OperatesHeavyMachinery
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2002
- Messages
- 838
I would have to agree with SoHi's assessment of the situation.
Christians and Muslims both believe in concepts of God which are derived from the OT Jewish vengeful, tribal war god. Their Gods share a common ancestor, so to speak.
But they have fundamentally divergent views on the nature of their version of God.
Was Jesus God in the flesh?
Yay or nay?
A God who has the specific properties of connection with the human race via a man who was Him, or a God who did not make such a connection.
It is here that the legends part ways, that the lines evolve into differing religions.
It's also rather obvious that the OT God is markedly different in characteristics than the NT God, so even saying that Jews and Christians believe in the same God is stretching the concept of God so that any of the statements made about that God by any of the religions are somewhat moot.
They're related storylines, but they branch and evolve into their own renditions. At the core, yes, they're based on the same legends. But to say they remain the same legends is to take them out of context and remove anything the specific religions have to say about the nature of God.
To say they're worshipping the same God is invalidating their claims. Is Jesus the Son of God? Or does God not go around practicing divine insemination on virgins, and filling a human body with his essence?
Fundamentally, that's the core of the Christian teaching and faith, that Jesus was God in the flesh. Which also makes that a strong statement about what Christians believe God to be. And Islam does not accept this, thus their version of God is one who does not do such things, and is fundamentally different.
Still the same "family" of God beliefs, but not the same God, unless you're willing to forgo what each religion believes to be the attributes of that God for the sake of historical connection.
Christians and Muslims both believe in concepts of God which are derived from the OT Jewish vengeful, tribal war god. Their Gods share a common ancestor, so to speak.
But they have fundamentally divergent views on the nature of their version of God.
Was Jesus God in the flesh?
Yay or nay?
A God who has the specific properties of connection with the human race via a man who was Him, or a God who did not make such a connection.
It is here that the legends part ways, that the lines evolve into differing religions.
It's also rather obvious that the OT God is markedly different in characteristics than the NT God, so even saying that Jews and Christians believe in the same God is stretching the concept of God so that any of the statements made about that God by any of the religions are somewhat moot.
They're related storylines, but they branch and evolve into their own renditions. At the core, yes, they're based on the same legends. But to say they remain the same legends is to take them out of context and remove anything the specific religions have to say about the nature of God.
To say they're worshipping the same God is invalidating their claims. Is Jesus the Son of God? Or does God not go around practicing divine insemination on virgins, and filling a human body with his essence?
Fundamentally, that's the core of the Christian teaching and faith, that Jesus was God in the flesh. Which also makes that a strong statement about what Christians believe God to be. And Islam does not accept this, thus their version of God is one who does not do such things, and is fundamentally different.
Still the same "family" of God beliefs, but not the same God, unless you're willing to forgo what each religion believes to be the attributes of that God for the sake of historical connection.