Episcopal Priest wants to be both a Christian and a Muslim at the same time

[Maximus]

To Episcopals, Jesus is the son of God.  To Muslims, Jesus is not the son of God.  HE CANNOT BE BOTH THINGS AT THE SAME TIME.

He can up until you open the box.

[Queequeg]

What you said to me was that there can't be two gods in Islam. Those mental gymnastics get around that. So there is specific language that God can't manifest himself in human form?

They don't get around it because the Trinity conceives of three persons sharing a single essence.  That violates the indivisibility of God under the Islamic tawhid - God is indivisible and can't manifest in multiple "persons" even if those persons share the same essence or substance.  Islam also sees God as transcendent and incorporeal - therefore there is no way that a individual human being could somehow be of God's substance or essence.

One of the extremely appealing things about Islam (there are a few, honestly) is that transcendental, extreme monotheism I think. In an odd sense I think Islam inherits a lot more from Classical (ie Pre-Christian) Hellenistic Theology  of Xenophanes than either Christianity or Judaism did. 

Always thought the origin of Islam, and the world that it came out of, is among the most fascinating topics in all of human history.

[grumbler]

To Episcopals, Jesus is the son of God.  To Muslims, Jesus is not the son of God.  HE CANNOT BE BOTH THINGS AT THE SAME TIME.

He can up until you open the box.

  Perfect!

[FunkMonk]

To Episcopals, Jesus is the son of God.  To Muslims, Jesus is not the son of God.  HE CANNOT BE BOTH THINGS AT THE SAME TIME.

He can up until you open the box.

Only theoretical physicists can have two gods. 

[Razgovory]

They don't get around it because the Trinity conceives of three persons sharing a single essence.  That violates the indivisibility of God under the Islamic tawhid - God is indivisible and can't manifest in multiple "persons" even if those persons share the same essence or substance.  Islam also sees God as transcendent and incorporeal - therefore there is no way that a individual human being could somehow be of God's substance or essence.

Thank you and contrary to claims out there, that didn't take too long.

JR has much more patience then I.

Also smarter and better looking.

[Caliga]

To Episcopals, Jesus is the son of God.  To Muslims, Jesus is not the son of God.  HE CANNOT BE BOTH THINGS AT THE SAME TIME.

He can up until you open the box.

That's it, I'm gonna have to reach for my Browning.

[DontSayBanana]

This is indeed stupid.
Yes its the same god. Well fucking duh. Everyone knows and realises that.
Totally different ways of worshipping him though. You can't be a catholic and a baptist at the same time afterall.
She needs a slap.

Then she joined the right religion.

[dps]

Never investigated the matter - but where in the NT does it discuss this?

I forget where, but Princesca likes to quote it (the passage goes something like "the time for Prophets and speaking in tongues has passed") all the time to annoy my mother-in-law, because one of the white trash losers at her Church claims to be able to speak in tongues.  My mother-in-law maintains she isn't faking, but somehow thinks it's not a contradiction of this passage.

I don't recall even reading that.  Perhaps it's in the Apocrypha? 

As for Judism, I'm pretty sure that some figures have been considered new prophets since Biblical times, but only by some sects.  IIRC, some Jewish radicals considered Meir Kahane a prophet, for example.

[Caliga]

I don't recall even reading that.  Perhaps it's in the Apocrypha? 

As for Judism, I'm pretty sure that some figures have been considered new prophets since Biblical times, but only by some sects.  IIRC, some Jewish radicals considered Meir Kahane a prophet, for example.

Well, yeah, all three of the Judeo-Christian religions have had splinter groups that have proclaimed new Prophets, but just as you assert the folks who back Meir Kahane are 'radicals' (although I usually think of the Lubavitchers when discussing Jewish Messianism).

As for the speaking in tongues thing, I just skimmed through an online Bible and I suspect the passage they refer to is 1 Corinthians 14 1:25... but after reading through it it seems to assert that speaking in tongues is evil, but that prophecy in and of itself isn't.  A key verse:

Tongues, then, are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is not for unbelievers but for believers.

The general message is that glossolalia is 'pointless' because nobody can understand what is being said, and that if the speaker of tongues doesn't pray for the ability to make sense, they're an unbeliever.

I'm not 100% sure this is what they're referring to, so I'll keep digging.  I may email Princesca today at work to see if she just knows off the top of her head.

Edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessationism