February 8, 2012
Over the years, I’ve come to realize that rationality, logic, and just “good-ole” common sense usually play some role in a good discussion or debate, but all of that seems to change when a discussion takes a religious or theological turn. It’s almost like the mere mention of the word God or religion prompts a culturally preconditioned response that involves the removal of people's thinking caps as they enter a world where contradiction somehow finds acceptance. Such was the mentality expressed by a teen columnist in one paper I read when this young writer petitioned his readers to let the similarities between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam override the foundational differences between them coupled with the call to respect all religious beliefs. Said the young writer, “Unbeknownst to many is the fact that Muslims, Christians, and Jews believe in the same God."
I understand the angle from which this common request comes, but I must remind my readers that such a mentality, despite its popularity, is dangerous in the real world – a reality illustrated by another recent column highlighting $4,600 in fake money orders that, according to the recipient, “looked so legitimate that they included a watermark and foil embossing.” The issue here, as is the case with any kind of counterfeit, is the similarities between an authentic and a phony piece of paper with one having legitimate value and the other having no essential value whatsoever.
This tells us that the best of counterfeits and the greatest deceptions, then, emerge from similarities that convincingly mask the foundational and substantive differences between authentic and real or true and false. Behind the idea that the Judaism, Christianity, and Islam worship the same God, then, is the fallacious assumption that certain superficial similarities should somehow outweigh the foundational differences that logically distinguish one theology from another.
Christians, for example, revere Jesus as the Son of God, God the Son, and count his death a substitutionary sacrifice for humanity’s inherent sin with his physical resurrection as the confirmation of each claim, but both Judaism and Islam vehemently reject these foundational ideas. The issue here is simple. If the claims of Jesus were true then modern Judaism and Islam are patently false, and if He isn't who Christians say he is, then, well, Christianity is false. There is no middle ground.
So, while religious ideas may have many similarities, there are still significant differences that make them logically irreconcilable, and saying that we should overlook those essential differences and respect other religious ideas is like saying one should ignore the law of non-contradiction or applaud the demise of simple logic in the process. It's like suggesting that we should respect other views despite their contradictory nature.
It's akin to holding the views of both Joseph Stalin and Mother Teresa in like esteem. It's like highlighting their similarities at the expense of those foundational differences that set them infinitely apart from one another. It's like concentrating on their similar physical characteristics, their similar personality traits, or their similar reasoning powers, and then suggesting that each of their ideas warrant the same consideration and/or respect.
Ridiculous? Absolutely! No one, at least as far as I know, would declare their respective views of reality, human nature, and human life worthy of equal honor, because, while one was synonymous with suffering and death the other was known for her alleviation of both.
No, the three monotheisms do not worship the same God. The God of Christianity alone sent his Son to die for the world, the love of God in historical high def, and any view of God that contradicts that reality, said Jesus, leaves men in their sin and without Him (John 8:24). “No man,” said Jesus, “comes to the father but by me,” and that is a significant and substantive difference that cannot be compromised.
Tony@link2eternity.com
- Print print this page
- Discuss 26 comments, Blog about
Comments
PaleRider 1 year, 3 months ago
True.
lauren_fedorov 1 year, 3 months ago
I heartily assure you that Islam does NOT worship the same God as do Christianity and Judaism, although it is a popularly held belief that they do. Allah is NOT another name for Jehovah. Allah is nothing more than a more modern reincarnation of Baal, the moon god, that was worshiped by some of the people that the Israelites were told to drive out of the promised land in the Old Testament. Jehovah is the one true God, the maker of heaven and earth and the universe and all that is within those. Baal AKA Allah, is nothing more than a false god who has never created anything. Allah is an idol, and there are demons behind every idol. Islam is of the spirit of antichrist. The Bible says in the epistles of John that anything or anyone who says that Jesus is not the Son of God is of the spirit of Antichrist. Islam's creed says that Allah has not begotten any sons. The Bible says that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16) These are two very distinct lines of thought and do not come from the same Being. Judaism worships Jehovah, but most do not believe that Jesus was the promised Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament prophets and Psalms. Most are still looking for a future Messiah. Islam is diametrically opposed to Judaism and Christianity. The god worshiped in Islam is NOT compatible with the God worshiped in Judaism and Christianity, so in answer to the question posed at the beginning of this article, absolutely, unequivocally, a million times a million times, NO!!!!!!!!!
but235 1 year, 3 months ago
One correction to your thinking is needed. We Christians believe Jesus IS God, the same God that those of the Jewish faith believe in. The difference between the two is that the Jewish believers believe Jesus is a prophet like Abraham whereas we Christians believe Jesus is God made man. As for Muslims, my understanding is that Islam traces its ancestry back to Abraham and thus Muslims share the core belief of monothesism with Christians and Jews. However, the cultural practices and interpretations of Islam vary widely. They believe Muhammad is greatest phophet since Abraham. The Quran is to the Muslims what the New Testament is to the Christians. Bottom line: all three religions believe in the same supreme being commonly referred to as God by the Christians, Yahwey by the Jews and Allah by the Muslims.
link2eternity 1 year, 3 months ago
Exactly. In fact, I made note of that fact stating that "Christians revere Jesus as the Son of God, God the Son." This marks his deity. Also while all three "monotheism" believe in one God, only Christianity maintains a trinitarian unity - another foundational distinction between the three. And, as the column indicates, either Christianity or the others are wrong if logic has anything to do with it.
Thanks for the comment.
Tony
SH59 1 year, 3 months ago
“good-ole” common sense usually play some role in a good discussion or debate, but all of that seems to change when a discussion takes a religious or theological turn." I don't think you can put common sense into a conversation about religion. I think that's the problem with religion today because there are so many rules and regulations depending on the church you belong to a rational thinking person can't understand it. First, one needs to buy into to "stories" before they can have a discussion. The "stories" can be really outrageous to someone who wasn't raised with them. Anything from a lizard talking to someone and hiding secret tablets that no one is allowed to see to a burning bush that talks and a human actually floating up to the sky. A common sense kind of person can look at that and believe that Religion lives in the realm of "magical thinking." If we weren't told that Santa wasn't real around 8 or 9 years old we would believe he was real too.
link2eternity 1 year, 3 months ago
SH59, I hope you are doing well.
I have a couple of questions then. First, just how do you classify yourself? Agnostic, atheistic, etc.?
SH59 1 year, 3 months ago
Look, all I'm saying is that you can't have a common sense discussion if you don't know the ins and outs of each religion you are talking about. Isn't that something that can be agreed on? As far as worshiping the same God, how many of them do you think are up there? Do you really think there are different Gods for different people or do you feel there is only one God and everyone else is deceiving themselves?
SH59 1 year, 3 months ago
Our country could very possibly elect a president who believes in the lizard story. His faith is just as powerful and committed as any Christian believer. To argue that there's only one God and that's the Christian God should be questioned.
link2eternity 1 year, 3 months ago
A common sense discussion involves simple logic on any matter with the law of non-contradiction coming into play here. It is illogical and nonsensical to say that diametrically opposite claims can all be true. All can be wrong but all can't be true.
To say that all religious claims are equally valid violates logic.
Now, moving to the claims of christianity, it behooves us all to look at the historical evidence. The resurrection of Jesus being the point here. The eyewitness accounts, the willingness of those same witnesses to die for their claims, the conversion of James - the half brother of Jesus, the conversion of Saul of Tarsus after seeing the risen Jesus - also known as the apostle Paul, the changing of the primary day of worship from saturday to sunday by converted Jews no less. It might be helpful to take a look at works by Gary Habermas, Lee Strobel, and Josh McDowell.
Thanks for the discussion.
SH59 1 year, 3 months ago
The very fact that God has been in the human consciousness since man was able to conceptualize something greater than themselves can be seen as evidence of one God. If he does work in mysterious ways isn't it possible he has spoken to man throughout history and how cultures developed their belief in God is the only thing that differentiates themselves from each other? Who are we to say that their God isn't the true God?
jamjam 1 year, 3 months ago
drink your hemlock
link2eternity 1 year, 3 months ago
Hello SH59,
Again, thanks for the civil discussion. That is a rarity in today world when dealing with such matters. I must ask, in regard to your above posts, however, do you believe God can speak in contradiction? If God has presented himself in any generation, the very idea that he is "God" should put to rest teh possibility of contradiction and/or inconsistency. If different cultures define him in contradictory terms, then somebody is wrong.
Second, if we can't determine whose view of God is "true" or not, then you have no basis to tell me that any view of God, mine included, is in any form or fashion, wrong.
Finally, I hang my hat on the evidence of the resurrection as the keystone of my faith. If Jesus rose from the dead, literally and physically, then he defined God for us. As he told his disciples, "if you have seen me you have seen the Father." Such a definitive view of God excludes any and all claims that stand in contrast.
Thanks again for the discussion.
Tony
SH59 1 year, 3 months ago
I don't think God speaks in contradiction but I believe that Man has interpreted his experience with God in relation to his culture. After all, written documents of any religion are an interpretation of sorts based on Man's understanding of events as they happened. Sometimes these documents were written a hundred years after the events with much discussion and attempt at understanding. It has even been documented and noted in the King James Bible that Jesus actually wrote that Heaven is here on earth but it was not stated in the original writings.
link2eternity 1 year, 3 months ago
Hello Again SH59,
Truth always has competition as my original column indicated. The valueless is always trying to pass itself off as something of value as in the counterfeit money order mentioned above. Likewise, truth has error trying to pass itself off as "truth."
I personally don't see how you can so glibly dismiss such matters. One's view of God, if wrong, means everything. Eternity is at stake, actually.
The issue I want to press here, however, is the fact that Jesus claimed to define God in certain terms that are logically, existentially, and historically verifiable. Then, if Jesus rose from the dead, he substantiated his claims. That is where the law of non-contradiction emerges. If Jesus confirmed his claims and defined God in substantive terms then any contrary claim is false.
SH59 1 year, 3 months ago
Link2eternity, I'm really enjoying this conversation and think about what you say during the day while I'm working. I did go back and read your article again and am thinking about the dichotomy that faith and fact creates. Your arguments are based on facts documented in the Bible but should the Bible be used as a factual document or a source of spiritual guidance to help us understand our human fallacies?
SH59 1 year, 3 months ago
Could you tell me the html code to make paragraphs, I seem to be able to only make indentations.
link2eternity 1 year, 3 months ago
Hello SH59,
You have discovered the one thing that differentiates christianity from all other relgions. It is factually based. That was, in fact, the Apostle Paul's point in 1 Corinthians 15 when he admitted that the resurrection of Jesus was the faith's "keystone." In other words, if the physical resurrection was a historical fact, then it confirms Christianity's claims about God, man, Jesus, etc.
Your example about putting someone to death based on the information available to one group of people, presumably a jury and judge, and the later discovery made by DNA help illustrate my point, in fact. It proves that the execution of the man you mentioned was wrong, plain and simple. The information did not yield the truth at all because as the "DNA" revealed otherwise. The same is true of the historical and physical resurrection of Jesus. It is the evidential DNA that nullifies any other verdict than that the one that declares Jesus to be the one he claimed to be.
The idea that faith transcends fact leaves any view based therein with pure subjectivity and devoid of any basis for any semblance of a valid truth claim whatsoever. Its merely my word against your words or Joe's word or Harry's word, ad infinitum. Frankly, such a view renders religious discussion a very foolish endeavor, and I don't believer that you or most who disagree with me believe it to be such.
Let me know what you think.
irkim13 1 year, 3 months ago
This has been a very entertaining and civil discussion (as it should be). Thanks to both the writter and SH59.
emb6683 1 year, 3 months ago
There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet!
SH59 1 year, 3 months ago
link2eternity: Ok, I get your point, if it is to believed and proven that the physical body of Jesus somehow ascended to heaven then the religion of Christianity is based on fact and is true.
I want to ask you about God in the Old Testament and how do we know that he isn't the same God man has acknowledged since man was able to conceptualize a God? Many people quote scripture from the Old Testament as though it was fact but it is often suggested that many of the stories were from earlier pagan folk lore and incorporated into a Christian format. Could this not be the same God that all religions worship?
link2eternity 1 year, 3 months ago
Good Question SH59, The resurrection comes into play here as well and the argument would go something like this (an abbreviated version to be sure). Jesus acknowledged that he was the God of the Old Testament. In fact, when the Jews contested Jesus authority, he said that he and the Father were one (John 10:31). Of course, the religious Jews wanted to stone him for his claim. When Jesus asked which works they were about to stone him for, they said that it wasn't for any particular work but because he being a man made himself equal with God. To them he had spoken blasphemy.
The resurrection, then, confirms Jesus claim, here and throughout the Gospels. He was the God-man. As John 1 tells, “and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.”
Jesus, then, with the resurrection as the basis, defined not only Judaism as it was divinely intended to be understood, but define God to us. Of course, he also defined man's problem and the only solution, his substitutionary death for the sin of the world. He, Jesus, absorbed the wrath of God for every man and his resurrection was the divine seal of approval of said sacrifice. Jesus is the Lamb of God slain before the foundation of the world.
The resurrection, as you can see, is so vital to the Christian faith. It validates the claims and works of the Messiah as the only way to God. Without it, Christianity and its claims are foolishness.
I hope this gives you something to think about.
SH59 1 year, 3 months ago
Prior to Jesus, man was speaking to God all the time in the Old Testament, but if I understand this correctly only those who accept that Jesus ascended to heaven were speaking to the true God. How did Noah know which God he was speaking to if he didn't know Jesus? The Old Testament was written 2,000 years before Christ and there were a lot of conversations going on then all believing they were talking to the true God. To say "by the way, I was God back then too" is a little suspect because the people then didn't have that knowledge.
link2eternity 1 year, 2 months ago
Another good question SH59. Been away from the computer for a few days. Finally got back to "work."
The common misconception about revelation, particularly in the Old Testament is that said revelation was some ethereal and uncertain communication between the divine and humanity. The fact of the matter is that in those cases marked in Scripture, the communication between God and human beings was as obvious as one man's communication with another.
God spoke, evidently, to Adam and Even verbally. He spoke to Cain in an audible voice and the passages that deal with others also seems physical. To Abraham, God revealed himself convincingly as well. In fact, the bible tells us that he was visited by physical beings, one of which is believed by scholars to be the pre-incarnate Christ. God's communication was not ethereal or mystical but was many times authenticated by some evidence – audible voice, burning bush, parting sea, iron ax head floating, fulfilled prophecy, or other miracle. God has always authenticated himself. Of Abraham, the bible tells us that he believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness (Hebrews 11).
The bible's continuity is overwhelming and the resurrection of Jesus is its primary link. He was the ultimate fulfillment of OT prophecy. There was a continuous expectation of a coming messiah in the Old Testament, beginning with Genesis 3:15. Remember, Jesus didn't just claim to be God, he showed his deity with the miraculous works he did – the resurrection being the greatest. He didn't emerge with your typical messiah complex. He fit the mold of Old Testament prophetic material perfectly. The glass slipper of Old Testament messianic prophecies fit perfectly. He was the substance of which the Old Testament tabernacle and all of its pieces pointed in typology.
The other factor also includes the resurrection. I know, I keep referring to the resurrection, don't I? Jesus did what the DNA evidence did in one of your other posts. In the example you used, DNA vindicated the innocent man put to death by identifying the right killer. This DNA authenticated the real killer. The resurrection of Jesus serves this same purpose. It identified the Old Testament accounts as genuine and confirmed Jesus to be the divinely intended messiah who would die for the sins of the world.
SH59 1 year, 2 months ago
Sorry I've been away from my computer too. My question in relation to your article is how did people know what God they were talking to at the time if they didn't have the knowledge of Christ. It would seem that there was only one God no matter who spoke to him which would suggest that there is only one God for everyone until Christ came along.
SH59 1 year, 2 months ago
I also have another question, do you believe that every story in the Old Testament is true?
link2eternity 1 year, 2 months ago
OK, I think I understand your question better. If not, just let me know. I think a closer look at the Old Testament (OT) will clarify the point somewhat. The OT is replete with the idea that men worshiped different gods. That is, the God of the bible distinguished himself often and significantly from the false gods at various times and among different cultures. While there was and is only one God, eternal and holy, the OT makes it clear that men more often than not worshiped false gods, which in reality, were not gods at all.
Second, Jesus' appearance on the scene does not challenge the monotheistic idea, it confirms i Jesus said that he and the Father were "one." This is classical trinitarian theology. This fits the idea of "progressive revelation." As the Bible says in Romans 4, "Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness." This same God distinguished himself from the myriad of false gods that permeated the land. Jesus, then, confirmed the God of the OT to be the one and only true God.
Finally, progressive revelation is an important issue. Adam and Eve, after the fall, believed God, as indicated with their acceptance of the coats of skin, and it was counted to them for righteousness. By the same token, they didn't know that what people from which the redeemer would come. They didn't know where he would be born nor when he would burst on the scene. Of course, they certainly didn't know what their redeemers name would be, because Genesis 3:15 is very brief. The important point is this. God's plan unfolds in human history and it does like the pieces of a puzzle.
As to your last question, I do take the "stories," as you call them, literally. They are historical accounts of God's dealing with humanity. Of course, the resurrection verifies this position.
Tony
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID