Discussion in 'Abrahamic Religions' started by muhammad_isa, Feb 3, 2021.
I don't make the rules, but if I did, I would give you an official warning.
Like the warning I politely provided to you? And still no apology for your blasphemy. In your eyes it is fine to rip apart what you don't understand. But when someone rips apart what you cherish, you take offense?
And I'm certain you fail to see the hypocrisy.
A rational demolition of Islam is every bit as possible, if you like I can continue?
I am not taking it personally. It is clear you are just being rude, and not taking part in debate. That is not acceptable.
Then let the games continue under your personal rules of engagement...
The irony is I can say precisely the same about you.
Why is satan a loser? Pride and arrogance, no?
Is that what this is to you, a game?
Either give your evidence, independent from the Bible, that "God is a trinity" or I shall ignore you
Sorry to step in here again. Are you asking for evidence independent from the Bible that God exists? Or independent of the Quran? We need to start with this independent evidence that God exists at all, before starting to get involved in the finer details, such as trinity or monotheism?
So do you have independent evidence of the fact that God exists?
I would consider that a badge of honor.
No, of course not. It can't be "proved" that God exists. We recently had a discussion about God being "within".
For example, a child finds it easy to understand the concept that our existence is not just a coincidence, and there must be something [ we call God ] responsible. It is debatable, but I would say that is why we have religions.
You misunderstand. In the OP, I suggested that one needs evidence APART from quoting literal Bible verses to sort out this issue.
That means that the Bible is [apparently] contradictory, as I can show you verses that LEAVE NO DOUBT that Jesus is not God, and you can quote me verses which imply that He is.
The only way that one can reconcile the contradictions is to claim that the trinity is a mystery, and does not have to be rational.
Claiming I don't understand the trinity, for example, does not address the issues of contradiction. It is not just a question of one or 2 verses .. there are many.
I therefore conclude that we need evidence, other than quoting the Bible, to support God being "3 in 1". Otherwise, we just get nowhere. You quote your verse .. I quote my verse .. I say God is rational .. you say He is not etc.
In other words, I'm asking why orthodox Christians claim that other creeds are heretical, based on unsound theology.
Even if one claims that the Bible is inerrant, it is STILL quite reasonable to believe that God is One, and leave it at that.
Nope. Before arguing details, independent of scripture of triune or monotheistic deity, the requirement falls upon you to indicate that deity itself can be proved independent of scripture?
Which is the whole purpose of your OP.
Ducking and diving won't help. A response to the problem is required?
You mean "my god" .. "your god" sort of stuff?
Well, I agree with Einstein .. I don't have a personal god.
I believe that the concept of "one god" makes a lot of sense. I'm not alone. Apparently there are many people in the world who agree, and who believe in the Bible & Qur'an.
It is a question of creed, not different deities.
I think what you are saying in effect, is that it can't be done. One can't prove that God exists without the Bible. One can't prove that God is a trinity without the Bible etc.
I would like to add that you can't prove that God exists .. full stop
However, mankind has a history, and we are able to use our intelligence.
People can conclude what they like for whatever reason, when it comes to religion.
Truth is distinct from falsehood. A court of law will not accept "mysteries" in evidence .. as far as I'm aware.
Why don't you read over what you've just written? What requires your reading and your definition correct? What requires even the fact that you believe in God to be correct? What requires your definition of what God requires from mankind correct? Where is the independent non-scriptural evidence to support it.
I'm basically waiting now for your next sidestep and avoiding the question ...
Before requiring of others to provide non scriptural evidence to justify what they believe, is it first necessary to provide non scriptural evidence for what you believe?
That is many questions
I know .. it's the last bit that you find offensive "truth is distinct from falsehood".
I think that you would agree with me when it comes to the subject of whether God exists or not.
We both believe the Bible contains truth.
The problem arises when it comes to creed.
Well, one can follow whatever they like .. for whatever reason.
It is our own business why we follow a certain creed, but you know why I follow mine .. because I find it rational.
What I can't accept, is that God would expect anybody to believe in a creed which can't be rationally explained.
eg. Jesus was tempted in the wilderness for 40 days
Can God be tempted?
I know .. the Son is God, but he is not the Father etc.
And I don't find a creed that believes G-d is a liar to be rational. Point blank, it isn't rational.
The ONLY way it can be made rational is if G-d and Allah are not the same.
it's no good putting your arm around my shoulder saying: look buddy we're both Abrahamics and so you know basically we do agree, nudge nudge, wink wink ...
I totally dispute your conclusions and do not support them at all.
Before going against other faiths you need to focus on providing non-scriptural evidence that your own faith is sound instead of continuing to flip up wiki quotes like cards, with no understanding of matrix and context.
Why do you have to focus on what somebody else believes? What's the problem why can't you just be what you are and get in with it?
Now where is your non scripture proof for your own belief?
No ducking and diving ...
If you cannot provide it for yourself, how can you require it from others?
OK .. but why?
That's a contradiction .. wikipedia IS a non-scriptural source of knowledge.
I have already said that it is not possible to prove whether God exists.
In the same way, one cannot categorically prove that a creed is correct.
One CAN start with "a blank slate" and look at all the evidence, scriptural and non-scriptural, and make unbiased conclusions based on their research.
..but it can't be proved.
That is why I object to Christians who insist on belief in the trinity. It can't be proved, and what's more it's irrational.
- wikipedia -
As I say, the trinity has always been a source of controversy.
Clearly, it still is.
There is plenty of controversy within Islam also. It is mankind. They are not pure.
Their intentions are often questionable.
I'll be glad when I die .. it'll all be over then
..but meanwhile, we are all entitled to our opinions.
- wikipedia -
This goes on and on..
Mankind and his love of power, eh?
It is a test from God being in a comfortable majority. The fact that a majority of people might share a religious creed does not make it true.
Mankind have been created weak .. we often love privilege, wealth & power more than we do God.
Separate names with a comma.