Religious Discussion

[DogOfWar]

Jezzus where do you live....it's already been happening for years now. "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" on cards. Many big stores don't even mention Christmas, Schools hold Christmas events without mentioning the religious side of it.

As for the religious provission, it will only last to the first court challenge. If you don't believe me look at the history, religious schools taken to court, Halls and camp grounds taken to court on a regular basis, How many of those court challenges were in favor of the Groups....JP's in I believe Manitoba and Sask have already been fired or forced to resign because of their religious beliefs.

Also could anyone te4ll me exactly what right's Gays are loosing by not being able to use the term "Marriage"

And as for pride parades, what do you think the reaction would be if I went to City Hall and asked for a permit to hold a White Pride or a Staight Family Parade.

Quite frankly as a Christian I dont believe that I worship the same God as Muslims, and other religions. But Im not trying to get a monopoly on the word "God" What rights of yours are being intruded upon by them calling it marriage? Does a part of you feel better when you call it a union? Its the same darn things. Lets get passed semantics. Right,wrong or other wise- God is going to see it the same way(right or wrong-for him to decide) and the government is going to see it the same way.....

Is this an issue close to your heart? You use the Lords name in vane in the first line of your post. Me thinks you should do some cleaning in your own yard.......

 

[Trinity]

Quite frankly as a Christian I dont believe that I worship the same God as Muslims, and other religions.

I'm going to hijack my own thread for a second...

um... lets see...  Jews, Christians and Muslims all share parts or all of the 'Torah'
and other Jewish scriptures.  We all have the same past and heritage.  We all
worship the God of Moses.....

hrm...  Biblical scholars would disagree and so do I.

I'm not forcing you to believe, but I would suggest you rethink
your position and evaluate why.  If your facts are weak, inconsistant
or non existant.. then don't stick to it.  Change is not a bad thing.
It means your growing up.

 

[neuromancer]

Sorry for contributing to a jacked-thread, but Trinity started it.

I'm confused Trin, are you saying that Christians do worship the same
god as Muslims and Jews, or that we don't worship the same god.

Its my personal view that any particular god in
question has a specific way in which it approves of being worshiped.
And so people claiming to worship a particular god might in fact be
worshiping something else, or perhaps just nothing at all through
improper religious practise.

Just my opinion though. But if we look at "Christianity" for example,
there has to be at least one thousands various forms of worship for that
one religion alone. Now if we think there is only one Christ as all of them
claim then I find it irrational that all of them could be right, especially
when many of the beliefs and customs are mutually exclusive.

However I should admit, I'm not a religious person, but
I do enjoy the occasional religious discussion.

I'm NOT trying to say that there is only ONE TRUE RELIGEON, only
that that it doesn't seem rational to me that so many religions all
be true.

However if we stop thinking like Newtonian and more like Quantum Physicists
then true and false go flying out the window. So who knows? Bleh.
What was my point again?? On Nevermind. 

Edit: spelling.

 

[dutchie]

I'm not trying to get this too far off topic, and trinity is the expert, but I thought I'd throw my $0.02 in....

I'm confused Trin, are you saying that Christians do worship the same
god as Muslims and Jews, or that we don't worship the same god.

Yes. The Muslim Allah, Jewish God/Yahweh, and the Christian God are the same 'being'. In fact, the Jewish Torah (Judaisms sacred book) are the 5 books of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy) found in the Christian Bible. Islam's Allah is also this same 'being'. Of course, you can't have 'Christianity' without 'Christ', and that is where Judaism and Islam diverts from Christianity. IIRC, Muslims believe Christ was a prophet, and Jews believe he was a false messiah.

Just my opinion though. But if we look at "Christianity" for example,
there has to be at least one thousands various forms of worship for that
one religion alone. Now if we think there is only one Christ as all of them
claim then I find it irrational that all of them could be right, especially
when many of the beliefs and customs are mutually exclusive.

But all (OK most) Christian denominations all believe in the divinity of the Holy Trinity (Father, Son, & Holy Ghost). They differ in interpretation of the Bible, and how the 'Church' should be run. Anglicans for instance broke from Rome mainly over politics (meddling of the Pope in England's affairs) and over Henry VIII's wish (and Rome's refusal) to get a divorce. Poof, new denomination. They still worship the same God, but have an Archbishop (of Canterbury) rather than a Pope.

Truly awful stuff- marriage was predominately a contractual financial relationship that was as politicized then as it is now.

well, it's nice to see we've come a long way, huh? We will probably have conflict over some aspect of marriage as long as it forms such a critical role in Canadian society. It's just too important not to argue about, I guess.

 

[DogOfWar]

I'm going to hijack my own thread for a second...

um... lets see...   Jews, Christians and Muslims all share parts or all of the 'Torah'
and other Jewish scriptures.   We all have the same past and heritage.   We all
worship the God of Moses.....

hrm...   Biblical scholars would disagree and so do I.

I think you need to educate yourself on the roots of Islam and the Hubal the "moon god". Just because we share some of the same terminology does not mean we worship the same deity. You would be the first "biblical scholar"(I use that loosely) to defend from this position.

"they did not slay him, neither crucified him, only a likeness of that was shown to them" (Qur'an 4:156) with respect to Jesus. Pretty hard to be worshiping the same God if- my "God" says that His Son died and their "God" says that it never happened.
"O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His apostles. Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah. Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs." (Koran, Surah 4:171) Nope again- that contradicts my religion directly. Without Jesus as a savior there is no Christianity.

"Certainly they disbelieve who say: Surely Allah is the third (person) of the three; and there is no god but the one God, and if they desist not from what they say, a painful chastisement shall befall those among them who disbelieve." Koran, Sura 5:73, food)
Geez Trinity- again contradicting my beliefs.....and you using that name are asking for trouble. Since you believe its the same "God".

Im not saying my beliefs are right and Islam is wrong. I believe in my heart of hearts this is the case BUT I would not force or attack a Moslem for his beliefs. He is entitled to them. But I will not accept we our "God" is one and the same.

So where is your case Trinity?

This has moved a little off topic now. But I believe I needed to defend myself. We can PM if you'd like Trin.

Christians essentially believe the same things. They differ on some issues but the fundamentals are the same. Like Caeser pointed out. But just because they mention Jesus in the Quran and all three have ties to Moses does not mean they are the same. 2 have to be wrong. Why would God send his Son to die for Christians, allow Moslems to disrespect Him and call him "just a prophet", and let Jews call Him a false messiah and a lunatic? Let them war and kill each other and have 3 different sets of rules for each? You havent thought this through.

 

[Acorn]

Well, I can't help but perpetuate this little deviation from the topic:

Beadwindow, you're missing the mark. However, I can see why, if one argues the Divinity of Christ and the immutability of the Holy Trinity. Do you accept that the God of the Jews is the same God? If so, you are accepting the Allah of Islam. The Qu'ran is quite clear in this, and clear in that Islam believes the Christian Faith deviated from the intent of the Prophet Isa (Jesus-pbuh) and assigned him a Divinity that he neither deserved, nor sought. There is no question about God though.

The difference may be a bit more pronounced than, say, Christian sect disagreement about Transmutation (the physical transmutation of the water and wine of the Eucharist to the Flesh and Blood of Christ), but it is still only a minor difference compared to that between Judeo-Christian belief and that of, say, the Hundu faith.

I suspect you may have been mislead in some way about Islam (the "moon god?")

"they did not slay him, neither crucified him, only a likeness of that was shown to them" (Qur'an 4:156) with respect to Jesus. Pretty hard to be worshiping the same God if- my "God" says that His Son died and their "God" says that it never happened.

The Qur'an is not denying the crucifiction of Jesus. It is denying the crucifiction of God. The Islamic mantra of "There is only one God, Allah..." is partly intended to deny the Holy Trinity - God is only one, and is not made man. Yes, it denies some fundamental basis of the Christian faith, but Judaism also denies those fundamentals , yet we do not deny that the Jewish God is the same. Or do you?

 

[DogOfWar]

The Qur'an is not denying the crucifiction of Jesus. It is denying the crucifiction of God. The Islamic mantra of "There is only one God, Allah..." is partly intended to deny the Holy Trinity - God is only one, and is not made man. Yes, it denies some fundamental basis of the Christian faith, but Judaism also denies those fundamentals , yet we do not deny that the Jewish God is the same. Or do you?

"Regarding Crucifixion of Jesus: And for their unbelief, and their uttering against Mary a mighty calumny, and for their saying, 'We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the Messenger of God'...yet they did not slay him, neither crucified him, only a likeness of that was shown to them. Those who are at variance concerning him surely are in doubt regarding him, they have no knowledge of him, except the following of surmise; and they did not slay him of certainty... no indeed; God raised him up to Him; God is Almighty, All-Wise. There is not one of the people of the Book [Bible] but will assuredly believe in him before his death, and on the Resurrection Day [at the end of time] he will be a witness against them." (Qur'an 4:156-159)

Am I the one missing the mark? Seems to me I got that verse right and you are the one who is "missing the mark". The bible says that it is Gods word and is written by divine inspiration. Moslems say it has been "tainted". THe bible says to test the "prophets" and prophecy against the bible. The bible says it is true and the Quran says the bible is wrong. Doesnt agree with scripture so it is- false according to the bible. God is "truth" and He does not lie. The Quran does NOT fall in line with the bible so one or the other is lying. If God can only do right(shall not the judge of this earth do right?) He would not contradict himself. And therefore SOMEONE- us or them is following a false god. Its basic. And as for the moon god Im gathering you didnt even bother "google" Hubal.

 

[Acorn]

"Regarding Crucifixion of Jesus: And for their unbelief, and their uttering against Mary a mighty calumny, and for their saying, 'We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the Messenger of God'...yet they did not slay him, neither crucified him, only a likeness of that was shown to them. Those who are at variance concerning him surely are in doubt regarding him, they have no knowledge of him, except the following of surmise; and they did not slay him of certainty... no indeed; God raised him up to Him; God is Almighty, All-Wise. There is not one of the people of the Book [Bible] but will assuredly believe in him before his death, and on the Resurrection Day [at the end of time] he will be a witness against them." (Qur'an 4:156-159)

Ahh, the wonderful tactic of the selective scripture quote (with marginal notes included, and translation not identified). The Book, by the way, is the Qur'an, not the Bible. Here's an alternate translation:

[4:156] (They are condemned) for disbelieving and uttering about Mary a gross lie.

[4:157] And for claiming that they killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of GOD. In fact, they never killed him, they never crucified him - they were made to think that they did. All factions who are disputing in this matter are full of doubt concerning this issue. They possess no knowledge; they only conjecture. For certain, they never killed him.

[4:158] Instead, GOD raised him to Him; GOD is Almighty, Most Wise.

[4:159] Everyone among the people of the scripture was required to believe in him before his death. On the Day of Resurrection, he will be a witness against them.

What do you suggest it means? Be clear, as I'm not fully certain of what point you're trying to make by quoting the Qur'an.

Am I the one missing the mark? Seems to me I got that verse right and you are the one who is "missing the mark". The bible says that it is Gods word and is written by divine inspiration. Moslems say it has been "tainted". THe bible says to test the "prophets" and prophecy against the bible. The bible says it is true and the Quran says the bible is wrong. Doesnt agree with scripture so it is- false according to the bible. God is "truth" and He does not lie. The Quran does NOT fall in line with the bible so one or the other is lying. If God can only do right(shall not the judge of this earth do right?) He would not contradict himself. And therefore SOMEONE- us or them is following a false god. Its basic. And as for the moon god Im gathering you didnt even bother "google" Hubal.

Here you are making the leap that because the Qur'an doesn't fall in line with the Bible (in many respects it does, though) that somehow Muslims are following a false God. The Bible and the Qur'an both make claim to being the Word of God, yet the former claims to be so through many prophets (the Old Testament is essentially the Torah - the word of God revealed through various prophets. The New Testament is the Gospels "according to" as well as the word of the Apostles - in fact more akin to the Hadith and Sunnah). The latter makes its claim through a single Messenger - Mohammed (pbuh) - and is a "correction" of the corruption of previous books which had lost their purity due to the corruption of Man (so it is claimed). You haven't answered whether you believe the God of the Jews is the same as that of the Christians.

Do you?

As for Hubal, I fail to see what a pagan god has to do with this discussion, unless you're claiming Allah is Hubal. Is Jesus Mithras? Do you want to go there?

Mods: I think we have a Golden Calf to this topic - a split might be in order.

Acorn
(discussing religion in the Mess - taboo or what?)

 

[neuromancer]

OK OK OK, I think everyone needs to chill a little bit.
Take a deep breath... hold it.. exhale.. relax.

We are all on the same side. Lets try to remember that.

But I just want to quickly mention that the way this thread is
developing proves the point I was making, how can all religions
be true when they quite clearly are at odds with one another.

And I know that most people will say that a catholic and a protestant
worship the same god, but by my way of thinking that can NOT possibly
be true either. Jesus said his followers would be united in love and would
even lay down their lives for one another, but catholics kill protestants
and vice versa.

Likewise jews kill muslims, muslims kill christians, christians
kill everyone. How can they possibly be worshiping the same god?

 

[Infanteer]

Ok, hot-button issue #2 split off from hot-button issue #1.  This one is facinating because we have some members with a real scholarly grounding in the topic, so I'm going to let it run for a bit - just be warned that the second it goes personal, it is going to get locked; so don't be the guy who posts without considering what they are saying.

 

[winchable]

The Qu'ran is quite clear in this, and clear in that Islam believes the Christian Faith deviated from the intent of the Prophet Isa (Jesus-pbuh) and assigned him a Divinity that he neither deserved, nor sought

I think Acorn's above quote was overlooked as it is quite important, it's difficult to argue over such subjective things but you either believe it or you don't and odds are you're not going to change your mind. I'll let Acorn argue that front, as he's already got it going.

As for Hubal, a sore point for me..yes.
For those of us not familiar with pre-islamic arabia (shame on you really) Hubal was an idol, a very important idol, in the ka'ba (that big black box in the middle of mecca) which the Pagan Arabs worshipped. They alternately called this particular idol "Allah" as we should well know, the Arabic word for "God" or "The God." There were hundreds of Idols in the ka'ba which each Arab house worshipped, when Mohamed (pbuh) came to Mecca he smashed the idols, most notably the Hubal and used the term "Allah" for "his God"

Now at some point a very interesting gentleman wrote a book called "The Islamic Invasion". That Gentleman's name was Robert Morey, in the book he claimed that Islam rose from Pagan tradition and is really just a reinvention of the ancient Pagan Cults which occupied Arabia prior to Monotheism. Now a number of Christian missionaries loved this idea because in the high stakes world of peoples souls, Islam and Christianity were really the only two in the salvation competition. The strongest basis for this claim (and the one beadwindow is using) is that the Pagan Arabs used the term "Allah" interchangedly with "Hubal" (their pagan "moon God")

First, let's have a look at the very first line of the old testament..in Hebrew and English, to the best of my ability to translate back and forth:

B'reshit bara ELOHIM et ha-shama'im, V'et ha-arets.
In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

The word Elohim(which is a word that is hotly contested anyway), like many words in semetic script, is found in a number of different forms with any number of diacritical marks to denote proper pronunciation. The root of Elohim, is Eloh meaning "God." Show me any Aramayic, paleo-hebrewic or nabatean script and you'll find a number of different pronunciations, marks and guides as to how to pronounce it, all differing but for the most part you don't need marks to tell you that the root (hopefully we're familiar with the idea of "roots" or in Arabic"jedda" because I'm not explaining them)  is:

alef-lamed-heh

The Hebrew predecessor of the word, works out roughly to be simply "el"
Looking at the Arabic root for the word "Allah" you find it is "Alif-leem-Hah"  Any semetic linguist, even the amatuer ones, will tell you that Arabic and Hebrew are more like half-brothers than cousins, a cousin of the two languages is Aramaic.
Now, not surprisingly the Aramaic word for god, or the god, is also "Alah" or "alap-lamad-heh" and Aramaic is firmly rooted in the ancient root for the word God which in English is roughly "eel" or "el"

Now, on to Arabic. The word "Allah" (God, or The God) as I've already said is at root "Alif-Leem-Hah" a root which is shared by "ilah" the much more generic term for "deity"

I'm not going to say anyone is wrong but taking a look at these very closely related semetic languages words for God, Deity what-have-you will look something like this:

Allâh, Alah, Eloh, Ilah, Eel, and El

Or for that matter, any other word meaning "God" in a semetic dialect is probably going to look nearly exactly like these ones.

If someone wishes to argue that the Muslim word "Allah" is a revival of Pagan cults they'd only be half right.
If a monolnigual Christian wants to tell me that Islam is rubbish because it's a bastardisation of Pagan cults, and base this on the "hubal" theory, they can throw their bible in the dustbin too because Jesus wasn't speaking English when he said

"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

he was probably saying something like:

"Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"

To summarize. Yes, Pagan's called Hubal "Allah" or some form of "Allah" possibly "Ilah" meaning God or The God and Deity respectively but the words weren't rooted in Paganism they were rooted in the ancient word for God, which all semetic languages are rooted in.

 

[Trinity]

Bead.. I am a theologian.. but i am having a hell of a time following your points....

From speaking to other Muslim theologians and Imams, it has come to my
understanding that we all worship the same god.

Jesus to them is not gods son.  OK.  That doesn't bother me although
it directly contradicts my religion.  There are many truths in religion, as
there are many denominations, as there are differences in people. 

I've sat in conferences with multi faith theologians and scholars of
the big three (Christianity, Judaism and Muslim) and all of us agree.

Is that a cheap way of defending my position... yes.. cause i can't
recite the facts off the top of my head.  But we all come and believe
in the same basic scriptures.  The Jews don't believe in Jesus either
so does that mean we worship a different God than them? I don't
think so cause god sent Jesus to the Israelites (i.e. the Jews).

It is entirely conceivable that God sent down another disciple for
a different group of people.  God is God.  God does not work
within our primitive understanding of him/her. Just because
we cannot conceive of his/her actions doesn't mean it can't be done
or that it can't be real or true.

Originally Jesus was sent only for the Israelites, I believe comes out in
the story of the Canaanite woman (spelling is wrong).  I can break out
the bible and quote that later if anyone is interested.  If that is true,
and Jesus was only here for the Israelites, what is left of the rest of us?


The major problem of you quoting the Qu'ran is... the fact you are doing
it in English.  The only true Qu'ran in the Muslim faith to MY UNDERSTANDING
needs to be read in its original language which I believe is Arabic.  Now, do
any of us understand Arabic... well, not me.  And posting the original Arabic
would definitely not help.  But (in my understanding) the true meaning of the
Qu'ran according to Muslim standards cannot be achieved unless it is read in
Arabic.  Yes.. I know, another cheap way making my case... and i do apologize,
but I said it only to have it noted of the significant difference, not to attack you.


I am impressed of your knowledge of the Qu'ran. 

It is way to early to argue this.... I need to stop checking this thing
too early in the morning.

Cesar.... thanks for the help in answering other points... 

As for this Hubal google.  Asking people to research your argument doesn't work.
If you want to make a point, make it.  Asking anyone to look up points will result
in people not doing it, so don't get mad that we didn't.  Even if we did google it,
how do you know that we are going to get the same point as you are trying to make?

So please.. I'm curious.. explain this point.  No need to PMs... there is no growth
in a PM...  we can all learn and grow from exploring our own beliefs.

 

[winchable]

The major problem of you quoting the Qu'ran is... the fact you are doing
it in English.  The only true Qu'ran in the Muslim faith to MY UNDERSTANDING
needs to be read in its original language which I believe is Arabic.  Now, do
any of us understand Arabic... well, not me.  And posting the original Arabic
would definitely not help.  But (in my understanding) the true meaning of the
Qu'ran according to Muslim standards cannot be achieved unless it is read in
Arabic.  Yes.. I know, another cheap way making my case... and i do apologize,
but I said it only to have it noted of the significant difference, not to attack you.

Quite right Trinity.
It's often described as a smokescreen but anyone who's studied Arabic (or as is seen above) any Semetic language will realise that any Arabic text (let alone the definitive volume) must be read in Arabic, accounting for all possible meanings of the words. It is a language of roots, so if the word was misinterpreted in translation the Arabic text will reveal a root of the word in Arabic which must be explored (was it 72 virgins..or 72 raisins...no seriously check it out) to understand the intent of the word which derived from the root. There is a difference between the word in English after it's translation and it's intent in its Arabic root before translation which is often overlooked by many when simply reading through the English translation. Now it's one thing to make a mistake on your own, but where this becomes a problem is when people start teaching anti-Islamic theories based on flawed translations, or misinterpretation of the intent.
This is partly why I believe that Islam can not be taught properly and must be learned through discipline and self-study. I'm not here to preach, or teach for that matter, just trying to keep the discussion balanced.

 

[Trinity]

Same goes for English translations of the bible


Translating from the Hewbrew, Greek or Latin texts often vary AND their root
words could have more than one meaning, changing the purpose of the text.

I've seen many of these in my studies.  So we share a common problem in
the translation... and not many people want to learn the greek to fully understand.

For example...  when we say Judas betrayed Jesus... it can also be translated into
Judas handed over Jesus...  If he handed over, then its not betrayal... which fits more
into the belief that Judas was told to do it by Jesus which some scriptures and movies
and scholars believe.  (sorry.. doing a Jesus film class right now... hence the film comment)

No translation is perfect.

 

[DogOfWar]

Hmm. Lets start this off witha disclaimer- Im not condemning Muslims or anyone else. Their religious beliefs are there own. Now.

With regards to Hubal and Islam-

Before Islam the Arab pagans use to have several traditions-

Each tribe would circle around their Kaba where a   black stone was kept seven times.

Nowadays Muslims during their pilgrimage circle the Kaba claiming Abraham did such.

The tribes kissed the black stone- present day Muslims do the same thing.

An idol of Hubal was placed on the Kaba 400 years before Muhammad according to several MUSLIMS

"About four hundred years before the birth of Muhammad one Amr bin Lahyo ... a descendant of Qahtan and king of Hijaz, had put an idol called Hubal on the roof of the Kaba. This was one of the chief deities of the Quraish before Islam. ("Muhammad The Holy Prophet", Hafiz Ghulam Sarwar (Pakistan), p 18-19, Muslim)"

His symbol was a star and crescent moon...the crescent moon is the symbol used to identify Islam. I believe that Islam is a "re-envisioning" of arab pagan beliefs. Of course I could be wrong. But Im pretty sure.


"The presiding deity was Hubal, a large carnelian statue kept inside the temple; 36o other idols were ranged outside. The three goddesses described in the Quran as the 'daughters of Allah' - Allat, 'Uzza and Manat - were also worshipped in the vicinity. (Islam in the World, Malise Ruthven, 1984, p 28-48) "

Could you explain this Che? Why are the daughters of Allah named the same as 3 female deities worshipped in the same area as Hubal? And why are they Allahs daughters? Do you see the connection between Allah and his daughters and the fact that under Hubal in the god food chain of the pagans were 3 other gods named Allat, Uzza and Manat??


Man Im having a hard time following my own thougts here so ask again and Ill try and clarify. I dont "write" for a living. ;D

I dont buy the argument that "it has to be read in Arabic". I believe thats smoke screen. Yes some meaning change from Hebrew to english for the bible but the message stays the same. Its pretty easy to dismiss the horrible verses by saying "thats not the arabic so it doesnt count".

As for Jews and God. Sigh here goes- I believe in the trinity. Jesus is God as well. So if Jews reject Jesus- then they reject God. Its a simplistic view I know but if "no one gets to the Father" except through Jesus then NO ONE gets to the Father except through Jesus.

John 3:17-21   For God sent not his son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved but he that believeth not is condemned already . . ."   You are condemned according to my beliefs if you do not accept and believe in Jesus as the son of God. For me to accept the God of Islam I must accept that Jesus is NOT God's son and I will not do that. This is a very touchy subject for everyone involved and I understand that my beliefs arent going to be popular BUT im trying to be respectful to everyone involved. So believe me when I say my tone is conversational and not accusatory.

Its nice to think we're all fighting the good fight but I just dont see it. If Im wrong God will take it up with me and Ill accept whatever he says. But here on Earth I take religious teachers and theologins worth a grain of salt. The pharacies were "religious experts" as well. If I dont see it in the bible I dont buy it.

If all Muslim's must reject the crucifixion of Christ based on the Quran and all Christians must reject Muhammad as a prophet based on the Bible, my question is: on exactly what basis do you believe Christianity and Islam are compatible religions?

Galatians 1:6-9 Apostle Paul says "I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Christ for a different religion. But even if an angel from heaven, should preach to you a different religion, let him be accursed." The story goes that Islam was given by the angel Gabriel....hmmm....

 

[neuromancer]

Bead.. I am a theologian.. but i am having a heck of a time following your points....

From speaking to other Muslim theologians and Imams, it has come to my
understanding that we all worship the same god.

Jesus to them is not gods son.  OK.  That doesn't bother me although
it directly contradicts my religion.  There are many truths in religion, as
there are many denominations, as there are differences in people. 

I've sat in conferences with multi faith theologians and scholars of
the big three (Christianity, Judaism and Muslim) and all of us agree.

No, I think the term you are looking for here is "claim".

I can readily agree that all of the aforementioned religions "claim" to worship
the same god, and perhaps they can agree that other religions are
also "claiming" to worship the same god.

But listen, the WHOLE IDEA of having another religion is that you
feel that the current religion is not worshiping god correctly in some way
and so you go off in the wilderness to "to it right"(TM). Of course I know
that sometimes there are splinter groups that form for political and other
non-faith related reasons.

At that point the two religions can be said to be worshiping different gods.

For a quick example:

The god of the Catholics believes in mass, the eating of the flesh of the
Christ and the sanctity of the pope, a direct descendant of Jesus himself.
You must believe in those things, and practise those habits or else the god
of the Catholics will be very unhappy with you, and you may wind up in a
very uncomfortable place in the afterlife because of it.

The god of the Protestants believes etc etc etc... You must believe in those
things, and practise those habits or else the god of the Protestants will be
very unhappy with you, and you may wind up in a very uncomfortable place
in the afterlife because of it.

The god of the Jews believes, etc etc etc... You must believe in those
things, and practise those habits or else the god of the Jews will be
very unhappy with you, and you may wind up in a very uncomfortable place
in the afterlife because of it.

The god of the Muslims believes etc etc etc... You must believe in those
things, and practise those habits or else the god of the Muslims will be
very unhappy with you, and you may wind up in a very uncomfortable place
in the afterlife because of it.

So if they are all worshiping the same "god" then why would "god" punish
one group for doing or not doing some things, and punish a different group
for doing completely different things or not doing completely different
things. This is so absurd.

Sorry if I'm being a little too pragmatic about this, or if I have any
particular facts about any particular religion wrong, I'm not a
Catholic so take whatever I said about their faith as just my best
guess since the details are not important to my arguments.

If there is one thing I will admit to believing about "god" it is this; consistency
is key. There would be no conflicting prophets, there would be no conflicting
messages. If "god" does indeed exist then he/she should at least be able to not
contradict himself/herself and definitely wouldn't lie either. A god that contradicts
or lies is not much of a god, and certainly not worth anyones time.

 

[Infanteer]

Can't God be the same, and only the way to his heart is the contentious issue?

 

[c4th]

And I know that most people will say that a catholic and a protestant
worship the same god, but by my way of thinking that can NOT possibly
be true either. Jesus said his followers would be united in love and would
even lay down their lives for one another, but catholics kill protestants
and vice versa.

One should recognize that there is a difference between a belief in one god and interpretations of scriptures.  On one hand you have the means, and the other you have the end.  Whether you believe or choose to not believe that other religious denominations worship the same god does not change the fact that Islam, Christianity, and Judaism all originated from the same region (the middle east) and document the same events and key players (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic_monotheism).  God's word has been written, transcribed and translated by prophets and scholars for millennia.  The scriptures are not autobiographies of God.  In simple terms, choosing not to believe that protestants, Catholics, Muslims, and Jews do not worship the same God through different means is precisely the same as believing that vehicles in the UK do not have internal combustion engines because the steering wheel is on the other side.

 

[Buzz]

The way I look at it is that because one guy had a believe that his way was the proper way of believing in God, he had to spread his word to others and convince them that his way is the one that has much more meaning to the word of GOD.  Hence starting a religion.

He was right in a sense in having a believe in God, but an individual belief.  When you think about it We have so many religions in the world that say there's is the right one.  And some religions are even branches of a mother religion.  But what it all comes down to is  to look at the other side of the coin and say that neither one of them may be right. But still believe in one thing.  So In essense there has to be a GOD.  But there doesn't have to be a religion, but an individual belief.

Cheers
-Buzz

PS. was almost ready to break out the "Soldiers Prayer" there

 

[Infanteer]

One should recognize that there is a difference between a belief in one god and interpretations of scriptures.  On one hand you have the means, and the other you have the end.  Whether you believe or choose to not believe that other religious denominations worship the same god does not change the fact that Islam, Christianity, and Judaism all originated from the same region (the middle east) and document the same events and key players (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic_monotheism).  God's word has been written, transcribed and translated by prophets and scholars for millennia.  The scriptures are not autobiographies of God.  In simple terms, choosing not to believe that protestants, Catholics, Muslims, and Jews do not worship the same God through different means is precisely the same as believing that vehicles in the UK do not have internal combustion engines because the steering wheel is on the other side.

That is what I am trying to say, but I just couldn't say it as well  .  Look at it as "Governments" (we'll just call it "governments of the soul") - Britain, Canada and the United States may not be the same governments, but they all have the same roots and principles.  Canada, Britain and the United States are related by the fact that they share many traits that are not shared with the tradition of governance in, say, Russia.  Don't mix up the Evolution of Doctrine (which is most assuredly different) with the Roots of Faith (which is, as others have pointed out, the same).