Combining the Sects of Abraham

Bishadi

Interfaith Forums
Messages
837
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Valley of the Sun
Since each of the main branches of Abrahamic religions could be described as Judaism, Islam and Christianity, then what are the unifying beliefs over and above monotheism?

What combines them and then what are the prophecies that each share?

Meaning what is the missing link to combine the beliefs/people?
 
Christianity - Jesus Christ is the Messiah and the Son of God

Islam - Jesus is a prophet

Judaism - Jesus as a teacher
 
That's misleading. Judaism doesn't have any particular religious view of Jesus. He's not an important figure in the Jewish religion, just an historical figure like Napoleon, Einstein and Charles Manson.
 
It's not very helpful to discuss those similarities that don't exist. It is better to have an honest view of each other.
 
Bar-chart?

All three believe Moses is a prophet, and the emphasis on Moses can be increased leading to a new unity. Thats a very simplified version of the idea.
 
All have a strong ethical foundation. Love God and neighbor. Take care of widows and children. Seek justice. Forget evil and learn to do good.
 
What's with all the calls for unity? :confused:
To me, a call for unity is a prelude to an attempt at mass manipulation.

Calling for opposition to a call for unity may be propagandistic as well.

Indeed, from the standpoint of power politics, attempts to create or highlight in-group/out-group differences may be forms of mass manipulation. A common technique is to portray the out-group as being a threat to the in-group's cultural norms or economic welfare. Stereotypes may be involved.

Speaking of stereotypes, it's interesting that Islam is considered by some to be a religion of militant evangelism. Yet The Prophet said that religious differences should not be taken very seriously.

Hyping group differences - even when they have little intrinsic practical significance - can serve to increase cultural or ethnic tensions and conflict. Differences that should have minimal significance are sometimes exaggerated in order to faciliate intolerance, social exclusion, or religioethnic discrimination. At times it's done to herd people into war.

This kind of thing is hard to distinguish from crude dime store social psychology. Yet it often appears in real life attempts at ideological manipulation and provocation. I'm aware of several right wing websites where it seems the idea is to emulate emotional presence by means of this kind of weird paranoid, xenophobic, separatist propaganda.
 
Calling for opposition to a call for unity may be propagandistic as well.

Indeed, from the standpoint of power politics, attempts to create or highlight in-group/out-group differences may be forms of mass manipulation. A common technique is to portray the out-group as being a threat to the in-group's cultural norms or economic welfare. Stereotypes may be involved.
Like the Chinese are saying that the Tibetan protesters are "dividers?"
(Sorry for the seemingly off-topic drift.)

Speaking of stereotypes, it's interesting that Islam is considered by some to be a religion of militant evangelism. Yet The Prophet said that religious differences should not be taken very seriously.

Hyping group differences - even when they have little intrinsic practical significance - can serve to increase cultural or ethnic tensions and conflict. Differences that should have minimal social significance are sometimes exaggerated in order to faciliate intolerance, social exclusion, or religioethnic discrimination. At times it's done to herd people into war.
Agreed. Making a big deal out of cultural differences, rather than human rights violations, has taken on the political significance needed to manipulate people. Those who want to homogenize people with the ideal of peace and unity in mind will find themselves with a bigger mess on their hands than they have now, imo.
 
Its difficult to accept our own deaths with a sense of humor, but that is what it takes. Individuals just aren't all that important, but they should be to each other.
 
Bishadi said:
Since each of the main branches of Abrahamic religions could be described as Judaism, Islam and Christianity, then what are the unifying beliefs over and above monotheism?

What combines them and then what are the prophecies that each share?


Meaning what is the missing link to combine the beliefs/people?[QUOTE]Namaste all,

Now I could be wrong. I have been before and am used to it. But unless I choose to read into the situation I don't see where Unity is proffered, simply what unifying beliefs do we have?

As Dauer indicated it does no good to see similarities where they don't exist. And as FS pointed out we differ greatly on what Jesus was. Although I do run into a number of Jews who state that Jesus was one of the many prophets running around at that time, just not worthy for a book like the minor or major prophets in their books.

So if one were to create a chart similar to those of the gospels, where they agree on various portions of Jesus's life. We could contemplate where two of the three agreed and where all three agreed on some tenent, event or aspiration.

Is there a harm in that?
SL said:
Like the Chinese are saying that the Tibetan protesters are "dividers?"
I don't think so, that doesn't sound like a commonality.
 
Since each of the main branches of Abrahamic religions could be described as Judaism, Islam and Christianity, then what are the unifying beliefs over and above monotheism?

What combines them and then what are the prophecies that each share?

Meaning what is the missing link to combine the beliefs/people?



This seems to me a kind of odd way of putting the question. Both Christianity and Islam claim to be fulfillments of the Hebrew scriptures; they both specifically and repeatedly reference these scriptures, so it's not like there is some great mystery as to the "common link".

As to the content of that link, what is most fundamental, what makes it unique is a corporate idea of salvation, i.e., that salvation is ultimately seen in a "people", however defined. And so you have cognate terms like "chosen people', "kingdom of heaven", "body of Christ", "social gospel", "ummah", etc.

What fundamentally distinguishes them is that first of all Judaism is a universalist construct with an ethnic practice, while Christianity and Islam are universalist both in construct and in practice. This universalist practice naturally entails a basically absolutist ideology for both Islam and Christianity.

The fundamental distinction between Christianity and Islam is that the former stresses doctrine (the creeds) and the latter practice (shariah). Either emphasis, however, serves the same universalist ideology that can be turned to a great variety of ends.

As for claims and counter-claims: the Christian claim on the most general level is that fulfillment of the law paradoxically also involves a rupture, a metaphysical/emotional/mystical transmutation. The Christian claim therefore is that the Jews don't know how to read their own scriptures. The Jewish response: good grief!

The Muslim claim, on the other hand, is not metaphysical or emotional but essentially legalist. They go back to Abraham, they say, because the Jews have not lived up to the original injunctions of God. The Muslim claim, therefore, is that the Jews have garbled and ignored their own scriptures. The Jewish response: good grief!

Such is my contribution to interfaith dialogue!
 
Devadatta, I mostly agree but with one small caveat. What you have said about Christianity has some basis in its modern practice. The Pauline letters insist practicing Jews are the keepers of the oracles of scripture. This has been borne out by history, and it must necessarily imply to Christians that Jews are very able to read and understand the scriptures. On that basis there is a lot of potential for Christians to respect Judaism, both its purpose and practice without insisting that Jews become Christians.
 
This seems to me a kind of odd way of putting the question. Both Christianity and Islam claim to be fulfillments of the Hebrew scriptures; they both specifically and repeatedly reference these scriptures, so it's not like there is some great mystery as to the "common link".
yet each base in compassionate relation between the participants. As one example; Moses commandments.

Yet each branched while maintaining many concepts and practices inert ‘religion’ as a word.

The fundamental distinction between Christianity and Islam is that the former stresses doctrine (the creeds) and the latter practice (shariah). Either emphasis, however, serves the same universalist ideology that can be turned to a great variety of ends.

The Christian claim therefore is that the Jews don't know how to read their own scriptures. The Jewish response: good grief!

The Muslim claim, therefore, is that the Jews have garbled and ignored their own scriptures. The Jewish response: good grief!

Such is my contribution to interfaith dialogue!

Or how about a dialogue of material.

Each;

Monotheism. For the most part. yet… praying to saints, Moses, mohammed, jesus…etc… is dual with or without admission. (there is a figure to the face or let’s say face to the figure) Broken rule by each of these sects own admonition.

Each think of creation as absolute. (mud, dust, women came from man; must rely on faith and magic) Why?

Each suggest their writings are by the words of GOD, but in each admit a man conveyed them; one from a bush, one from an unlettered man, one from the son but dead before the books were authored so a bunch of authors..

Culturally binding (promise of Abraham-circumcision)

As well each are awaiting some person to come (return) that will …. Do what?

Interfaith dialogue perhaps could begin developing these into living creations of wisdom. Maybe a kid will come alone who wants a straight answer; be good if a group of people on this site could bring up the opinions of many in specific categories.
 
erm... we don't pray to moses.

if i were being facetious, i might well suggest that the only thing we all agree on is that G!D Gave Torah to moses. and since that is the only thing jews believe and everyone disagrees on anything else, the only unarguable bit is the jewish bit.

*thumbs nose irreverently*

b'shalom

bananabrain
 
erm... we don't pray to moses.

if i were being facetious, i might well suggest that the only thing we all agree on is that G!D Gave Torah to moses. and since that is the only thing jews believe and everyone disagrees on anything else, the only unarguable bit is the jewish bit.

*thumbs nose irreverently*

b'shalom

bananabrain

looks like a bananabrain response.... er..um.......

no need to suggest as you may ONLY have the education that any video game playing kid walked through before going to the second game

as to comprehend that Isaac and Ishmael were blood brothers than know the fight of Islam and Jews is between brothers who care only of faith rather than chose to learn more than yesterday's teachers.
 
Back
Top