QuoteEpiscopal minister defrocked after becoming a Muslim
Ann Holmes Redding says she saw no contradiction in Muslim being a minister
Christian parishioners, family saw Redding as having abandoned her faith
Diocese rules that priest "cannot be both a Christian and a Muslim"
By Patrick Oppmann
CNN
SEATTLE, Washington (CNN) -- Ann Holmes Redding has what could be called a crisis of faiths.
For nearly 30 years, Redding has been an ordained minister in the Episcopal Church. Her priesthood ended Wednesday when she was defrocked.
The reason? For the past three years Redding has been both a practicing Christian and a Muslim.
"Had anyone told me in February 2006 that I would be a Muslim before April rolled around, I would have shaken my head in concern for the person's mental health," Redding recently told a crowd at a signing for a book she co-authored on religion.
Redding said her conversion to Islam was sparked by an interfaith gathering she attended three years ago. During the meeting, an imam demonstrated Muslim chants and meditation to the group. Redding said the beauty of the moment and the imam's humbleness before God stuck with her.
"It was much more this overwhelming conviction that I needed to surrender to God and this was the form that my surrender needed to take," she recalled. "It wasn't just an episode but .... was a step that I wasn't going to step back from."
Ten days later Redding was saying the shahada -- the Muslim declaration of belief in the oneness of God and acceptance of Mohammad as his prophet.
But Redding said she felt her new Muslim faith did not pose a contradiction to her staying a Christian and minister.
"Both religions say there's only one God," Redding said, "and that God is the same God. It's very clear we are talking about the same God! So I haven't shifted my allegiance." Watch Redding say, "Being a Muslim makes me a better Christian."
The imam at the Islamic Center in Seattle, Washington, where Redding prays said she brings the best of both traditions to her beliefs.
"Coming from an example of wanting to be Christ-like and coming from the perspective of wanting to follow the best example -- the example of our prophet Mohammed -- it all makes sense then," Benjamin Shabazz said.
There are many contradictions between the two religions. While Islam recognizes Jesus as a prophet, Christianity worships him as the son of God.
James Wellman, who chairs the department of comparative religion at the University of Washington, said that while it is not unusual for people to "mix and match" beliefs, it is almost unheard of for a minister to claim two religions.
"When you take ordination as a Christian minister, you take an explicit vow of loyalty to Jesus. It's hard for me to understand how a Christian minister could have dual loyalties," Wellman said.
Redding said she sees the theological conflicts but that the two religions, at their core, "illuminate" each other.
"When I took my shahada, I said there's no God but God and that Mohammed is God's prophet or messenger. Neither of those statements, neither part of that confession or profession denies anything about Christianity," she said.
To her parishioners and family, though, Redding has turned her back on her faith and office. There was, she said, "universal puzzlement" at her decision to convert to Islam but still remain an Episcopal minister.
"I have people who love me very much who really don't want me to do this, and I love them very much. And I would love to be able to say, 'Because I love you I will renounce my orders' or 'I will renounce Islam' ... I hate causing pain to people who love me, that's not my intention," Redding said.
The Episcopal Church also rejected Redding's religious choice.
"The church interprets my being a Muslim as 'abandoning the church,' " she said. "And that [there] comes an understanding that you have to be one or the other, and most people would say that. It simply hasn't been my experience that I have to make a choice between the two."
The Diocese of Rhode Island, where Redding was ordained, told her to leave either her new Muslim faith or the ministry. A diocese statement said Bishop Geralyn Wolf found Redding to be "a woman of utmost integrity. However, the Bishop believes that a priest of the Church cannot be both a Christian and a Muslim."
Even though she has been defrocked, Redding said she is not capable of turning her back on either faith. She said she wants to continue speaking about and teaching religion and perhaps even travel to the Hajj, a journey to Mecca that every Muslim is supposed to make in their lifetime.
Redding said she does not want her belief in two religions to diminish the value she holds for both Christianity and Islam. Each faith by itself is enough to fulfill a person spiritually, she said.
"It's all there. I am not saying you have to go somewhere else to be complete. Some people don't need glasses, some people need single lenses. I need bifocals."
So is this woman crazy, or just shockingly stupid? It's impossible to belong to both of these religions at the same time, despite the fact they are certainly related. 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. :P
Quote from: Caliga on April 02, 2009, 08:47:50 AM
So is this woman crazy, or just shockingly stupid? It's impossible to belong to both of these religions at the same time, despite the fact they are certainly related. 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. :P
Besides the fact that Episcopals believe in the trinity while the Muslims believe that is heresy and polytheism. I am sure she would be welcome to attend that Episcopal church as a weird Christo-Muslim but she certainly should leave the clergy. The church was right to defrock her.
It amuses me that she acknowledges that everyone around her thinks she's crazy, and she says that she herself would have denounced such behavior as crazy before undergoing her conversion... but yet doesn't seem to recognize that she might be crazy. :)
What if Jesus was adopted? He could then be and not be the son of God. :p
Quote from: Martinus on April 02, 2009, 08:56:23 AM
What if Jesus was adopted? He could then be and not be the son of God. :p
I'm sure adoption agencies were plentiful back then. :lol:
Quote from: Martinus on April 02, 2009, 08:56:23 AM
What if Jesus was adopted? He could then be and not be the son of God. :p
Jesus could have two dads. -_-
Quote from: Caliga on April 02, 2009, 08:57:29 AM
I'm sure adoption agencies were plentiful back then. :lol:
Sure there were. Julius Caesar adopted Octavian didn't he?
The wheels are really falling off the Anglican church. This is what happens when one doesn't condemn gays firmly enough.
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2009, 08:58:22 AMSure there were. Julius Caesar adopted Octavian didn't he?
God would have to go through an adoption agency. He doesn't really have any family or close friends on Earth.
She just bought into Pascals Wager and is covering her bets as best she can. Can't balme the poor woman.
Quote from: Berkut on April 02, 2009, 09:08:17 AM
She just bought into Pascals Wager and is covering her bets as best she can. Can't balme the poor woman.
She should convert to Judaism just to complete the hattrick...
and then she will die and discover the Catholics were right all along.
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2009, 09:10:49 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 02, 2009, 09:08:17 AM
She just bought into Pascals Wager and is covering her bets as best she can. Can't balme the poor woman.
She should convert to Judaism just to complete the hattrick...
and then she will die and discover the Catholics were right all along.
What would really suck is to die and discover the Sumerians were right all along.
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 09:12:41 AM
What would really suck is to die and discover the Sumerians were right all along.
Isn't that one of those things were you go to a dark underworld for all eternity?
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2009, 09:14:49 AM
Isn't that one of those things were you go to a dark underworld for all eternity?
Yeah, but it is better than being condemned to Detroit for all eternity.
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2009, 09:14:49 AM
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 09:12:41 AM
What would really suck is to die and discover the Sumerians were right all along.
Isn't that one of those things were you go to a dark underworld for all eternity?
Yup. A particularly wretched and pessimistic view. It would certainly be a big shock to those expecting a Christian sort of afterlife!
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2009, 08:57:44 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 02, 2009, 08:56:23 AM
What if Jesus was adopted? He could then be and not be the son of God. :p
Jesus could have two dads. -_-
I'd like to see a caricature depicting Jesus as a son of a same sex couple consisting of Jahweh and Allah. :cool:
Quote from: Martinus on April 02, 2009, 09:39:28 AM
I'd like to see a caricature depicting Jesus as a son of a same sex couple consisting of Jahweh and Allah. :cool:
Nah Joseph and Jahweh were getting it on. That is why Mary was a virgin, being Joseph's beard.
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2009, 09:10:49 AM
and then she will die and discover the Catholics were right all along.
:rolleyes:
Hmmm, there is no God but God and Mohammad is his prophet say the Muslims. Jesus is not only the Son of God but is also God say the Christians.
Yep no possible conflict there. :lol:
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 09:45:50 AM
Hmmm, there is no God but God and Mohammad is his prophet say the Muslims. Jesus is not only the Son of God but is also God say the Christians.
Yep no possible conflict there. :lol:
They really are not compatible at all on a dogmatic level.
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2009, 09:14:49 AM
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 09:12:41 AM
What would really suck is to die and discover the Sumerians were right all along.
Isn't that one of those things were you go to a dark underworld for all eternity?
It's not all bad, you do get a covering of feathers and get to eat dust :huh:
Pfft, believing that Jesus is both the son of god and not the son of god at the same time is not more silly than believing that he "sacrificed" himself for humans while being immortal.
From the outside looking in, her actions are no more loony than all the other contradictions and looniness in just about all religions. Maybe she can start a new one.
Quote from: Berkut on April 02, 2009, 09:53:01 AM
Pfft, believing that Jesus is both the son of god and not the son of god at the same time is not more silly than believing that he "sacrificed" himself for humans while being immortal.
From the outside looking in, her actions are no more loony than all the other contradictions and looniness in just about all religions. Maybe she can start a new one.
Well one thing is for sure, Islam has less crazy contradictions about it than standard Christianity on the surface. I mean both man and God who sacrifices himself to make men immortal...
I sure haven't noticed that people have gotten much better since 30 AD.
But that is beside the point. The point is if you do not believe that stuff (or at least pretend to) you should not have a job as a leader of a Christian church.
Quote from: Berkut on April 02, 2009, 09:53:01 AMMaybe she can start a new one.
I kinda wonder if that's her intent, actually.
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2009, 09:50:21 AM
They really are not compatible at all on a dogmatic level.
Considerin that is totally in vogue to run around picking and choosing what one likes from a religion, it wouldn't be too hard to see two religions as two different views of the same truths.
Besides, who said internal contradiction is necessarily a bad thing?
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 10:16:10 AM
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2009, 09:50:21 AM
They really are not compatible at all on a dogmatic level.
Considerin that is totally in vogue to run around picking and choosing what one likes from a religion, it wouldn't be too hard to see two religions as two different views of the same truths.
Besides, who said internal contradiction is necessarily a bad thing?
I think it is fine, even a little admirable, for an ordinary church goer. But it just doesn't work for a priest or church leader.
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 10:16:10 AM
Considerin that is totally in vogue to run around picking and choosing what one likes from a religion, it wouldn't be too hard to see two religions as two different views of the same truths.
Besides, who said internal contradiction is necessarily a bad thing?
In vogue now? Syncretism is part and parcel of religion.
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.
Quote from: Berkut on April 02, 2009, 09:53:01 AM
Pfft, believing that Jesus is both the son of god and not the son of god at the same time is not more silly than believing that he "sacrificed" himself for humans while being immortal.
From the outside looking in, her actions are no more loony than all the other contradictions and looniness in just about all religions. Maybe she can start a new one.
Point taken. She is essentially starting a new one since the two she currently subscribes to are mutually inconsistent other then the fact that they both worship a God. The Devil is in the details.
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2009, 09:10:49 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 02, 2009, 09:08:17 AM
She just bought into Pascals Wager and is covering her bets as best she can. Can't balme the poor woman.
She should convert to Judaism just to complete the hattrick...
and then she will die and discover the Catholics were right all along.
Trifecta!
Question: could one be Jewish and Muslim at the same time?
I can't think of any necessary theological contradiction off the top of my head.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 02, 2009, 11:07:04 AM
Question: could one be Jewish and Muslim at the same time?
I can't think of any necessary theological contradiction off the top of my head.
I don't see why not, per se.
Hell, from a theological standpoint, can't you argue that Christians are a sect of Jews anyway?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 02, 2009, 11:07:04 AM
Question: could one be Jewish and Muslim at the same time?
I can't think of any necessary theological contradiction off the top of my head.
Would Jews have a problem with Muhammad being the "seal" of the Prophets? Wouldn't the Messiah be another prophet?
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 02, 2009, 11:07:04 AM
Question: could one be Jewish and Muslim at the same time?
I can't think of any necessary theological contradiction off the top of my head.
Ask your Rabbi!
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 02, 2009, 11:07:04 AM
Question: could one be Jewish and Muslim at the same time?
I can't think of any necessary theological contradiction off the top of my head.
Can't think of any contradiction theologically. But I dont think one can be a Muslim and a follower of any other faith. I have a vague recollection that one of the worst sins in Islam is for a believer to embrace another faith.
Minsky makes an interesting point, actually. I think it is possible to be both Jewish and Christian at the same time (the Armenian Paulicians and a lot of the early Christians clearly fall under this category), and possibly Jewish and Muslim at the same time, but not Muslim and Christian at the same time. Makes sense, with Judaism as the ur-religion and the two others being 'daughter' religions who developed along vaguely similar lines but in open conflict to each other for their entire history.
Quote from: Queequeg on April 02, 2009, 11:26:17 AM
Minsky makes an interesting point, actually. I think it is possible to be both Jewish and Christian at the same time (the Armenian Paulicians and a lot of the early Christians clearly fall under this category), and possibly Jewish and Muslim at the same time, but not Muslim and Christian at the same time. Makes sense, with Judaism as the ur-religion and the two others being 'daughter' religions who developed along vaguely similar lines but in open conflict to each other for their entire history.
What exactly prevents the "combining" of Muslim and Christian thought?
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 11:27:40 AM
[What exactly prevents the "combining" of Muslim and Christian thought?
Read posts above. Christ as God for one.
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 11:27:40 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on April 02, 2009, 11:26:17 AM
Minsky makes an interesting point, actually. I think it is possible to be both Jewish and Christian at the same time (the Armenian Paulicians and a lot of the early Christians clearly fall under this category), and possibly Jewish and Muslim at the same time, but not Muslim and Christian at the same time. Makes sense, with Judaism as the ur-religion and the two others being 'daughter' religions who developed along vaguely similar lines but in open conflict to each other for their entire history.
What exactly prevents the "combining" of Muslim and Christian thought?
It would have to dump either the the trinity, the crucifixion and some of the turn the other cheek stuff, or alternatively dump the harsh monotheism, iconoclastic aesthetic and warrior ethos. There is a lot of overlap, and I think it is probably fair to say that Islam is a natural offshoot of some of the more Jewish, adoptionist Christian heresies of the 7th Century Middle-East, but Islam has for its entire history defined itself as something related but different and
better than Christianity.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 11:29:47 AM
Read posts above. Christ as God for one.
And you can't handwave over that?
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 11:19:24 AMCan't think of any contradiction theologically. But I dont think one can be a Muslim and a follower of any other faith. I have a vague recollection that one of the worst sins in Islam is for a believer to embrace another faith.
Yes, the very wording of the
shahadah suggests to me that Muslims are absolutely expected to be exclusively loyal to their faith.
I agree that it seems possible to be a Muslim and a Jew simultaneously. I've never heard of any Jewish texts explicitly stating that Muhammed was NOT a Prophet, nor any laws that make it impossible for him to have been one, though I suppose Jews wouldn't believe a non-Jew could be a Prophet of God. On the other hand, it's a bit unclear whether or not the Arab (and clearly Semitic) tribes of western Arabia would be viewed as belonging to the Chosen People or not... and IIRC alot of the Arabs of that region were Jews around the time Muhammad was born.
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 11:32:09 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 11:29:47 AM
Read posts above. Christ as God for one.
And you can't handwave over that?
Nope. Islam has proclaimed Christianity for being polytheistic for that very reason. Changing that view would go to the most important teaching of Islam that there is only one God.
As a side note the Old Testament/Torah even recognizes other Gods by the Commandment that followers should "have no other Gods before Me". Islam absolutely demands not only that followers worship no other Gods but that there are no other Gods.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 11:36:18 AMAs a side note the Old Testament/Torah even recognizes other Gods by the Commandment that followers should "have no other Gods before Me". Islam absolutely demands not only that followers worship no other Gods but that there are no other Gods.
Interesting... you know, I've never thought about it but it seems like the ancient Jews were quasi-polytheistic in that I think they did acknowledge the existence of other gods, but just refused to worship them because Yahweh had given them that commandment.
Nowadays, I doubt any Jews believe in the existence of other gods. I wonder when that changed, and if Christianity's uncompromising monotheism had something to do with it?
Quote from: Caliga on April 02, 2009, 11:45:56 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 11:36:18 AMAs a side note the Old Testament/Torah even recognizes other Gods by the Commandment that followers should "have no other Gods before Me". Islam absolutely demands not only that followers worship no other Gods but that there are no other Gods.
Interesting... you know, I've never thought about it but it seems like the ancient Jews were quasi-polytheistic in that I think they did acknowledge the existence of other gods, but just refused to worship them because Yahweh had given them that commandment.
Nowadays, I doubt any Jews believe in the existence of other gods. I wonder when that changed, and if Christianity's uncompromising monotheism had something to do with it?
Just a reflection of the cultural realities. The ancient Jews were surrounded by more powerful cultures having different Gods and the Jews themselves worshipped other Gods - read the rants against Jews who worshipped the Queen of Heaven for example.
As you already noted the main religions in the area of Medina were Jews and some Christians. Easy enough to create a religion proclaiming only one God with deference to the other religions of the Book.
Quote from: Caliga on April 02, 2009, 11:34:55 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 11:19:24 AMCan't think of any contradiction theologically. But I dont think one can be a Muslim and a follower of any other faith. I have a vague recollection that one of the worst sins in Islam is for a believer to embrace another faith.
Yes, the very wording of the shahadah suggests to me that Muslims are absolutely expected to be exclusively loyal to their faith.
I agree that it seems possible to be a Muslim and a Jew simultaneously. I've never heard of any Jewish texts explicitly stating that Muhammed was NOT a Prophet, nor any laws that make it impossible for him to have been one, though I suppose Jews wouldn't believe a non-Jew could be a Prophet of God. On the other hand, it's a bit unclear whether or not the Arab (and clearly Semitic) tribes of western Arabia would be viewed as belonging to the Chosen People or not... and IIRC alot of the Arabs of that region were Jews around the time Muhammad was born.
Not true - you don't have to be Jewish to be a prophet: there are at least seven non-Jewish biblical prophets:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balaam
QuoteIn rabbinic literature Balaam is represented as one of seven gentile prophets; the other six being Beor (Balaam's father), Job, and Job's four friends (Talmud, B. B. 15b). In this literature, Balaam gradually acquired a position among the non-Jews, which was exalted as much as that of Moses among the Jews (Midrash Numbers Rabbah 20); at first being a mere interpreter of dreams, but later becoming a magician, until finally the spirit of prophecy descended upon him (ib. 7).
And this doesn't even count such figures as Noah (sometimes considered a prophet as well).
Not that you don't even have to be a good guy to be a prophet - Balaam is considered a villian in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, but a prophet none the less.
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 12:46:59 PM
Not true -
And you said you didnt learn anything at that youth Torah camp.
Wow, interesting.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 12:49:56 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 12:46:59 PM
Not true -
And you said you didnt learn anything at that youth Torah camp.
:lol:
Though here's something I don't know - an explaination as to why there are not new prophets in Judaism.
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 12:56:11 PMThough here's something I don't know - an explaination as to why there are not new prophets in Judaism.
There *can* be new ones, right? I think there just haven't been any for a while.... unlike in Christianity, where it says explicitly in the New Testament someplace that there can be no more prophets, which is why I find it endlessly amusing when Christian cult leaders and the like proclaim themselves prophets.
Quote from: Caliga on April 02, 2009, 12:51:32 PM
Wow, interesting.
In the OT, prophecy is more like an affliction than an exalted status - it is something God
does to you, poor sucker, for reasons of His own, and you can't escape even if you
want to - look at Jonah: the whole bit with him and the whale was God's way of making this clear.
Quote from: Valmy on April 02, 2009, 09:41:55 AM
Quote from: Martinus on April 02, 2009, 09:39:28 AM
I'd like to see a caricature depicting Jesus as a son of a same sex couple consisting of Jahweh and Allah. :cool:
Nah Joseph and Jahweh were getting it on. That is why Mary was a virgin, being Joseph's beard.
Nah, Jesus's dad was probably Matthew the Idol Carver or Marcus the Weaver.
"No Joseph, I have no idea how this could have happened, me being a virgin. Must be a miracle!" :whistle:
Quote from: Caliga on April 02, 2009, 12:58:50 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 12:56:11 PMThough here's something I don't know - an explaination as to why there are not new prophets in Judaism.
There *can* be new ones, right? I think there just haven't been any for a while.... unlike in Christianity, where it says explicitly in the New Testament someplace that there can be no more prophets, which is why I find it endlessly amusing when Christian cult leaders and the like proclaim themselves prophets.
I simply don't know. The only religion I know for sure has ruled out new prophets is Islam, where Mohammed is said to be the "seal of the prophets" (i.e. the very last).
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 01:02:18 PMI simply don't know. The only religion I know for sure has ruled out new prophets is Islam
and Christianity ;)
(unless you consider the LDS Church to be Christian)
Quote from: Caliga on April 02, 2009, 01:07:31 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 01:02:18 PMI simply don't know. The only religion I know for sure has ruled out new prophets is Islam
and Christianity ;)
(unless you consider the LDS Church to be Christian)
Never investigated the matter - but where in the NT does it discuss this?
Quote from: Queequeg on April 02, 2009, 11:14:27 AM
Would Jews have a problem with Muhammad being the "seal" of the Prophets? Wouldn't the Messiah be another prophet?
Yes but the very concept of Messiah is not within the Torah - it is not "core" in that respect and there is room for disagreement about what the messianic concept means and how to interpret it.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 11:36:18 AM
Nope. Islam has proclaimed Christianity for being polytheistic for that very reason. Changing that view would go to the most important teaching of Islam that there is only one God.
So you bend around and say that God isn't really more than one person although he can manifest himself in the body of a person called Christ (after all, he is all powerful or something). You can also see that as being more than one person, whilst one God.
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 01:11:14 PMNever 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 guess to at least a handful of Christians two diametrically opposed notions CAN be true at the same time. :D
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 12:56:11 PM
:lol:
Though here's something I don't know - an explaination as to why there are not new prophets in Judaism.
Prophecy as such ceased after Ezra's refoundation. There was no longer a need for the office of Prophet to deliver the message of God directly because everything one needed to know about God's will could be discerned from the existing scripture and the law. The prophets were replaced by scribes and sages.
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 01:16:37 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 11:36:18 AM
Nope. Islam has proclaimed Christianity for being polytheistic for that very reason. Changing that view would go to the most important teaching of Islam that there is only one God.
So you bend around and say that God isn't really more than one person although he can manifest himself in the body of a person called Christ (after all, he is all powerful or something). You can also see that as being more than one person, whilst one God.
Not sure what you are saying. You are only describing the mental gymnatastics Christians go through in explaining the Trinity. What you are describing would be contrary to Islamic understanding of God who by Islams Definition cannot manifest himself in the body of another.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 01:30:13 PM
Not sure what you are saying. You are only describing the mental gymnatastics Christians go through in explaining the Trinity. What you are describing would be contrary to Islamic understanding of God who by Islams Definition cannot manifest himself in the body of another.
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?
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 01:33:21 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 01:30:13 PM
Not sure what you are saying. You are only describing the mental gymnatastics Christians go through in explaining the Trinity. What you are describing would be contrary to Islamic understanding of God who by Islams Definition cannot manifest himself in the body of another.
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?
There is only one God and Mohommad is his profit. The clearest most straightforward creed of all the religions of the Book. Some would also say the most simplistic but that is another debate.
It leaves no room for the machinations the Christians bedeviled themselves with over the centuries regarding the true nature of Christ and God.
There are so many problems with what you suggest that it would take too long to eductate you here. I suggest you read up on the subject if you are really interested.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 01:36:31 PM
There is only one God and Mohommad is his profit.
Leaving out the tee-hee about profit, how does that contradict anything? Do Christians think that Christ and God equal two gods?
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 01:33:21 PM
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.
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 01:39:01 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 01:36:31 PM
There is only one God and Mohommad is his profit.
Leaving out the tee-hee about profit, how does that contradict anything? Do Christians think that Christ and God equal two gods?
No, but Muslims think that.
Quote from: Barrister on April 02, 2009, 01:40:37 PM
No, but Muslims think that.
I dont think so. They reject the notion that God could have taken human form as Christianity asserts (or at least which many kinds of Chrisitianity asserts). It is not that Islam mistakes Christianity's meaning, it is that Islam rejects it.
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 01:39:01 PM
Leaving out the tee-hee about profit, Quote
:blush:
how does that contradict anything? Do Christians think that Christ and God equal two gods?
What JR said. Its not so much multiple Gods - which Christians would say they do not have. It is an matter of the nature of God on which the Muslims and Christians could never agree.
Hinduism in some forms at least has a similar notion to Christians - all of the "gods" share a single essence (Brahman), which merely manifests itself as seperate "gods" (and everything else as well).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman
Thus, Hinduism is also "not polytheistic" in a manner similar to why Christianity is "not polytheistic" - except instead of three manifestations, Hindus have manifestations without count.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 02, 2009, 01:39:17 PM
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. :)
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 02:10:34 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 02, 2009, 01:39:17 PM
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.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 02, 2009, 01:28:52 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 12:56:11 PM
:lol:
Though here's something I don't know - an explaination as to why there are not new prophets in Judaism.
Prophecy as such ceased after Ezra's refoundation. There was no longer a need for the office of Prophet to deliver the message of God directly because everything one needed to know about God's will could be discerned from the existing scripture and the law. The prophets were replaced by scribes and sages.
Where though is this described? I assume somewhere in the Talmud ...
Ask Madonna, she knows her Jewish shit.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 02:12:56 PM
JR has much more patience then I.
Actually, perhaps you should learn that writing, essentially, the same one liner over again isn't an effective way of teaching. :)
Quote from: Caliga on April 02, 2009, 08:47:50 AMTo 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. :P
He can up until you open the box.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 02, 2009, 01:39:17 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 01:33:21 PM
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.
Quote from: Maximus on April 02, 2009, 03:51:50 PM
Quote from: Caliga on April 02, 2009, 08:47:50 AMTo 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. :P
He can up until you open the box.
:lmfao: Perfect!
Quote from: Maximus on April 02, 2009, 03:51:50 PM
Quote from: Caliga on April 02, 2009, 08:47:50 AMTo 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. :P
He can up until you open the box.
Only theoretical physicists can have two gods. :D
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 02, 2009, 02:12:56 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 02, 2009, 02:10:34 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 02, 2009, 01:39:17 PM
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.
Quote from: Maximus on April 02, 2009, 03:51:50 PM
Quote from: Caliga on April 02, 2009, 08:47:50 AMTo 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. :P
He can up until you open the box.
That's it, I'm gonna have to reach for my Browning.
Quote from: Tyr on April 02, 2009, 10:48:34 AM
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. :yes:
Quote from: Caliga on April 02, 2009, 01:26:33 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 02, 2009, 01:11:14 PMNever 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.
Quote from: dps on April 03, 2009, 03:28:46 AMI 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:
Quote from: 1 Corinthians 14Tongues, 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 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessationism)