Why Do People Like To Talk About Their Spiritual Beliefs?

muhammad_isa

Save Our Souls
Messages
3,135
Reaction score
676
Points
108
Location
Worcester UK
Arianism? Really? Honestly, I think you exaggerate.

No .. I'm not exaggerating. Unitarians are often called "Arians". You might not like that, but it is a fact "
Muslims are Unitarians, so often deemed Arians [ although 'Saracens' was a common term, I believe ]
 

muhammad_isa

Save Our Souls
Messages
3,135
Reaction score
676
Points
108
Location
Worcester UK
So: can God have a Son, or not? Never mind what Newton believed.

They say: 'The All-merciful has taken unto himself a son.' You have indeed advanced something hideous! The heavens are well nigh rent of it and the earth split asunder, and the mountains well nigh fall down crashing for that they have attributed to the All-merciful a son; and it behoves not the All-merciful to take a son

He cannot have a literal Son .. no. You know that.
..and then you are going to suggest that Arians are polytheists .. right? ;)

Not true .. Arians do NOT believe that Jesus was "a god".
A "son of God" as meaning a special creation, I believe, is the correct way of viewing Arian belief.
 

RJM

God Feeds the Ravens
Admin
Messages
9,283
Reaction score
2,181
Points
108
He cannot have a literal Son .. no. You know that.
..and then you are going to suggest that Arians are polytheists .. right?
;)

Not true .. Arians do NOT believe that Jesus was "a god".
A "son of God" as meaning a special creation, I believe, is the correct way of viewing Arian belief
The red parts are the personal, off context, subjective, conjectural, lecturing and downtalking parts of your post. The black parts are your answer to my question, in an interfaith debate, without telling ME what I believe or should believe. Especially as say you are here to learn, not preach, imo?
Why do I like to talk about my spiritual beliefs?

Because i like learning things!
 

Thomas

Administrator
Admin
Messages
12,468
Reaction score
2,683
Points
108
Here is Isaac Newton's list of why he was an Arian. [ non-trinitarian ]
You see, here's the problem: You're assuming 'Arianism' and 'non-trinitarianism' is the same thing – that all Arians are non-trinitarians, and all non-Trinitarians are Arians.

That's not the case at all.

Socinians, for example, are non-Trinitarians, but equally, non-Arians, in that they don't believe Jesus existed before the human person, whereas Arius believed that Jesus existed before the creation of the world.

As you accept wiki as a source:
Arians do not believe in the traditional doctrine of the Trinity (emphasis mine)

Arian Ulfilas ... ordained a bishop by Arian Eusebius of Nicomedia ... believed: God, the Father, ("unbegotten" God; Almighty God) always existing and who is the only true God. The Son of God, Jesus Christ, ("only-begotten God"), Mighty God; begotten before time began and who is Lord/Master. The Holy Spirit (the illuminating and sanctifying power, who is neither God the Father nor Lord/Master)...

So there was a form of Trinitarianism, even if not that which we now call the orthodox one.
 

muhammad_isa

Save Our Souls
Messages
3,135
Reaction score
676
Points
108
Location
Worcester UK
You see, here's the problem: You're assuming 'Arianism' and 'non-trinitarianism' is the same thing – that all Arians are non-trinitarians, and all non-Trinitarians are Arians.

That's not the case at all.

Maybe so.
Why does one have to be so technical? Isn't the result the same thing?
i.e. People who don't believe that Jesus is God and the orthodox trinity, are to be squashed as it is heretical belief.

That's what I mean. Isaac Newton considered himself a non-trinitarian Arian, and I use the term in that fashion.
His list of points, by the way, could not be published until well after his death, due to the uproar it would have caused :)
 

muhammad_isa

Save Our Souls
Messages
3,135
Reaction score
676
Points
108
Location
Worcester UK
For an answer, hopefully?

OK, I beg your pardon.
The Qur'an passage you quoted talks about a "literal son" as in begotten.
A "Son of God" as in the Jewish scriptures, identifying a prophet, saint or angel is another concept entirely.

You have to remember that Newton only had access to the 17th. century Univ. of Cambridge Library.:)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RJM

RJM

God Feeds the Ravens
Admin
Messages
9,283
Reaction score
2,181
Points
108
OK, I beg you pardon.
The Qur'an passage you quoted talks about a "literal son" as in begotten.
A "Son of God" as in the Jewish scriptures, identifying a prophet, saint or angel is another concept entirely.
Fair enough.
 

Thomas

Administrator
Admin
Messages
12,468
Reaction score
2,683
Points
108
Here is Isaac Newton's list of why he was an Arian.

But was he though? These sites suggest not, rather that because his theology sounds like Arianism, people erroneously assume it is Arianism.

Was Isaac Newton an Arian?
"Newton was neither “orthodox” (according to the Athanasian creed) nor an Arian. He believed that both of these groups had wandered into metaphysical speculation. He was convinced that his position was the truly biblical one, in which the Son was affirmed to be the express image of the Father, and that this position was best represented by those Bishops at Nicaea who held the Son to be of the same kind of substance as the Father but not numerically the same. Newton may still be considered heterodox, but in light of the evidence of his theological development he may no longer be considered an Arian, that is to say, a heretic. (emphasis mine: last paragraph)

Was Isaac Newton an Arian?
"That to say there is but one God, ye father of all things, excludes not the son & Holy ghost from the Godhead because they are virtually conteined & implied in the father ... To apply ye name of God to ye Son or holy ghost as distinct persons from the father makes them not divers Gods from ye Father… Soe there is divinity in ye father, divinity in ye Son, & divinity in ye holy ghost, & yet they are not thre forces but one force."
(Van Alan Herd, The Theology of Sir Isaac Newton, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Oklahoma (2008), p167, citing Isaac Newton, Yahuda, MS 14.)

Isaac Newton's Religion (A Unitarian website)
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM

RJM

God Feeds the Ravens
Admin
Messages
9,283
Reaction score
2,181
Points
108
But was he though? These sites suggest not, rather that because his theology sounds like Arianism, people erroneously assume it is Arianism.

Was Isaac Newton an Arian?
"Newton was neither “orthodox” (according to the Athanasian creed) nor an Arian. He believed that both of these groups had wandered into metaphysical speculation. He was convinced that his position was the truly biblical one, in which the Son was affirmed to be the express image of the Father, and that this position was best represented by those Bishops at Nicaea who held the Son to be of the same kind of substance as the Father but not numerically the same. Newton may still be considered heterodox, but in light of the evidence of his theological development he may no longer be considered an Arian, that is to say, a heretic. (emphasis mine: last paragraph)

Was Isaac Newton an Arian?
"That to say there is but one God, ye father of all things, excludes not the son & Holy ghost from the Godhead because they are virtually conteined & implied in the father ... To apply ye name of God to ye Son or holy ghost as distinct persons from the father makes them not divers Gods from ye Father… Soe there is divinity in ye father, divinity in ye Son, & divinity in ye holy ghost, & yet they are not thre forces but one force."
(Van Alan Herd, The Theology of Sir Isaac Newton, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Oklahoma (2008), p167, citing Isaac Newton, Yahuda, MS 14.)

Isaac Newton's Religion (A Unitarian website)
The word God put absolutely without restriction to the Son or Holy Ghost doth always signify the Father from one end of the scriptures to the other.
It comes at the top, as in: all following derives. Again, quoting a wiki passage that proves exactly the opposite of what I want it to mean, lol ...
 
Last edited:

muhammad_isa

Save Our Souls
Messages
3,135
Reaction score
676
Points
108
Location
Worcester UK
But was he though? These sites suggest not

You are being technical again? Why?
Perhaps it's because you want to differentiate between different forms of "Arianism", so
suggesting that some believe Jesus is God, and some do not.
I'm afraid this approach makes no sense to me.

You cite various different websites, that I'm not familiar with. The internet is full of "opinions".
Let's go back to "good old wikipedia", which is more accountable. It is read by billions of people.

Although born into an Anglican family, by his thirties Newton held a Christian faith that, had it been made public, would not have been considered orthodox by mainstream Christians; Scholars now consider him a Nontrinitarian Arian. In 2019, John Rogers stated, "Heretics both, John Milton and Isaac Newton were, as most scholars now agree, Arians."
- wiki -
 

muhammad_isa

Save Our Souls
Messages
3,135
Reaction score
676
Points
108
Location
Worcester UK
Last edited:

Tone Bristow-Stagg

Well-Known Member
Messages
869
Reaction score
232
Points
43
Location
Normanton
Actually, no. As I said, I like to let the sources speak.

The sources speak and one chooses to hear what they say.

Back in the 90's, I had many conversations with my mother, at that time a born again Christian about Jesus and God.

One day I decided to read Bible front to back, Old and New and find passages that showed Jesus was Not God. I ended up with 5 x A4 pages of 4 columns of verses that indicate clearly that Jesus is Not God, but the Spirit that was Jesus was of God.

Then I sat down to write the letter to prove the case. I actually only got down to the Dear Mother part of the letter, because as I contemplated which verses to start with, I saw the magnitude of the task I had taken on.

If I had seen so many passages in the Bible that proved undoubtedly that Jesus was not God, how was it my mother did not? I then realised that it is not I that changes hearts and no matter what I tried to offer, my mother would not see it as God had allowed me to.

I realised it is our own choices that are our reality. I never started the letter, but I still have the A4 pages of quotes.

I know no amount of explanations will change the way you choose to see Jesus.

Peter said it best when asked as to who Peter saw Jesus was.

"Who do you say I am?" Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven."

The Son is not the Father, but the Son can become the Father. Baha'u'llah (Glory of God) has said that He is the Father promise to all.

Such is the Quandary of Faith and I see this quandary will not change until we as a united humanity see that there is only One God, and all Messengers were from that One Same God.

That is how I see it Thomas.

I also see the old ways are changing.

Regards Tony
 

Tone Bristow-Stagg

Well-Known Member
Messages
869
Reaction score
232
Points
43
Location
Normanton
No, I mean you disregard the scholarship and the evidence.

When it comes to Faith, who are the true Scholars? Another quandary of Faith.

In the past those that first accepted Christ would have been ridiculed by the Scholar's of the time, yet they are the benchmark of scholarship these days.

Many people in history have been killed by scholars, branded as heritics, whereas it was most likely they were not wrong.

Regards Tony
 

RabbiO

הרב יונה בן זכריה
Messages
384
Reaction score
350
Points
63
Such is the Quandary of Faith and I see this quandary will not change until we as a united humanity see that there is only One God, and all Messengers were from that One Same God.

That is how I see it Thomas.

I also see the old ways are changing.

Regards Tony
You realize that everything you say about everyone else’s perceptions, or lack thereof, could with justification be said of you.
 

Cino

Big Love! (Atheist mystic)
Admin
Messages
3,653
Reaction score
1,967
Points
108
Location
Germany
Why does one have to be so technical? Isn't the result the same thing?

I'd like to throw in a quote by long-gone German Federal Chancellor Helmut Kohl, for its comic value:

"It is the same with cows: The only thing that matters is what comes out at the end!"

:)

To people like me, lurking in the corners, the finer details do matter. Sometimes it is vital to understand more about the various ends in such a matter.

i.e. People whor don't believe that Jesus is God and the orthodox trinity, are to be squashed as it is heretical belief.

May I ask a personal question? At one point in the past weeks, I read a post by you, saying you consider yourself Christian, in that Islam is a superset of Christianity. You also mention the various unitarian Christian denominations. And you keep bringing up the topic of violent persecution of such Christian denominations by the churches of Rome and Constantinople.

My question is: What's your stake in this?

It must be very close to your heart, but I haven't been able to see it yet. At times I thought you wanted to be accepted as Christian here, by other Christians. At other times, I thought you wanted to speak for disadvantaged Christians. At yet other times I thought you wanted to bring up some new finding in text analysis or ancient history. But I haven't been able to see the center of this whirlwind.

I ask respectfully, but also want to challenge you about your personal motives.
 
Top