One God (Islam) Or Trinity (Christianity)

Genna said:

Why does God in the Quran often refer to himself as we, us and our?

Click to expand...

It's a linguistic convention known as the "royal We."

Queen Victoria said, "We are not amused" also, but I doubt that was an indication of multiple personalities.

Peace said:

We don't think lowly of others. We have our own religion as they have theirs. We try our best to convey the message of Islam and show the truth, if people believe it's great but if they don't it's fine, for there is no compulsion in Islam.

Peace

Click to expand...

That sounds great since some religions' main objective is conversion, almost like a territorial battle so they depict non believers as evil.

YmirGF said:

I actually use the "royal We" in everyday conversation a fair amount. When people correct me, I simply point of that I am meaning "me, myself & I", my own little Trinity.

Click to expand...

I do wee, but isn't royal.

82 some religions' main objective is conversion, almost like a territorial battle so they depict non believers as evil.
Attemptin to speak for Christians: Christ's a person. Not a religion. And folks need not be evil to need conversion

76 there is no compulsion in Islam.
Duz that mean there Wwas no compulsion in, or by, Islam?


80 Does the Bible mention this trinity?
Often

65 whereas the Christians claim 1 in 3 the trinity. These are 3 seperate entities being all at the same time each other
Father, Son, Spirit are not separate. Distinct, but not separate.
There's a distinction 'tween the words "distinct" and "separate"

68 Father, Son and Holy Ghost...they're simply three manifestations of one God.
That's fair to say. Except mebbe the word "simply."
Cuz Hiz 'manifestations' also interrelate

69 when jesus uttered my god my god why have you forsaken me? Does that make sense if jesus is truly the almighty god himself. Why would he call to himself?
cuz Father and Son are distinct, though never separate. In other words: God's Father, Son, and Spirit. 'cordin to the Bible

60 in the bible it doesnt even mention the trinity
To the contrary: the NT especially often mentions the 3 nouns Father, Son, and Spirit; and Their interrelationship

you would think that something that important would be brought up but it is not.
To the contrary: the NT especially often mentions Father, Son, and Spirit and Their interrelationship, and relationship w/ His created vessel: us

the apostels do not make any mention of it
Him. Not "it". Since the apostles wrote the NT, they often mention Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; one God. For instance, Paul wrote: God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts crying Abba Father (Gal 4:6)

neither does Jesus
To the contrary: Jesus often spoke of His Father, Himself, and God's Spirit. For instance, in Matthew 28:19 He said: Baptizing them into the name [not "names"] of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit

the trinity,read the bible and u will see very quickly that it doesnt hold water.
To the contrary: God, the Triune, likens Himself to water in His book. My people have committed two evils: They've forsaken Me, the fountain of living waters, to hew out for themselves cisterns, broken cisterns, which hold no water (Jeremiah 2:13). Whoever drinks of the water that I'll give him shall by no means thirst forever. But the water that I'll give him will become in him a fountain of water gushing up into eternal life (Jn 4:14). If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes into Me, as the Scripture said, out of his innermost being'll flow rivers of living water. But this He said concernin the Spirit, whom those who believed into Him were about to receive; for the Spirit wasn't yet, because Jesus hadn't yet been glorified (7:38-39). For also in one Spirit we were all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and were all given to drink one Spirit (1 Cor 12:13). And he showed me a river of water of life...(Rv 22:1)

31 God says one thing you as Christians say something different.
what God said includes His book

you say Jesus a man is God. Yet the bible in the verse above says this is not possible.
To the contrary: Numbers 23:19 duzn't contradict John 1:1, 14

Jesus's last words on the cross. From the testimony of the four canons. List them verse for verse. Are they the same.
Why would different accounts be identical in all respects?

Christians follow Pauls interpretation. Not jesus or his companions or even God.
Jesus is God. Jesus is in Paul. Paul's interpretation Is Jesus, who is God,'s interpretation

As if they need him to clarify their statements.
Thas exactly what the Lord Jesus said in John 16:12-13. I've yet many things to say to you, but you can't bear them now. But when He, the Spirit of reality, comes, He'll guide you into all the reality; for He won't speak from Himself, but what He hears He'll speak; and He'll declare to you the things that are coming

Is not God/Jesus the all knowing.
Yes

Would he not be able to explain himself very clearly to his creation.
still duz

You interpret the Bible as you see it and not how Jesus saw it.
That depends. Az a blanket statement: thas mistaken

Not to mention the fact none of the documents you have are the same.
Mujahid Mohammed's mistaken

The Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him
i'm unable 2 call sumone, in the years AD before Christ returns, "blessed" for spreading his religion militarily by force and by execution

:no: Many do believe in monotheism, but what does it matter who? What matters is the ancient Hebrews through Moses gave the world monotheism, so it originated with the Hebrews.
Moses could say from Sinai millenniums ago, "You heard it here first!":clap
Islam found out God is one thanks to the Jews. Baha'ism also is not original with montheism.

You're right, Simone - but Christians view the Old Testament (Jewish) and the New Testament (Christian) as one, whole Christianity; and the Muslims view the Old Testament, New Testament, and Last Testament (Muslim) as one, whole Islam.

For Christians, Moses was an important part of Christianity - not specifically, or uniquely, Judaism. For Muslims, Moses was an important part of Islam - not specifically, or uniquely, Judaism.

So it's undeniable that we all have our roots in Judaism, but people view this past as a stage of their own faith. In that circumstance Jews becomes the stragglers who refused to recognize Jesus, and later Mohammed - and not the forefathers of these faith - in the minds of their followers. Which is unfortunate.

There would be no Islam if not for Moses the man from Levi's tribe.
If not for Moses, there would be no Islam, which began with Ishmael, not Moses.
I would say Moses is the most important person in history next to Jesus Christ.

Well Moses preached for Islam in the first place. See we believe in Islam that all the prophets and messengers since Adam p.b.u.h to Mohammed p.b.u.h preached one message. Worship one God and surrender to him (Islam). Islam means surrendering to God, the one God, Allah. Why would God send three diferent relegions? Theyre not diferent, theyre one relegion with one message. Worship God, not what he created.

The trinity is a Catholic idea. It is not what the Bible teaches.

Greetings. There is great discussion in this thread from such knowledgeable, bright and faithful people. It gives someone like me, who loves all these religions, significant new insights and hope - thank you. Disagreement seems to have simmered down to an amiable 'agreement to disagree,' with respect, so it probably would not be wise for me to start something new on my view of the triniterian which is still different from those presented.

My approach might be helpful to some however. So let me offer that the triniterian was of interest to me just because it is important to so many Christians. My only thought was to understand it in order to understand Christians better and to see if there was a message of more general benefit to me and to others. My study gave me much personal benefit. It led me to three central symbols that point to reality, and in my opinion that is the original function of the triniterian - "to express in embracing symbols the self-manifestation of the Divine Life to man." Wish those are my words but they come from the late Christian philosophical theologian Paul Tillich.

Simone is correct. While reading through this thread, I noticed some, defending the Trinity, speak of "the Church."

The concept of the Trinity was borrowed by the Catholic Church, and carried on by her Protestant daughters.

It is not a debate between the monotheism of Islam and the Trinity of "Christianity", but rather the Trinity doctrine of the CATHOLIC Church and her Protestant daughters. MANY Christians do NOT accept the Trinity doctrine.

We do believe, however, that the ONE who spoke to Moses, Adam, Noah, and Abraham WAS the very ONE who came as Yeshua. HE said He came to REVEAL the Father--meaning, before He came, NO ONE KNEW of the OTHER member of the Godhead.

carlbenator said:

Simone is correct. While reading through this thread, I noticed some, defending the Trinity, speak of "the Church."

The concept of the Trinity was borrowed by the Catholic Church, and carried on by her Protestant daughters.

It is not a debate between the monotheism of Islam and the Trinity of "Christianity", but rather the Trinity doctrine of the CATHOLIC Church and her Protestant daughters. MANY Christians do NOT accept the Trinity doctrine.

We do believe, however, that the ONE who spoke to Moses, Adam, Noah, and Abraham WAS the very ONE who came as Yeshua. HE said He came to REVEAL the Father--meaning, before He came, NO ONE KNEW of the OTHER member of the Godhead.

Click to expand...

Strange. All those who deny the Trinity appear to be children, once removed, of the Roman Catholic Church also, being children of Protestant churches. They, generally, are merely repeating heresies (often without any knowledge that they are doing so) dealt with in antiquity. Those of us who genuinely aren't children of Rome still believe in the Trinity whether we've been out of communion with Rome for 1 millennium (us) or 1.5 (the Oriental Orthodox). Even the Nestorians, though they follow another heresy and have been out of communion with the rest of us for even longer, don't deny the Trinity.

James

Islam said:

Well Moses preached for Islam in the first place. See we believe in Islam that all the prophets and messengers since Adam p.b.u.h to Mohammed p.b.u.h preached one message. Worship one God and surrender to him (Islam). Islam means surrendering to God, the one God, Allah. Why would God send three diferent relegions? Theyre not diferent, theyre one relegion with one message. Worship God, not what he created.

Click to expand...

Show me where in the bible Moses preaches/ teaches submission to allah! He never does, he teaches submission and obedience to the laws of Jehovah and points to the coming of another Prophet who the Jews were to heed.

For all the differences in theology and opinion of the various denominations of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, they really all have the same message, imho. Regardless of which one is right, if not all, the implications for our own actions are the same: Do what is right. Love others. Strive to live a righteos life. Simply by doing the best with what we know. Surely a just God would not condemn a person, regardless of what religion they believe, for simply doing what they believe to be right. One day, we will all know who was right, but it won't really matter. If Christians are right, an observant Muslim will be in a much better position than a wicked Christian. And the reverse is true as well. In my opinion, the true test of this life is what we do with what we know, not what we know. My sincere prayer is that we will all do the best with what we believe whether we are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Athiest, or anything else. And maybe one day we can overcome bickering and arguing and be filled with love for our fellow men, who simply have a different point of veiw.

97 Surely a just God would not condemn a person, regardless of what religion they believe, for simply doing what they believe to be right.
The just God became a just man to die for all folks, that they might receive Him

the trinity did not come from the catholic church. the catholic church was just the first and major church to actually rise in power. and they did this with wealth and violence.
There were many who were fighting the idea of the trinity from the get go.
anyone ever hear of the nicean council. they were all of different "christian" groups.
it is from this group that it was "voted" by men wether or not the churches at that time were going to accept the idea of the trinity.
the two major ideas at the time were that Jesus was God and not man at all, and the other was that Jesus was not God, but he was more than just a man.
From this the group met in the middle on the vote and brought the two ideas together to appease each other(nothing to do with God). So the end result was that Jesus was 100%man/100%God. The accepted belief today of the trinity.

The God of the bible is connected in thought through the three major faiths-islam,christianity,judaism. But you must figure out who Jesus is and what role he played and how you should live your life, these things decide if you are a servant of God or not. Religions and there names mean nothing to God. He has never changed and will not change, it is up to you to find the truth.

FOA

faithofabraham said:

the trinity did not come from the catholic church. the catholic church was just the first and major church to actually rise in power. and they did this with wealth and violence.
There were many who were fighting the idea of the trinity from the get go.
anyone ever hear of the nicean council. they were all of different "christian" groups.
it is from this group that it was "voted" by men wether or not the churches at that time were going to accept the idea of the trinity.
the two major ideas at the time were that Jesus was God and not man at all, and the other was that Jesus was not God, but he was more than just a man.
From this the group met in the middle on the vote and brought the two ideas together to appease each other(nothing to do with God). So the end result was that Jesus was 100%man/100%God. The accepted belief today of the trinity.

The God of the bible is connected in thought through the three major faiths-islam,christianity,judaism. But you must figure out who Jesus is and what role he played and how you should live your life, these things decide if you are a servant of God or not. Religions and there names mean nothing to God. He has never changed and will not change, it is up to you to find the truth.

FOA

Click to expand...

Your understanding of the Council of Nicea is seriously flawed. It was not called to get various Christian groups to a agree on Christology (the Gnostics, for instance, were not invited and nor were any other previously condemned heretics). It was called so that the whole Church could meet and consider the new teachings of Arius that were making waves in the Church. There was no vote on the Trinity whatsover - this was the a priori belief of the vast majority at the council. There was a vote on Arianism and that pretty much unanimously went against him (after the episode with St. Spyridon's brick even most of the supporters of Arius deserted him).

There was likewise nobody at the council that believed that Christ was just a man. That was another heresy associated with Paul of Samosata, called Adoptionalism, which had already been condemned by several synods about 80 years earlier. The two competing theologies were that Christ was the Word Incarnate, consubstantial with the Father (this is what won out and is found in the Creed) and Arius' teaching that Christ was a lesser god Incarnate as a man. This lesser god was, apart from being a separate being created by God, pretty much no different from the Trinitarian view- i.e. he was present at creation, all things were created through him, he was the subject of OT theophanies etc. Arius was, indeed, anti-Trinitarian, but his theology was not monist but, rather, di- (or perhaps tri-, his views on the Holy Spirit are not clear) theist.

The Christology that states that Christ was both fully God and fully man was not settled at Nicea either and nor was it a compromise between any groups. It is the natural upshot of the acceptance of the (by far majority even before the council) position that Christ was one Hypostasis of the Trinity Incarnate, but it was never dogmatically defined until it was questioned by monophysites much later (at Chalcedon, though in my opinion the apparent heresy was more down to semantic misunderstanding). This is the way for all the councils. Not one of them was called to vote on new dogma. Every single one was called to defend the existing teachings of the Church against a new heresy. Whatever the sources are for understanding of the Ecumenical Councils, you need better ones. How about starting with the actual canons the councils produced? You should have no difficulty finding them online.

James