John 1

[Muslimah]

Bismillah

I wanted to bring something else to this discussion. I have long thought that the terms we use are false: Jew, Christian, Catholic,Protestant, Muslim, etc. There are lots of sects within each.
Christ was a Jew. It is the God of Abraham and Moses that we believe in. Jesus was the Son of God, but even as a prophet, it is always the same God. Therefore, we (you the Muslim and me the Christian) should be calling ourselves Jews. Or perhaps Hebrews. Of course, that gets messy with the idea of the second covenant, but the second covenant wasn't a new covenant, it was an expanded covenant. More were given Grace. The family became bigger.


I am willing to give up the language of trinity, and even the title Christian, are you willing to give up the term Muslim? Isn't the point of God's grace about seeing ourselves in a new light? The name we choose would certainly be an indication of that.


Isn't 'believer' enough?

Steve this point certainly needs a totally new thread. For now, I just want to confirm something, u believe in the trinity dont u? because sometimes, you really get out of topic that the focal point is lost.


Do u believe in the trinity????? simple yes or no.

[Steve Consilvio]

Let's just say that we have different understandings of the trinity. I certainly believe in God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. The problem is which definition of Trinity are you using? I am willing to accept the Qu'ran as it is written, but perhaps not as you interpret it.


There are many things that I disagree with in regard to Catholic Doctrine. If we take your position (the trinity is totally false) and the Church's position *the trinity is totally true) as opposite extremes, then I am somewhere in the middle.


Language is a tool. Definitions are representations of ideas. It is the ideas that are important. Ideas rule the world. God is an idea, too. Scripture is God's way of correcting our ideas, but just because A is wrong, that doesn't make B correct. B can be incorrect, too. As well as C, D, E, etc.


In other words, when you ask for a 'yes or no,' it is because you are thinking in a dualistic way. I always see three or more possibilities to every issue, and the one truth should satisfy/include/solve everyone's perspective. 2+2=4. There are an infinite number of wrong answers to the question 2+2=?


New threads are not needed because everything is always interrelated. New threads are just another expression of your dualistic approach, which I do not share.


Definitions constantly evolve, which is a huge inter-generational problem. It may be that we are using a different definition of the trinity than the one being discussed in the Qu'ran. We have no way of knowing, pro or con. What is important is that we be a peace with one another and with God. Fighting over God defeats the purpose of the message, and this has been the problem over many generations.


Let's be frank here. Every religion has an element of fear and self-superiority in regard to other religions. I do not believe in these groupthink vs groupthink battles. I want to be on God's side. I do, however, appreciate the effort that everyone makes to understand God and our duty. And, of course, it is the points of disagreement (like the trinity issue) that tend to be the most rich for learning. My approach, however, wins no friends. That itself is an interesting lesson, too. The battle for virtue is between me and God. I constantly fail, no matter how hard I try, and no matter how much I improve.


Think about the concept of mercy for a moment. Shouldn't we have mercy for those who think differently from ourselves? And shouldn't we be open to that fact that they could teach us what we have not experienced, just as we could teach them what we have experienced? And, by sharing our experience, we can all come to know God better?


For example, if the use of the word trinity was 'not good' then what can be said of all the prayers and rituals that have also been created by man? They are not scripturally sound, either. When you unravel one tradition, you unravel all tradition.

[Muslimah]

Bismillah


Do u care to explain more how your belief stands in between the regular trinity concept and that of Quran.


And I wonder if u or FHC are interested in discussing the other point I introduced on the other thread???

[Steve Consilvio]

Bismillah
Do u care to explain more how your belief stands in between the regular trinity concept and that of Quran.


And I wonder if u or FHC are interested in discussing the other point I introduced on the other thread???

I don't know what else I could say. I started with the position that the concepts of monotheism and trinity are at odds with one another, from a logic point of view. I argued in defense of the trinity because all is possible with God 3=1. I now accept the Qu'ran position that teaching the trinity is 'not good' to the extent that the trinity is 'one God.' Primarily because it masks the important differences between God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. The three exist, and are of central importance, even according to the Qu'ran. For example, I see no problem with opening a prayer with "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit." Nor do I see a problem with The Lord's Prayer, which mentions neither Jesus nor the Holy Spirit. To a certain extent, the Qu'ran has affirmed what I 'smelled' regarding the logic issue. However, logic is not the important issue, faith is. In that regard, one of the problems I have always encountered, regardless of faith or denomination, is that people are unwilling to 'Trust the Spirit.' Rules, dogma, and religious, political and economic bigotry are the norm. I question everything, but what I really question are my own beliefs. And as this issue demonstrates, I constantly evolve. So when you ask where my 'belief stands,' please realize that I am always walking.


I see all scripture as a combination of <b>instruction</b>, <b>prediction</b> and <b>description</b>. It is important to understand how the point of the conversation changes. <b>Describing</b> a war is not an <b>instruction</b> to war, for example. The <b>instruction</b> is for peace; war is a <b>description</b> of the consequences for failing to abide by the <b>instructions</b>. Scripture is what it is obviously meant to be: It is an attempt by the Father to teach His children how to avoid mistakes in life. Sometimes we don't always understand why our parents make the decisions they do, but we trust the spirit and love them and respect them. Children, however, fail to heed their parents advice, make mistakes, and only later come to understand what was meant and why. Unfortunately, it is hard to learn without experience. And parents in this world are not always right and are growing, too. For example, I now teach my children the opposite of what I used to teach them. As I grow, what I teach changes. God does not have this problem. What He has always taught has been consistent. He just sends new mouthpieces.


I try to understand everyone's experience, for good and ill. I try to understand their wisdom, as well as their folly (fear and pride) for both will shed a light on my thinking. My goal is to please God, and to understand fully what is expected of me, and to accomplish that task. I do not accept any groupthink, just as I do not accept my own thinking. I am constantly testing and searching and sharing. My wife says sometimes that I 'criticize everything.' I see her point, but I am testing everything. I described Reagan the other day to somebody, and it was received as a withering criticism. It was not meant that way, nor was it my purpose. I was trying to explain how fear and pride color people's beliefs. Reagan is an easy and well-known example.


In a funny way, what we love also reveals what we fear. Therefore, I love no groupthink, and I do not fear being alone. I am not interested in being in a group that thinks itself superior to other groups. One who thinks critically about the group is not welcome in the group, by definition. Hence all the schisms, by those who leave and form their own groups. They think they have something to 'win' by creating separations. I don't. I think like an individual, and try to get people to think like an individual, and not hide behind the skirts of scholars, Popes, or old or new cultural tradition. The truth is found on our own. We have to do our own lifting. We can share within a group, and worship as a group, obviously, but doctrine is just an attempt by one person to explain what one person is thinking. It is a road to a destination, not the destination.


<b>One should never stand still, much less stand still permanently with ideas that are not their own.</b> God's message is always simple, because it always has Love at its center.

[Muslimah]

Bismillah


Thank you very much Steve for your answer, sorry later reply, Ramadan timing is really different and tight.


Do u case to give your opinion, hoping that FHC will come to that thread too, on the thread I started:


http://islamsms.com/bb/index.php?showtopic=5146