Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Aabiss_Shakari

Monotheist Christians

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

If you mean islamic monotheism, then no. There is no christian sect that exists which matches it, because even the non-trinitarians end up making Jesus (pbuh) some sort of demigod (concept of divinity), so they aren't even close

But if you must know, the closest christian sect to islamic monotheism (tawhid) are unitarians and jehovah's witnesses because they take Jesus (pbuh) as a completely seperate entity than God swt. But still, like I said, they make Jesus into some sort of demigod; like jehovah witnesses who claim that Jesus (pbuh) was the first creation of God swt, through whom he created all of creation.

There are secularists, hindus, sikhs, jews and plenty others who come closer to tawhid than christians. Even the chinese concept of chi is closer to tawhid, than christian interpretation of monotheism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

I came to know that there is one sect of Monotheist Christians who do not have faith in "trinity" and are Mowhid (Monotheists) like Muslims. Do you guys have any information?

Hello Aabiss. The Bible does not teach three Gods, but three persons who form one God. The Old Testament speaks of God as the "Holy One" of Israel, not the Holy Three. If Muslims believe that Christians believe in three Gods, Jesus would have said, "Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is Three (not one)." (Mark 12:29) There is no justification for anyone to think that Christians believe in three Gods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should find these links helpful

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitarianism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontrinitarianism

If Muslims believe that Christians believe in three Gods
Islamic teachings and Jurisprudence treat Christians as Monotheists. That's the foremost reason why marriage with jews/christians is permitted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Aabiss. The Bible does not teach three Gods, but three persons who form one God.

Wrong again. The Bible does not teach that at all, which is why no where in the scriptures is trinity defined

The Old Testament speaks of God as the "Holy One" of Israel, not the Holy Three.

Exactly. Now only if christians understood that; how ill-defined trinity really is in the OT

If Muslims believe that Christians believe in three Gods, Jesus would have said, "Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is Three (not one)." (Mark 12:29) There is no justification for anyone to think that Christians believe in three Gods.

And if Jesus (pbuh) was here, hearing how you blaspheme his name and attribute false words to him such as your pagan trinity, he too would give you the same lecture on "Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is ONE" not one in three, or three in one...just ONE.

This is precisely why christianity is considered outside the folds of Judaism. When the Council of Nicea invented the concept of trinity, they effectively removed christianity from a Jewish movement, into a pagan mystery religion that lost all touch with its Jewish roots.

Edited by koroigetsuga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello Ya aba. I don't think all muslims think this way.

Muslims regard christians as monotheists; but we believe your concept of monotheism (tawhid) is flawed. If only you obeyed Jesus (pbuh) ("The Lord is One", "The father is greater than I", etc), rather than councils and church fathers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

I came to know that there is one sect of Monotheist Christians who do not have faith in "trinity" and are Mowhid (Monotheists) like Muslims. Do you guys have any information?

Jehova Witness do not confess the trinity, there may be others. JW consider themselves christian, but traditional christian churches do not consider JW to be christians.The therm "trinity" is not mentioned in the Bible, but was an interpretation made by the early roman church. There has been a lot of controversy on this subject, and it was one of many reasons why the orthodox and catholics split up 1000 years ago. There is no magic in the word Trinity, but the subject is very difficult. There are probably also subjects in the Quran so dificult that they are interpreted diferently. Is this not one reason why we have got Sunnies, Shias, Wahabis and others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Islam, Christians are nevertheless considered monotheist. In fact, in the Qur'an they are distinguished from the polytheists; thus, we shouldn't group them in with polytheism (since, if we say they aren't monotheistic, we are implying that they uphold polytheism). There is little doubt that the trinity has been one of Christianity's foremost downfalls, both in the theological and rational circles. So many people leave Christianity due to this belief - one that you will have to dig really deep to find justification for. But this is the problem when we exalt human beings to such high levels. We begin to form beliefs that contradict Abrahemic faith, reason and doctrinal proof.

Edited by asphyxiated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jehova Witness do not confess the trinity, there may be others. JW consider themselves christian, but traditional christian churches do not consider JW to be christians.The therm "trinity" is not mentioned in the Bible, but was an interpretation made by the early roman church. There has been a lot of controversy on this subject, and it was one of many reasons why the orthodox and catholics split up 1000 years ago. There is no magic in the word Trinity, but the subject is very difficult. There are probably also subjects in the Quran so dificult that they are interpreted diferently. Is this not one reason why we have got Sunnies, Shias, Wahabis and others?

I think you have hit the nail on the head. No one person can say "I have read and understood everything in it's perfection", and that includes any or all people of any or all religions, reading any or all scriptures.

BTW, Unitarians are not considered to be "real" Christians either. Anyone who remembers the Javy rants directed at the Placid clan can attest to that.

Traditional Calvanism has forced many beliefs on people, as history has shown, and backed it up with fire and brimstone to keep people from looking outside the box. Their doctrines are to be "taken by faith", with no allowance is given for human understanding.

People who question the doctrines are practically accused of treason, forced into meetings with 4-5 elders, and one on ones to convince them they are wrong. If people cannot be convinced (through repetative force, and fear mongering) they are judged already by the church, and if not bannished...ignored.

I know this from experience. Through my own studies I removed myself from Calvinism, and became Unitarian before I knew what a Unitarian was.

IMHO, Anyone who were to read the Testaments, Old and New without Calvin breathing down their neck would become a Unitarian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Muslims regard christians as monotheists; but we believe your concept of monotheism (tawhid) is flawed. If only you obeyed Jesus (pbuh) ("The Lord is One", "The father is greater than I", etc), rather than councils and church fathers

Please do explain why you think my concept of monotheism is different than the christians you cite above.

The Father is greater than the humanity of Jesus, not his deity. If only you understood:)

Jehova Witness do not confess the trinity, there may be others. JW consider themselves christian, but traditional christian churches do not consider JW to be christians.The therm "trinity" is not mentioned in the Bible, but was an interpretation made by the early roman church. There has been a lot of controversy on this subject, and it was one of many reasons why the orthodox and catholics split up 1000 years ago. There is no magic in the word Trinity, but the subject is very difficult.

It is not difficult to see that scripture teaches Father, Son and Holy Spirit are God, but it is difficult to understand how the three form one God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please do explain why you think my concept of monotheism is different than the christians you cite above.

The Father is greater than the humanity of Jesus, not his deity. If only you understood:)

I have told you I am not going to waste anymore time on you. I have done that for months. Ariella already destroyed any argument you could ever make long ago. All you are doing now is rinsing and repeating already refuted arguments. The people here are free to use the search feature to go back on this forum and check and see how all these things were explained to you countless times, yet you kept coming rehashing the same refuted arguments. I am no longer going to be participating in this forum anymore anyway. I have a life outside teaching you about your own religion.

You want to continue believing in original sin never mentioned in the OT, or cherry-picking the Torah for isolated names of Yahweh to justify your ludicrous trinity, or pagan resurrecting gods copied from ancient middle-eastern religions, some guy dieing for your sins copied from pagan myths of transferring sins onto lambs, a trinity fabricated at the Council of Nicea (that even Marantha admitted to), and other distortions of Judaism brought by the likes of Paul and Constantine, then go ahead. I'm done debunking your gospels. You aren't worth the effort anymore.

Edited by koroigetsuga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IMHO, Anyone who were to read the Testaments, Old and New without Calvin breathing down their neck would become a Unitarian.

More truthful words were never spoken.

The OT has no original sin, no trinity and no concept of God coming down and dying for sins (unless of course the blind and the desperate go cherry-picking out of context verses for them); all of which as concepts by the standards of the OT are blasphemy anyway

Edited by koroigetsuga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no magic in the word Trinity, but the subject is very difficult.

Trinity is the main reason people leave christianity. Pure monotheism is so much simpler.

For instance the Bible is full of verses that contradict trinity. For instance;

God is not man, that he should lie,

or a son of man, that he should change his mind.

Has he said, and will he not do it?

Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it? [Numbers 23:19]

or

1Cor8:6

"for us there is but one God, the Father...and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ"

God=Father, Lord=Jesus

or

1Cor6:14

"By his power God raised the Lord from the dead"

Jesus did not raise himself up, 8:6 makes it clear God is identified with Father, Lord identified with Jesus and 6:14 is clear that God (father) raised the Lord (Jesus).

The Council of Nicea took all the scriptures that existed and threw out the ones that disagreed with what they wanted to be Christianity. Who convened the Council of Nicea? Constantine, a pagan idolator. And this Council is where trinity came from.

But here's the thing that makes trinity so ludicrous, because in a nut shell this is what it says about God: God sends God to earth to die so God can resurrect God and then God will no longer hold us accountable for our wrongdoings against God. Furthermore, God wandered around in the dessert for 40 days where God was tempted by "Satan", and after God proved that God couldn't be tempted, God was happy with God. Or the scene where John the Baptist immerses God in water and then God tells God that God is happy with God. :P

There's a name for that -- Multiple Personality Disorder, and I reject the notion that God runs around proving to God how wonderful God is so that God will let God die to make things all better ;)

Sounds more like the Trials of Hercules. You know, Hercules was a man-god. Zeus came to earth, impregnated a mortal woman, and she gave birth to Hercules. Don't you think it the least bit suspicious that a Roman pagan emperor (Constantine) would commission religious leaders to produce a religion that included such a common pagan theme repeated in so many pagan mythologies (eg: Horus, Mirtha, Dionysus, Attis, etc)?

There are probably also subjects in the Quran so dificult that they are interpreted diferently. Is this not one reason why we have got Sunnies, Shias, Wahabis and others?

First the only real difference amongst muslims are sunnis, shias and sufis. Wahabis are an extreme version of sunnis. There is nothing in Islam that compares to the divisions in Christianity as there are around 900 christian sects and growing

Furthermore unlike the christian sects, these divisions amongst muslim are political differences, not theological ones

Anyway I'll stop here. I only participated in this thread at "son of Placid's" request

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
name='koroigetsuga' date='Sep 6 2008, 11:10 PM' post='1745546']

Wrong again. The Bible does not teach that at all, which is why no where in the scriptures is trinity defined. Exactly. Now only if christians understood that; how ill-defined trinity really is in the OT

"Defined" is the wrong word. Definition of Trinity is easy: three persons form one God. What you mean to say is that you want to see in the OT scriptures where there are examples of Father, Son and Holy Spirit as God.

Father - Deut. 32:6

Son - Isa. 9:6, Ps. 2:7-12

Holy Spirit - Gen. 1:2, Ps. 104:30, Job 33:4

And if Jesus (pbuh) was here, hearing how you blaspheme his name and attribute false words to him such as your pagan trinity, he too would give you the same lecture on "Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is ONE" not one in three, or three in one...just ONE.

Please explain why Jesus doesn't fit as God in Ps. 2:7-12 and Isa. 9:6. Also, please don't respond with rhetoric or your usual derogatory comments. I know that will be hard, but discipline yourself:)

This is precisely why christianity is considered outside the folds of Judaism. When the Council of Nicea invented the concept of trinity,

It has been explained many times that Nicea did not "invent" the Trinity, rather affirmed it, along with the Deity of Jesus. The Nicean creed is consistent with the Apostle's and Athanasian Creeds. Unless you can cite documentation of the council inventing the Trinity, please delete it as what you think is a proof of it being invented. I will hold your feet to the fire on this, so be prepared with documentation:)

You might want to check this also:

http://answers.org/theology/trinity_biblical.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

I came to know that there is one sect of Monotheist Christians who do not have faith in "trinity" and are Mowhid (Monotheists) like Muslims. Do you guys have any information?

I would like to know why you would ask such a foolish question?

You may perhaps qualify your monotheism with Unitarian Monotheism, but to limit your monotheistic understanding and conclude all others are polytheistic is nonsense. Trinitarian Monotheism is different only in terms of 'personhood' not essence.

We can debate this all day, the fact remains no one can demonstrate why we limit monotheism to a God who is one in all senses. That isn't the definition. The belief in one God means that there is essentially one being, to qualify it further would mean to speak of differing types of monotheism(s) not non-monotheistic theism. Sheesh.

Edited by Maranatha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Defined" is the wrong word. Definition of Trinity is easy: three persons form one God. What you mean to say is that you want to see in the OT scriptures where there are examples of Father, Son and Holy Spirit as God.

Father - Deut. 32:6

Son - Isa. 9:6, Ps. 2:7-12

Holy Spirit - Gen. 1:2, Ps. 104:30, Job 33:4

Please explain why Jesus doesn't fit as God in Ps. 2:7-12 and Isa. 9:6. Also, please don't respond with rhetoric or your usual derogatory comments. I know that will be hard, but discipline yourself:)

It has been explained many times that Nicea did not "invent" the Trinity, rather affirmed it, along with the Deity of Jesus. The Nicean creed is consistent with the Apostle's and Athanasian Creeds. Unless you can cite documentation of the council inventing the Trinity, please delete it as what you think is a proof of it being invented. I will hold your feet to the fire on this, so be prepared with documentation:)

You might want to check this also:

http://answers.org/theology/trinity_biblical.html

Refuting some of your trinitarian christian claims;

First, Isaiah 9:6 refuting you from jewsforjudaism.org; link: jewsforjudaism.org refuting trinitarian christians on Isaiah 9:6

Quote- Written by Gerald Segal

Can you give a reason why Jews say Isaiah 9:6 does not refer to Jesus?

Answer: Christian theologians argue that the name "A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the ruler of peace" refers to Jesus, who they allege combined human and divine qualities. They mistakenly believe that such a name can only be applied to God Himself. Moreover, the Christians incorrectly translate the verbs in verse 5 in the future tense, instead of the past, as the Hebrew original reads. Thus, the Christians render verse 5 as: "For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; and the government will rest on his shoulders; and his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace."

While admitting that "wonderful counselor" and "ruler of peace" can be applied to a man, Christian theologians argue that the phrases "mighty God" and "everlasting Father" cannot be incorporated as part of a man's name. Thus, they contend that Isaiah teaches that the Messiah has to be not only a man, but God as well. That this entire reasoning is incorrect may be seen from the name Elihu, "My God is He," which refers to an ordinary human being (Job 32:1, 1 Samuel 1:l, 1 Chronicles 12:21, 26:7, 27:18). A similar Christian misunderstanding of Scripture may be seen in their claims revolving around the name Immanuel, "God is with us." The simple fact is that it is quite common in the Bible for human beings to be given names that have the purpose of declaring or reflecting a particular attribute of God, e.g., Eliab, Eliada, Elzaphan, Eliakim, Elisha, Eleazar, Tavel, Gedaliah.

The fact remains that Jesus did not literally or figuratively fulfill any of Isaiah's words. A wonderful counselor does not advise his followers that if they have faith they can be agents of destruction (Matthew 21:19-21; Mark 11:14, 20-23). A mighty God does not take orders from anyone (Luke2:51, Hebrews 5:8), for no one is greater than he is (Matthew 12:31-32; John 5:30, 14:28). Moreover, he does not ask or need to be saved by anyone (Matthew 26:39, Luke 22:42), for he cannot die by any means (Matthew 27:50, Mark 15:37, Luke 23:46, John 19:30). He who is called the Son of God the Father (John 1:18, 3:16) cannot himself be called everlasting Father. One cannot play simultaneously the role of the son and the Father; it is an obvious self-contradiction. He who advocates family strife (Matthew 10:34-35, Luke 12:49-53) and killing enemies (Luke 19:27) cannot be called a ruler of peace.

end quote.

Then on your trinitarian christian claims about a Psalm of David(as) in Psalm 2:12; again from jewsforjudaism.org; link: jewsforjudaism.org refuting trinitarian christians on Psalm 2:12

Quote- Written by Gerald Segal

The respective Jewish and Christian translations of nash-ku bar (Psalms 2:12) differ from each other. What is the proper translation?

Answer: The Jewish rendering of Psalms 2:12 states: "Do homage in purity [nash-ku bar], lest He be angry, and you perish in the way. . . ." The Christian translation of the Hebrew phrase nash-ku bar is "kiss the son."

The Christian translation is based on a misinterpretation. The meaning of the Hebrew word bar is "pure" or "clear." Only in Aramaic does it have the meaning of "son." However, in Aramaic, bar is used only as a construct "son of" (Proverbs 31:2; Ezra 5:1-2, 6:14), whereas the absolute form of "son" in Aramaic (which would have to be used in verse 12) is ber'a. Thus, according to the Christian conception, the verse should have read nash-ku ber'a, "kiss the son," not nash-ku bar, "kiss the son of." Even though "son" could refer to David in verse 12, it is not the proper translation.

There is no compelling reason to employ an Aramaism in view of the use of the Hebrew noun bayn, "son," in verse 7. The phrase is best rendered as, "do homage in purity," because kissing is generally an expression of homage, as found, for example, in 1 Samuel 10:1: "Then Samuel took the vial of oil, and poured it upon his head, and kissed him." Bar, meaning "purity," occurs in the phrase "pure in heart" (Psalms 24:4, 73:1).

The intention implied in verse 12 is: with sincerity of heart, acknowledge me, David, as God's anointed, and thereby avoid incurring God's anger. Thus the Hebrew phrase nash-ku bar simply means "do homage in purity," and superimposing any other interpretation will distort the meaning of this psalm.

end quote.

Again Psalm 2:12 is a Psalm of David(as) and has nothing to do with Prophet Jesus(as) in the Corrupted OT bibles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...