in the commandments in the verses of OT).

Pantheism on the other hand is the idea that God can dwell in animate and inanimate things. As was demonstrated by certain writings of Paul, what you and onetimehard have said (his sayings that God can even become satan, can be a tree that can be chopped up and burnt, become a human or 'anything').

Polytheism is that there is more than one God. Now you dwell a fine line between that, you claim that God is 'three persons'. You have concluded that based on Pauline teachings. Apocrypha books lack this and teach of a Jesus as a servant of God but these are 'unofficial' and therefore unacceptable, but since the NT is mostly Paul's letters and writings you base your teachings on this.

Remember Jesus' disciplines didn't accept Paul, they rejected him and doubted his intentions as he was a pharisees Jew and a servant of the Romans, persecuting Jesus' followers.

Jesus' followers held the law, while Paul like the Romans wanted to rid themselves of Jews and the law.

As I mentioned in the first paragraph, your interpretations of verses basically make God out as bipolar or you have to be bipolar to accept these claims.

Such as:

-'god' praying to God; as in one example three times with the companions falling asleep the third.
-'god' sitting at the right hand of God.
-'god' not knowing but God only knows the time of the hour
-'god' crying out to God for help
-'god' saying that he cannot do anything but without God
-not 'god' 's will but God's will be done?

Etc...

There doesn't need to be a specific pagan belief to be identified although Mithraic paganism was accepted between the 1st and 4th century, not 'later' it was a 'rival' to the christian faith. And as we know much of christianity blended with paganism.

Jesus was not born on december 25th and christmas has nothing to do with Jesus. Easter has nothing to do with Jesus. Although something quite later, but it should be acknowledged.

Nor the traditions revolving around christmas with the tree, shoe, door decorations, star, etc... all pagan things. Although again later pagan additions, none the less shows the nature how christianity has moulded through paganism.

The faith of the Jews was not accepted by Romans, they wanted to destroy the Jews and their law. Hence it is quite convinient for Paul to try to lead the early followers including disciples of Jesus to abandon the law. An almost early conspiracy to do away with the holders of the law, the jews and their law and replace it with something acceptable to the roman empire.

Why do you think the Pope is called the 'holy father'?

Didn't quote any verses and name calling is meaningless.

Christians are trinitarian monotheists serving one eternal, unchanging God.

Please post the pantheistic verses of Paul so we can review.

Paul's teachings came directly from God.

Jesus' disciplines or disciples?  If disciplines please explain.  If disciples, 2 Peter 3:15-16 --- 15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Please show the verses where Paul indicated wanting to get rid of the jews.  Paul taught his divine revelation from God that the disciples affirmed; although, please show verses were disciples do not affirm Paul.

All the verse quotes you mentioned were already addressed by me in other threads (repeatedly actually).  If you need me to repost I'll be happy to oblige.   God came as a man in Jesus Christ limiting himself and submitting to God the Father as an example of how we should live.  After his resurrection his returned to his full glory.

Please provide the verses from Paul outlining December 25th, Easter dates, Christmas trees and Christmas decorations.  Saul served Rome, Paul served Christ.  Yes, Saul/Paul was a Roman citizen and he affirmed that as well.  Rome was filled with Romans.






Report to moderator   Logged

bigbobs
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9620


Islam, Nasser and Corvettes.


« Reply #10 on: November 06, 2012, 11:05:52 AM »

It's vastly important to Islam because Islamic theology cannot stand on its own.  It's backwards in the sense that it must....MUST....deny Christianity and all of its tenets at all costs.  If the divinity of Christ, Christ resurrection and the trinity are all affirmed then Islam crumbles.  

When you say "Christianity and and all of its tenets" you are making the convenient assumption that the divinity of Christ, trinity, etc. are definite tenets of Christianity, but unfortunately for your argument this is simply not true.  Many Christians who do not believe in the divinity of Jesus.
Report to moderator   Logged
bigbobs
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9620


Islam, Nasser and Corvettes.


« Reply #11 on: November 06, 2012, 11:07:11 AM »


And again, Christianity is about trinitarian monotheism....one God....one divine nature....three persons

Apparently not Wink  http://americanunitarian.org/explanation.htm
Report to moderator   Logged
bigbobs
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9620


Islam, Nasser and Corvettes.


« Reply #12 on: November 06, 2012, 11:08:44 AM »

Christians are trinitarian monotheists

Again, simply untrue Smiley  http://americanunitarian.org/explanation.htm
Report to moderator   Logged
bigbobs
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9620


Islam, Nasser and Corvettes.


« Reply #13 on: November 06, 2012, 11:11:20 AM »

God came as a man in Jesus Christ limiting himself and submitting to God the Father as an example of how we should live.

You do realize that makes no sense unless one believes God is bipolar?
Report to moderator   Logged
Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15081


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #14 on: November 06, 2012, 11:16:02 AM »

Again, simply untrue Smiley  http://americanunitarian.org/explanation.htm


Just a small sect of nominal Christians that does not represent the vast majority of Christianity.....much like extremist sects of Muslims that don't represent the core of peace and brotherhood.   We've discussed this previously though.  In no way whatsoever have I misrepresented the core of Christianity that is represented in scripture that is based upon trinitarian monotheism.  You know it and I know it.....the existence of Unitarianism Christianity poses no problem for me at all.  They're free to belief however they choose, but they don't represent the essence of Christ...simple as that.
Report to moderator   Logged

bigbobs
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9620


Islam, Nasser and Corvettes.


« Reply #15 on: November 06, 2012, 11:22:06 AM »

Just a small sect of nominal Christians that does not represent the vast majority of Christianity.....much like extremist sects of Muslims that don't represent the core of peace and brotherhood.   We've discussed this previously though.  In no way whatsoever have I misrepresented the core of Christianity that is represented in scripture that is based upon trinitarian monotheism.  You know it and I know it.....the existence of Unitarianism Christianity poses no problem for me at all.  They're free to belief however they choose, but they don't represent the essence of Christ...simple as that.


First of all the group of Christians which don't believe in the divinity of Jesus are not as small as you think. Many don't even call themselves "unitarian" but when you ask "Do you believe Jesus is God" its not always a yes.  Everyone interprets it how they want due to the various contradictory verses in the Bible.

Secondly the group would also have been much larger had the trinitarians not systematically killed them off during the first several hundred of years after Jesus' death.

I've posted several times that the differences in Islamic sects are in no way similar to the different interpretations of Christiany. Our differences are in certain rulings but there is no confusion over something so fundamental as the monotheistic nature itself.
Report to moderator   Logged
Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15081


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #16 on: November 06, 2012, 12:17:42 PM »


First of all the group of Christians which don't believe in the divinity of Jesus are not as small as you think. Many don't even call themselves "unitarian" but when you ask "Do you believe Jesus is God" its not always a yes.  Everyone interprets it how they want due to the various contradictory verses in the Bible.

Secondly the group would also have been much larger had the trinitarians not systematically killed them off during the first several hundred of years after Jesus' death.

I've posted several times that the differences in Islamic sects are in no way similar to the different interpretations of Christiany. Our differences are in certain rulings but there is no confusion over something so fundamental as the monotheistic nature itself.

Many people refer to themselves as "Christians"......many are not.   Unitarian Christians, Buddhist Christians, Islamic Christians, Naturalistic Christians, etc....in short, not Christians.  Within the (trinitarian monotheistic) Christian church there are people that are undecided on topics of pre/post tribulation, stances on evolution, but at the core they believe in salvation through Christ, Christ's resurrection and the trinity....this is the essence of Christ.    


Agian, the vast majority of Muslims support peace and brotherhood and submission to Allah.   Then, some "Muslims" believe all Christians and Jews should be slaughtered on the spot....I'd say that's fundamentally different and nonrepresentative of the whole.  
Report to moderator   Logged

Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15081


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #17 on: November 06, 2012, 12:24:37 PM »

You do realize that makes no sense unless one believes God is bipolar?

I realize this "makes no sense" to Muslims that MUST deny Christ's divinity, Christ's resurrection and the trinity at all costs, but I also understand how nothing makes sense without the Holy Spirit.  That simply isn't your fault though.   I know that for Muslims raised their entire life under the theology of Islam understand the concept of shirk and the penalty for apostasy....I get why attacking Christianity is so essential to Islam....I really, really do and I'm sorry that's the reality.  Still, Christianity does not commit shirk because true Christians are trinitarian monotheists.   I know Islam does not believe in salvation so there's no need for a savior....it's about good works.  Again, completely contrary to Christianity and Islam must oppose Christians at every turn....Islam hinges on Christianity being torn down (in a theological sense that is).  

I posed this question to ahmed (but he didn't answer):  Is Allah unable to enter into his creation and take any form his chooses to do so?
Report to moderator   Logged

bigbobs
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9620


Islam, Nasser and Corvettes.


« Reply #18 on: November 06, 2012, 01:19:03 PM »

I realize this "makes no sense" to Muslims that MUST deny Christ's divinity, Christ's resurrection and the trinity at all costs, but I also understand how nothing makes sense without the Holy Spirit.  That simply isn't your fault though.   I know that for Muslims raised their entire life under the theology of Islam understand the concept of shirk and the penalty for apostasy....I get why attacking Christianity is so essential to Islam....I really, really do and I'm sorry that's the reality.  Still, Christianity does not commit shirk because true Christians are trinitarian monotheists.   I know Islam does not believe in salvation so there's no need for a savior....it's about good works.  Again, completely contrary to Christianity and Islam must oppose Christians at every turn....Islam hinges on Christianity being torn down (in a theological sense that is).  

I posed this question to ahmed (but he didn't answer):  Is Allah unable to enter into his creation and take any form his chooses to do so?

I'm tied up right now at a work conference so I will try to respond to the rest later, but have time to quickly answer the question you posed.  

And this is just my opinion and I'm not an Islamic scholar of course - I don't believe God has a physical form such that he enters into someplace or someone and while in doing so would have left another place.

If you mean whether God can decide to make himself appear to us in a form that is visible to our human eye, I'd say yes, but if He did the form woudl not have limitations - and Jesus did.

Comes back to ahmed's question of "Do you believe God can become Satan?"  If He does, then He is not God anymore.  Therefore, it will never make sense that Jesus a human is God at the same time.
Report to moderator   Logged
a_ahmed
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5784


Team Nasser


« Reply #19 on: November 06, 2012, 01:19:47 PM »

lol we don't have to deny anything, because it's not true to begin with.

It has nothing to do with Jewish teachings or Jesus' teachings but later teachings including that of Paul's we've been over this already Smiley

Without Paul and the roman church you have no trinity. As was already mentoined the early christians, true followers of Jesus were executed. Anything deemed heretic to the roman church was done away with.

You said Paul was commanded on God's authority as a prophet. We see him as a false prophet. Jesus warned of false prophets who would speak in his name and Paul certainly fits the criteria.

Trinitarianism was enforced by the sword.

Of course God does not enter his creation or becomes his creation. lol. THIS is a concept you can't grasp. That is why I made this thread, you are preaching PANTHEISM not monotheism.

The concept in monotheism is that God is without beginning or end, everlasting, eternal, never changing. He does not lose or get something extra of knowledge or otherwise.

God 'becoming' something else means God changes. Jesus certainly had a beginning and an end. God does not.

I found it funny when I thought about it. 'God' being in the womb of a woman for 9 months.

Adam had no mother or father, but our creator God and was formed from the earth.
Eve had no mother or father, but our creator God and was formed from man.

Jesus had no father but a mother, but God created him and he was born through a miracelous birth through a woman.
Report to moderator   Logged
Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15081


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 06, 2012, 03:37:58 PM »

lol we don't have to deny anything, because it's not true to begin with.

It has nothing to do with Jewish teachings or Jesus' teachings but later teachings including that of Paul's we've been over this already Smiley

Without Paul and the roman church you have no trinity. As was already mentoined the early christians, true followers of Jesus were executed. Anything deemed heretic to the roman church was done away with.

You said Paul was commanded on God's authority as a prophet. We see him as a false prophet. Jesus warned of false prophets who would speak in his name and Paul certainly fits the criteria.

Trinitarianism was enforced by the sword.

Of course God does not enter his creation or becomes his creation. lol. THIS is a concept you can't grasp. That is why I made this thread, you are preaching PANTHEISM not monotheism.

The concept in monotheism is that God is without beginning or end, everlasting, eternal, never changing. He does not lose or get something extra of knowledge or otherwise.

God 'becoming' something else means God changes. Jesus certainly had a beginning and an end. God does not.

I found it funny when I thought about it. 'God' being in the womb of a woman for 9 months.

Adam had no mother or father, but our creator God and was formed from the earth.
Eve had no mother or father, but our creator God and was formed from man.

Jesus had no father but a mother, but God created him and he was born through a miracelous birth through a woman.
So that's a no on the scripture references and a no response to my little question, correct?  If you need more time by all means take what you need.
Report to moderator   Logged

Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15081


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #21 on: November 06, 2012, 04:04:33 PM »

I'm tied up right now at a work conference so I will try to respond to the rest later, but have time to quickly answer the question you posed.  

And this is just my opinion and I'm not an Islamic scholar of course - I don't believe God has a physical form such that he enters into someplace or someone and while in doing so would have left another place.

If you mean whether God can decide to make himself appear to us in a form that is visible to our human eye, I'd say yes, but if He did the form woudl not have limitations - and Jesus did.

Comes back to ahmed's question of "Do you believe God can become Satan?"  If He does, then He is not God anymore.  Therefore, it will never make sense that Jesus a human is God at the same time.

Do I believe God can become Satan in the sense that he becomes the essence of Satan or are you asking if can God merely assume the apperance of Satan?  

At first blush I would say God is all-powerful and capable of anything.  Would he change his essence....capriciously alter his divine holy nature to the antithesis?  I would say he could if he chose to do so, but he certainly wouldn't as he's already made it clear he will not change his absolute holy nature as we know it.

Can God assume the form/appearance of Satan....make himself to look like Satan?  Again, same answer....he could but he wouldn't.  

God will not change from his all holy, all loving, all powerful, all knowing, all merciful state because he chooses not to change, not because he's unable to change.  God is without sin and as a man he was also without sin, but he purposefully chose to limit his form to that of a man on Earth via his Son essence while submitting to his Fatherly essence as an example for us to follow (while maintaining every bit of his Fatherly essence and his Holy Spirit essence) so that he may die in our place as the perfect atonement for our sin....because we have all fallen short, we are all sinners and our works are not sufficient.  The notion that our works are sufficient is an outright lie fabricated by the ruler of this Earth and he has convinced droves of its legitimacy.

I consider the ole "Can God create a stone too heavy for him to lift?"  The answer is yes...he already did.  Jesus Christ was God in the form of a man with normal, human, physical limits thta could not lift every stone on Earth (temporarily).  That said, God created a stone to heavy for him to lift.  

Like you I'm not a theologian so my words are not very well crafted....my apologies.
Report to moderator   Logged

a_ahmed
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5784


Team Nasser


« Reply #22 on: November 06, 2012, 04:35:33 PM »

"Can God create a stone too heavy for him to lift?"

lol see, that's a question atheists will ask you to laugh at you... and they do so mischievously taking advantage of your pretexts that are illogical even through philosophical debate in theology, especially while claiming monotheistic belief and reading the bible itself.

As a muslim on the other hand we answer it differently.

We say that God is not limited by the creation as he is not in the creation literally or the creation. He is the everlasting, eternal creator with no beginning or end, nothing resembles God.

In the Qur'an God says that he is closer to us than our own jugular vein (you know what it is), however that does not mean God is right now in us, it just means that God is all aware and hears our every thoughts knows our soul and heart, etc... Is aware of every bit of creation He has created, whether we know it/see it/hear it or don't.

God is not limited by what he created: weight is a limitation created by God, gender is something created by God, procreation is something created by God, death is something designed and destined for us all by God.

We would answer, it is an invalid question, because it puts God in the creation and limited by the creation. God is not the creation and nothing resembles God. He has no beginning or end. Is eternal and never changing, everlasting.

You are proposing God can be the creation and can change. Therefore by doing so you are comparing God to a human being or whatever in the creation and you fall trapped to the question by atheists regarding the rock he cannot himself lift. As you said yourself "ANYTHING". So you trap yourself.

It's no different than if you started arguing "Can God die" and you say "yes he can do anything" its foolishness and then you would go even further maybe and say Jesus died and was resurrected and mix it all up.
Report to moderator   Logged
Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15081


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 06, 2012, 04:39:25 PM »

"Can God create a stone too heavy for him to lift?"

lol see, that's a question atheists will ask you to laugh at you... and they do so mischievously taking advantage of your pretexts that are illogical even through philosophical debate in theology, especially while claiming monotheistic belief and reading the bible itself.

As a muslim on the other hand we answer it differently.

We say that God is not limited by the creation as he is not in the creation literally or the creation. He is the everlasting, eternal creator with no beginning or end, nothing resembles God.

In the Qur'an God says that he is closer to us than our own jugular vein (you know what it is), however that does not mean God is right now in us, it just means that God is all aware and hears our every thoughts knows our soul and heart, etc... Is aware of every bit of creation He has created, whether we know it/see it/hear it or don't.

God is not limited by what he created: weight is a limitation created by God, gender is something created by God, procreation is something created by God, death is something designed and destined for us all by God.

We would answer, it is an invalid question, because it puts God in the creation and limited by the creation. God is not the creation and nothing resembles God. He has no beginning or end. Is eternal and never changing, everlasting.

You are proposing God can be the creation and can change. Therefore by doing so you are comparing God to a human being or whatever in the creation and you fall trapped to the question by atheists regarding the rock he cannot himself lift. As you said yourself "ANYTHING". So you trap yourself.

Yes, Christian apologists answer the "stone too heavy to lift" question also with an invalid logic response as well, but that need not be the case.
Report to moderator   Logged

Agnostic007
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3813



« Reply #24 on: November 06, 2012, 04:39:40 PM »

Well I am just exposing what you are preaching ontimehard is one level above you in preaching pantheism.

You claimed in another tread that you are totally monotheistic when clearly this is not the case.

The establishment of trinitarianism and "Jesus is God" was fought over and not agreed upon for quite some time so to say 500-600 years is being dishonest. The early non trinitarian christians were killed off.

Islam doesn't crumble, but the church and pauline christianity crumbles when faced with the facts.

The church combined paganism of the roman empire with the teachings of paul.

The early christians were not trinitarianists.

You yourself said God dwells in you, that is pantheism. God in everything, in his creation, etc...

These are just the facts. People should be made aware of what you are preaching for. It is not Jesus' teachings but Paul's teachings.

Besides if you claim Islam 'crumbles' then so would Judaism, is that your idea?

Judaism is monotheistic and so was Jesus, a Jew, who throughout the bible was also called a rabbi. Jesus never preached pantheism or polytheism.

I think you really give Christians too much credit. The vast majority haven't even read the bible cover to cover, so I doubt they are going to give your concerns much thought. They go to church on Sunday, listen to the preacher tell them what the bible says and what it means, and they are good to go. Present christians excluded of course..
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!