"I believe in an Almighty God," said President Bush in an interview with Al Arabiya, "and I believe that all the world, whether they be Muslim, Christian, or any other religion, prays to the same God. That's what I believe."
The President's attempt to promote a monotheistic ecumenism among the world's religions is noble but misguided. Neither Muslims nor Christians (or as I hope to show, Jews) believe that we "pray to the same God."
At the risk of overcomplicating the issue, let's examine the claim by putting it into a logical structure. The Muslim's argument, based on the Qu'ran, can be put in the form of a (modus ponens) syllogism:
1. {If P then Q} If you believe that Jesus is the begotten son of God, then you do not believe in the one true God (See Note 1: Qu'ran (Sura 112))
2. {P} Christians believe that Jesus is the begotten son of God. (See Note 2: John 3:16)
3. {Q} Christians do not believe in the one true God.
Note 1: Qu'ran (Sura 112) -- "Say: He is God, The One and Only; God, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, Nor is He begotten; And there is none Like unto Him."
Note 2: John 3:16 (KJV) -- "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
While I doubt the President was aware of this argument, I'm sure that he would agree this is a valid argument with true premises. He should also, therefore, agree that from the Muslim perspective, we do not all pray to the same God.
But the most that can be inferred by that conclusion is that Muslims do not believe Christians and Muslims worship the same God. A slightly more complex argument is needed to prove that Christians (at least those Christians, like evangelicals, who believe the Bible is authoritative) also should not subscribe to this view:
1. P -- The Gospels of Matthews and John make accurate claims about what Jesus said.
2. Q -- Everything Jesus said was true.
3. R -- Jesus said that he is the begotten son of God. {John 3:16, 1, 2}
4. S -- Jesus said that you can know the Father, if and only if you know him first. {John 8:19, Matt. 11:27 1, 2}*
5. T --> U -- If you deny that Jesus is the begotten son of God then you do not know Jesus. {Modus Ponens, 1, 2, 3}
6. U --> V -- If you do not know Jesus then you do not know the Father. {Modus Ponens, 4}
7. T --> V If you deny that Jesus is the begotten son of God then you do not know the Father. {Hypothetical syllogism, 5, 6}
8. W -- Muslims deny that Jesus is the begotten son of God. (Qu'ran (Sura 112) -- "Say: He is God, The One and Only; God, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, Nor is He begotten; And there is none Like unto Him.")
9. T & W -- You deny that Jesus is the begotten son of God and Muslims deny that Jesus is the begotten son of God. {Conjunction, 5, 8}
10. W --> V -- If Muslims deny that Jesus is the begotten son of God then Muslims do not know the Father. {Simplification, Modus Ponens, 7, 9}
If this argument is valid then it proves that Christians and Muslims do not pray and worship the "same" God. The problem is that agreeing with #6 implies that Jewish believers--at least since the time of Christ--also do not worship the "same" God.
This is precisely what I believe.
One of the basic axiomatic truths of Christianity is that God is Triune. While this is a difficult doctrine that no one fully comprehends, all orthodox Christians agree that Jesus is not merely a 'part' or 'attribute' of God but is one of the three persons and that all are God and all are one. A Christian cannot speak of 'God' without including both Christ and the Holy Spirit.
We also should not claim that, though Jews have an incomplete knowledge of God, they worship the "same" God as Christians. For it is not that Jews are unaware of Jesus; it is that they reject him. They believe it is blasphemous to claim that Christ is the same person as God. Christians, if we are consistent with our belief in the triune Godhead, will say that it is blasphemous to claim that that Jesus is not God.
To do otherwise is to either deny the validity of our belief in Christ or dismiss the Jewish belief that he is not divine. In essence we are claiming either that Jews are ignorant concerning the person they claim to worship or that it is possible to worship God and exclude Christ. In my opinion, both of these options are unacceptable.
Most Jews (and Muslims) are aware of the person of Jesus Christ, aware of the claims made about him in the New Testament, and have concluded that the claim concerning his deity are false. While I disagree with their conclusion, I trust that they have justified reasons, at least in their own minds, for why they reject him as Lord. We do all believers a disservice, when like President Bush, we resort to a "bait and switch" theology-- claiming that we all worship the same God and yet adding an element on which the other religions find abhorrent.
Religious liberty is a divinely permitted freedom. As Christians it is our duty to speak the truth in love and to deal maturely with genuine disagreements. The ideal of religious tolerance is not to agree to the lowest common beliefs but rather to show respect due to fellow humans made in the image of God. By glossing over our theology with a layer of politically correct ecumenical agreement we are being 'intolerant' of both Islam and Judaism.
I agree. Let's take it further. The Deists and Unitarians among the founders did not worship the same god as monotheists. Thus, when Jefferson speaks of "nature's God" in the Declaration of Independence, that is a completely different god than the one you worship.
Perhaps the motto should be changed to "one nation under gods"?
Do Mormons (think Mitt Romney) believe in the same god that you do?
Could you use the same basic argument to show that Calvinists and Arminians do not worship the same god?
Do errantists and inerrantists worship the same god?
How many gods are worshipped by people who consider themselves Christians?
"As Christians it is our duty to speak the truth in love and to deal maturely with genuine disagreements."
christians do not speak "the truth"...they speak THEIR biased version of what they believe the truth to be...dare i say it...what they WANT the truth to be...same as muslims...same as jews...same as everyone who feels compelled to insist that they must be right while everyone else must be in error...especially when their cult beliefs are riddled with mechanism that essentially discourage them from testing their assumptions for fear that they may be found wanting...there exists a wisdom to which religionists of all tripes seem to be completely immune...it is the simple realisation that while it is probably impossible for everyone to be right, it is very possible (and very likely) that everyone is wrong when it comes to the truth.
What is the difference between disagreeing over a characteristic of someone versus believing they are a different person?
For example, I believe Joe has blonde hair. You believe he has black hair. We both believe that Joe Carter is the author of this blog but we have different beliefs about his nature (one of which may be true or neither may be true).
On the other hand, if I think the Joe Carter who writes this blog is the same Joe Carter who killed a dozen people 175 years ago in a frontier town then I probably believe in a 'different' Joe Carter than the one everyone else here does.
I think that Boonton has an excellent point.
Did Bush say that all beliefs are equal and valid? or did he say that we are all (at least attempting) to pray to the same God?
If I believed that all Christians spoke the truth, than I would be ignorant. As a Christian, I believe the Bible is truth and man falls short of perfection.
You shouldn't let Bush or any other Christian represent Christianity. You should study religion in general and filter it through your own perception of the world. I have done this and found the Christian religion and worldview to be the most applicable to my life and beliefs. I didn't automatically believe in what the Bible said. I questioned and studied the faith.
Joe,
I wonder if such a comment by a believing Christian like President Bush causes you to re-think a Romney presidency.
While you and I probably agree that President Bush is a Christian he is also wrong in his statement that Christians, Muslims and Jews all pray to the same god. Clearly we do not.
Yet, President Bush is seen by many Christians in the United States as a good and decent man with great authority. Certainly he prays to the Lord God Almighty on a daily basis and He guides President Bush in decisions he makes while in the White House.
If this is true and President Bush claims that we all pray to the same god, might this lead some Christians into believing something absurd?
On the contrary, every Christian I worship with and know on a personal level does not believe Mormon's are Christians. Therefore, if a President Romney were to make such a statement, lay Christians would dismiss it out of hand as misguided Mormonism.
So I wonder if this mistaken theology by President Bush leads you to reconsider your position on Mitt Romney.
I should note here that ive never actually read or heard your position on Mitt Romney. However, I have seen you quote others whose positions you seemed to agree with which leads me to believe you are opposed to a Mitt Romney presidency.
ex-preacher Do Mormons (think Mitt Romney) believe in the same god that you do?
No.
Could you use the same basic argument to show that Calvinists and Arminians do not worship the same god?
No.
Do errantists and inerrantists worship the same god?
Yes.
How many gods are worshipped by people who consider themselves Christians?
Depends. If they are Christian in the historical meaning of that term, then the answer is one.
Boonton What is the difference between disagreeing over a characteristic of someone versus believing they are a different person?
For our purposes, we could say a characteristic is something that could be changed without changing the essential nature of the person. If someone thinks I have have red hair when my hair is brown, they could still be referring to me. If someone think I'm an 80 year old Chinese woman then they probably aren't referring to me at all.
Tim L Did Bush say that all beliefs are equal and valid? or did he say that we are all (at least attempting) to pray to the same God?
What Bush said is actually more convoluted than what I credited him with. It's one thing to say that Muslim and Christians worship the same God. But he said that "all religions" worship the same God. I'm not sure how he fits polytheists, animists, and monist religions into his scheme.
For the sake of argument, and out of respect for our president, let's assume that God exists.
What does God want?
Does She want everyone to learn the dogma of his parents and/or community and internalize that dogma as a rigid part of his core identity?
Or does She want everyone to be motivated by religion to be a good person of good character who appreciates and loves people from every background and religion?
Many would say the two preferences are not mutually exclusive. And I would agree, up to a point.
However, the way I look at it is, if God exists, then everybody (including the atheists such as myself) has a handle on a different aspect of God. If you reject someone else's beliefs as "blasphemous", you are actually ignoring an aspect of God which you are not aware of or you don't understand.
It's the old parable of the blind men and the elephant. Each man held a different piece of the elephant, the tusk, the foot, the ear, the trunk, the tail, the hide. Each man confused the special part for the whole.
It's as if Joe Carter has red hair and brown hair, and is an 80-year-old Chinese woman who also killed a dozen people 175 years ago.
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense at first blush, perhaps, but nobody here is mistaking Joe for God, at least not so far. And anyone who has studied the infinite is likely to have encountered some interesting paradoxes that seem just as counter-intuitive as my analysis of God.
In short, it's not that the Muslims or the Buddhists are wrong, they are just looking at pieces of the God-mosaic that are different from the ones that Christians and Jews like to contemplate.
"What does God want?"
thats an easy question to answer....nothing. If God exists, IT wants nothing...it has everything and therefore wants nothing...want is what define beings who are not gods...being who's powers are limited...beings like us....ergo,Humans want...God has. If it exist,humans want it...if it exists,God has it. thats the key attribute which defines humnans and God....want and has.
Ludwig,
Yes, you are right, God wants nothing.
I had a music teacher, Mrs. Murowski (who was a wonderful music teacher and person), who believed that each of us, through our sinful behavior, had the power to stick a thorn in the Sacred Heart of Jesus and release a sorrowful rivulet of divine blood.
I'm not sure what the Calvinists would make of her theory, but that was one piece of the God-mosaic that I could never put into place.
On the other hand, my non-theist comrade, consider the fact that we are, each of us, part of the cosmos, and that each of us has our own individual desires, drives, passions, and what-nots.
If we were to consider God to be a pantheistic background spirituality in the universe, then would it not be possible to ascribe to God, as it manifests itself in each of us, the capacity to want and to need and to desire?
Eccumenical pluralism is not certainly not the answer.
IIRC, a pantheistic perspective on Islam was the motivation for much of the violence in Europe a couple of years ago. Their orthodoxy was affronted with a clear heresy and blasphemy because they see their faith as exclusive. Christians who are (small-o) orthodox hold the same core position -- there is one God, Jehovah, and no other god's beside Him. Each belief system considers itself exclusively true. Only the radical pluralists today would say that (x = !y) and (x = y) can both be true.
There was a day when Aquinas could debate the Muslim theologians on (esp.) transcendency and they wouldn't be killing each other. May we someday arrive again at the point where we disagree but discuss theology. No equivocation and no unnecessary bloodshed.
Collin
http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com/
For our purposes, we could say a characteristic is something that could be changed without changing the essential nature of the person. If someone thinks I have have red hair when my hair is brown, they could still be referring to me. If someone think I'm an 80 year old Chinese woman then they probably aren't referring to me at all.
"essential" is in the eye of the beholder, though. Whether or not you're an 80 yr old Chinese women isn't very essential to writing this blog. It would be to your military service. If I was writing a book on the history of different hairstyles whether you're the Joe with red or blonde hair is essential. Even the Trine nature of God wasn't essential, at least in God's opinion, to be revealed until halfway through the Bible. Naturally every denomination will think their particular beliefs are 'essential', otherwise why would they have bothered to go and create their own denomination.
Joe--
You should know that many New Testament Scholars (conservative, evangelical ones) view John 3:16 as the words of John, as narrator, commenting on what Jesus had said earlier to Nicodemus. No one knows for sure where Jesus' words stop and John's words begin, but most agree that Bibles with red letters and quotation marks take the quotation too far. So technically, point 3 in your argument doesn't really work. However, if the argument is for those who "believe the Bible is authoritative," then it shouldn't matter whether the words are those of Jesus himself or the inspired words of John.
I dont think Bush has had much exposure to theology. I suspect he would say that his ecumenical faith is a mystery -- we dont understand, but God works it out.
Or it could be that President Bush was only being diplomatic. It's not like he has presented himself to the world as a theologian. He's not required to speak in theologically correct phraseology as far as I know. It also might be his desire that all life-respecting Muslims not be condemned to eternal Hell for worshipping the incorrect God. It may also be worth it to explore whether or not the life-respecting Muslim's worship a different god than the Islamists that would implement Sharia in the U.S. and persecute atheists and Christians alike. It could also be said that Muslims DO worship the same God, but have a heretical understanding of him in their mistaken belief that Jesus was not the only begotten Son of God and on another mistaken understanding of the Holy Trinity as the one true God, one God in three persons which seems to be a minor sticking point with the Jewish as well. I don't really think it could be argued that Christian and Jew worship a different God.
Isn’t this all just a bit of semantics? Since we know that only one god actually exists, and that god is the one who begat Jesus, it follows that anything else that people might be worshipping is a figment of their imagination. It might as well be Leprechuans.
I think the question is, who do they THINK they’re worshipping? If they think they’re worshipping the God of Abraham, what difference does it make to us?
I think that saying they worship a DIFFERENT god actually legitimizes them by implying that there is something else out there and they are worshipping it.
Reading Joe's post again I'm not sure where he is coming down on Jews, it sounds like he is saying they worship a different God as well. So don't get too excited, Joe seems like he is trying to be very fair here and apply this criteria to everyone equally as best he can.
But this begs an interesting question. Before Jesus Joe would have to say Jews worshipped the same God as Christians do today. So if they today worshipp a different God, when exactly did someone switch out the God of the Jews with whatever God they worship now?
Take it like this:
Stage 1 Jews worship Joe's God.
Stage 2 People start saying Jesus was the Son of God, Joe's God is really 3 persons in 1 etc.
Some choose to alter their beliefs, others do not.
Stage 3 Now Jews are worshipping a different God?????
What really seems to happen is a disagreement on a characteristic of one God. Whether or not this is essential isn't really important. If I told you guys today that Joe was really a plant by Media Matters to make conservative religious types seem silly...most of you wouldn't believe me but maybe some will. That certainly is a disagreement about something 'essential' to Joe's nature. But we would all still be talking and arguing about the same Joe.
The same exercise holds for Muslims except in stage 1 everyone is worshipping the "God of Abraham" and in stage 2 people start claiming the Koran provides the most refined and accurate description of this God. Disagreement ensues but no one made a decision here to 'switch Gods'.
Re the theology of President Bush: "by their fruits ye shall know them...."
What are the fruits of the Bush administration?
Does President Bush's bible omit the book of James? Does he show partiality to one class of people over the other?
"Isn’t this all just a bit of semantics? Since we know that only one god actually exists, and that god is the one who begat Jesus, it follows that anything else that people might be worshipping is a figment of their imagination. It might as well be Leprechuans. "
LOL....that has got to be the clearest exemple of the kettle saying to the pot "hey ure black!" that i ve ever seen...not only dont you know anything...you dont even know that you dont know anything...but at least ure entertaining.
Most Jews (and Muslims) are aware of the person of Jesus Christ, aware of the claims made about him in the New Testament, and have concluded that the claim concerning his deity are false.
Although Muslims are certainly "aware" of Jesus, how many of them actually know what his gospel claims? How many have ever owned a Bible or even cracked one? Most of the world is not as open to free inquiry as you and I are used to. Muslims are some of the most spiritually hungry and inquisitive people on the planet. If they reject Christ it is as likely to be due to lack of exposure or oppression as to knowing rejection, IMHO. Good post.
This reminds me of the famous Abraham Licoln quote:
"If you call a tail a leg, how many legs has a dog? Five? No, calling a tail a leg don't make it a leg."
We are all God's children, regardless of whether we are Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, atheist, and agnostic). Right?
Maybe we should just respect and treat each other accordingly instead of playing word games which basically amount to saying my God is better than your God, therefore you are inferior and your beliefs have no value.
"We are all God's children, regardless of whether we are Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, atheist, and agnostic). Right?
Maybe we should just respect and treat each other accordingly instead of playing word games which basically amount to saying my God is better than your God, therefore you are inferior and your beliefs have no value."
huh?!! did i miss something here? you just completely reversed your position to its diametrical opposite inside 35 minutes...from "i know i am right and you re all wrong" to "cant we all just get along...we re all the same.."...was it something i said?...:)
"We are all God's children, regardless of whether we are Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, atheist, and agnostic). Right?
Not if you accept Scripture at its word. How about "Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God." (John 1:12)
A plain reading would show this to say that we are not all God's children. All dogs don't go to heaven.
JohnW,
I thought you were a Christian. What good is being a Christian if you don't believe that Jesus Christ is the only path to eternal life?
"A plain reading would show this to say that we are not all God's children. All dogs don't go to heaven."
oh? and which are the dogs that do make it past the pearly white gates? we are talking about actual dogs here right? if so than whats the hurdle?...if they dont ever poop in the living room they get to live on a cloud? as for being children of God,i dont think there ever was a more innacurate statement ever made...children are the inheritors of their parents legacy...the continuation of their race...the link in the chain that lead to the next link...for all those reasons,nothing that exists can be the child of any god bcause gods are eternal,unique and you cant inherit anything from them...every possible purpose served by a child is utterly useless to a god.
"What good is being a Christian if you don't believe that Jesus Christ is the only path to eternal life?"
which in essense means...
"what good is being a Christian if that means you re required to be a dimwitted fool who cant tell his @ss from a hole in the ground"
hum...no good?...
Steve,
My thinking is all people are God's children. In other words, if a person is born, he is a part of God's creation and God loves him. Since God created all things, we are all his children.
God is love and God loves the person that has the whole bible memorized as much as a person born in a Muslim country. The agnostics who visit this blog to mock what they see as evangelical arrogance and hypocrisy are just as loved by God as you are, Right?
Oclarki, I believe Christ is God's son who died and resurrected from the dead. He is the way, the truth, and the life. That does not mean that I possess all the answers and those who do not believe are not God's children and are not loved by him. It does not mean that people of other faith have no valid ideas. God is the only righteous judge-not me.
Oclarki, I'll use myself as an example. I have frequently commented here about the Iraq war/occupation and I believe I am right. My strong belief that I am right and others are wrong influence the tone of my arguements negatively. If I was christ-like, I'd show more humility and patience with people who don't share my views. If I did this, I would likely communicate better. If I question the motives of those I disagree with or discount them as being ignorant-I'm not communicating in the best way.
[Ludwig, you've got me confused with John M]
"[Ludwig, you've got me confused with John M]"
oops...sorry mate...
"Since God created all things, we are all his children."
so...are rocks children of God?...whats about the moon,or the sun. are trees? cats? birds? any of those children of God? or is that dubious distinction reserved to humans? and if so,then i m really confused..if we re all children of God,wouldnt that make Jesus our brother? and what role do we serve as children of a God exactly?...certainly not the role that children are meant to serve...what is the purpose of God having any children?
JohnW,
Thanks for clearing that up. I am in agreement that every person is created and loved by God. However, as a Christian, I must believe that there are eternal consequences for our acceptance or rejection of Christ's claim to be the only path to the Father.
"Thanks for clearing that up. I am in agreement that every person is created and loved by God. However, as a Christian, I must believe that there are eternal consequences for our acceptance or rejection of Christ's claim to be the only path to the Father."
well you have to i suppose...in fact,you are even required to hope and wish that there is such a consequence...wouldnt that be just terrible if you live you life in chritian beliefs and still wind up in the same place as everyone who doesnt in the end...that would just kill ya....
Boonton,
Stage 1 Jews worship Joe's God.
Stage 2 People start saying Jesus was the Son of God, Joe's God is really 3 persons in 1 etc.
Some choose to alter their beliefs, others do not.
Stage 3 Now Jews are worshipping a different God?????
Excellent point. I think this precisely the reason there has been so much anti-Semitism during the past two millenia of Christendom.
And I know that this is precisely the reason Martin Luther (the Protestant reformer, not the civil rights leader) hated the Jews. He was very tee-ed off that the Jews, who had righteously disavowed papism down through the centuries, had declined to convert en masse now that Lutheranism had come along.
At first he proselytized them in a very respectful, even reverent manner. But later, when they said, "Thanks, but no thanks", he advocated burning their synagogues and all kinds of other very nasty things.
If I told you guys today that Joe was really a plant by Media Matters to make conservative religious types seem silly...most of you wouldn't believe me but maybe some will. That certainly is a disagreement about something 'essential' to Joe's nature. But we would all still be talking and arguing about the same Joe.
The same exercise holds for Muslims except in stage 1 everyone is worshipping the "God of Abraham" and in stage 2 people start claiming the Koran provides the most refined and accurate description of this God. Disagreement ensues but no one made a decision here to 'switch Gods'.
Another excellent point.
Here's a question: where do the atheists fit in, in your view? Roman Catholics believe that an atheist of good character worships God by living a good life. Do you think that atheists also worship the same God as Joe or other Christians?
Ludwig,
I'm not so good with the fancy rhetoric. You bring up some good points.
I think the moon, the sun, cats, and dogs are part of God's creation. The moon, trees, rocks, cats, and dogs are not people though .
Yes, Jesus is our brother-he lived on the earth and had the same experiences as we all do and provides us an example of how we should live. What's the purpose of God having children? That question is too deep for me to answer. For a christian perspective on this, I'd recommend reading the Gospels (I would recommend an Oxford study bible which gives historical context for the writings).
Compare these positions:
Christian:
1. There is a God.
2. He loves me.
Atheist:
1. There is no God.
2. I hate Him.
"Yes, Jesus is our brother-he lived on the earth and had the same experiences as we all do and provides us an example of how we should live."
really? i certainly would never attack anyone for monney lending,no matter where they did it. nor would i curse a tree for not providing fruits outside of season.
"What's the purpose of God having children? That question is too deep for me to answer. For a christian perspective on this, I'd recommend reading the Gospels (I would recommend an Oxford study bible which gives historical context for the writings)."
I m afraid the question is nowhere near as "deep" as you believe it to be and no amount of reading the Gospels (which i did for 6 years in catholic school) would or could ever provide an answer for it. As i said above,a child is the inheritor of its parent. The means by which a specie of biological organisms perpetuate itself and its legacy on the world it inhabits. None of these things can be said to apply to a god. We as humans can inherit nothing from God, nor are we meant to take up its mantle at any point and since God is eternal,it doesnt need us to perpetuate itself. Furthermore,we are nothing like God so we cant even be considered as its children even if we could serve a purpose as such,which we dont anyway. If God has any children,It would not be God. doesnt get any simpler.
"Mark Hunsaker"
pick up a dictionary and look under the letter S for the expression "STRAWMAN"...you should find your picture in there. probably also under the letter M for Mor...well...see for yourself...
Ludwig,
I'm done preaching for the day-thanks for honestly sharing your beliefs.
I think we could both agree on this-we are both human beings and we should treat each other with respect. Right?
For the christians on this blog. Ludgwig's posts on this thread show he is not receptive to hearing about christianity and thinks it's stupid and misguided. How should a christian respond? It's very easy to get angry when someone bashes your beliefs. What would Jesus do? What's the right thing to do?
Here's a question: where do the atheists fit in, in your view? Roman Catholics believe that an atheist of good character worships God by living a good life. Do you think that atheists also worship the same God as Joe or other Christians?
I'm not sure this is Roman Catholic doctrine. A priest might caution that we cannot assume an atheist we knew is in hell because we cannot really know anyone's heart nor do we know how God judges...but I don't think he would say "atheism! no problem just do good things and that's all you need".
So I suppose what you're saying is living a good life is a type of worship of God. OK in that case you're talking about God and you're saying the atheist may be worshipping him without realizing it.
Aw c'mon it's easy... "God is too big to fit in one religion". This is true because the cheeseball bumper sticker I saw the other days says so!
Boonton,
I'm not sure this is Roman Catholic doctrine.
It wasn't for a very, very long time. But about 100 years or so ago the pope spoke and changed course and it has been re-affirmed since then.
Of course, the important question is not what is the pope's magisterium, but rather, what does God herself think?
Mark,
Atheist:
1. There is no God.
2. I hate Him.
Don't forget:
Fundamentalist:
1. There are no atheists.
2. They're going to hell.
And this is where Ex-preacher would point out that Jesus loves all the hell-bound atheists.
MATTHEW WROTE: However, the way I look at it is, if God exists, then everybody (including the atheists such as myself) has a handle on a different aspect of God. If you reject someone else's beliefs as "blasphemous", you are actually ignoring an aspect of God which you are not aware of or you don't understand.
I think you are partly right, and partly wrong, because you fail to distinguish between common and revealed truth. Common truth, which can be discovered through experimentation and observation, is common to all enduring religions. So when the Christian mentions sowing and reaping, and the Buddhist talks about Karma, in some sense, they are describing the same spiritual law.
It is likely that, for instance, Buddhism has captured more common truth or wisdom than Christianity has in some areas, and so there is an opportunity for xians to learn from other faiths.
But when it comes to revealed truth - what is God like, what is man's problem, how do you solve the problem, what happens in the life to come, religions disagree, and they can NOT all be correct. It is in this arena where we must make a stand.
And from this point of view, it is obvious, as Joe pointed out, that Mormons, Muslims, and Christians do NOT agree. So in that sense, they can NOT be serving the same God, since they desribe the essence of God in starkly disagreeing terms.
Now, they may be attempting to worship the same God, but since their disagreement is so great on His essential nature, two of them, if not all, MUST be grossly incorrect. And attemtping to worship God and doing it accurately are worlds apart. To be crass and funny, we could both be aiming to pee in the same toilet, but if you are pointed in the other direction, your toilet is definitely not the same as mine.
Can a Mormon have a saving faith? A Muslim? A Jew?
There is yet another idea which is missed here, and that is that people in Christian cults (Catholicism, Mormonism, JW's, or unhealthy Christian churches) may actually understand the gospel and be saved, even if that salvation is obscured by other confusing and untrue doctrines. So while we will certainly see people from these churches in heaven, the idea is that, we will see many fewer because MOST have never heard, understood, and beleived the gospel that christ died for them and rose from the dead to prove it.
Jews, however, are interesting. While I agree that they are not saved without believing in their Messiah Jesus, they are attempting to serve the same God, and they do have the OT knowledge of what God is like, which is accurate (from a Christian point of view). However, having rejected his Messiah, they are actually in rebellion to Him, or at least serving under a misunderstanding of what their God really wants from them (faith in Christ), and of course, are NOT saved by their piety (actually, no one is).
Seeker,
For someone who is willing to write off various categories of people as "not saved" (meaning eternally damned, yes?), you seem like a very nice and thoughtful person.
So it is out of respect for our common humanity and humaneness that I point out to you that the God of the Bible is a vengeful and jealous tyrant who makes Stalin and Kim Jong Il look like benevolent father-figures in comparison.
If this be revealed truth, I'll take the common truth any day, sir.
Peace and love,
Matthew
BOONTON WRITES: Stage 3 Now Jews are worshiping a different God?????
No. They are *attempting* to worship the same God, but they are not actually successfully worshiping God, because according to Jesus, biblical worship is "in spirit and in truth" (John 4:24). They have rejected the truth, and so are not worshiping their God, but rather, their idol, their wrong idea of what they want God to be.
It's like having sex with your wife, but imagining another woman. Are you really having sex with their wife? You be the judge.
I know that's a little bit of semantics, but the distinctions are important.
Do you think that atheists also worship the same God as Joe or other Christians?
Actually, those without faith always serve some god, just not the one that requires faith to please Him. But they don't serve or worship in the same manner as those with creeds or doctrines. But they do reserve reverence, time, and money for something hallowed - because they are made to.
Humans have sinned against God's perfect order, and seprated themselves from God. In the process we have rejected what is good and true to do evil. We have spit in the face of our most wise, loving and benevolent Creator, the very being who gives us breath.
In spite of that, this being has provided a way for us to return to fellowship with Him and offers to restore our relationship through the free gift of salvation. Indeed this being went so far as to lower Himself to become a human, endure suffering and ultimately die a horrible death all in the name of restoring the relationship. Yet somehow he is a tryant?
Oclarki,
I respect your beliefs, my remark was really directed primarily at Seeker and his views that un-believers and mis-believers are eternally damned, and that the Bible is the inerrant word of God.
Perhaps you agree with him, perhaps you don't. It's not really any of my business either way. I'm just sharing my perspective.
It's like having sex with your wife, but imagining another woman. Are you really having sex with their wife? You be the judge.
Errr yes you are. Likewise if you're having sex with another woman but are imagining your wife I doubt you'll get much credit for that.
I see what you're trying to say but it isn't what JOe said. Joe said not that they have the wrong idea but the wrong God. To use your above example, it's like a man having sex with his wife who thinks so hard about another woman he starts thinking he is really having sex with another woman. He has the 'right woman, wrong idea'. You wouldn't say that thinking or believing the wrong idea really really hard would make his wife turn into another woman.
Joe seems to be saying the opposite. If this man believes enough things about the woman he has sleeping with that are untrue she will cease to be his wife and turn into 'another woman'. To the chagrin of more than a few, that trick does not seem to work.
Matthew,
Well, I was responding to your assertion that God is some kind of tyrant by showing how that is most certainly not the case.
I don't know that the question of whether Christians, Muslims, and Jews pray to the same god is all that interesting (they obviously don't; neither Jews nor Muslims pray to Jesus and Jews don't pray to Allah), I think a more interesting question is whether JohnW and say, James Dobson worship the same god.
To Boonton, MG, ex, Lud, etc., where's your dog in this fight? Why do you care whether or not Christians, Jews, and Muslims pray to the same god?
To Boonton, MG, ex, Lud, etc., where's your dog in this fight? Why do you care whether or not Christians, Jews, and Muslims pray to the same god?
Someone's gotta keep the nuts here in line.
MATTHEW WROTE: So it is out of respect for our common humanity and humaneness that I point out to you that the God of the Bible is a vengeful and jealous tyrant who makes Stalin and Kim Jong Il look like benevolent father-figures in comparison.
Ahh, them's fighting words. But seriously, to state a complex and detailed subject in a few words, I understand those sentiments, but I think that we must understand that love requires justice, and justice is more severe when warnings and lighter punishments are ignored. I think this is what we see in the bible.
Listen, if God lets a Hitler get away with murder, is that love? IF we believe in a God of love, we must also believe in a God of justice.
Your assessment of God's righteousness is interesting, but I think errant. I started (but never finished) a series on this entitled Evaluating God's Righteousness. Enjoy.
Boonton,
It must get frustrating trying to keep people in line who neither recognize your authority, nor particulary care for self-appointed busybodies.
Someone's gotta keep the nuts here in line.
Which says absolutely nothing about why you care which god Christian, Muslims, or Jews worship. You know sometimes it's okay to recognize that you have nothing to contribute to a thread and perhaps the best thing to do is just to go grab a beer and relax. Joe's nothing if not prolific; I am sure he will come up with thread you have some interest and/or knowledge in.
If we are all praying to the same god, then there is no such thing as idolatry.
Yet, Scripture is full of warnings against and condemnations of idolatry.
Therefore, we are not all praying to the same god.
Uncengfer,
I want to say James Dobson worships the gods of prestige, fame, and power, but I'm trying to be respectful of others. Besides, I'm not perfect either.
So, to answer your question: James Dobson worships the God that was presented to him as a child growing up and just leave it at that. I'll assume his belief is sincere.
Last night, I happened to see Mr. Dobson being interviewed by Sean Hannity regarding his assessment of the republican candidates for president. It was followed by an analysis of Mr. Dobson's views by Ms. Ann Coulter. There was no discussion of Ron Paul who is a christian. It was all very interesting in a Jon Stewart / Colbert Report kind of way, except they were actually trying to pass themselves off as some sort of legitimate news analysis program. It was very interesting...and sad.
Which says absolutely nothing about why you care which god Christian, Muslims, or Jews worship. You know sometimes it's okay to recognize that you have nothing to contribute to a thread and perhaps the best thing to do is just to go grab a beer and relax.
Joe's presented an interesting argument that is flawed. So that's my interest. This topic is borderline in that it's very close to an esoteric word game rather than a serious discussion but for the time being Joe's been able to keep in line, if just barely.
Besides, I'd really like to know if it turns out I can sleep with other women and get a pass if I say I was thinking of my wife when I did it.
Marie
Yet, Scripture is full of warnings against and condemnations of idolatry.
Therefore, we are not all praying to the same god.
Yet much of those warnings are against literal idolatry as in making little figures, pictures etc. Not about those with heretical beliefs not really praying to the same God.
JohnW,
Your comments on Dobson are pretty offensive. I don't agree with him on lots of issues. In fact he's not the sort of guy I'd ever see myself liking based on his personality. But to cheap shot his faith as that of a child means you think his decades long relationship with Christ has not caused him to grow or be transformed at all. In fact you are usurping Gods position of judging a man's relationship with Him.
Would it be so hard for you to say "James Dobson is a faithful servant of Christ who holds some political views I disagree with"?
Oclarki,
I was just saying his relationship was with the God that was presented to him while growing up (the christian God). Was not making any statement on his maturity.
I realize Mr. Dobson is held in high esteem by many based on his child raising books and publishing empire. He is definitely not child-like. He is a very astute and savy adult. He knows how to influence people-he's been quite successful at it too.
His appearance on Hannity's interview program was interesting and informative. It raises the question-why should we look to this man to tell us who to support for presdent? Why is he, along with Tony Perkins, presented in the media as leading evangelical spokesmen?
Oclarki,
Well, I was responding to your assertion that God is some kind of tyrant by showing how that is most certainly not the case.
I know, and it's true that your theology highlights the love of God and his concern for his creation.
On the other hand, if you believe that unbelievers are condemned to eternal suffering and ignominy, then such a restriction of freedom of thought, conscience, and/or expression (on the part of God, not yourself) is indeed a tyranny of the most horrible and repulsive variety.
I don't think you can have it both ways (God is infinitely good and merciful, but watch out or you'll end up in hell), but as I said before it's not really my business what your beliefs are. People can believe whatever they want and still get along very well with each other. We just need to respect and love each other and not get hung up over theological differences. The quality of one's soul is not dictated by the content of one's catechism.
Ucfengr,
To Boonton, MG, ex, Lud, etc., where's your dog in this fight? Why do you care whether or not Christians, Jews, and Muslims pray to the same god?
Because the ones who worship Allah have been recruited, at least in some other countries, to blow things up, even things that happen to have lots of people in them.
Because the ones who take Jesus to be their saviour are, every once in a while, vulnerable to regarding other sects as inferior, and have been known to express their disdain in what could be considered unfortunate ways.
Because there are a lot of misconceptions about atheists and materialists, and it is better to light a candle than curse the darkness.
Because it's fun to exchange ideas with people who want to challenge you instead of provide you with an echo chamber.
Because Boonton and Ludwig can be insufferable know-it-all's at times and I like to hold them accountable for their arrogance, although that's easier said than done.
Because life is too short to duck a good fight when there is fun to be had.
And because there are plenty of good Christians, such as President Bush, who believe things I don't, but whom I am glad to support and defend because they do the right things and have a good heart. And I know that I am not the source of all wisdom anyway, so I'm not trying to prove anything anyway.
Seeker,
Your assessment of God's righteousness is interesting, but I think errant.
I can't really expect you to concede more than that, so I salute your commitment to truth and justice, and wish you well. Thank you for the respectful exchange of ideas.
I did not see the interview with James Dobson, but I've heard he is advocating Christians back a third-party candidate if Rudy G. gets the Republican nomination. Am I the only one getting alarmed that he's trying to introduce a de facto "Christian Party" into our politics? This would be a very bad development, both for the country and (more importantly) the Church.
The original question about whether the Christian God is the one to whom Jews also pray is a very important question. I was recently asked a very similar question at my website, and I will copy the answer I posted there:
"David, the question you raise is a good one. Pastors and theologians who hold that Christians and Jews worship the same God do so on the basis of the covenant relationship God had with Israel, which began with the unconditional promises He made to Abraham. It was to Abraham's descendants that God revealed Himself as Yahweh (or "Jehovah"), and while God's self-revelation before Christ was far less extensive, it was still a true revelation. Since God does not change and His Word remains eternal, these pastors and theologians argue the Jews today are still praying to the true God, just as Christians do today with a fuller understanding through Christ.
"They have fallen into an error that is not obvious until it's pointed out, for you are correct that Christians do not worship or offer prayers to the same God as contemporary Jews. Christian prayer is addressed to the Triune God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, who, as one, undivided God, is rejected by the Jews.
"The error of these pastors and theologians is chiefly in seeing a continuity with contemporary Judaism and Old Testament Israelites. Judaism today is not the same religion as either the Hebrew faith of the Old Covenant, or even the Jews of the Jesus' day. Judaism today does not worship God on the basis of the New Covenant, because they refuse to repent and turn to Jesus Christ. Judaism today does not worship God on the basis of the Old Covenant, because that covenant is no longer in effect; it ended completely on the day Christ rose from the dead.
"That they are invoking the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is no more proof they are worshiping the true God than the fact that Mormons regularly invoke the name of Jesus in their prayers with no saving faith in Christ. "And without faith it is impossible to please God." (Heb. 11:6) St. Paul is very clear that those who have the same faith as Abraham are the ones who are now heirs to the unconditional promises made to Abraham, whether they are Jewish or non-Jewish. If an ethnically Jewish person would worship the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, he has to come to see that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob have now been saved by faith in Christ. The faith that is imputed to us as righteousness is the same faith Abraham had (although his was based on comparatively limited revelation), but it is really unrelated to contemporary Judaism. Even the rabbis seem to be aware of this, in that many will agree the orthodox practice of their religion rests more today on the Talmud than on the Tanach, the Jewish name for the Old Testament. The god the rabbis insist on identifying with Yahweh is much more a philosophical god-concept arising out the interplay between their tradition and speculation."
For those interested in more, check out www.LutheranDifference.com
Well fortunately Joe, you will soon have the perfect opportunity to take up your concerns with the main players in the GOP itself. Bush is soon to out of the picture but that doesn't mean you can't bring up your issues with his potential replacements.
I speak of course of the "values voters" summit on the 20th.
While you are there are you also going to challenge the GOP leadership by pointing out to them that torture, rendition, and even plain old "stress positions" are not compatible with Christian ethics? Or at least what used to be Christian ethics?
If not, are you sure that those at the "values voters" summit, share your actual values?
Patrick,
Maybe Joe could clarify what values are going to be stressed at the "values voter" summit.
I wouldn't want to pre-judge, but I don't think there will be any challenges to the GOP concerning torture (or enhanced interrogation techniques). Maybe the wisdom of a pre-emptive strike on Iran might be a hot values laden topic up for discussion?
So, it's only idolatry if you have a little figure you are praying to?
I don't think so.
Actually idolatry, I believe, was just making the figures....even a statue or picture that you didn't prey too would be idolatry. This was an issue, I believe, that exploded several times thru Christian history, although like most deep arguments it has kind of settled down nowadays since we all got TV.
While I doubt the President was aware of this argument, I'm sure that he would agree this is a valid argument with true premises. He should also, therefore, agree that from the Muslim perspective, we do not all pray to the same God.
Joe, that's nuts. The first premise is quite obviously what he'd deny. He doesn't think you worship a false god by believing Jesus is the Son of God.
As the the more substantive issue, which is your own argument, it has the same problem that it had the first time you offered it several years ago. I can accept your entire argument by agreeing with all the premises, accepting its logic, and agreeing with its conclusion. I do think it's true that Muslims or non-Christian Jews do not know the Father in the sense involved in salvific faith. But it doesn't follow that they don't worship him in any sense.
As I said back then, you need to distinguish between two things people might mean when they say two people worship the same being. One thing you might mean is that they worship the same being properly. You're not really worshiping God if you go to him with beliefs that are so radically false that he won't accept your worship as legitimate. But at the same time it's still him you're attempting to worship, since there's no other being with the characteristics the person worshiping has in mind.
Now it's true that not all of the characteristics the person has in mind are true of God, but the same is true of lots of cases when we might misidentify someone but still refer to them. People who didn't know that heat was average kinetic energy but thought it was a fluid called caloric still referred to heat with the word 'heat', because there was something they had in mind. They just believed false things about it. I don't have any hesitation saying that Muslims and Jews are falsely worshiping God, and it is the same God I worship that they are falsely worshiping. The Bible doesn't have problems with speaking that way either. So why is it a problem if Bush does?
Someone's gotta keep the nuts here in line.
So, you admit you are a controlling individual. I don't see that very often!
Jeremy,
Joe, that's nuts. The first premise is quite obviously what he'd deny. He
doesn't think you worship a false god by believing Jesus is the Son of God.You're not really worshiping God if you go to him with beliefs that are so radically false that he won't accept your worship as legitimate. But at the same time it's still him you're attempting to worship, since there's no other being with the characteristics the person worshiping has in mind.
In essence, what you are saying is that Jews are worshiping Jesus Christ—they just don't know it. Jesus is not a "characteristic" of God. Jesus is God. There is no way for them to get around that fact. Trying to worship the Father while rejecting the Son is--as Jesus himself pointed out--radically false. They are replacing the true God (as revealed in Christ) for preferred vision of what they think God is.
Now it's true that not all of the characteristics the person has in mind are true of God, but the same is true of lots of cases when we might misidentify someone but still refer to them. People who didn't know that heat was average kinetic energy but thought it was a fluid called caloric still referred to heat with the word 'heat', because there was something they had in mind.
Again, Jesus is not a "characteristic" of God. You can't deny God and worship him at the same time without doing violence to logic, the Trinity, or the meaning of "same."
The Bible doesn't have problems with speaking that way either. So why is it a problem if Bush does?
Where does the Bible say that one can reject Jesus and still worship the Father?
I don't know where you got your idea of what constitutes a cult, but if the Catholic Church is a cult, then that makes the Protestant faiths (and descendents) that split off from it doubly so. And to nit pick just a bit more, Jehovah's Witness is not a Christian faith, and neither is the Mormon faith.
John W
"Why is he, along with Tony Perkins, presented in the media as leading evangelical spokesmen?"
That would be because Fallwell died, Pat Robertson requires them to put him on live and unedited, and they want a poster boy for Christianity that they can ridicule. Though perhaps this is not the case so much on Fox.
Boonton:
You seem to be confusing graven images with idolatry.
Mike O,
I don't think they put Dobson and Perkins on to ridicule them; they are usually presented as being some sort of authority on the christian viewpoints on various issues or things that happen. For instance, when the scandal with Congressman Foley was in the news: Tony Perkins appears on CNN to talk about it.
Dobson and Perkins are held out to be spokesmen for christian "values", yet when I visit the FRC website to see what is going to be discussed in the upcoming Washington Brief / Values Voter Summit, I see nothing about peacemaking or the pressing issue of the growing income inequality in our country. I suppose they don't have the Sermon on the Mount or the book of James in their bibles.
JohnW,
Because we all know the real reason Christ came to earth was to provide economic advice and lay out the best political/economic system for the world to adopt.
Boonton:
You seem to be confusing graven images with idolatry.
Perhaps your right. On the other hand I'm skeptical that idolatry was meant to cover all erronous beliefs.
More seriously
Joe
In essence, what you are saying is that Jews are worshiping Jesus Christ—they just don't know it. Jesus is not a "characteristic" of God. Jesus is God. There is no way for them to get around that fact. Trying to worship the Father while rejecting the Son is--as Jesus himself pointed out--radically false. They are replacing the true God (as revealed in Christ) for preferred vision of what they think God is.
So when did this happen? Presumably you feel Jews began by worshipping God but then when Jesus was revealed some type of bait and switch happened and they are now worshipping a different God? That makes no sense, no one changed Gods here.
To use your example, you said if someone claimed you were an 80 year old Chinese woman that would be talking about a different Joe Carter. But how do we really know you're not an 80 yr old Chinese woman with an excellent command of English and American culture? Suppose some people here start to suspect you choose that example becuase you really are an 80 yr old Chinese woman. The community here would split between Chinese-Joe believers and US-Joe believers but the argument is still about the same Joe Carter.
Again, Jesus is not a "characteristic" of God. You can't deny God and worship him at the same time without doing violence to logic, the Trinity, or the meaning of "same."
Again who were the Jews worshipping before anyone ever heard of Jesus? If they were worshipping the same God then then when did this switch take place? It still seems like this is an argument about the nature of God rather than an argument about which God is being worshipped.
oclarki,
At my church last Sunday, the sermon was about the book of James-it's wrong to show partiality towards the rich. Also, all throughout the bible it shows that God having a special concern for the poor and oppressed.
Income inequality is a very real problem effecting the lives of millions of people in our country and billions throughout the world. So while I agree Christ did not come to advance a narrow partisan agenda, he does have a deep concern for the poor. We are told in the bible to have concern for the poor and to be peacemakers-this will sometimes involve politics and economic systems. If our faith is truely to touch every part of our lives, it will effect these areas too.
Because the ones who take Jesus to be their saviour are, every once in a while, vulnerable to regarding other sects as inferior, and have been known to express their disdain in what could be considered unfortunate ways.
Matthew, this is not a vulnerability that unique to Christians, or even other religious folk; in fact it is rather common among atheists, Ludwig being a good example.
Ucfengr,
Matthew, this is not a vulnerability that unique to Christians, or even other religious folk
Quite right. I didn't want to get very specific about Christian failings, though, because this is a Christian blog and I was trying to be diplomatic.
I think almost everyone here would agree that religion is a very powerful force. It motivates people to do great things. It motivates people to be good and do good things. And it also motivates people to do some of the worst things you can imagine (although that is only true of other people's religion, and never one's own).
One of the reasons President Bush likes to say nice things about Islam, and to say that the great religions worship the same God, is because he understands that every religion, including Christianity, has a tendency to divide people into "us" and "them". This polarizing aspect of religion is one of the main drivers of religiously-inspired mischief and evil, and President Bush is correct to work against it.
And of course, if there is one God, then anyone who prays to God is praying to the same God, because there ain't nobody else to pray to. Joe Carter disagrees, but he doesn't work the prayer switchboard, so it isn't like he is privy to some special knowledge that President Bush doesn't have.
I myself think everybody would be a lot better off without praying and God, but I also have a healthy respect for tradition and I wouldn't dream of imposing my views on other people.
That said, if someone says the Bible is infallible or that infidels (or Christians who are insufficiently Calvinist) are going to hell, I am going to want to call him on it. Thinking your next-door neighbor is going to hell because he doesn't go to your church is not a healthy way of perceiving reality.
Are Christians any worse than any other religious group? I don't think so.
Are they worse than atheists? Probably not. But I don't think they are better either.
in fact it is rather common among atheists, Ludwig being a good example.
Ludwig says many things, but he never claims that Christians are fundamentally flawed people or deserve eternal punishment. His disdain can be broad, but it's not as deep as God's, if God is really in the fire-and-brimstone business.
JohnW,
The only difference in my compassion for the poor compared to yours, is that I think individuals motivated by Christs commandments to give to the poor and serve them are far more effective than giving my taxes to an inefficient beauracracy and having it distribute it to people who may or may not be in need.
I'm sure you'll agree that it is more effective for me as a Christian to fellowship with and provide support to a less fortunate person than for me to rely on the government to do it in my place. Additionally, how many sould have been won for Christ by a government check compared to the impact of ministries like Compassion International or World Vision?
Oclarki,
Please don't misunderstand me, I do not think Government has the answer for poverty and compassion towards the poor. That's not what I am suggesting. Currently, things are skewed way towards the rich and business interests. We have welfare for corporations in this country. I'm just saying let's make the laws and tax policy not lean so much towards the rich, business interests, and the military.
Joe, you should review your CS Lewis.
Narnian Chronicles: The Last Battle
Aslan accepts the Muslim (Calormene)
Reading CS Lewis always makes me love Christianity. Reading Dobson and Perkins always makes me want to hate it.
Oclarki,
I forgot to say I do agree that your personal support and fellowship with a person in need is better than any sort of government assistance. This is always true.
I like Compassion Internation-my wife contributes to two children.
very logical.
i'm an american christian living in the middle east. the majority of muslims that i've met tend to believe that the God of Jews, Christians and Muslims is in fact the same God. certain tracts aimed at "the truth about Jesus and the Bible" begin with the supposition that Christians and Muslims believe in the same God.
don't let the contradiction between what they believe and what you found in the Qu'ran bug you though...inconsistency plagues every religious community...even ours.
Jesus is God. If you don't believe this we do not
pray to the same God.
John 10:31-39
...(even if you refuse to believe in me, at least believe in the work I do; then you will know for certain that the Father is in Me and I am in the Father.)
It seems that the elusive reality is the Magical realization of our beliefs lie in the WORKS that are displayed from our FAITH !
Our One True GOD gave Moses the 10 Commandments for people to follow them on the path to everlasting life. Man being unable to follow/obey the Commandments, was then given the SAVIOUR-JESUS CHRIST who took all the sin of mankind within HIS responsibility and gave his LIFE out of HIS undefined,total, all encompassing LOVE of Mankind. (Others)
Mark 3:28-29
all will be forgiven them except those who blaspheme against the HOLY SPIRIT it will never be forgiven them.
GOD's 2 Greatest commandments 1.) Love GOD with thy whole heart, thy whole soul, with thy whole strength. 2.)Love thy neighbor as thy Self.
Both of these greatesst commandments given by JESUS CHRIST GOD places others ahead of or equal to ourselves.
So, first we must LOVE GOD (who is the epitome of LOVE, the all encompassing LOVE, the EVERLASTING LOVE, the TRUTH that is realized through HIS LOVE. HIS BEING!!! GLORY BE TO GOD!!! ALLELLUIA!!!
I shall not condemn those that do not understand or believe as I do, but I hope and pray that my FAITH shall be shown through my works. (not condemning others, who do not see as I do is so damn hard. I must leave that to the PARACLETE who does speak to all.)
May the HOLY SPIRIT of GOD open our hearts and minds to the understanding and teachings of JESUS CHRIST.
Maybe it just appears that the evangelicals' main mission is to condemn those that are different and claim to know it all.
Long ago I was told, "Better to Light a candle, than to curse the darkness." Oh, how I wish I had/have given much more heed to those words.
Maybe it just appears that the evangelicals' main mission is to condemn those that are different and claim to know it all.
Long ago I was told, "Better to Light a candle, than to curse the darkness." Oh, how I wish I had/have given much more heed to those words.