I've probably stirred up a hornet's nest....

[GraceSeeker]

In response to a comment in another thread I have made a rather lengthy response. I'm sure that given the place in which it is posted that it will stir up a hornet's nest. So be it. I didn't post for that purpose, but realize I may have to live with that sort of fallout.

Though, I haven't been active here in several months, given that I have recently posted, and knowing this group to be a little less reactionary and a little more thoughtful, yet at the same time no less willing to analyze and critique, I invite you to take a look at what I have posted and then return to this thread to discuss my views. Do they fit within Methodism as you understand it? Are they off the wall?

I'll not continue to discuss my thoughts in the other site. I've learned that there are those there who will hear them and those who will not, and never the twain shall meet. But, here, my hope is that we might yet entertain some sort of fruitful discussion.

I'll not post all that I wrote because it is so long, but here is the link...
Christians VS Other Religions?

 

[brinny]

In response to a comment in another thread I have made a rather lengthy response. I'm sure that given the place in which it is posted that it will stir up a hornet's nest. So be it. I didn't post for that purpose, but realize I may have to live with that sort of fallout.

Though, I haven't been active here in several months, given that I have recently posted, and knowing this group to be a little less reactionary and a little more thoughtful, yet at the same time no less willing to analyze and critique, I invite you to take a look at what I have posted and then return to this thread to discuss my views. Do they fit within Methodism as you understand it? Are they off the wall?

I'll not continue to discuss my thoughts in the other site. I've learned that there are those there who will hear them and those who will not, and never the twain shall meet. But, here, my hope is that we might yet entertain some sort of fruitful discussion.

I'll not post all that I wrote because it is so long, but here is the link...
Christians VS Other Religions?

Unless i missed it, did you address that it is clearly declared that allah has no son?

Did i understand you correctly, that you claim that allah and the living God of Israel to be one and the same?

Thank you kindly.

 

[GraceSeeker]

Unless i missed it, did you address that it is clearly declared that allah has no son?

I said that most modern Muslims would consider the Christian understanding of God to be shirk. I did not say the reason that they would feel this way, but that would be one of the primary reasons.

Did i understand you correctly, that you claim that allah and the living God of Israel to be one and the same?

Yes. You do understand correctly.

 

[brinny]

I said that most modern Muslims would consider the Christian understanding of God to be shirk. I did not say the reason that they would feel this way, but that would be one of the primary reasons.


Yes. You do understand correctly.

Would you be so kind as to explain what this means?

I said that most modern Muslims would consider the Christian understanding of God to be shirk.

Are you basing your statement that the living God of Israel and allah are one and the same based on what is written in the living God's Word, the Bible?

 

[GraceSeeker]

Would you be so kind as to explain what this means?

Are you familiar with the term "shirk" It is a term used by Muslims, pejoratively, to describe someone who believes things about God that they hold are not true of God -- most specifically claiming that God is not one, that God could have a son, or that God could exist within creation (such as in human form).

Are you basing your statement that the living God of Israel and allah are one and the same based on what is written in the living God's Word, the Bible?

On many things. I take the Bible as primary. But I also use reason, tradition and experience to reflect upon questions of life and faith and to inform my understanding of what is revealed about God and how to follow him as described in the Bible.

 

[brinny]

Are you familiar with the term "shirk" It is a term used by Muslims, pejoratively, to describe someone who believes things about God that they hold are not true of God -- most specifically claiming that God is not one, that God could have a son, or that God could exist within creation (such as in human form).


On many things. I take the Bible as primary. But I also use reason, tradition and experience to reflect upon questions of life and faith and to inform my understanding of what is revealed about God and how to follow him as described in the Bible.

Yet you are not describing the living God of the Bible. What the living God of the Bible requires is that He be "believed".

 

[GraceSeeker]

Yet you are not describing the living God of the Bible. What the living God of the Bible requires is that He be "believed".

You understand that this ^^ is NOT what the Bible actually says. It says that we are to believe IN Him ["pistis eis", not just "pistis"].

Or do you not remember that even the demons believe, and shudder? Belief IN Jesus/belief IN God is manifestly different than believing ABOUT them. Belief IN is to trust in God/Jesus and their work in our lives. It does not have anything to do with the content of our faith. The doctrines worked out in the various ecumenical councils are important and significant, but believing in them is NOT synonymous to having faith. Faith is to fully rely on God and his grace. Many Muslims actually do this. Their understanding of God is amiss, many of the things that they believe about God I do not believe in, but the object of their faith is not so foreign from our own. To the extent that they too fully rely on God, verses their own work (and sadly most Muslims do have a works righteous sort of salvation), then they too are living in a faith relationship with God much as Paul speaks of people outside of the covenant community doing so in Romans 2. It is, therefore, not for me to condemn them, but to (where the opportunity avails itself) to show them more of the nature of God's love as found in Jesus Christ, but not to deny whatever grace and light God may have been able to shine into their lives at present.

Let us remember, God's standard is not getting close, but perfection. I don't believe that we can ever have perfect knowledge in this life. So, if the content of our faith is what is important, then we are all doomed. But, I do believe we can have perfect faith (i.e. trust). Thus it is the object of our faith, God himself (and not my knowledge) that I look to for the source of my (and anyone else's) salvation.

 

[brinny]

You understand that this ^^ is NOT what the Bible actually says. It says that we are to believe IN Him ["pistis eis", not just "pistis"].

Or do you not remember that even the demons believe, and shudder? Belief IN Jesus/belief IN God is manifestly different than believing ABOUT them. Belief IN is to trust in God/Jesus and their work in our lives. It does not have anything to do with the content of our faith. The doctrines worked out in the various ecumenical councils are important and significant, but believing in them is NOT synonymous to having faith. Faith is to fully rely on God and his grace. Many Muslims actually do this. Their understanding of God is amiss, many of the things that they believe about God I do not believe in, but the object of their faith is not so foreign from our own. To the extent that they too fully rely on God, verses their own work (and sadly most Muslims do have a works righteous sort of salvation), then they too are living in a faith relationship with God much as Paul speaks of people outside of the covenant community doing so in Romans 2. It is, therefore, not for me to condemn them, but to (where the opportunity avails itself) to show them more of the nature of God's love as found in Jesus Christ, but not to deny whatever grace and light God may have been able to shine into their lives at present.

Let us remember, God's standard is not getting close, but perfection. I don't believe that we can ever have perfect knowledge in this life. So, if the content of our faith is what is important, then we are all doomed. But, I do believe we can have perfect faith (i.e. trust). Thus it is the object of our faith, God himself (and not my knowledge) that I look to for the source of my (and anyone else's) salvation.

The reason Abraham was called "righteous" by God Himself is because he "believed" God and His promises.

 

[GraceSeeker]

The reason Abraham was called "righteous" by God Himself is because he "believed" God and His promises.

You just made my point. The term "believed" (in Romans 4:3) is in the genitive case and carries with it the idea of belonging to (i.e., trusting in) and not of believing about. Again, it is more than the content of Abraham's faith that is important in Paul's mind, rather it is the object of Abraham's faith (God) which most matters. Abraham trusts in God, not in what Abraham himself does. That is why he is considered righteous before Abraham has even done anything. Paul's entire point in Romans 4 and mine are the same.

 

[brinny]

You just made my point. The term "believed" (in Romans 4:3) is in the genitive case and carries with it the idea of belonging to (i.e., trusting in) and not of believing about. Again, it is more than the content of Abraham's faith that is important in Paul's mind, rather it is the object of Abraham's faith (God) most matters.

Not following you.

 

[GraceSeeker]

hmmm.....
OK. Let me think of how to say it another way. Or maybe someone else will chime in to say it better than me.

Anyway, good questions. Time for a few hospital calls, I'll try to mull this over in my mind in the drive.

 

[brinny]

On a side note:

"Believing" God means that one takes Him at His Word, and thus trusts Him, which is what "faith" is.

"But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." ~Hebrews 11:6

 

[Paul uk]

The reality is that because we each have our own unique lens through which we view the world that we each have our own unique understanding of biblical passages. And, as a result of that we each have our own unique understanding and concepts with regard to the God described therein.

I read the linked post and thought that it was very well-considered. I agree with what you wrote and this snippet sums it up nicely. A more mundane example would be how two Christians, who uphold identical doctrines, can nevertheless arrive at diametrically opposed political views, whilst maintaining that their faith intimately informs their political choices.

 

[food4thought]

Consider 1Jo 4:1-6.

Muslims deny that the Son of God came in the flesh, therefore they are rightfully called antichrist, not worshipers of the same God.

I appreciate the where you are coming from, not wanting to erect barriers to the gospel, but when the gospel itself is the barrier, there is nothing to do but speak the truth in love.

 

[GraceSeeker]

Consider 1st John 4:1-6.

Muslims deny that the Son of God came in the flesh, therefore they are rightfully called antichrist, not worshipers of the same God.

And Jews deny the same thing. What do you think Saul was having Stephen murdered for in Acts 7. So, is it your assertion that Saul is worshipping a different God in Acts 7 than he is confronted by in Acts 9?

 

[food4thought]

And Jews deny the same thing. What do you think Saul was having Stephen murdered for in Acts 7. So, is it your assertion that Saul is worshipping a different God in Acts 7 than he is confronted by in Acts 9?

Yes. Paul was worshiping a god as he supposed him to be, not God as He was revealed to be thru Christ. Once God revealed Himself thru Christ the Jews had no excuse for rejecting Him except to deny Him, and to deny Him was to deny God. Christians may differ on many things, but they do not differ on who God is. Muslims worship a god who did not manifest himself through Christ, but one who denies the very heart of who the true and living God is. So did Paul before his conversion.

There is only one God to worship, but I would say that Muslims worship a false god which Muhammad made up by himself, or maybe he was duped by a fallen angel... whichever it was, it is not the God revealed in the Bible. Actually, if anything, Muhammad would have us return to law as a way to righteousness, and not even the Law of Moses but a law he declared. In contrast, Paul may have worshiped God thru the Law (or perhaps even then he was worshiping a god of his imagination) until God revealed Himself through Christ... but once he denied Christ, he ceased worshiping God and worshiped a god of his own imagination, the same as (perhaps) Muhammad.

 

[GraceSeeker]

OK. Well, I think we differ on what it was that Paul was doing. So, it follows that if we differ in our understanding of the God who Paul worshipped that we most certainly are going to differ in our understanding of who it is that Muslims worship today.

I do agree that Muslims would have us return to law as a way to righteousness. This is one of my most critical observations with regard to Islam. But as far as God goes, I believe that there is only one God. And I believe that all people who are seeking to worship God are therefore seeking after the one who is the Creator. They may not know him as also being Redeemer as I do, but that doesn't mean that because they are unaware or misunderstanding of this aspect of his revelation, it does not follow (at least not in my opinion it does not) that they are therefore worshipping a different God.


And, Brinny, I still think that the best way I can address your question is to return again to the difference between believing in and believing about. For the scriptures, faith is always belief in. Jesus comes to renew our relationship with God. Relationships are things that are built on trust (i.e., belief in someone). They are not built by having simply head knowledge about someone. Our English translations don't always capture the importance of faith being not just believing things about God, and the importance of placing one's faith IN Jesus, or IN God through the relationship that one has with God through Jesus. But the Greek makes it clear that this is what we mean when we speak of faith. It is infused into both the vocabulary and the grammar of the Greek New Testament. Even where it isn't explicit, it is implicit. It was this aspect of Greek grammar that I was referencing above which you said you did not follow -- "The genitive cases [the declension of the noun in the verse you quoted] expresses relationship."*

*quote from "New Testament Greek for Beginners" by J. Gresham Machen, p. 25

 

[brinny]

OK. Well, I think we differ on what it was that Paul was doing. So, it follows that if we differ in our understanding of the God who Paul worshipped that we most certainly are going to differ in our understanding of who it is that Muslims worship today.

I do agree that Muslims to law as a way to righteousness. This is one of my most critical observations with regard to Islam. But as far as God goes, I believe that there is only one God. And I believe that all people who are seeking to worship God are therefore seeking after the one who is the Creator. They may not know him as also being Redeemer as I do, but that doesn't mean that because they are unaware or misunderstanding of this aspect of his revelation, it does not follow (at least not in my opinion it does not) that they are therefore worshipping a different God.


And, Brinny, I still think that the best way I can address your question is to return again to the difference between believing in and believing about. For the scriptures, faith is always belief in. Jesus comes to renew our relationship with God. Relationships are things that are built on trust (i.e., belief in someone). They are not built by having simply head knowledge about someone. Our English translations don't always capture the importance of faith being not just believing things about God, and the importance of placing one's faith IN Jesus, or IN God through the relationship that one has with God through Jesus. But the Greek makes it clear that this is what we mean when we speak of faith. It is infused into both the vocabulary and the grammar of the Greek New Testament. Even where it isn't explicit, it is implicit. It was this aspect of Greek grammar that I was referencing above which you said you did not follow -- "The genitive cases [the declension of the noun in the verse you quoted] expresses relationship."*

*quote from "New Testament Greek for Beginners" by J. Gresham Machen, p. 25

I said "believe" God.

It means to "take God at His Word".

Of course it is not possible to "believe" God if one does not believe IN the living God.

 

[GraceSeeker]

I said "believe" God.

It means to "take God at His Word".

Of course it is not possible to "believe" God if one does not believe IN the living God.

We would be in agreement with that concept of believing, that to believe God one would have to believe IN God. Given that, my question then is, in light of that concept, how does believing IN GOD become synonymous with believing certain sets of doctrines base on one's interpretation of the Bible, rather than just trusting in God himself?

 

[brinny]

We would be in agreement with that concept of believing, that to believe God one would have to believe IN God. Given that, my question then is, in light of that concept, how does believing IN GOD become synonymous with believing certain sets of doctrines base on one's interpretation of the Bible, rather than just trusting in God himself?

Believing God means taking God at His Word. His Word is the Bible. Interpretation of His Word is done by His Holy Spirit.

This verse comes to mind:

"Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and show thee great and mighty things, which thou knowest not." ~Jeremiah 33:3

"Calling" unto God is seeking Him in His Word. When we seek Him through His Word, He, by His Holy Spirit, teaches us/shows us "great and mighty things" we previously did not know.