OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 23, 2014, 01:56:15 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Scholar: Christians, Muslims believe in -- but don't worship -- same God  (Read 1323 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,343



« Reply #45 on: May 02, 2012, 10:24:50 PM »

I'll just settle the argument and say that the ultimate scholastics are the Buddhists.

Awesome. I'll take your word for it. Though it seems to me from the small of amount of writing I've read on from the Dalai Lama (sp?), he is either a transcendental materialist or playing that angle to woo Western money and attention.



The Dalai Lama's public teaching is not the best source on Buddhist doctrine, even for his own Geluk school. Young monks spend a lot of time learning how to argue with positions no one has held for 2000 years.

I know. It is my way of saying I know jack about Buddhism in any systematic manner.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
That person
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 1,155


Long live Commie Superman


« Reply #46 on: May 02, 2012, 10:37:23 PM »

The only thing we have that indicates Allah is God the Father is the Qur'an, which we view as either full of mistakes, made up, or intentionally deceptive.

Really these claims don't hold to scholarship. The notion that the Qur'an is full of mistakes is no longer taken very seriously and the textual criticism shows that the Qur'an was for all intents and purposes a rather unified document from early on.

Lazily googling will give you the infos. Just read the wikipedia articles. I've looked them over at times and they are quite good.

As far as the deceptive part goes, it is hard to actually read generously the account of Muhammed's life and think of him as driven by intentional deceit.

Actually, you are reading too much into my wording.  There are mistakes in the Qur'an, perhaps not in dictation, recording, grammatical inference, but in theology, understanding, and the presentation of who the supreme deity is.

I'll pass on the googling prescription, lazily or not.

The account of Muhammad's life written by whom? When?  Oh, it's sympathetic to his story? How objectively shocking.  Then the deception comes from another source.  Who might that be?  

You realize that this method of reading puts the claims of Christianity into greater jeopardy than Islam.

The Koran, I am kicking it old school, and other likely contemporaneously writing of Mohamed doesn't paint him into some "perfect" human.

Again, if you are not interested, there is no point. But I would suggest passing on repeating vague criticisms especially when they are likely to more damning towards the claims of most Christians.

This method of reading?  Determining that some scripture is true while others are false?  I'm not following.

Of course the Koran doesn't paint him as some "perfect" human; who suggested it did, and why is that relevant?

I am very interested in the subject and have studied it in some detail, but I really don't know what you are getting at.  Additionally, I have no idea how my vague criticisms, in other words, what our Church believes, are damning towards claims of Xtians.

Then you were intentionally vague about your criticisms of the Koran. If you don't take the typical criticisms and thus agree with the notion that the Koran is a singular document within the history of the Arabic language and quite different from any other "words" from have from Mohamed, then awesome.

As far as the Qur'an being "internally" theologically flawed, sorry but the Christian Scriptures are actually much more complicated and contradictory, which I find frankly to be a strength incidentally. (FWIW, I am not expert on the Koran; however, it ain't hard to see how it is more consistent throughout in its understanding of God. And how it leads thus much to a more easily to systematic theology, which again I find to be a weakness. After all it is written in direct light of engagement of neo-Platonic with Semitic thought. The Muslims didn't have as much trouble of having to make their Scripture speak Greek so to speak, ironically as some would say.)

And to notions of the veracity of the claims about people's lives based on their "biased" nature, toss out all your lives of the Saints, Gospel, etc.

A generous reading of charity rather than suspicion I find over the long run will find the real problems which lie within texts. Ones you can actually discuss with those who love them, as you have as well.









I find this intriguing. Any chance you could expound on it? Does it have to do with transience?
Logged

"Some have such command of their bowels, that they can break wind continuously at pleasure, so as to produce the effect of singing."- St. Augustine of Hippo

Movie reviews you can trust.
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,343



« Reply #47 on: May 02, 2012, 10:46:32 PM »

The only thing we have that indicates Allah is God the Father is the Qur'an, which we view as either full of mistakes, made up, or intentionally deceptive.

Really these claims don't hold to scholarship. The notion that the Qur'an is full of mistakes is no longer taken very seriously and the textual criticism shows that the Qur'an was for all intents and purposes a rather unified document from early on.

Lazily googling will give you the infos. Just read the wikipedia articles. I've looked them over at times and they are quite good.

As far as the deceptive part goes, it is hard to actually read generously the account of Muhammed's life and think of him as driven by intentional deceit.

Actually, you are reading too much into my wording.  There are mistakes in the Qur'an, perhaps not in dictation, recording, grammatical inference, but in theology, understanding, and the presentation of who the supreme deity is.

I'll pass on the googling prescription, lazily or not.

The account of Muhammad's life written by whom? When?  Oh, it's sympathetic to his story? How objectively shocking.  Then the deception comes from another source.  Who might that be?  

You realize that this method of reading puts the claims of Christianity into greater jeopardy than Islam.

The Koran, I am kicking it old school, and other likely contemporaneously writing of Mohamed doesn't paint him into some "perfect" human.

Again, if you are not interested, there is no point. But I would suggest passing on repeating vague criticisms especially when they are likely to more damning towards the claims of most Christians.

This method of reading?  Determining that some scripture is true while others are false?  I'm not following.

Of course the Koran doesn't paint him as some "perfect" human; who suggested it did, and why is that relevant?

I am very interested in the subject and have studied it in some detail, but I really don't know what you are getting at.  Additionally, I have no idea how my vague criticisms, in other words, what our Church believes, are damning towards claims of Xtians.

Then you were intentionally vague about your criticisms of the Koran. If you don't take the typical criticisms and thus agree with the notion that the Koran is a singular document within the history of the Arabic language and quite different from any other "words" from have from Mohamed, then awesome.

As far as the Qur'an being "internally" theologically flawed, sorry but the Christian Scriptures are actually much more complicated and contradictory, which I find frankly to be a strength incidentally. (FWIW, I am not expert on the Koran; however, it ain't hard to see how it is more consistent throughout in its understanding of God. And how it leads thus much to a more easily to systematic theology, which again I find to be a weakness. After all it is written in direct light of engagement of neo-Platonic with Semitic thought. The Muslims didn't have as much trouble of having to make their Scripture speak Greek so to speak, ironically as some would say.)

And to notions of the veracity of the claims about people's lives based on their "biased" nature, toss out all your lives of the Saints, Gospel, etc.

A generous reading of charity rather than suspicion I find over the long run will find the real problems which lie within texts. Ones you can actually discuss with those who love them, as you have as well.









I find this intriguing. Any chance you could expound on it? Does it have to do with transience?

Maybe, can you tell what you mean by transience?
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
That person
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catechumen
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 1,155


Long live Commie Superman


« Reply #48 on: May 02, 2012, 10:57:53 PM »

The idea that God changes. If God is described differently at different times, then it could indicate that God is indeed different at different times. I've heard some arguments from you about why this is a good thing. The only other explanation I thought for your statement was that it indicates how fundamentally incomprehensible God is, but that really doesn't seem like your style.
Logged

"Some have such command of their bowels, that they can break wind continuously at pleasure, so as to produce the effect of singing."- St. Augustine of Hippo

Movie reviews you can trust.
Cognomen
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Phyletism Rules, OK
Posts: 1,968


Ungrateful Biped


« Reply #49 on: May 02, 2012, 11:06:22 PM »

Then you were intentionally vague about your criticisms of the Koran.
I was.  Nor were the criticisms necessarily mine.

Quote
If you don't take the typical criticisms and thus agree with the notion that the Koran is a singular document within the history of the Arabic language and quite different from any other "words" from have from Mohamed, then awesome.

I think the document is singular, and I think it's transcription, composition, whatever you want to call it was a far more organized process than Xtian scriptures.  In terms of its content, I am largely limited to English, and so have little authority to comment on the uniqueness of it in Arabic.  As to where the content came from...? 

Quote
As far as the Qur'an being "internally" theologically flawed, sorry but the Christian Scriptures are actually much more complicated and contradictory, which I find frankly to be a strength incidentally. (FWIW, I am not expert on the Koran; however, it ain't hard to see how it is more consistent throughout in its understanding of God. And how it leads thus much to a more easily to systematic theology, which again I find to be a weakness. After all it is written in direct light of engagement of neo-Platonic with Semitic thought. The Muslims didn't have as much trouble of having to make their Scripture speak Greek so to speak, ironically as some would say.)

The theology is flawed in that it contradicts the truth (according to Christians), not in that it doesn't meet qualifiers which deem it excellent theology.  The Qur'an (and Islam) can be quite compelling.  Although Islamic complex theology exists, there is really not much need for it.  No need for divisive Christological debates and the like.  The idea that the existing Semitic populations of the Byzantine Empire were all forced to accept it is nonsense.  They appreciated freedom from the petty, mind boggling, out of touch yammering, along with the simplicity of the message.  This hasn't changed much in the Holy Land to this day.  Just ask an Arab Patriarch...

That said, I've always found the abrogation arguments a bit unconvincing.

Quote
And to notions of the veracity of the claims about people's lives based on their "biased" nature, toss out all your lives of the Saints, Gospel, etc.
Of course, but I am an Orthodox Christian and so I try to believe the stories of the Saints.  I don't try to believe the "biased" stories about Muhammad. 

I have to escape the Western, logic confined mindset and enter the Eastern world... Hah! I had to do it, but I couldn't continue any longer with that bit.

Quote
A generous reading of charity rather than suspicion I find over the long run will find the real problems which lie within texts. Ones you can actually discuss with those who love them, as you have as well.

I think we're in agreement on this.

Logged

North American Eastern Orthodox Parish Council Delegate for the Canonization of Saints Twin Towers and Pentagon, as well as the Propagation of the Doctrine of the Assumption of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 (NAEOPCDCSTTPPDAMAFM®).
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,343



« Reply #50 on: May 02, 2012, 11:11:30 PM »

Then you were intentionally vague about your criticisms of the Koran.
I was.  Nor were the criticisms necessarily mine.

Quote
If you don't take the typical criticisms and thus agree with the notion that the Koran is a singular document within the history of the Arabic language and quite different from any other "words" from have from Mohamed, then awesome.

I think the document is singular, and I think it's transcription, composition, whatever you want to call it was a far more organized process than Xtian scriptures.  In terms of its content, I am largely limited to English, and so have little authority to comment on the uniqueness of it in Arabic.  As to where the content came from...? 

Quote
As far as the Qur'an being "internally" theologically flawed, sorry but the Christian Scriptures are actually much more complicated and contradictory, which I find frankly to be a strength incidentally. (FWIW, I am not expert on the Koran; however, it ain't hard to see how it is more consistent throughout in its understanding of God. And how it leads thus much to a more easily to systematic theology, which again I find to be a weakness. After all it is written in direct light of engagement of neo-Platonic with Semitic thought. The Muslims didn't have as much trouble of having to make their Scripture speak Greek so to speak, ironically as some would say.)

The theology is flawed in that it contradicts the truth (according to Christians), not in that it doesn't meet qualifiers which deem it excellent theology.  The Qur'an (and Islam) can be quite compelling.  Although Islamic complex theology exists, there is really not much need for it.  No need for divisive Christological debates and the like.  The idea that the existing Semitic populations of the Byzantine Empire were all forced to accept it is nonsense.  They appreciated freedom from the petty, mind boggling, out of touch yammering, along with the simplicity of the message.  This hasn't changed much in the Holy Land to this day.  Just ask an Arab Patriarch...

That said, I've always found the abrogation arguments a bit unconvincing.

Quote
And to notions of the veracity of the claims about people's lives based on their "biased" nature, toss out all your lives of the Saints, Gospel, etc.
Of course, but I am an Orthodox Christian and so I try to believe the stories of the Saints.  I don't try to believe the "biased" stories about Muhammad. 

I have to escape the Western, logic confined mindset and enter the Eastern world... Hah! I had to do it, but I couldn't continue any longer with that bit.

Quote
A generous reading of charity rather than suspicion I find over the long run will find the real problems which lie within texts. Ones you can actually discuss with those who love them, as you have as well.

I think we're in agreement on this.



All you had to say was that I am a Christian and thus reject Islam.

Sheesh.

Selam.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Cognomen
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Phyletism Rules, OK
Posts: 1,968


Ungrateful Biped


« Reply #51 on: May 02, 2012, 11:14:05 PM »

All you had to say was that I am a Christian and thus reject Islam.

Sheesh.

Selam.

Sigh... So right.
Logged

North American Eastern Orthodox Parish Council Delegate for the Canonization of Saints Twin Towers and Pentagon, as well as the Propagation of the Doctrine of the Assumption of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 (NAEOPCDCSTTPPDAMAFM®).
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,343



« Reply #52 on: May 02, 2012, 11:17:22 PM »

The idea that God changes. If God is described differently at different times, then it could indicate that God is indeed different at different times. I've heard some arguments from you about why this is a good thing. The only other explanation I thought for your statement was that it indicates how fundamentally incomprehensible God is, but that really doesn't seem like your style.

I started a reply before yours. I'll try to get back to it.

God IS comprehensible. It's part of the Gospel.

Quote
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life— 2 the life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us— 3 that which we have seen and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. 4 And these things we write to you that your[a] joy may be full.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #53 on: May 02, 2012, 11:21:08 PM »

I am a Christian, and I reject Islam. And I don't believe in Islamophobia.

And I like green chiles, pugs, and bagels.

Sorry, I just thought I should try to balance out the negativity in the earlier part of the post.
Logged

akimori makoto
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-heretical Christian
Jurisdiction: Fully-sik-hektic archdiocese of Australia, bro
Posts: 3,126

No-one bound by fleshly pleasures is worthy ...


« Reply #54 on: May 02, 2012, 11:22:09 PM »

As far as the Qur'an being "internally" theologically flawed, sorry but the Christian Scriptures are actually much more complicated and contradictory, which I find frankly to be a strength incidentally. (FWIW, I am not expert on the Koran; however, it ain't hard to see how it is more consistent throughout in its understanding of God. And how it leads thus much to a more easily to systematic theology, which again I find to be a weakness. After all it is written in direct light of engagement of neo-Platonic with Semitic thought. The Muslims didn't have as much trouble of having to make their Scripture speak Greek so to speak, ironically as some would say.)

Amen, amen.
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.07 seconds with 37 queries.