Do we (Muslims, Christians and Jews) believe in the same God or not?

[mansio]

I agree with you Amica.

[n4h1z]

Peace to all....

I also agree with Amica’s view. Here I would like to contribute additional info for you guys. Actually Judaism, Christianity and Islam is not the only religion that believes in One Single Supreme God. There are a number of religions which, originally believes in the Oneness of God, which is quite similar to the monotheistic religions.



The Zulus in Africa worships a Single Divine Power. The Zulus believe in a Divine Being known as Mvelinqangi, also know as Umkhulukhulu.
MVELINQANGI who became without being created, who is the creator of everything.
UMKHULUKHULU wawokhokho bethu means he is the Greatest of all our Ancestors, he was not begotten nor does he beget and there is nothing whatsoever like unto him. Zulus Ancestors called him uMvelinqangi; a Zulu word, meaning "He who existed before all else; who came from no where; he begets not nor was he begotten; he is the creator of everything". This was the concept of God in the whole of the African continent prior to the introduction of Christianity.



Hinduism is well known as a polytheistic religion. Some Hindus believe in three gods while some believe in 33-croce gods e.g. 330 million gods. But there are some hindus who are well versed in their holy scriptures believes in only one God.
There are several similarity in the Quran and the holy scriptures of the Hindus. E.g.

The Upanishads:


1) “Ekam evaditiyam” : “He is only one without a second” Chandogya Upanishad 6:2:1

2) “Na casya kasuj janita na cadhipah” : “Of Him there are neither parents nor lord” Svetasavatara Upanishad 6,9

3) “ Na tasya pratima asti” : “There is no likeness of Him”. Svetasavatara Upanishad chapter 4:19

4) “Nainam urdvham na tiryancam na madhye na parijagrabhat na tasy pratime asti yasya nama mahad yasah” : “There is no likeness of Him whose name is great glory” The principal of Upanishad by S.Radhakrishnan pg 736 & 737

If we compare these verses in Upanishad and the verses in the Quran, we can see the similarity. ( I use the Quran as the example for comparison not to promote Islam. It’s just that I have no deep knowledge in the OT and NT, I’am sure there is similar verses from OT and NT too)

The Quran says:

“There is none like unto Him” 112:4
"There is nothing whatever like unto Him” 42:11

There is more:


Vedas:

1) “There is no image of Him” YajurVed 32:3

2) “He is bodyless and pure” Yajurved 40:8

3) “ They enter darkness, those who worship natural things (air, water, fire). They sink deeper in darkness whose who worship sambuthi (creted things: furniture, idol, etc) Yajurved 40:16

4) “God is verily great” Atharva Veda 20 58:3

5) “verily, surya , thou art great; truly, aditya, thou art great. As thou art great indeed thy greatness is admire: yea, verily, great art thou, O God”. Atharva Veda samhiti vol 2 William Dmight Whitney pg 910)

6) “O friends, do not worship anybody but Him, the Divine One.” Rigveda Book 8:1:1


Sikhism belives in the worship of one God. The concept is quoted as “Mal Mantra” which is the fundamental creed of Sikhism. Sikhism is strictly motheistic and believes in One Supreme God, in unmanifest form, known as “Ek Omkara”

“ There exists but One God, who is called the true the Creator, free from fear and hate, immortal not begotten, self-existant, Great and Compassionate” Sri Guru Granth Sahib vol 1 Japuji : 1

Seems like Hiunduism and Sikhism also has a monotheistic origin which is very much like Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
I would like to add more but I think this is sufficient for now…I hope it would help in our search for the truth.
Peace....

[smkolins]

[quote=n4h1z]Peace to all....

I also agree with Amica’s view. Here I would like to contribute additional info for you guys. Actually Judaism, Christianity and Islam is not the only religion that believes in One Single Supreme God. There are a number of religions which, originally believes in the Oneness of God, which is quite similar to the monotheistic religions./QUOTE]

Indeed. But truthfully that isn't the reason this discusson area was framed thus. It was pretty specifically so that Jews, Christians and Moslems could talk about areas of mutual concern or others could talk about those concerns. Other monotheists have already mentioned some of their/our concerns.

[InChristAlways]

What are judaism, Islam's and other religions' interpretation of Jeremiah 31 and Isaiah 65/28?

What is the "tried stone" representing in Isaiah 28 for example, Muhammed or Jesus [Word of God in the "flesh"], or "other"?

{Young LT}Isaiah 28:16 Therefore, thus said the Lord Jehovah: `Lo, I am laying a foundation [#03245] in Zion, A stone--a tried [#0976] stone [#068], a corner [#06438] stone [#03245] precious, a settled foundation [#04143], He who is believing doth not make haste.

Isaiah 65:17 For, lo, I am creating new heavens, and a new earth, And the former things are not remembered, Nor do they ascend on the heart.

Jeremiah 31 doesn't mention a "heaven and earth" passing away, just the "OC" made with the original OC Hebrew 12 tribes of Israel out of Egypt.[later divided into 2 Nations of Judah and Israel after Solomon]

What is interesting about this passages is the "days are coming" [Jesus preaching up to the Cross] and "after those days" [Pentecost and after]?

Jeremiah 31:31 Lo, days are coming, an affirmation of Jehovah, And I have made with the house of Israel And with the house of Judah a new covenant, 32 Not like the covenant that I made with their fathers, In the day of My laying hold on their hand, To bring them out of the land of Egypt, In that they made void My covenant, And I ruled over them--an affirmation of Jehovah. 33 For this [is] the covenant that I make, With the house of Israel, after those days, An affirmation of Jehovah, I have given My law in their inward part, And on their heart I do write it, And I have been to them for God, And they are to me for a people.

Isaiah 61:2 To proclaim the year of the good pleasure of Jehovah, And the day of vengeance of our God, To comfort all mourners. 3 To appoint to mourners in Zion, To give to them beauty instead of ashes, The oil of joy instead of mourning,

[Saltmeister]

Originally Posted by Amica

Jewish people worship ONE G_D. Muslim people worship ONE GOD ('ALLAH' is The God in arabic language).

Christians worship Jesus, a Spirit and 'Father' God= a 'god' that is somehow three yet 'one'.

Do we worship the same God? My personal belief about this is:

--Jews and Muslims=yes;

--Christians--in my own personal opinion, may have a slight idea of oness of God Almighty, but they worship Jesus really since to them God 'incarnates' into a human being claiming to be 100% while still human. A bit confusing concept that only a Christian may understand and perhaps believers of other faiths who have similar or same religious concept of the deity/deities of worhsip.

I don't think it's confusing at all. I think there's a good reason why we have a concept of the Trinity.

One of the things we all have to do is understand that while our concepts of God may be different, the reason for these differences becomes more apparent if we understand the differing concepts of the "Word of God."

In Islam, the Quran is the Word of God. In Judaism, the Word of God is the Torah. In Judaism and Islam, the Word of God is the same as the Sacred Text (Torah/Quran). In Christianity, however, the Word of God and the Sacred Text are not the same thing. For Christians, Jesus was the Word of God. The Bible is the Sacred Text that tells us the secrets, character and personality of this Word of God figure.

Also, in Christianity, God and His Word are One. The Word is simply God expressing Himself. Actually, it is more than that. It is God revealing Himself, God projecting an image of Himself, God's Revelation of Himself. To Christians, this is the Ultimate Revelation.

Notice the differences. Jews and Muslims think of the Sacred Text as the Word, the Ultimate Revelation, but Christians believe the Ultimate Revelation was God Himself. Jesus was simply a medium, a mirror/television set projecting God's character and personality.

So why do Christians believe in a Trinity? I think this may explain it.

The Christian Gospel tells us to avoid confining our way of thinking to rules, protocols, traditions and institutions.

Today's Judaism revolves around traditions. Islam revolves around rules, protocols and institutions. Even some Christians will make the mistake of creating their own system of doctrines.

Look around you. The world is full of people who think that following rules, protocols, traditions and institutions is the way to live. We have nations and governments founded on systems of rules, protocols, traditions and institutions. It is full of people who think that by changing the rules of the world we live in, by making bigger, better and fatter rules and institutions that the world will be a better place.

Political systems, political structures, ideology and statecraft is what it's called.

All the political movements, revolutions and cults we've had are attempts by people to substitute one form of ideology/statecraft for another in the hope that it will bring about some kind of utopian perfection.

This makes me particularly suspicious as a Christian. What makes one tradition or one system of rules and institutions superior or closer to God than another? Rules and traditions don't always reflect the true attitudes of people. Attitudes and thoughts should be able to speak for themselves. Why build a system of rules, traditions and institutions around them?

When people start thinking that their rules and traditions is special, it starts becoming a form of idolatry. If you start believing in them, then the God you worship is not really the Yahweh God of Israel, but the rules, traditions, protocols, institutions, ideology and statecraft you have come to believe in so much. Your god is an ideological god, a statecraft god or an institutional god. Your god may also be a cult, political structure, political system.

Believing in a "God" who gives you rules, traditions and institutions to follow, and a utopian political system to construct is the same as building a God out of wood, clay and stone. The Canaanite idolaters believed they could make gods out of wood and stone. What we have today is no different. We are simply building gods out of different materials and structures. We have substituted wood, clay and stone with rules, traditions, protocols, institutions, ideologies and statecraft.

Their error was not worshipping a Living God, but worshipping gods made of wood, clay and stone. Today many of us continue this error by building gods out of rules, traditions, protocols, institutions, ideologies and forms of statecraft instead of being intimate with a Living God.

I think this is where our concept of the Trinity comes in. "Father" means "Source." God is the Source of everything that is holy.

Jesus' character and personality was a projection of God's character and personality. Revelations from God in the past were in the form of dreams, visions, prophecy and speeches made by God. It now came as a human being. I see it as another way in which God expresses Himself. To me, Jesus was rather like a dream, vision, prophecy and speech combined into a single manifested phenomenon.

The purpose of Jesus' life was to demonstrate "the perfect human being." Because of Jesus' purity of behaviour and conduct, it means that rules, traditions, protocols or institutions are not really necessary to be "righteous." People follow rules and traditions because they don't trust each other. They think the world is going to fall apart if there are no rules.

To solve this problem they sign up a pact/treaty with each other. Follow these rules, stay with these boundaries or beware. They make these rules because they can't trust each other. Anyone who breaks the rules is violating that trust. It's not really God, but human cynicism that's involved in the process.

Because Jesus was not dependent on rules, it means we should follow his example by understanding our own human nature and making our thoughts pure just like those of Jesus. Love, patience, kindness, generosity, humility and contentment all come from God. God put these things in human nature, but we simply don't use them often enough. The reason why we sin is because we have other things in our human nature as alternates -- selfishness, arrogance, greed, lust and hatred.

The example of Jesus is to not choose these alternatives. Rules can't make us pure. Abstinence from the dark side of human nature is the key.

God is the Source. He makes us pure without needing rules and traditions. He lives in us by putting His Word and Spirit in us and growing us from within. The Source, Word and Spirit are really all the same thing but represent God performing different functions.

It sounds bizarre, but I actually think Christianity is in many ways more monotheistic than Judaism and Islam because it tells you the right and wrong way to conceptualise God. Judaism is about traditions. Islam is a form of statecraft where thieves have their hands cut off and apostates are taxed, put in prison or executed. This is to protect the integrity of the Islamic State.

In a sense, the God of Judaism and Islam does have partners -- their partners are the god of traditions/god of statecraft.

As a Christian I believe in One Living God, a God that is One in His Word and Spirit not a god made out of wood, clay and stone.

[InChristAlways]

--Christians--in my own personal opinion, may have a slight idea of oness of God Almighty, but they worship Jesus really since to them God 'incarnates' into a human being claiming to be 100% while still human. A bit confusing concept that only a Christian may understand and perhaps believers of other faiths who have similar or same religious concept of the deity/deities of worhsip.

Notice the differences. Jews and Muslims think of the Sacred Text as the Word, the Ultimate Revelation, but Christians believe the Ultimate Revelation was God Himself. Jesus was simply a medium, a mirror/television set projecting God's character and personality.One of the things we all have to do is understand that while our concepts of God may be different, the reason for these differences becomes more apparent if we understand the differing concepts of the "Word of God."

Good post Salt.
Christ-ians also believe God sent Jesus to bring in the New Covenant as prophecied [Jeremiah 31/Malachi] and without believing unto His NAME, we cannot enter into God's rest. If Christ did not die and ascend, then our Faith is "in vain".
Steve

John 1:36 And looking at Jesus as He walked, he said, "Behold the Lamb of God!"

John 19:28 After this, Jesus, knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the Scripture might be fulfilled [#5055], said, "I thirst!"

Acts 13:29 and when they did complete [#5055] all the things written about Him, having taken [him] down from the tree, they laid him in a tomb;

Christians also believe the book of "revelation" is an Inspired book and fulfills the prophecies of the OT [whereas Islam does not]:

Reve 1:18 "I [am] He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.

Reve 19:13 He [was] clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.

[chokmah]

My opinion would be that:

1) Jews and Muslims worship a similar G-d (may very well be the same).
2) The Christian G-d is not the same as the Hebrew G-d.

JMHO.

[wil]

Originally Posted by chokmah

My opinion would be that:
1) Jews and Muslims worship a similar G-d (may very well be the same).
2) The Christian G-d is not the same as the Hebrew G-d.
JMHO.

I'd love for you to expound on that. I've always thought for all us that believed in G-d there was just one. We may see it different, have different interpretations or even misunderstandings...but it is the same source.

In your number one you indicate a similar G-d. Does that mean that you believe in two Gods or that the others are just wrong.

In number two same question, if the Chistian G-d is not the same G-d of Judaism, then are you implying two or more...or simply saying someone is wrong?

I'm here to agree of sorts, the G-d of the Christian OT definitely has differences in methods and methodogy from the NT, however there appear to be changes throughout the OT which to me indicates it is the perception of the writers that is different and not G-d.

[chokmah]

Originally Posted by wil

I'd love for you to expound on that. I've always thought for all us that believed in G-d there was just one. We may see it different, have different interpretations or even misunderstandings...but it is the same source.

You know what? To an extent, I agree with your point after reading the above. My opinion appears rather judgmental in its briskness, so I thank you for giving me the opportunity to clarify.

Originally Posted by wil

In your number one you indicate a similar G-d. Does that mean that you believe in two Gods or that the others are just wrong.

The theological consideration of Islam and Judaism is staunchly monotheistic. Christianity attempts to validate the idea of the trinity, but in essence, this is completely incompatible with the monotheistic understanding of G-d in Islam and Judaism.

For me, a Noachide, I ascribe myself to the belief in the G-d of Israel. This is a belief and a faith that I have. I understand the subjective nature of both, and as such, I understand that there is the possibility that I could be quite wrong. Therefore, I believe that there are no other gods beside the G-d of Israel. However, that distinction is secondary to what I state above about monotheistic v. trinitarian/henotheistic.

The "incarnation" causes a great enough divide for me to say that worshipping Jesus (as Christians do) is worshipping a different god than the G-d of Israel.

Does that help?

Originally Posted by wil

In number two same question, if the Chistian G-d is not the same G-d of Judaism, then are you implying two or more...or simply saying someone is wrong?

That is quite true; except for the fact that believing in a different god does not necessarily make that different god a god. gods are not predicated on belief (at least how I see it). Therefore, the possibility does arise for both parties to be wrong above, but not necessarily for the same reasons - that would depend on perspective.

Originally Posted by wil

I'm here to agree of sorts, the G-d of the Christian OT definitely has differences in methods and methodogy from the NT, however there appear to be changes throughout the OT which to me indicates it is the perception of the writers that is different and not G-d.

There are different representations, descriptions, and even actions by the G-d of Israel. However, there is the one consistency: He is spirit. The G-d of Israel is incorporeal. Anthropomorphism is fine and dandy AS LONG AS it is not taken as literal. When it becomes literal, then it becomes idolatry. (from the Jewish/Noachide POV)

[InChristAlways]

The theological consideration of Islam and Judaism is staunchly monotheistic. Christianity attempts to validate the idea of the trinity, but in essence, this is completely incompatible with the monotheistic understanding of G-d in Islam and Judaism.

Perhaps Islam doesn't understand why Jesus was sent to Israel/Judah?

Romans 11:26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; 27 For this [is] My covenant with them, When I take away their sins." 28 Concerning the gospel [they are] enemies for your sake, but concerning the election [they are] beloved for the sake of the fathers.

[chokmah]

Originally Posted by InChristAlways

Perhaps Islam doesn't understand why Jesus was sent to Israel/Judah?

From a Christian POV, I completely agree with you.
From Judaic/Noachide/Muslim POV, I cannot.

There have been many messiahs throughout Jewish history. The different messiahs would be: Moses, Joshua, David, Hezekiah, the judges, the prophets... many, many people. If I'm not mistaken, Muslims do not consider Jesus to be THEE Messiah, but instead, simply a messiah. The same would be said for Muhammed. He is an "anointed" man according to Muslims; not divine.

Originally Posted by ICA

Romans 11:26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; 27 For this [is] My covenant with them, When I take away their sins." 28 Concerning the gospel [they are] enemies for your sake, but concerning the election [they are] beloved for the sake of the fathers.

I can't really take Paul's interpretation of the Tanakh as legitimate, but I do understand where you're coming from.

[InChristAlways]

The theological consideration of Islam and Judaism is staunchly monotheistic. Christianity attempts to validate the idea of the trinity, but in essence, this is completely incompatible with the monotheistic understanding of G-d in Islam and Judaism.

Originally Posted by InChristAlways
Hi chokma. Perhaps Islam doesn't understand why Jesus was sent to Israel/Judah?

Romans 11:26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; 27 For this [is] My covenant with them, When I take away their sins." 28 Concerning the gospel [they are] enemies for your sake, but concerning the election [they are] beloved for the sake of the fathers.

From a Christian POV, I completely agree with you.
From Judaic/Noachide/Muslim POV, I cannot.

There have been many messiahs throughout Jewish history. The different messiahs would be: Moses, Joshua, David, Hezekiah, the judges, the prophets... many, many people. If I'm not mistaken, Muslims do not consider Jesus to be THEE Messiah, but instead, simply a messiah. The same would be said for Muhammed. He is an "anointed" man according to Muslims; not divine.

I can't really take Paul's interpretation of the Tanakh as legitimate, but I do understand where you're coming from.

Mohammad didn't read Christianity testaments( Both new and old ) at all..
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) told his companions much about the anti-christ (Dajjal). Although all prophets warned their people about the anti-christ , Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him ) gave very detailed account of the anti-christ who at the end of time would appear. Only Jesus (peace be upon him) will be able to contend with him at that time.....

.........This is so because Jesus will not be descending with a new law. To Allah belongs the decree, first and last. He does what He wills and rules as He wills. There is none to come after His Rule. He is the All-Mighty, All-Wise.

Hi chokma. The above was from a muslim and according to him Mohammad [PBUH] never read the OT/NT. That appears to present some problems as the OT describes what the Messiah would do for Israel/Judah upon His coming to them.

How would Mohammed know who Abraham, Ishmael and Moses [PBUT] were for example
Steve

[chokmah]

Originally Posted by InChristAlways

Hi chokma. The above was from a muslim and according to him Mohammad [PBUH] never read the OT/NT. That appears to present some problems as the OT describes what the Messiah would do for Israel/Judah upon His coming to them.

True. I guess I would ask this particular Muslim to show proof of such statements.

Originally Posted by ICA

How would Mohammed know who Abraham, Ishmael and Moses [PBUT] were for example
Steve

I was under the impression that Muhammed actually consulted with Jews about some things. Maybe I'm wrong. Whether he read the Tanakh or not, I do not know.

[Saltmeister]

The theological consideration of Islam and Judaism is staunchly monotheistic.

In explicit words, yes.

But what is monotheism? It is not just belief in one God and assigning partners to God but also building gods out of wood, clay and stone. This is what the God of Israel objected and complained about in the OT/Torah.

We all have different ways of expressing our concept of God, the universe, cosmos and spirituality. Jews have their traditions. Muslims believe in following rules, protocols and institutions and constructing the Islamic State. Christians use different terminology to explain how God works in the spiritual and physical universe in His efforts to connect with us personally.

Conceptualising God as a Being that gives us rules, traditions, protocols, institutions, ideologies and statecraft may actually be the same as making gods out of wood, clay and stone. If this is our idea of God then we are pretty much trying to "create God." These concepts are concepts of a man-made God, and we are no better than the Canaanites who built gods out of wood and stone because they couldn't think of a better God.

People make rules because they don't trust each other, so rules are man-made. People start traditions for the fear that followers of a religion or movement won't continue aligning themselves to the same concepts or the same aims/objectives, so traditions are also man-made. All these things are built on human cynicism. We have this idea that things will fall apart and won't hold together if we don't have these things.

It's no wonder atheists criticise us for "creating God." Following rules and traditions doesn't mean much when we could all have just made them up for ourselves without God existing in the first place. For atheists, "there is no God but what we make for ourselves." They believe that God was created by humankind to solve humanity's problems. Rules and traditions are not dependent on God, but on human beings.

Haven't we all followed something man-made? People who forget the past are doomed to repeat it. The Canaanites built gods out of wood, clay and stone. We continue the mistake by building God out of rules, traditions and institutions. Aren't we hypocrites?

Some basic do's/don'ts:
1. Believe in one God; don't believe in other gods.
2. Don't assign partners to God.
3. Don't build gods out of existing, freely available or man-made materials. You can't recreate God.
4. Don't build a Tower of Babel. This includes coming up with statecraft or a utopian political system.

Do all that and you have a truly 100% monotheistic religion.

It's easy to criticise Christianity because of the way people express it. However, saying "we believe in one God and no other" doesn't mean your religion is purely or truly monotheistic. I can't agree with the idea that Judaism and Islam are 100% monotheistic then.

If we were all highly critical of each other's faiths, then we could all find reasons why Judaism, Christianity and Islam aren't monotheistic. Christianity would violate points 1 and 2 because of the Trinity. Judaism would violate points 2 and 3 because of devotion to Jewish traditions. Islam would violate points 3 and 4 because of the command to conform to the institutions of the Islamic State.

Don't just look at what they say directly and explicitly about God. Look at the whole theology. A religion may say "believe in one God" but that religion's theology may not agree with the "one God" theory. What is God? Can you recreate God? I think they are all equally monotheistic, but we tend to have biased rather than balanced views on monotheism.

Christianity attempts to validate the idea of the trinity, but in essence, this is completely incompatible with the monotheistic understanding of G-d in Islam and Judaism.

The Bible (as in Christian Gospel) never speaks of God as three-in-one. This is merely Christian leaders and scholars extrapolating from what Christian apostles wrote. Neither, Paul, Peter, James, John, Luke or Matthew ever say God is three or three-in-one. The issue seems to come from the terminology that they used -- Father, Son, Holy Spirit, Word, Christ, Spirit, Spirit of God, Spirit of Christ, Lord, God.

I think the reason why we have terminology like Father, Son, Word, Holy Spirit, Lord is simply to explain how God works in this world without man-made structures like rules and traditions. Father means God is the Source. Son refers to the first fruits of God -- God's glory. Word means "God's Revelation." The Holy Spirit is God's Spirit. God is the Holy Spirit because everything holy comes from Him and He is incorruptible.

If God is the Source then rules, traditions and institutions aren't necessary. No man-made structure is needed. God provides the radiance that transforms and regenerates us so that we will hold together naturally as we grow and develop spiritually. God doesn't need rules or traditions and nor does His creation.

The Christian faith doesn't say rules and traditions are wrong, but it does tell us to avoid them if they distort our perception of our own spiritual journey and God. Christianity does not revolve around rules, traditions or institutions. Christianity does not have any formalised concepts. I think the reason is so that we will all grow into God's spiritual Kingdom and spiritual Temple.

I actually think the Christian faith is monotheistic in the sense that it is a "more natural" approach to the concept of God. I suppose Christianity does in some ways satisfy all four criteria (points 1 to 4) mentioned above.

Here are my reasons (my view only):

Point 2 - Don't Assign Partners to God
We do not associate rules, traditions, protocols, institutions, ideology, statecraft and political systems as wisdom coming from God. We do not formalise God in this way. God doesn't need rules, traditions and institutions.

Point 3 - Don't Build God Out of Wood, Clay and Stone
We don't build our concept of God out of rules, traditions, etc. We believe in a Living God. God is the Source. Everything that is holy comes from Him. He grows and develops us from within. We can't recreate Him.

Point 4 - Don't Build a Tower of Babel
Our aim is not to create a utopian political system. Statecraft has never been the aim or objective of the Christian Gospel.

Point 1 - Believe in one God and no Other
Points 2 to 4 support this point.

Christianity sounds monotheistic to me. You may accuse me of avoiding and neglecting the Trinity, but as I said the Christian apostles never put forward a Trinity concept. Moreover, they were in Christian terms closer to God then we are now. Trinity is more about the terminology they used rather than a definition of God. The Trinity doesn't define God.

The apostles never defined God in the first place. They simply explained the meaning of God.

And no, I don't want to start a heated debate on the Trinity.

[NewAgeNerd]

Hello All,

It has been a long time since I've posted here, but this discussion is interesting and I thought I'd jump in.

According to the Jewish Tradition, G.D cannot be fragmented. He is a perfect Oneness devoid of seperation absolutely. Therefore, any concept of G.D that includes fragmentation is automatically rejected by Judaism as strictly monotheistic. In addition, the idea that G.D, an infinite being, could incarnate is something that Judaism also rejects. There is a question, however, of wether or not a belief in a god who is one and yet many constitutes Idol Worship and would thus be a violation of a Noahide Law. I for one do not think it does and consider Christianity a perfectly acceptable Religion. This holds true for the Hindus as well.

With regards to Islam, Jews hold that their G.D is our G.D and a Mosque is considered an appropriate place for a Jew to worship. It is a huge shame that there is so much bad blood between our peoples as we(Muslims and Jews) are truly brothers. The Sikhs are also strictly monotheists and as a result their G.D is our G.D.

Just to clarify, while we do believe in a Messiah, this Messiah is of the flesh and is no more a part of the infinite creator than any one of us. He will lead the world back to its Supreme, and Awesome Creator, and will unify the world with worship of Him.

Peace and Love,

J.L.