nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Why did Jesus allow demons to enter a herd of pigs?

santana75

Reading Luke 26-39, the story of a demon possessed man.....Jesus commands the evil spirits to come out of the man but they beg him not to send them into the "Bottomless pit", but instead they ask to be sent into a herd of pigs. Jesus actually agrees to this and the pigs end up throwing themselves into a lake and drowning.
What is this about? Why would Jesus allow any concession to demons? Why not just cast them out and throw them into the so called bottomless pit? It seems like a compassionate act by Jesus, but compassion for demons, why?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

theological

Peregrinus wrote: »

But having an idea about God which is wrong doesn't mean that you are worshipping a false God. Since God passes understanding, it's true for every one of us that some of our ideas about God are wrong.

It depends on how crucial the differences are. The Scriptures are clear that the Sonship of Christ is crucial. You've not really engaged with them so far other than to say my understanding is extreme.

To give a quick worldly inadequate analogy (real substance comes from looking at Scripture).

Let me put it more simply in another way.

If I said that my name was Paul, I'm a 30 year old Irishman and an accountant and someone said that my name was actually Mateusz, alleged I was a 70 year old Polish retiree would they be speaking of the same person? We wouldn't be because the differences radically alter the identity of the person to the point we're talking about different people.

There are indeed a number of things in common both being white, European and male asides from other things that wouldn't be obvious.

The reality is we're still talking about different people.

In terms of the gods that modern Jews and Muslims believe in despite some commonalities they depart from the God of the Bible in significant ways.

The crux of the matter is that you don't think the Sonship of Christ is a significant enough difference. I'd love to know why with reference to Scripture. If we don't engage with the Scriptures we'll be going around in circles.

Peregrinus

But having an idea about God which is wrong doesn't mean that you are worshipping a false God. Since God passes understanding, it's true for every one of us that some of our ideas about God are wrong.

uck51js9zml2yt

Peregrinus wrote: »

Firstly, Islam doesn't seek to destroy Judaism or Christianity. Christianity is founded on a missionary impluse which seeks to convert the world (thereby "destroying" all other religions, if you want to put it in those terms) but Islam does not.
Islam wants to wipe out Israel and considers all others as infidels.
Secondly, while Muslims do believe that there is only one God, they also consider that Jews and Christians worship that God. They do not think that Judaism and Christianity worship a God that does not exist (though they do think that Christians in particular have some pretty funny ideas about the God that does exist).

Jesus said He was the only way to God. Either it is true or not.

Yes, I do realise that. That doesn't mean that God they worship is a different God, though; just that they have different ideas about him.

only one can be right

recedite

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yes, I do realise that. That doesn't mean that God they worship is a different God, though; just that they have different ideas about him.

Where do you draw the line though?
Mormons? Jehovas Witnesses, Hindus?
The Hindus have Brahma as their main creator deity. The ancient Greeks had Zeus.
Why not declare Brahma and Zeus to be the same god as Allah and Yahweh and Jehova. Maybe you do already?
All different names for the same godhead. Its just that they have different ideas about him.

If you're going to go all hippy on us, you may as well go the < whole hog >.

santana75

realdanbreen wrote: »

I'll take your word for that but I doubt if I would find any 1 of the thousands of Catholic churches in Ireland 'packed to the rafters' on any given Sunday.

Where is this church that you are talking about?

I cant speak for catholic services, the church I attend is Evangelical. I can PM you the details if you like, you're more than welcome to come along on a sunday morning and see for yourself.

ChrisJ84

Peregrinus, thanks for taking the time to construct such a detailed post. I think I understand better where you're coming from now. I agree with everything @theological said in his reply, and would pick up on a few other things:

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think the question comes down to this: Is it possible to worship the God who reveals himself in Christ without appreciating that he has, in fact, revealed himself in Christ? It is possible to worship the Triune God without appreciating that he is, in fact, Triune?

Jesus makes clear and unambiguous claims, that he is the way, the truth and the life, and that he is the only way to the Father. That those who know the Father know him, and that those who do not know him do not know the Father either, and so on. As @theological says, none of that is changed by the progressive nature of revelation, or how God dealt with old testament Israel. Everyone alive today needs to grapple with the unique claims that Jesus makes.

Peregrinus wrote: »

So, in many ways, it’s precisely his Jewish faith, his fidelity to the Covenant, that is an obstacle to his acceptance of Christian claims about Christ.

If he was being faithful to the covenant he would recognise that Jesus is, in fact, the long promised and anticipated Messiah. This is something Jesus spoke quite sharply to the religious leaders about during his earthly ministry, as recorded in the gospels.

Peregrinus wrote: »

How do we, as Christians, account for what at first glance look like contradictions in our own tradition?

Curious to know what you mean by contradictions?

Peregrinus wrote: »

First, we read the Hebrew Scriptures in the light of the Christian Scriptures, and therefore we understand them differently from people who read the Hebrew Scriptures on a stand-alone basis. But this isn’t something we can reasonably urge Jews to do; the only basis for reading the Hebrew Scriptures in the light of the Christian Scriptures is that you already have faith in Jesus Christ. You can offer this as defence of the reasonableness or coherence of Christian faith, but not as an argument for accepting Christian faith in the first place, since it’s an argument that can only weigh with people who have already accepted Christian faith.

On the contrary, this is precisely what we need to urge Jews, Muslims and everyone else to do. Scripture is clear that these are spiritual things and spiritually discerned; in other words, it isn't our job to reason anyone into Christian belief, but to present the truth in love and leave the rest to the Holy Spirit. This is quite different to discussing / arguing that Christian faith is reasonable (kind of what we are trying to do in this forum).

Peregrinus wrote: »

Secondly, we can point to the growing relationship between God and his People, unfolding in history, which means that we have a knowledge and understanding of God that is always imperfect, but always capable of development. Hence what might seem to be a contradiction in scriptures may in truth reflect a better understanding, or a better articulation, of the same unchanging truths.

Thirdly, and with particular reference to the nature of God, we point to the mystery of God. The truths that we seek to express in doctrines like the Trinity and the Incarnation are simply mind-bending. Even after encountering Christ and coming to faith in him it took the Christian community centuries to nut them out; to agree what they believed and how they read scripture, and how this should be expressed. And you could argue strongly that’s an ongoing process; we’re still not finished.

You can also argue that, while it’s important to reflect on God and to seek to understand him, in the end the appropriate response to a holy mystery is not to understand it - it’s called “mystery’ for a reason - but to enter into it.

Yes, our understanding is always imperfect, and God is indeed a holy mystery. But that doesn't mean that we can't understand anything. Jesus makes some pretty clear and staggering claims about himself, and that is where we need to begin. Retreating into mystery is a bit of a cop out, no?

Peregrinus wrote: »

Right, And on top of all of this we must recall truths that you and I have both already agreed on; God is unchanging, and his identity and reality does not depend in any way, not in the smallest degree, on what you or I or anyone else understands or thinks or believes about him.

Yes, but again we need to deal with the things that God has revealed about himself, primarily the fact that Jesus is the second person of the trinity and is the only to know or have a relationship with God.

Peregrinus wrote: »

So, if a Jew or a Muslim does not accept my claims about the nature of God, the Trinity, the Incarnation, that does not mean that he no longer worships the true God. He worships the same true God he always worshipped; his understanding of that God differs from mine but, in the end, none of us are going to be judged on how well we understood God (or, if we are, we’re all in trouble!). Failing to understand God in the way that others do is not the worship of a false God.

I think this is quite a dangerous mindset for a Christian. If Jesus' claims are true, then it makes all the difference in the world (and into eternity) what we make of him, and whether we come to him in repentance and faith. We are not going to be judged on the basis of how well we understand God; but we will be judged on the basis of whether we are in Christ or not.

realdanbreen

santana75 wrote: »

I have no idea what churches you're going to but the one I attend every sunday is packed to the rafters.

I'll take your word for that but I doubt if I would find any 1 of the thousands of Catholic churches in Ireland 'packed to the rafters' on any given Sunday.

Where is this church that you are talking about?

santana75

realdanbreen wrote: »

But it's not working is it Santana?
You can talk about the bible and 'joint and marrow' and two edge swords till the cows come home and meanwhile young people are not engaging in any of this because those who are supposed to be leaders and whose job it is to spread the word of god will not engage with them and answer their questions.
It's actually scarey that you don't appear to either understand or accept that there is a problem .

I have no idea what churches you're going to but the one I attend every sunday is packed to the rafters. So much so that they've had to put on an extra service to accommodate the demand. Thats two services back to back that are full. And thats without any advertising whatsoever. No standing on the street handing out leaflets, no trying to convince people to come to church, they find us. The congregation continues to grow, and we're all fairly young. Theres some people in their 50s and 60s, a few in their 40s, but mostly its people who are in their 30s and 20s. Theres a good few teenagers and children aswell. Its not a lifeless gathering of pensioners, quite the opposite in fact. Its alive and vibrant, you can feel it the minute you enter the building. People look forward to the service all week, but outside of church on sundays theres a whole community of groups and activities taking place. I myself am part of a group of guys, who are in their 20s and 30s and we meet up all the time, sometimes to just hang out and play pool, other times to study the bible.
So like I said, I have no idea what church you attend, but the one I go to and others I've visited are alive and growing.

theological

I've already addressed Abraham and previous prophets in an earlier post. I've got nothing to add. He trusted in God's grace before Christ. He accepted God as He revealed Himself at that juncture in salvation history. That marks him as being distinct from modern Jews who reject God as He has revealed Himself in Christ. That is a clear distinction. Post-Christ Jews are not like Abraham in this respect which is why we see the heated exchange I quoted in John 8 where He says Abraham is not their Father. Abraham rejoiced at the day of Christ (John 8:56).

I don't think it's possible to worship God without acknowledging His Son after His coming. That's why Jesus says in John 5 that the Jews who reject Him don't believe what Moses wrote about Him. We need to engage with what Jesus said. You said my understanding was extreme. I don't consider it my understanding but the plain words that He spoke. We need an alternative.

If we fail to acknowledge the Son we're not acknowledging God rightly as He has revealed Himself. The mystery has been revealed (Ephesians 1:9-10). If we refuse to acknowledge the Son He will not acknowledge us before the Father (Matthew 10:32-33). That's a serious crucial consequence of not acknowledging God as He has revealed Himself.

This is why I said in that post that we need to play on the same pitch and look to what Jesus actually says in the Scriptures. Having nice thoughts is nice but they are not authoritative as the Scriptures.

God's identity does not depend on our understanding but on what He has spoken in His Word and by His Son. If we don't believe God as He has revealed Himself we can't be said to be worshipping Him. Jesus was clear on this Scripturally we need to engage with it. There aren't many ways up the mountain to God. Jesus is the only way (John 14:6, Acts 4:12)

Peregrinus

theological wrote: »

. . . As for the disciples increasing in understanding I would happily admit that the disciples came to faith through the course of their time with Jesus. That however doesn't change who God is. God's identity is "wholly unaffected" by our understanding.

Here's the crux of the issue. Jews post-Christ, and Muslims do not worship the God who has revealed Himself to us in this way in Christ. That's precisely why I'm saying I don't believe that Jewish people who reject Jesus as the Christ, and Muslims who deny what He has said about Himself worship the same God as I do.

The Son of God is an essential part of who God is in His triune nature. It isn't a small or an insignificant matter, and I think the Scriptures are pretty clear on that.

Sure. But God was always Triune, and this was never a small or insignificant matter. This was just as true in Abraham’s time as it is now.

I think the question comes down to this: Is it possible to worship the God who reveals himself in Christ without appreciating that he has, in fact, revealed himself in Christ? It is possible to worship the Triune God without appreciating that he is, in fact, Triune?

On a simple level, the answer has to be “yes”, if only because, we agree, before Christ the Jews did worship that God. They didn’t, of course, understand or appreciate the Trinity or the Incarnation - how could they?

And we can also consider the position of a Jew at or shortly after the time of Christ, who hasn’t himself encountered Christ, or been evangelised by Christians. The Incarnation, at this point, has happened, but he has never heard of it; completely unaware. Can we say that, merely because the event has now happened, he is no longer worshipping the true God? Again, the answer must be “no”. We cannot say that.

Right. We come now to the case of the Jew who has heard of claims about the Incarnation and the Trinity, either because he has been evangelised, or because he has heard of them at second-hand - i.e. he knows there are Christians who believe these things. Can we say that he, now, does not worship the true God?

We have to accept that there’s a considerable barrier in the way to his accepting these claims, in the form of Jewish belief about the nature of God, and in the form of Jewish beliefs about idolatry. It is idolatry to worship a created thing as God. Humans are created things. Therefore, from the Jewish perspective, Christian belief in the Incarnation looks a lot like idolatry. And the Hebrew Scriptures are pretty severe in their condemnation of idolatry. And likewise polytheism.

So, in many ways, it’s precisely his Jewish faith, his fidelity to the Covenant, that is an obstacle to his acceptance of Christian claims about Christ.

How do we, as Christians, account for what at first glance look like contradictions in our own tradition? I suggest we do it in (at least) three ways:

First, we read the Hebrew Scriptures in the light of the Christian Scriptures, and therefore we understand them differently from people who read the Hebrew Scriptures on a stand-alone basis. But this isn’t something we can reasonably urge Jews to do; the only basis for reading the Hebrew Scriptures in the light of the Christian Scriptures is that you already have faith in Jesus Christ. You can offer this as defence of the reasonableness or coherence of Christian faith, but not as an argument for accepting Christian faith in the first place, since it’s an argument that can only weigh with people who have already accepted Christian faith.

Secondly, we can point to the growing relationship between God and his People, unfolding in history, which means that we have a knowledge and understanding of God that is always imperfect, but always capable of development. Hence what might seem to be a contradiction in scriptures may in truth reflect a better understanding, or a better articulation, of the same unchanging truths.

Thirdly, and with particular reference to the nature of God, we point to the mystery of God. The truths that we seek to express in doctrines like the Trinity and the Incarnation are simply mind-bending. Even after encountering Christ and coming to faith in him it took the Christian community centuries to nut them out; to agree what they believed and how they read scripture, and how this should be expressed. And you could argue strongly that’s an ongoing process; we’re still not finished.

You can also argue that, while it’s important to reflect on God and to seek to understand him, in the end the appropriate response to a holy mystery is not to understand it - it’s called “mystery’ for a reason - but to enter into it.

Right, And on top of all of this we must recall truths that you and I have both already agreed on; God is unchanging, and his identity and reality does not depend in any way, not in the smallest degree, on what you or I or anyone else understands or thinks or believes about him.

So, given all this I would still argue that, if we fail to appreciate that God is Trinity, or that God is incarnate in Jesus Christ, this does not change in any way, in the smallest degree, the nature of the God we worship. It cannot. Therefore, it cannot mean that we are worshipping a false God. What it can do is say something about the nature of our worship; about how complete and how developed a response it is to God’s invitation to us to know him. But it’s impossible to say that a Jew or a Muslim who has the same understanding of God as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob did is worshipping a different God from the God that they worshipped. He’s worshipping the same God, with the same understanding that they had.

So, if a Jew or a Muslim does not accept my claims about the nature of God, the Trinity, the Incarnation, that does not mean that he no longer worships the true God. He worships the same true God he always worshipped; his understanding of that God differs from mine but, in the end, none of us are going to be judged on how well we understood God (or, if we are, we’re all in trouble!). Failing to understand God in the way that others do is not the worship of a false God.

realdanbreen

santana75 wrote: »

Hebrews 4 -12

For the word of God is alive and powerful. It is sharper than the sharpest two-edged sword, cutting between soul and spirit, between joint and marrow. It exposes our innermost thoughts and desires

The word of God is alive and powerful. This is the point, more than anything else. If you want to investigate whats in the Bible you have to read it for yourself, first hand. Study it and be open to its message otherwise you wont have a clue what its all about. To me and others who accept God's word, its all "Plain English" but to anyone whos not open to the word of God and is more interested in arguments, then they wont have a barneys what any of it means. Jesus said that he was thankful to God for hiding the meaning of these things from people who consider themselves "Intelligent" and for revealing his message to the childlike.

But it's not working is it Santana?
You can talk about the bible and 'joint and marrow' and two edge swords till the cows come home and meanwhile young people are not engaging in any of this because those who are supposed to be leaders and whose job it is to spread the word of god will not engage with them and answer their questions.
It's actually scarey that you don't appear to either understand or accept that there is a problem .

theological

If we have "different ideas" to the point that it radically changes who God is and what He is like that means they follow a different god.

Rejecting the divine Son of God is a radical departure to who God is and how He reveals Himself to us in His Word. Both in the Scriptures and in Jesus Christ the Word made flesh.

If you could engage with my reply to you I think we could get more in detail about what that means.

Peregrinus

recedite wrote: »

That's not what Tatranska said though.

Islam seeks to destroy Judaism and Christanity, not the gods of those religions. Muslims do not believe that any other deities exist, other than Allah, so why would they try to destroy something that does not exist?

Firstly, Islam doesn't seek to destroy Judaism or Christianity. Christianity is founded on a missionary impluse which seeks to convert the world (thereby "destroying" all other religions, if you want to put it in those terms) but Islam does not.

Secondly, while Muslims do believe that there is only one God, they also consider that Jews and Christians worship that God. They do not think that Judaism and Christianity worship a God that does not exist (though they do think that Christians in particular have some pretty funny ideas about the God that does exist).

recedite wrote: »

Do you accept the divinity of Jesus Christ, Peregrinus?

Yes.

recedite wrote: »

Surely you realise that Jews and Muslims do not.

Yes, I do realise that. That doesn't mean that God they worship is a different God, though; just that they have different ideas about him.

santana75

realdanbreen wrote: »

But isn't that the whole point? Young -and not so young-people nowadays do think about it and don't go along with a blind faith as we did in the past. Is that not one of the reasons why church attendance is tumbling and it's mostly grey heads you will find in the church. I was pulled by the mod in an earlier post for using the word 'waffling' but I really feel strongly that if our clerics want to hammer home the message and belief in god they need to communicate that message in plain English and be open to questioning.

Hebrews 4 -12

For the word of God is alive and powerful. It is sharper than the sharpest two-edged sword, cutting between soul and spirit, between joint and marrow. It exposes our innermost thoughts and desires

The word of God is alive and powerful. This is the point, more than anything else. If you want to investigate whats in the Bible you have to read it for yourself, first hand. Study it and be open to its message otherwise you wont have a clue what its all about. To me and others who accept God's word, its all "Plain English" but to anyone whos not open to the word of God and is more interested in arguments, then they wont have a barneys what any of it means. Jesus said that he was thankful to God for hiding the meaning of these things from people who consider themselves "Intelligent" and for revealing his message to the childlike.

recedite

Peregrinus wrote: »

Whatever their other differences, Jews and Muslims agree on at leaast one thing; that they worship the same God. It seems ... unfairly pejorative, then, to claim that Islam seeks to destroy the God of Judaism. Muslims openly worship the God of Judaism.

That's not what Tatranska said though.

Islam seeks to destroy Judaism and Christanity, not the gods of those religions. Muslims do not believe that any other deities exist, other than Allah, so why would they try to destroy something that does not exist?

Do you accept the divinity of Jesus Christ, Peregrinus?
Surely you realise that Jews and Muslims do not.

realdanbreen

theological wrote: »

What age do you think I am? Do you know?

The talk of "our clerics" also isn't particularly helpful. Many of the people on this thread are not Roman Catholics.

Well up until the above post I had figured you were pretty mature.
BY clerics I mean religious leaders across the Christian board. Anyway do you want to address the real point in the post?

theological

realdanbreen wrote: »

But isn't that the whole point? Young -and not so young-people nowadays do think about it and don't go along with a blind faith as we did in the past. Is that not one of the reasons why church attendance is tumbling and it's mostly grey heads you will find in the church. I was pulled by the mod in an earlier post for using the word 'waffling' but I really feel strongly that if our clerics want to hammer home the message and belief in god they need to communicate that message in plain English and be open to questioning.

What age do you think I am? Do you know?

The talk of "our clerics" also isn't particularly helpful. Many of the people on this thread are not Roman Catholics.

realdanbreen

theological wrote: »

You seem to believe that Christians believe what they do blindly without thinking about it. Can I suggest that this isn't really true?

But isn't that the whole point? Young -and not so young-people nowadays do think about it and don't go along with a blind faith as we did in the past. Is that not one of the reasons why church attendance is tumbling and it's mostly grey heads you will find in the church. I was pulled by the mod in an earlier post for using the word 'waffling' but I really feel strongly that if our clerics want to hammer home the message and belief in god they need to communicate that message in plain English and be open to questioning.

Peregrinus

Iliana Cold Mayonnaise wrote: »

They differ on their expectation of the Messiah.they have the same root.

If "they have the same root" means they worship the same God, then it's very hard not to extend that to include Muslims as well, since they also have that root.

Iliana Cold Mayonnaise wrote: »

Islam seeks to destroy both.

Whatever their other differences, Jews and Muslims agree on at leaast one thing; that they worship the same God. It seems ... unfairly pejorative, then, to claim that Islam seeks to destroy the God of Judaism. Muslims openly worship the God of Judaism.

ChrisJ84

realdanbreen wrote: »

You're missing the whole point. The "evidence " as you call it is where the problem begins!

Saying that the evidence is invalid / that you don’t find it convincing is not the same as there being no evidence. Christianity is not blind faith, in the absence of or in contradiction to any available evidence. On the contrary, it is a highly developed and nuanced worldview which we claim is the best and most consistent way to understand reality, and the only way for us to be reconciled with God himself. Trying to dismiss it as if it's equivalent to believing in unicorns is silly, and definitely isn’t going to lead to a useful or interesting conversation.

theological

realdanbreen wrote: »

Absolutely agree. You can, and should, dispute these things. After all there are something like 2.1 Billion Christians of which there are hundreds upon hundreds of branches and sub divisions not to mention Billions of Muslims,Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jews! Relying on a book that was written thousands of years ago and rewritten and translated over and over without questioning it or thinking that Fr Tom on the alter who was press ganged into the church as a youngster is going to enlighten you is being just plain childish. If the clergy (of all religions)spoke out in plain English instead of waffling in riddles they might at least stop the hemoraging of church goers.

Funnily enough the Bible hasn't been "rewritten" nor is there any evidence to suggest such. Are there multiple translations? Sure, but that is a strength. That means that not only can I check the thousands of Greek manuscripts, I can also check several translations of said manuscripts throughout history and see that they cohere.

I rely on the Scriptures because of the testimony of the eyewitnesses about Jesus. I rely on the Scriptures because they have been proven to be textually authentic and reliable, and because I'm convinced of the case that the eyewitnesses present.

Does that make me more closed minded than the atheist or the sceptic who thinks they are all wrong? No. Probably less closed minded to be honest.

You seem to believe that Christians believe what they do blindly without thinking about it. Can I suggest that this isn't really true?

I would say that dismissing the Bible without proper investigation is childish.

Turtwig

realdanbreen wrote: »

Absolutely agree. You can, and should, dispute these things. After all there are something like 2.1 Billion Christians of which there are hundreds upon hundreds of branches and sub divisions not to mention Billions of Muslims,Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jews! Relying on a book that was written thousands of years ago and rewritten and translated over and over without questioning it or thinking that Fr Tom on the alter who was press ganged into the church as a youngster is going to enlighten you is being just plain childish. If the clergy (of all religions)spoke out in plain English instead of waffling in riddles they might at least stop the hemoraging of church goers.

Mod:
This is the Christianity forum. You've made your point and are beginning to soapbox. Please stop.

Also,
For the purposes of this forum Christianity is not waffle.

realdanbreen

ChrisJ84 wrote: »

realdanbreen wrote: »

Absolutely agree. You can, and should, dispute these things. After all there are something like 2.1 Billion Christians of which there are hundreds upon hundreds of branches and sub divisions not to mention Billions of Muslims,Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jews! Relying on a book that was written thousands of years ago and rewritten and translated over and over without questioning it or thinking that Fr Tom on the alter who was press ganged into the church as a youngster is going to enlighten you is being just plain childish. If the clergy (of all religions)spoke out in plain English instead of waffling in riddles they might at least stop the hemoraging of church goers.

I think you might be confusing debating / asking questions with being perpetually uncertain. Sounds to me like @santana75 has looked at the evidence and concluded that the claims of Christianity are, in fact, true. That's not being closed minded, it's just believing in something.

You're missing the whole point. The "evidence " as you call it is where the problem begins!

uck51js9zml2yt

Peregrinus wrote: »

Do Christians and Jews worship the same God, Tat?

They differ on their expectation of the Messiah.they have the same root.

Islam seeks to destroy both.

ChrisJ84

realdanbreen wrote: »

Absolutely agree. You can, and should, dispute these things. After all there are something like 2.1 Billion Christians of which there are hundreds upon hundreds of branches and sub divisions not to mention Billions of Muslims,Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jews! Relying on a book that was written thousands of years ago and rewritten and translated over and over without questioning it or thinking that Fr Tom on the alter who was press ganged into the church as a youngster is going to enlighten you is being just plain childish. If the clergy (of all religions)spoke out in plain English instead of waffling in riddles they might at least stop the hemoraging of church goers.

I think you might be confusing debating / asking questions with being perpetually uncertain. Sounds to me like @santana75 has looked at the evidence and concluded that the claims of Christianity are, in fact, true. That's not being closed minded, it's just believing in something.

realdanbreen

Effects wrote: »

You see that's where you are wrong. You can dispute anything.
And you let yourself down by being so doggedly closed minded.

Absolutely agree. You can, and should, dispute these things. After all there are something like 2.1 Billion Christians of which there are hundreds upon hundreds of branches and sub divisions not to mention Billions of Muslims,Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jews! Relying on a book that was written thousands of years ago and rewritten and translated over and over without questioning it or thinking that Fr Tom on the alter who was press ganged into the church as a youngster is going to enlighten you is being just plain childish. If the clergy (of all religions)spoke out in plain English instead of waffling in riddles they might at least stop the hemoraging of church goers.

recedite

The Jewish version of Yahweh excludes Jesus.
Its a matter of semantics whether you call that "the same" god or not.
Same name, but different constituent parts.

Peregrinus

Iliana Cold Mayonnaise wrote: »

If Christians and Muslims worship the same God( they don't) then Jesus saying He was the only way to God was and is a lie.(it's not)

Do Christians and Jews worship the same God, Tat?

uck51js9zml2yt

Prestonites wrote: »

If you read your word you will see it discussed that all religions worship the one God. They consider the same almighty and omnipresent God, they may have different perceptions or views on Jesus I.E Islam- Holy trinity

But to me as a Christian, I see the same Christ that Catholics see or muslims see. Our forms of worship may be different but end game is the same.

If Christians and Muslims worship the same God( they don't) then Jesus saying He was the only way to God was and is a lie.(it's not)

recedite

As a general rule, each religion considers the other religions to be wrong.
The three main Abrahamic religions are no exception, each considering the other to be heretical.
Whether they all worship the same god is then a superficial or even a moot point. If you believe there is only one god, then you believe that the others are worshiping your god, but in the wrong way.
Even if you believed in a whole pantheon of gods, you could still allow yourself to believe that their one god was actually one of yours.

If you believe in a 3 part god, as Christians essentially do (whether they realise it or not) then like peregrinus, you can allow yourself to believe that the Muslim and/or Jewish one god is actually one part of yours.

Or, from the perspective of Jews and Muslims, only one out of 3 parts of the Christian trinity is the true god.

All that is very narcissistic though. Its like seeing some random guy on the street wearing the same shoes as you, and saying "he is copying my outfit, but he got some of it wrong". No, the truth is, he's not interested in you or your outfit. He just happens to have the same shoes, because he visited the same shoe shop.

In religion, its far more honest to just say "I'm right and they are wrong, therefore their god is a false god"
Maybe its not as pc, but its more honest.