veiled4allah: theological musings veiled4allah: theological musingsAll comments are copyright their authors
Here's who's pinging me:
(no pings yet)The following is a list of the ten most recent entries in veiled4allah as of Mar 10, 2006:
View a list of all entries in veiled4allah
This entry has been tagged as covering the following subjects: religion. The following is a list of the ten most recent entries in Al-Muhajabah's Islamic Blogs that share any of these tags:
A semantic analysis of this entry also suggests the following keywords to search for related content on: christian right, believe trinity, southern baptists, god allah, southern baptist, god, God, people, Christian, christian, believe, islam, Islam, make, think, right, Christians, jesus, baptist, Christianity, even, Jews, Jesus, christians, Baptist
What links here: View a list of other entries in this blog (if any) that link to this entry
Or look generally for informational pages on my website tagged with religion
A semantic search of Al-Muhajabah's Islamic Blogs suggests the following as the ten entries most closely related to this entry:
Check out other web pages (if any) that I've bookmarked via del.icio.us that share the same tags: religion
Explore reference materials from Answers.com about these subjects: religion
Read news stories at Common Times about these subjects: religion
View search results at gada.be metasearch service for these subjects: religion
Find books at Amazon.com on these subjects: religion
Check Waypath for blog entries generally related to this entry, or Technorati or Bloglines for blog entries that link to this entry.
Technorati tags: View blog entries, bookmarks and photos tagged by others with the same subjects as this entry: religion
For external resources on the topic of this entry, you can run a search for its title theological musings (Google, DayPop, Feedster) or keyword(s) religion (Google, DayPop, Feedster). DayPop is a search engine similar to Google that focuses on searching news sources and blogs. Feedster searches blogs via RSS feeds.
Subject: Re: theological musings
The only real grounds on which Christians can say that Muslims don't believe in the same God is if they insist that the Trinitarian conception of God is the only valid conception.Well al-M, you are trying to reconcile sense with nonsense, which, unfortunately is the task of every believing-Christian (which for the sake of my own sanity I like to distinguish from cultural, non-believing Christians such as myself). Part of the problem with all of this is the basic contradiction in the position that a- there is, as the SBs claim, one God, only; but b- there is a tacit acknowledgement that there are other (G)ods, if the accusation is possible that someone worships a God other than their form of deity. It's something that fundo Christianity has never really been able to reconcile. When challenged on it, watch them change the subject...
It's interesting that you mention this -- as you know, I have rejoined the AMEs, the original "African-American Methodists", if you will, and since I've decided not to drop my long list of AME credentials, I have found myself taking the required membership classes. They instruct on the history of the denomination, basic beliefs, tours of the church, explanation of the different ministries, etc.
Week before last, the pastor covered the concept of the trinitarian "Godhead", according to Methodist/Wesleyan belief. You are spot-on: the (T)rinity is not found in scripture. He didn't go on to say that it is the result of the dizzying, and often-politicized prejudices of the Early church Fathers, which resulted in the anti-Gnostic Apostles' Creed, and the anti-Arian Nicene Creed). But we Religious Studies heads were able to fill that in ;-).
Ask these Christian Right leaders what they think of Judaism and make sure to mention that Jews don't believe in the Trinity. You might find their answer a bit hard to take, even though you don't blink at their saying the same thing about Islam.
I see what you are saying about the double standard in which Islam and Judaism are treated, absolutely. But the real thrust behind this is about the person of Jesus and Christology. For the people in question (the Southern Baptists), belief in what they say about Jesus is the key, and their real beef is that 1- Jews do not accept (H)im as the Messiah (Christ) as prophesied in the Hebrew Bible and 2- Muslims see (H)im as a great prophet, but not as God.
Now, enter Trinitarian belief. And then baptismal formulas after that. Thus, their name.
Sometimes, Christianity is so needlessly complicated. But the real key here is that there are also non- and anti-trinitarian Christians, some on the social and political left, such as the ultra-liberal Unitarians (who merged with the Universalists in the 60s to become the "UUs"), and some among the Jeeboccrats. Certain denominations that happen to be on or at least tangential to the Christian Right, such as the many branches of Pentecostals (United Pentecostals and Apostolics), like to speak of a "Oneness" (classic Modalism), while others are concerned with a concept called "Jesus Only", based on some proof-texts in Book of Acts. Still other Pentecostals tout an idea called "Word of Faith", which actually bears much resemblance to Christian Science. A lot of these churches have abandoned recition of the Creeds, as most so-called mainstream Churches do. Then there are the Jehovah's Witness, Mormons, Christian Scientists (and numerous offshoots) and hundreds of Orthodox branches, who all have their own quite unique beliefs about Jesus/Messiah/Christ, etc. (Not surprisingly, the Southern Baptists don't count these groups as worshipping the same God, necessarily, either, but that's the SBs for you. These are the same people who denied Communion to Civil Rights workers in their ranks in the 60s. And they weren't the only ones...)
So for me, I will have to bow out of this church experience if ever called upon to claim belief in these things. But that's just me. To be equally clear, most Christians, Creed-repeating or Creed-repudiating, are completely disconnected from their meaning and history. It's "just tradition", and quite often, just mouthing words. Most people calling themselves Christians don't think twice about this stuff, for better or for worse. I wish more did. People have gone murderous over this stuff, which is what makes it dangerous.
Sorry for such a long-winded reply, but as usual you got me thinking.
Subject: Re: theological musings
Just a quick note...in the present climate of "Baptistism," it might be necessary to specify "Southern Baptist Convention" instead of "Southern Baptist." Because Baptists believe in the gathered congregation, the national organization has authority only over those churches which voluntarily choose to belong to it, much as with the other types of Baptists. I remember a couple of years ago reading about local and even state churches splitting off to follow a more traditionalist version of the faith, rather than the charismatic fundamentalism which has taken over thanks to their legions of motivated followers. The Baptist faith I was raised in placed individual conscience above all, with the individual the ultimate guide to one's own moral life. The media keeps going to the spokespeople at the national level partly because it's easier and they do have a lot of influence, and partly because they've placed Baptists in the "Christian fundamentalist" box even though it is a denomination claimed by people like Martin Luther King, Jr. and Bill Clinton.Subject: Re: theological musings
You're right about the wide berth of Baptists --Primitive, Hardshell, American, Bible-Fellowship, we could tick off probably at least 40 different Baptist Conventions and Assoiations -- although from my knowledge "Southern Baptists" and the SBC are basically interchangeable. For instance, no one would call MLK a "Southern Baptist" although he was a Baptist from the South - formally speaking he was from the National Baptist Convention, while Jackson belongs to the Progressive National Baptist Convention, both Black denominations. In the circles I run in, "Southern Baptists" also distinguishes certain (white) churches and congregations from the more liberal/mainstream American Baptist Convention. But again, you are right and I'll be sure to add "Convention" when appilcable, to avoid confusion.While we're on the topic of nomenclature, tagging Charismatics in partiular as "fundamentalists" is a misnomer, and generally, Charismatics do not call themselves that. Fundamentalists are those who follow the principles set forth in a set of pamplets called, what else but "The Fundamentals", compiled at the turn of last century. Although Charismatics agree with certain aspects of fundamentalism such as inerrancy of the scriptures, there are other things they don't follow, thus making the tag a misnomer.
There was an academic initiative in the early 90s called "The Fundamentalism Project" which I think confused things even more in this regard. But for lack of a better term, I myself must use this misnomer myself at times. Just thought I'd offer this distinction since we're on the topic.
Al-M, this talk of "fundamentalism" I think goes along with what you were saying earlier re Islam and Judaism - when do we hear talk of fundamentalist Jews, yet "Islamic fundamentalism" is often bandied about as an assumed term, without context or critique.
Subject: Re: theological musings
I read something once that distinguished between "fundamentalists" and "evangelicals" and it was similar to what you said, charismatic groups are different in many ways from groups that declare themselves to be "fundamentalist" so that "evangelical" is often a better word to describe the movements that we tend to think of as "the Christian Right" than "fundamentalist".Subject: Re: theological musings
Very good points...to be honest, I haven't been around much theology in several years, and then it was mostly informal, so you almost certainly have a better sense of the lay of the land than I do.Subject: Re: theological musings
Thanks for such a lengthly and detailed reply. I tried to specify "the Christian Right" in my comments because I'm sure that most liberal and mainstream Christians would not make exclusionary statements against unitarian belief in the way that these particular individuals have. I think that ultimately this contradiction is at the heart of most versions of Christianity, which is one of the major reasons that I am no longer a Christian. When I was one, at least nominally, it was a block to my faith rather than an aid to it which is why I was only a "nominal" Christian.The main point I wanted to make in bringing up Judaism is that these particular members of the Christian Right tend to hide a lot behind "Judeo-Christian" but there is to my knowledge no way to make a defense of the Trinity "Judeo-Christian". I think this is an issue where the Christian exclusivist nature of the Christian Right becomes clear and I wanted to make sure that people realized it. From what I've read of the dispensationalist theology, although most of these groups are Zionist in the sense of supporting Israel, they are not actually that friendly towards Jews, since they see Jews as either converting to Christianity or dying during the End Times. With "friends" like that, who needs enemies?
Subject: Re: theological musings
Y, that is an axe I've been grinding for many years and especially now. The flipside of it is people like Abe Foxman of the ADL, who has gotten into bed with these Christians out of mutual disdain. I suppose in a sense it was inevitable - why not take their support for Israel, insincere may it be, especially knowing Jews will never convert, as is the Evangelical plan? The whole thing is very disturbing to watch.Subject: Re: theological musings
Or Lieberman and the International Fellowship of Jews and Christians.Subject: Re: theological musings
Part of the problem with all of this is the basic contradiction in the position that a- there is, as the SBs claim, one God, only; but b- there is a tacit acknowledgement that there are other (G)ods, if the accusation is possible that someone worships a God other than their form of deity. It's something that fundo Christianity has never really been able to reconcile. When challenged on it, watch them change the subject...In fact, I've had rabbis I was studying with (Reform rabbis at that) change the subject when one brings up the idea that to promote monotheism over polytheism one must acknowledge an implicit recognition of polytheism as (someone's) viable alternative. "No, no, just idols, which of course are just stone or clay, and hence powerless." But people don't worship gods they *believe* are powerless.
Point out the polytheistic roots of Judaism (one of the predominant names for G*d is "Elohim," a plural noun) and the conversation becomes diverted even more quickly.
One doesn't have to be an atheist to see the human origins of religion, and the changes that take place in all religions over time. But it is very difficult for some to achieve enough objective distance, even momentarily, to see that, however divinely inspired, all religions are received, recorded, and inevitably changed by their human practitioners.
Subject: Re: theological musings
There is no difference in the god Islam serves and the God Christians serve? What about the fact that in Islam, a horrible excuse for a human being could not make it to paradise on his deathbed. This horrible man would be doomed to hell because of all of the sin he had committed in his life. For him there would be no recourse, because he couldn't do any good to make up for all of the sin he committed. Now consider The Lord Jesus The Christ (who, by the way is not a different person than God, he is just God in flesh form.) Jesus of Nazareth took every sin ever committed by man upon His own flesh, so that men would no longer owe the price of that sin. He forgave, and asked nothing in return but belief in His Sovereignty. This means that a person who had done absolutely no good in their life, could make it to paradise in the final hours by just sincerely believing that they had been forgiven on a cross by Jesus the Christ. Christianity is based on Grace, Islam is based on works.Subject: Re: theological musings
Your comment appears to be written in complete ignorance of Islamic teachings about God's forgiveness, love, and mercy. I would suggest that you take the time to learn about this before you comment further. Here is a good place to start.Your words carry little weight if you don't know what you're talking about.
Subject: Re: theological musings
Salam, (Peace)As a "simple" muslim, I do not recognise the God (Allah in arabic) that you ascribe to Islam.
I believe in God (Allah) whose mercy is infinite, who can forgive anyone, anytime even in their death bed before their last breath, as long as they repent to him "sincerely".
I believe we all are responsible for our actions "AND" our intentions, and none bears the burden of another in the eyes of God.
Since God (Allah) knows what is in everyones heart and since he is "The most just" and "The most merciful", we trust in his mercy to all, even the most evil or "bad" people, if they "truly" repent before it is too late.
We believe that Allah is more merciful on his servants, than a mother is on her baby.
If we turn towards him by a single step, he will turn towards us, by many leagues.
Thanks you Sis Al-Munaqabah for the very nice site/link. I think it provides a much better "background" for those interested. I found it very well done, "Jazaki Allahu Khairan" (May God/Allah reward you).
Thank you, to all the sincere and kind people contributing to this site/thread.
If I made sense it is from Allah, and if I made mistakes, it is from me.
Traveler.
Subject: Re: theological musings
"...a person who had done absolutely no good in their life, could make it to paradise in the final hours by just sincerely believing that they had been forgiven on a cross by Jesus the Christ."Ugh! I'm not sure what I believe about an afterlife, but I don't want to share it with someone who was a loathsome, evil person, never repented, but just believed in grace conferred by Christ.
"Christianity is based on Grace, Islam is based on works."
I believe this to be a flase statement, both in respect to Christianity and to Islam, but if it were true, I would find Islam the more appealing for it.
Subject: Re: theological musings
Hey al-M check it out, an article on Fuller Theological Seminary's "reaching out" to Muslims, as well as an attempt to educate Evangelicals about Islam, so they don't run around so ignorant all the time. Well I hope that's the goal, anyway.Not sure what I think about it yet, especilly since it's funded by DOJ money (!?) but you were right wrt trinitarian beliefs, at least among the SBC.
Fuller's similar assertion [to Pres Bush's] is tragic and lamentable, said R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky. He said the Koran explicitly rejects Christianity's central beliefs in the divinity of Jesus and a triune Godhead of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
[Sigh] There is so much work to do. I have so many doubts that we progressive church-going types can make any kind of dent in this mentality. It really makes me want to quit before I get started good.
Subject: Re: theological musings
Oops - forgot linkhttp://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-muslim6dec06,1,2110963.story