Tweet
Thanks, Zymologist.
I guess the main issue here boils down to what it means to know or worship a god. Clearly there are differences in the Christian and Islamic conceptions of God, but there are also several similarities. Both sides believe in a supreme, omnipotent deity who created the universe and had prophets such as Abraham and Moses and Jesus, after all. Both sides believe that people ought to humbly submit to this deity's commands, and characterize this deity as merciful and compassionate. So is there a line between having incomplete/partially differing knowledge of a deity and not knowing the deity at all? I believe there is, so the question I have concerns where that line is drawn.
For instance, it's commonly objected that the deity worshipped by Muslims is substantially different to the point of having a different identity altogether because Allah isn't believed to be triune. But the Jews before Jesus' time didn't seem to believe that YHWH is triune, and yet their worship certainly seemed to be accepted. Likewise, Muslims may not believe that what Christians mean by God the Father has a Word and Holy Spirit, but theoretically, wouldn't they, like Christians and the ancient Jews, also believe in the Father? If your household consisted of you, your parents, your brother and your sister, but I mistakenly believe that your household consisted merely of you and your parents, would this mistaken belief mean that when I refer to "the Zymologist household," I'm thinking of something completely different than what you think when you're referring to it? There are certainly differences, but don't we ultimately share a significant similarity at the core of our conceptions? I would say that my hypothetical belief is lacking information, but I wouldn't say I'm actually thinking of a completely different household--after all, we both acknowledge that you, Zymologist, are a central member.
So, although the Quranic presentation of God may contain differences from the Biblical presentation of God, if Muslims genuinely believe that at the heart of all reality there is an all-powerful deity who created the universe and is merciful and compassionate, how does the core of their belief about God substantially differ from the core of Christian belief about God? To elucidate this a bit more, think of "God" not as a proper name for an individual, but rather as "the divine." If a Muslim believes that there exists something divine, and interprets this as a being whom he truly believes is the transcendent creator and sustainer of the universe, who knows all, can do all, is merciful, compassionate, "ever forgiving," "ever providing," and is "the source of peace," it seems to me that at the heart of it all, he is interpreting the divine in many of the same ways in which Christians interpret the divine. It would just be that the Muslim's belief is incomplete, and that the God he earnestly worships is even greater than he had imagined.
With that in mind, there are a few posts I saw earlier that I also wanted to address:
This comes off as awfully narrow-minded and bigoted. I can just as easily make this claim about Christians by pointing to the myriad of terrible things that they've done in the name of God and saying "Look at their fruits." That sort of logic would be invalid because, among other reasons, there are many Christians who do live honorably and bear good fruits--just like there are many Muslims who live honorably and bear good fruits as well.
That lends itself to my earlier question of just what it means to worship God. One could say that the Christian god is actually false because many Christians do terrible things in his name, or one could say the Christian god is true but many Christians are still capable of doing terrible things regardless, or one could say that the Christian god is true but some people who claim to be Christians are actually worshipping something different than the Christians who do good things. But I've yet to see anyone argue that Calvinists and Arminians are actually worshipping an entirely different god altogether.
True, this verse is clear that no one can come to Father except through Jesus, but what about the possibility that one can know Jesus without consciously realizing it? As Shakespeare wrote, "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." If, per 1 John 4:8, God is love and whoever does not know love does not know God, could it be that the inverse is also true--that whoever does know love does know God, in a mystical way at the most fundamental, rudimentary level of understanding? And if, as Holding argues here, Jesus is God's wisdom personified, could it also be that to devote one's self to seeking and living in accordance to wisdom is to seek and follow Jesus at the most fundamental, rudimentary level?
I mean, let's face it--convincing someone that on the other side of the world almost two thousand years ago, a man who was actually God incarnate died and then physically came back to life and ascended "into heaven," whatever that means, and is still living today is not a simple task that can be accomplished quickly. Perhaps God has mercy on those who don't receive sufficient evidence to believe but were genuinely seeking truth and goodness. Perhaps to genuinely seek truth and goodness means that if one actually did receive sufficient evidence to believe in the gospel of Jesus, one would indeed accept it--after all, if it was actually true, why would any person genuinely seeking truth and goodness refuse to follow the very source of truth and goodness?
I guess the main issue here boils down to what it means to know or worship a god. Clearly there are differences in the Christian and Islamic conceptions of God, but there are also several similarities. Both sides believe in a supreme, omnipotent deity who created the universe and had prophets such as Abraham and Moses and Jesus, after all. Both sides believe that people ought to humbly submit to this deity's commands, and characterize this deity as merciful and compassionate. So is there a line between having incomplete/partially differing knowledge of a deity and not knowing the deity at all? I believe there is, so the question I have concerns where that line is drawn.
For instance, it's commonly objected that the deity worshipped by Muslims is substantially different to the point of having a different identity altogether because Allah isn't believed to be triune. But the Jews before Jesus' time didn't seem to believe that YHWH is triune, and yet their worship certainly seemed to be accepted. Likewise, Muslims may not believe that what Christians mean by God the Father has a Word and Holy Spirit, but theoretically, wouldn't they, like Christians and the ancient Jews, also believe in the Father? If your household consisted of you, your parents, your brother and your sister, but I mistakenly believe that your household consisted merely of you and your parents, would this mistaken belief mean that when I refer to "the Zymologist household," I'm thinking of something completely different than what you think when you're referring to it? There are certainly differences, but don't we ultimately share a significant similarity at the core of our conceptions? I would say that my hypothetical belief is lacking information, but I wouldn't say I'm actually thinking of a completely different household--after all, we both acknowledge that you, Zymologist, are a central member.
So, although the Quranic presentation of God may contain differences from the Biblical presentation of God, if Muslims genuinely believe that at the heart of all reality there is an all-powerful deity who created the universe and is merciful and compassionate, how does the core of their belief about God substantially differ from the core of Christian belief about God? To elucidate this a bit more, think of "God" not as a proper name for an individual, but rather as "the divine." If a Muslim believes that there exists something divine, and interprets this as a being whom he truly believes is the transcendent creator and sustainer of the universe, who knows all, can do all, is merciful, compassionate, "ever forgiving," "ever providing," and is "the source of peace," it seems to me that at the heart of it all, he is interpreting the divine in many of the same ways in which Christians interpret the divine. It would just be that the Muslim's belief is incomplete, and that the God he earnestly worships is even greater than he had imagined.
With that in mind, there are a few posts I saw earlier that I also wanted to address:
Originally posted by Jedidiah
That lends itself to my earlier question of just what it means to worship God. One could say that the Christian god is actually false because many Christians do terrible things in his name, or one could say the Christian god is true but many Christians are still capable of doing terrible things regardless, or one could say that the Christian god is true but some people who claim to be Christians are actually worshipping something different than the Christians who do good things. But I've yet to see anyone argue that Calvinists and Arminians are actually worshipping an entirely different god altogether.
Originally posted by Cow Poke
I mean, let's face it--convincing someone that on the other side of the world almost two thousand years ago, a man who was actually God incarnate died and then physically came back to life and ascended "into heaven," whatever that means, and is still living today is not a simple task that can be accomplished quickly. Perhaps God has mercy on those who don't receive sufficient evidence to believe but were genuinely seeking truth and goodness. Perhaps to genuinely seek truth and goodness means that if one actually did receive sufficient evidence to believe in the gospel of Jesus, one would indeed accept it--after all, if it was actually true, why would any person genuinely seeking truth and goodness refuse to follow the very source of truth and goodness?
Seems like he's coming real close to "undermin[g] the orthodox Christian faith of others" to me. Jedidiah is not a bigot. His view was well within an orthodox framework. And if square_peg really is confused about what it means for Christ to be ascended to heaven, then he's certainly not on the same page as the rest of us. You're right though, up to the mods.
Comment