Chrislam????

[Heather in Neverland]

So a friend sent me an article recently from the Orange County Register Newspaper describing a project or coalition, etc., that famous mega-church pastor, Rick Warren, has formed with Muslim groups in SoCal.

 

The point of the association is to "build bridges" and focus on commonalities and what-not. Ok, sounds great. We do a lot of that here between Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and Muslims. I'm all for it.

 

What I found interesting was that one of the "points of agreement" is this:

 

The Rev. Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest and one of America's most influential Christian leaders, has embarked on an effort to heal divisions between evangelical Christians and Muslims by partnering with Southern California mosques and proposing a set of theological principles that includes acknowledging that Christians and Muslims worship the same God.

 

Huh??? It's being dubbed "Chrislam" in the blogosphere.

 

Now I am no expert on Islam but I have learned A LOT living in a Muslim country for nearly three years and I can tell you that the Muslims here absolutely DO NOT believe that Christians and Muslims worship the same God. The Christian God is trinitarian and the Muslim God is not.

 

In fact, not too long ago there was violence and unrest here in Malaysia because local Christian organizations were handing out Bibles in the Malaysian language and using the word "Allah" for "God" in the translation and the Muslims here went berserk over it. They were HIGHLY offended and took the matter to the highest court in Malaysia in addition to some church bombings.

 

So while Rick Warren and his followers may be feeling all warm and fuzzy inside about the bridges they are building...which is fine... I am just perplexed that they are perpetuating these false beliefs.

 

Hmmm.....

 

 

.

[Annabel Lee]

I learned of "Chrislam" recently from Hal Lindsey's TV show. The issue he emphasized wasn't claims of the 2 groups worshipping the same God or not (or maybe that just didn't catch my attention), but that there are Bibles being translated to Arabic after being rewritten to exclude any parts about God being a Father, Jesus' claim to be the Son of God, etc. What is left is a Bible stripped of it's core message. Upon reading, it seems docile to Muslims because there are less or no conflicts with their culture. Thus, it's seen as a peaceful way share the "message" with Muslims. Except it's stripping the Message right out of the book and sharing a lie. I think this topic has also been discussed on that show with Jack VanCamp and Rexella (700 Club?). Both Hal and the latter have websites where more information might be posted.

 

All this is based on the premise that Hal had his facts checked.

 

ETA: It must have been somewhere else that I heard of Bibles being mistranslated for the purpose of Chrislam. Also, I meant Jack VanImpe, not VanCamp, who purport the Rick Warren rumors (again, thank you katiejane for the link. I'm glad to learn that is misinformation). I'm aware there are Bibles accurately translated to Arabic and those are not what I'm talking about. Again, not sure where on earth I heard about these books that are not quite Bibles and not quite Q'rans.

Edited March 1, 2012 by Annabel Lee

[Spy Car]

So a friend sent me an article recently from the Orange County Register Newspaper describing a project or coalition, etc., that famous mega-church pastor, Rick Warren, has formed with Muslim groups in SoCal.

 

The point of the association is to "build bridges" and focus on commonalities and what-not. Ok, sounds great. We do a lot of that here between Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and Muslims. I'm all for it.

 

What I found interesting was that one of the "points of agreement" is this:

 

The Rev. Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest and one of America's most influential Christian leaders, has embarked on an effort to heal divisions between evangelical Christians and Muslims by partnering with Southern California mosques and proposing a set of theological principles that includes acknowledging that Christians and Muslims worship the same God.

 

Huh??? It's being dubbed "Chrislam" in the blogosphere.

 

Now I am no expert on Islam but I have learned A LOT living in a Muslim country for nearly three years and I can tell you that the Muslims here absolutely DO NOT believe that Christians and Muslims worship the same God. The Christian God is trinitarian and the Muslim God is not.

 

In fact, not too long ago there was violence and unrest here in Malaysia because local Christian organizations were handing out Bibles in the Malaysian language and using the word "Allah" for "God" in the translation and the Muslims here went berserk over it. They were HIGHLY offended and took the matter to the highest court in Malaysia in addition to some church bombings.

 

So while Rick Warren and his followers may be feeling all warm and fuzzy inside about the bridges they are building...which is fine... I am just perplexed that they are perpetuating these false beliefs.

 

Hmmm.....

 

 

.

 

Good grief.

 

It is no news that Jews and Muslims do not believe that Jesus was God or a part of a Triune god-head. But Muslims do believe that Jesus was a great prophet, the only prophet to my knowledge through whom God performed miracles. The Muslims pray to the God of Abraham. They pray to the same One God that Jews do. Christians, from the Muslim perspective, also worship the God of Abraham, but error in their conception of God as including (from their perspective as strict monotheists) 3 parts or persons, and are especially against the idea of making a partner for God a human being—great prophet, or not.

 

So Muslim and Jews have a different conception of the "God of Abraham" than Trinitarian Christians do. But Christians believe they worship the God of Abraham, as do Jews (who reject a Triune God) and Muslims (who, like Jews reject the Triune God).

 

This is very old news.

 

Bill

[katiejane]

Rick Warren says it isn't so.

[Amira]

And I have met many Muslims who absolutely believe we all worship the same God. I know nothing about Chrislam, and I've never been to Malaysia, so I'm not commenting about that, but it is certainly not the case that all Muslims think we worship different gods.

[Kate in Arabia]

This topic has been discussed here before.

 

I have a copy of the New Testament in Arabic, and Allah is used as the term for God; every Christian Arab I know uses Allah to mean God.

 

There are many people here and elsewhere -- Muslim, Christian, and neither -- who say Muslims and Christians worship different entities, and others in all those groups who say they worship the same one but with some different understandings.

[Annabel Lee]

Katiejane, thank you for that link. This

must be the Hal Lindsey show I overheard while working in the kitchen at a friend's house. It has nothing to do with the translation of the word Allah to God or God to Allah, or whether they're the same God. Supposedly (I haven't fact-checked it), Chrislam is a religion that started in Logos, Nigeria, combining tenets of both Christianity & Islam, and views the Bible & the Q'ran as equally holy texts. It embraces the notion that Jesus was only a prophet, not the Son of God as he claimed (and was later killed for those claims, according to Christianity). The problem is that it is impossible to mesh the two without compromising one or both. The Q'ran flatly states God has no Son; "And say: [All] praise is due to Allah, who has not taken a son, and who has not a partner in the kingdom, and Who has not a helper to save Him from disgrace; and proclaim His greatness magnifying [Him]." - Surah 17.111, The Q'ran. The discrepancy is that if Jesus is not the Son of God then He was a liar, which disqualifies him from being a prophet. Surah 4.157-158 claims Jesus ("Isa") was not crucified, where Christians see His crucifixion as eternal atonement for sin, yielding salvation. Do you see my point? It's not about "Allah" translating to "God", it's much more complex.

 

P.S., I have no idea where it was I heard the bit about Bibles being mistranslated for the purpose of Chrislam. I know there are Bibles accurately translated into Arabic. Those are not what I was referring to. Hopefully that was just more VanImpe (not VanCamp, I got the name wrong previously) misinformation.

[CaffeineDiary]

This may be old news to you but it was published in that newspaper less than a week ago. Maybe Muslims aren't the same everywhere but here they are well aware that Christians believe their God is trinitarian and I have PERSONALLY had several Muslims tell me God (christian god) and Allah are NOT the same. I've also had Jewish people (my best friend being one of them) tell me the same thing.

 

Actually, not all Christians believe in a triune God. cf: Arianism. That being said, it seems to me that this conversation can't possibly go anywhere good. Theological debates tend to not really be ones that are easily resolved through logical discussion, in my experience.

Edited March 1, 2012 by peterb

[Heather in Neverland]

Actually, not all Christians believe in a triune God. cf: Arianism. That being said, it seems to me that this conversation can't possibly go anywhere good. Theological debates tend to not really be ones that are easily resolved through logical discussion, in my experience.

 

You are new here. We do this is all the time. :D

[Cammie]

Granted I am no theological scholar but I always thought that Christians, Jews and Muslims were all "people of the book." As we are all at the very foundation Abrahamic religions, and all three believe in one God...then we all must believe in the same God. Now I agree that we all get to that God in very different ways and of course you can start to have all sorts of very intricate theological discussions about the differences. My reading of the SOTW is that even among Christians there are extreme differences (and always have been) regarding the exact nature of Jesus.

 

If what we are trying to say is that all three believe in one God and that is the same God for all - I don't see how that is a problem.

 

Of course, if there are attempts to convert based on tricks and language play that is wrong.

[Cammie]

Interesting verses from the Koran (source is Wikipedia) on the relationship between Muslims, Christians and Jews.

 

And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit. [Quran 29:46]

 

In other places the Qur'an says:

• Not all of them are alike; a party of the people of the Scripture stand for the right, they recite the Verses of God during the hours of the night, prostrating themselves in prayer. They believe in God and the Last Day; they enjoin Al-Ma'rûf and forbid Al-Munkar ; and they hasten in (all) good works; and they are among the righteous. And whatever good they do, nothing will be rejected of them; for God knows well those who are Al-Muttaqûn .(3:113-115)
  

• And there are, certainly, among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), those who believe in God and in that which has been revealed to you, and in that which has been revealed to them, humbling themselves before God. They do not sell the Verses of God for a little price, for them is a reward with their Lord. Surely, God is Swift in account. '(3:199)'
  

• Verily! Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in God and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve . [Quran 2:62]
  

• Say (O Muhammad ): "O people of the Scripture : Come to a word that is just between us and you, that we worship none but God, and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides God. [Quran 3:64]
  

[Annabel Lee]

Well, I'll leave the rest of this discussion for you all. There are points being made about Rick Warren and I'm not all that familiar with him, except that he wrote a book popular in some Christian circles. I don't know of his connection to this topic.

[ktgrok]

I would imagine that claims to the contrary where you live, the idea that they worship the same God is actually both historical and biblical. Muslims have traditionally believed in the God of the Bible, the God of the Old and New Testament. They believe that the message of the new testament was "distorted" and that Jesus is a prophet, not God. But they certainly believe in the God of Abraham. As do the Jews.

[ktgrok]

Wow. I've never been accused of riling up hatred before. I guess there is first time for everything. :glare:

 

This may be old news to you but it was published in that newspaper less than a week ago. Maybe Muslims aren't the same everywhere but here they are well aware that Christians believe their God is trinitarian and I have PERSONALLY had several Muslims tell me God (christian god) and Allah are NOT the same. I've also had Jewish people (my best friend being one of them) tell me the same thing.

 

It is common practice here for Christians to "befriend" a Muslim, show them all the verses in the Bible and the Koran that line up, talk about how we worship the same God, and convince them that they can "accept Christ in their heart" and still be Muslim.

 

I personally feel this a bait and switch and dishonest. If Christianity and Islam are "almost" same thing then talking to a Muslim about Jesus would not be illegal here.

 

 

.

 

I believe you that the people you have met feel that way. But Muhammed didn't. The Islam of history didn't. The people you have met are misinformed.

[mytwomonkeys]

honestly heather, i find it hard to believe. i imagine rick warren has been misrepresented here. he is of sound doctrine imho.

[chiguirre]

In fact, not too long ago there was violence and unrest here in Malaysia because local Christian organizations were handing out Bibles in the Malaysian language and using the word "Allah" for "God" in the translation and the Muslims here went berserk over it. They were HIGHLY offended and took the matter to the highest court in Malaysia in addition to some church bombings.

.

 

What's the word for "god" in Bahasa? Allah is Arabic.

[lionfamily1999]

So a friend sent me an article recently from the Orange County Register Newspaper describing a project or coalition, etc., that famous mega-church pastor, Rick Warren, has formed with Muslim groups in SoCal.

 

The point of the association is to "build bridges" and focus on commonalities and what-not. Ok, sounds great. We do a lot of that here between Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and Muslims. I'm all for it.

There's a church two towns over that holds meditation classes and weekday classes in Buddhism and Hinduism. I couldn't believe it. How can you put those different religions together and say they're all right (ish, I guess). Especially since at least two of them say they're the only true religion. Check out the quote (way down there) from the article. I laughed when I read that. Of course the evangelicals were kept out :lol:

What I found interesting was that one of the "points of agreement" is this:

 

The Rev. Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest and one of America's most influential Christian leaders, has embarked on an effort to heal divisions between evangelical Christians and Muslims by partnering with Southern California mosques and proposing a set of theological principles that includes acknowledging that Christians and Muslims worship the same God.

 

Huh??? It's being dubbed "Chrislam" in the blogosphere.

 

Now I am no expert on Islam but I have learned A LOT living in a Muslim country for nearly three years and I can tell you that the Muslims here absolutely DO NOT believe that Christians and Muslims worship the same God. The Christian God is trinitarian and the Muslim God is not.

I think this falls under how literal you are. Romans called Christians godless athiests, because they denied the Roman gods and godesses. Some Christians consider anyone not of their denomination athiests, regardless of how that person defines themself, because they aren't worshipping the one true God. I'm guessing the loudest Muslims where you are lean more towards a strictly literal belief of that sort. Or it could just be, if you change the definition of who God is (three-in-one) then no matter who you say you're worshipping it's not God.

In fact, not too long ago there was violence and unrest here in Malaysia because local Christian organizations were handing out Bibles in the Malaysian language and using the word "Allah" for "God" in the translation and the Muslims here went berserk over it. They were HIGHLY offended and took the matter to the highest court in Malaysia in addition to some church bombings.

I remember this. I was so scared for you.

So while Rick Warren and his followers may be feeling all warm and fuzzy inside about the bridges they are building...which is fine... I am just perplexed that they are perpetuating these false beliefs.

 

Hmmm.....

 

 

.

Heather, I linked the article (inside your quoted post). In case you wanted to share :)

 

Have you ever listened to Alistair Begg? Here's a free sermon (all of his sermons are free in MP3 form) on The Golden Rule. It's worth taking a listen. He talks about getting shut down by it and explains some of the pit falls. I notice that the article revolved around loving they neighbor, but one of the big things he talks about is what is required before you can hope to do so.

 

I don't know enough about Warren (looking now), but thought you'd enjoyed the sermon :D

 

 

Guibord said that when she and Jihad Turk co-founded the Christian-Muslim Consultative Group in 2006, they sent invitations to mosques, the Catholic archdiocese and a variety of mainline Protestant denominations throughout Southern California, but not to evangelical churches.

 

"I think that many evangelicals feel a mandate to convert people to Christianity," Guibord said. Because the Consultative Group was founded to respond to increasing antagonism between the two faiths, "we would not have made headway" if one side was trying to convert the other, she said. Now, she said, it might be possible to include evangelicals in her group's work.

 

They must be talking about that whole "go out into the world and preach the gospel" thing... the great commission. Evangelicals are so silly, thinking that meant going out and preaching the gospel. :lol:

[lionfamily1999]

I have a hard time reconciling the first article with this. Maybe it's another deceptive sort of thing.

 

:huh:

[Roadrunner]

Another interesting tidbit Muslims believe that most people are unaware - they believe Jesus will return before the end of the world.

 

 

In "old" cultures neighborly spirit between different religious groups living in the close proximity (during the times of peace) has been maintained largely by sticking to their own kind and minding our own business. In the city I was born, we have had a church, a mosque and a synagogue on the same street for centuries. No member of those communities goes around attempting to convert people and stirring trouble.

There is a lot of anxiety in societies unaccustomed to missionary work about upsetting the status quo, or as locals put it "tearing the established fabric of society."

What I am trying to say is missionary work can be controversial no matter the approach in parts of the world unaccustomed to dealing with it (including my native home that is a Christian country).

[Bluegoat]

I have seen a lot of this bunk lately.

 

There are places where there are odd combinations of Islam and Christianity that are true to neither, mostly in Africa. That is not what is going on here.

 

It is fairly normal, theologically speaking and historically, to say that Jews, Christians, and Muslims are worshiping the same God. And for that matter, pagans like Plato, or Hindu philosophers.

 

There is only one immaterial self-existent source of all Being - if a person or religion has recognized that entity, it is the same one as other groups worship or recognize. It is totally unique and to know it in principle is to know it actually, if not completely. There isn't another First Principle hanging around.

 

Of course it is also possible to ascribe things to God or deny things about him in error, which is what all these different groups would generally say about the others. In so far as one does this, one may be worshiping a less complete idea of God or perhaps more importantly additionally worshiping things which are not in fact God or godly. That does not mean though that one is worshiping a wholly different object.

 

Historically we see this is the attitude of Christianity. Jews have always been understood to be worshiping the Father - Christianity is pretty nonsensical otherwise. St Paul recognized pagan philosophers as knowing God. And in the case of Islam, when it appeared some theologians considered it as a Christian heresy, not another religion.

 

We also see the Muslims, Jews and Christian theologians reading and borrowing from pagans as well as each from other. St Basil tells us it is fine to learn from pagan philosophy, as does Calvin and many other saints and philosophers and Christian thinkers. All truth comes from God, unity of knowledge is a real principle. None of that would be sensible if they thought those people were worshiping a wholly different God.

 

I am not sure why this hysteria over "Chrislam" here in North America has been so great lately. The new Bible traslation refered to is an entirely minor issue - quite possibly - even likely - a bad translation decision, but not a conspiracy to compromise Christianity.

Edited March 1, 2012 by Bluegoat

[Harriet Vane]

Reminds me of "Tashlan. . . "

[SKL]

Interesting. I guess, like other religious matters, it could differ depending on where you are. Maybe there are many Muslims in California who agree that they worship the same God as Christians do. Personally, I agree with that, but nobody asked me . . . .

[ktgrok]

Interesting. I guess, like other religious matters, it could differ depending on where you are. Maybe there are many Muslims in California who agree that they worship the same God as Christians do. Personally, I agree with that, but nobody asked me . . . .

 

Well, Muhammed himself felt they worshiped the same God, so I don't think it is just a California thing :)

[sassenach]

I found this online:

 

Rick Warren does not embrace Chrislam

 

Warren’s comment:

 

Several of the above comments are completely incorrect, based on believing 2nd hand false rumors instead of finding out the facts before speaking up. "Only a fool believes all he hears" Proverbs 14:15

 

The so-called "Chrislam" rumor is 100% false. If the guy who started this libelous myth, or anyone else who passed it on, had obeyed our Lord's command (Matt. 18:18-20) to come directly to me, and then asked what I actually believed – they would have been embarrassed to learn that I believe the exact opposite. As a 4th generation Christian pastor, my life & ministry is built on the truth that Jesus is the only way, and our inerrant Bible is our only true authority.

 

As an evangelist, I spend much of my time speaking to non-Christian groups. You cannot win your enemies to Christ; only your friends, so we must build bridges of friendship and love to those who believe differently so Jesus can walk across that bridge into their hearts. Besides, it is not a sin, but rather COMMANDED by Jesus that we love our enemies. In the past 10 years, Saddleback Church has baptized over 22,000 new adult believers – simply because we express love to those who don’t know Christ yet.

 

It is nonsense to believe that you must compromise your beliefs, or water down your convictions in order to love someone, or even just treat them with dignity.

 

 

[amey311]

They must be talking about that whole "go out into the world and preach the gospel" thing... the great commission. Evangelicals are so silly, thinking that meant going out and preaching the gospel. :lol:

 

Well, there are plenty of Christians who don't think it's their job to try to convert everyone they meet (which I'm sure makes them less of a Christian in some eyes). Trying to have a business of mixed faith paths where certain people are going to show up every day and try to convince you that you're living your life in the wrong way makes for a hostile work environment, whether that person is selling Jesus or Amway.

[CalicoKat]

So a friend sent me an article recently from the Orange County Register Newspaper describing a project or coalition, etc., that famous mega-church pastor, Rick Warren, has formed with Muslim groups in SoCal.

 

The point of the association is to "build bridges" and focus on commonalities and what-not. Ok, sounds great. We do a lot of that here between Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and Muslims. I'm all for it.

 

What I found interesting was that one of the "points of agreement" is this:

 

The Rev. Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest and one of America's most influential Christian leaders, has embarked on an effort to heal divisions between evangelical Christians and Muslims by partnering with Southern California mosques and proposing a set of theological principles that includes acknowledging that Christians and Muslims worship the same God.

 

Huh??? It's being dubbed "Chrislam" in the blogosphere.

 

Now I am no expert on Islam but I have learned A LOT living in a Muslim country for nearly three years and I can tell you that the Muslims here absolutely DO NOT believe that Christians and Muslims worship the same God. The Christian God is trinitarian and the Muslim God is not.

In fact, not too long ago there was violence and unrest here in Malaysia because local Christian organizations were handing out Bibles in the Malaysian language and using the word "Allah" for "God" in the translation and the Muslims here went berserk over it. They were HIGHLY offended and took the matter to the highest court in Malaysia in addition to some church bombings.

 

So while Rick Warren and his followers may be feeling all warm and fuzzy inside about the bridges they are building...which is fine... I am just perplexed that they are perpetuating these false beliefs.

 

Hmmm.....

 

 

.

:iagree: Amen.

[Roadrunner]

I think it's a bit more complex. My brother works with muslim groups in Africa so I've heard a bit about it and you might check Christianity Today magazine for more details. Muslims, as was stated, consider the idea of "3 in 1" blasphemous; they also just as strongly object to the term Son of God - I guess it's next to impossible to state that without implying that God had a physically intimate relationship with Mary. Some translators have stuck with SoG anyway, trusting that though it's inflammatory it does convey a real truth about Jesus' relationship to God the Father. Other translators have started using alternate terms, like "beloved of God" to indicate Jesus intimate connection with God without making it specifically sexual; they see it as removing a barrier to people's understanding of the gospel. Now the translators are arguing over which is right.

 

Muslims take an objection to Jesus being an actual son (in the physical sense). In the spiritual sense they believe we are all children of god and we are all loved somewhat equally.

[Kate in Arabia]

According to my brother, the muslim objection to the term "son of god" is that it comes across to them in Arabic as more than just physical - it definitely has sexual overtones, as in christians by this wording are asserving that God actually had intimate relations w/Mary. Again, I am not the expert, and I refer those interested to the magazine Christianity Today, which has had a couple of lengthy articles over the past couple of years on this topic.

I don't know why people keep bringing sex into it. I've never heard that before in my life, I've never heard anyone mention that or even hint in that direction. And I know a lot of Muslims, and a wide range.

 

And I would suggest, if someone is wanting to learn more about Islam, to perhaps look beyond Christian publications about Islam.

[EmmaNZ]

I don't know why people keep bringing sex into it. I've never heard that before in my life, I've never heard anyone mention that or even hint in that direction. And I know a lot of Muslims, and a wide range.

 

And I would suggest, if someone is wanting to learn more about Islam, to perhaps look beyond Christian publications about Islam.

 

:iagree:wholeheartedly

[TXBeth]

I think it's a bit more complex. My brother works with muslim groups in Africa so I've heard a bit about it and you might check Christianity Today magazine for more details. Muslims, as was stated, consider the idea of "3 in 1" blasphemous; they also just as strongly object to the term Son of God - I guess it's next to impossible to state that without implying that God had a physically intimate relationship with Mary. Some translators have stuck with SoG anyway, trusting that though it's inflammatory it does convey a real truth about Jesus' relationship to God the Father. Other translators have started using alternate terms, like "beloved of God" to indicate Jesus intimate connection with God without making it specifically sexual; they see it as removing a barrier to people's understanding of the gospel. Now the translators are arguing over which is right.

 

This exactly. Obviously the literal interpretation is preferred. But in languages where the most commonly used term for "Son" implies that God had s3x with Mary, translators try to find a different term that avoids the s3xual connotations while preserving the familial relationship between God and Jesus.

 

I don't know why people keep bringing sex into it. I've never heard that before in my life, I've never heard anyone mention that or even hint in that direction. And I know a lot of Muslims, and a wide range.

 

And I would suggest, if someone is wanting to learn more about Islam, to perhaps look beyond Christian publications about Islam.

 

It is not a "Muslim" issue; it is a linguistic issue. It's not that Muslims reading the Bible would see "Son of God" and assume something s3xual. It's that the actual vocabulary used for the most common word for "Son" in certain languages (not all languages in Muslim countries, just certain ones) contain a semantic connotation of s3xual intimacy between God and the mother of the "Son." This is extremely offensive, particular to people with a Muslim background (but honestly it would be offensive to me as well). This is difficult to understand if you don't have a linguistic background, because in English the word "son" does not carry this meaning, so it is hard to imagine how it could be true in another language.

 

There is a debate going on right now about how best to handle Divine familial terms on those few situations where a literal translation of the most commonly used term for "son" would lead to not just offense, but actual inaccuracy (since the Greek word does NOT include these s3xual implications). However, all parties involved in the debate are involved because they care deeply about preserving the accuracy of the Bible. There is no big conspiracy to deny the family relationship in order to make it "easier" to convert Muslims.

[Lovedtodeath]

1 John 2:22-23 Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also.

 

2 John 7 I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8 Watch out that you do not lose what we[a] have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully. 9 Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take them into your house or welcome them. 11 Anyone who welcomes them shares in their wicked work.

 

It is no news that Jews and Muslims do not believe that Jesus was God or a part of a Triune god-head. But Muslims do believe that Jesus was a great prophet, the only prophet to my knowledge through whom God performed miracles. The Muslims pray to the God of Abraham. They pray to the same One God that Jews do. Christians, from the Muslim perspective, also worship the God of Abraham, but error in their conception of God as including (from their perspective as strict monotheists) 3 parts or persons, and are especially against the idea of making a partner for God a human being—great prophet, or not.

 

So Muslim and Jews have a different conception of the "God of Abraham" than Trinitarian Christians do. But Christians believe they worship the God of Abraham, as do Jews (who reject a Triune God) and Muslims (who, like Jews reject the Triune God).

And he received it at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, and made it a molten calf; and they said: 'This is thy god, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.'-- Exodus 32:4

 

The Israelites in this story were not worshiping the God of Abraham, but worshiping a man-made god with the same name.

 

Abraham worshiped this God: Jeremiah 23:23 - Good News Translation Catholic Edition (GNTCE)

23“I am a God who is everywhere and not in one place only.

 

(Genesis 18)1And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; 2And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground,

3And said, My LORD, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:

4Let a little water, I pray you, be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree:

5And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your hearts; after that ye shall pass on: for therefore are ye come to your servant. And they said, So do, as thou hast said.

 

9And they said unto him, Where is Sarah thy wife? And he said, Behold, in the tent.

10And he said, I will certainly return unto thee according to the time of life; and, lo, Sarah thy wife shall have a son. And Sarah heard it in the tent door, which was behind him.

11Now Abraham and Sarah were old and well stricken in age; and it ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women.

12Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?

13And the LORD said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, which am old?

14Is any thing too hard for the LORD? At the time appointed I will return unto thee, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son.

15Then Sarah denied, saying, I laughed not; for she was afraid. And he said, Nay; but thou didst laugh.

 

 

 

16And the men rose up from thence, and looked toward Sodom: and Abraham went with them to bring them on the way.

17And the LORD said, Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do;

18Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?

19For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the LORD, to do justice and judgment; that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.

20And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;

21I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.

22And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD.

 

32And he said, Oh let not the LORD be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake.

33And the LORD went his way, as soon as he had left communing with Abraham: and Abraham returned unto his place. Genesis 18

 

19

 

1And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;

 

 

16And while he lingered, the men laid hold upon his hand, and upon the hand of his wife, and upon the hand of his two daughters; the LORD being merciful unto him: and they brought him forth, and set him without the city.

17And it came to pass, when they had brought them forth abroad, that he said, Escape for thy life; look not behind thee, neither stay thou in all the plain; escape to the mountain, lest thou be consumed.

18And Lot said unto them, Oh, not so, my LORD:

19Behold now, thy servant hath found grace in thy sight, and thou hast magnified thy mercy, which thou hast shewed unto me in saving my life; and I cannot escape to the mountain, lest some evil take me, and I die:

20Behold now, this city is near to flee unto, and it is a little one: Oh, let me escape thither, (is it not a little one?) and my soul shall live.

21And he said unto him, See, I have accepted thee concerning this thing also, that I will not overthrow this city, for the which thou hast spoken.

22Haste thee, escape thither; for I cannot do anything till thou be come thither. Therefore the name of the city was called Zoar.

23The sun was risen upon the earth when Lot entered into Zoar.

24Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;

Edited March 2, 2012 by Lovedtodeath

[LibraryLover]

And I wonder why I can't stop logging in.

 

This board is amazing; and I say that without a bit of snark.

 

Further, I once again wonder what SpyCar does for a living. I imagine you a producer, or maybe a writer, a psychiatrist, a technical advisor to writers? The one called in to verify whether plot lines of CSI or the like make sense? PS Will you read my screenplay? (J/k, I don't have a sp.)

Edited March 2, 2012 by LibraryLover

[Lovedtodeath]

Some translators have stuck with SoG anyway, trusting that though it's inflammatory it does convey a real truth about Jesus' relationship to God the Father. Other translators have started using alternate terms, like "beloved of God" to indicate Jesus intimate connection with God without making it specifically sexual; they see it as removing a barrier to people's understanding of the gospel. Now the translators are arguing over which is right.

Isaiah 53:1 Who has believed our message

and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?

5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,

he was crushed for our iniquities;

the punishment that brought us peace was on him,

and by his wounds we are healed.

 

 

John 1:18 No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.

 

Jesus is the Logos, the Word that came forth, or went out from the Father (see Jn 8:59, 13:3, 16:27-28).

Edited March 2, 2012 by Lovedtodeath

[Melinda in VT]

This exactly. Obviously the literal interpretation is preferred. But in languages where the most commonly used term for "Son" implies that God had s3x with Mary, translators try to find a different term that avoids the s3xual connotations while preserving the familial relationship between God and Jesus.

 

 

 

It is not a "Muslim" issue; it is a linguistic issue. It's not that Muslims reading the Bible would see "Son of God" and assume something s3xual. It's that the actual vocabulary used for the most common word for "Son" in certain languages (not all languages in Muslim countries, just certain ones) contain a semantic connotation of s3xual intimacy between God and the mother of the "Son." This is extremely offensive, particular to people with a Muslim background (but honestly it would be offensive to me as well). This is difficult to understand if you don't have a linguistic background, because in English the word "son" does not carry this meaning, so it is hard to imagine how it could be true in another language.

 

There is a debate going on right now about how best to handle Divine familial terms on those few situations where a literal translation of the most commonly used term for "son" would lead to not just offense, but actual inaccuracy (since the Greek word does NOT include these s3xual implications). However, all parties involved in the debate are involved because they care deeply about preserving the accuracy of the Bible. There is no big conspiracy to deny the family relationship in order to make it "easier" to convert Muslims.

 

Do you have a link to an article that explains this? (Apologies if you've linked it already and I missed it.) It seems to me that the very idea of sonship implies either sex with the mother or adoption, whatever the language. I think Christians have just gotten so used to the idea of Jesus as the son of God by some miraculous process that didn't involve sex that we don't see the obvious conclusion that non-Christians draw. I don't think it has anything to do with semantics. But, I'm willing to read the argument for your position if you have a link.

[TXBeth]

Do you have a link to an article that explains this? (Apologies if you've linked it already and I missed it.) It seems to me that the very idea of sonship implies either sex with the mother or adoption, whatever the language. I think Christians have just gotten so used to the idea of Jesus as the son of God by some miraculous process that didn't involve sex that we don't see the obvious conclusion that non-Christians draw. I don't think it has anything to do with semantics. But, I'm willing to read the argument for your position if you have a link.

 

I haven't done research into the specific languages; I will keep digging to see if I can find specifics. I'll include the link to SIL's official position on this (this is the organization we work with), but they don't give language-specific examples - just an overview.

http://www.sil.org/translation/divine_familial_terms.htm

[TXBeth]

In fact, not too long ago there was violence and unrest here in Malaysia because local Christian organizations were handing out Bibles in the Malaysian language and using the word "Allah" for "God" in the translation and the Muslims here went berserk over it. They were HIGHLY offended and took the matter to the highest court in Malaysia in addition to some church bombings.

 

which doesn't make a lot of sense when you consider the fact that the word "Allah" predates Islam. (and Christianity, for that matter)

[KungFuPanda]

I'll own up to having only read the first page, but I'm focusing on language. What word did they want used instead of 'Allah?'. I have a copy of the Bible in Arabic and a copy of the Quran in English and Allah=God in both these translations. Did they suggest an alternative?

[Roadrunner]

Do you have a link to an article that explains this? (Apologies if you've linked it already and I missed it.) It seems to me that the very idea of sonship implies either sex with the mother or adoption, whatever the language. I think Christians have just gotten so used to the idea of Jesus as the son of God by some miraculous process that didn't involve sex that we don't see the obvious conclusion that non-Christians draw. I don't think it has anything to do with semantics. But, I'm willing to read the argument for your position if you have a link.

 

Interestingly Muslims also believe that Mary was a virgin when she got pregnant. So they believe only two people were created without a physical father (Adam and Jesus). They have a different version of events. Mary was virgin, got pregnant, her family wanted to kill her (because she was pregnant and not married), Mary got married to basically give a baby a father. Still they maintain god doesn't have children in a sense of physical children, but all the things that exist are in essence his children.

I made some phone calls yesterday :tongue_smilie:.

[LucyStoner]

If there was not a shared history, then Jesus would not be a prophet in Islam. Unless we think that there is more than 1 god or that Abraham was not worshipping a single god, then we must accept that Judaism, Christianity and Islam are looking to different beliefs about the same God.

Edited March 2, 2012 by kijipt

[Lovedtodeath]

We really have two choices in this world. Christians, Jews and Muslims can be "ecumenical" and accept that each of the other faith groups sincerely attempt to worship God in their own ways and attempt to live in peace and with mutual respect,

:thumbup1:

Good way of wording things.

[stripe]

Interestingly Muslims also believe that Mary was a virgin when she got pregnant. So they believe only two people were created without a physical father (Adam and Jesus). They have a different version of events. Mary was virgin, got pregnant, her family wanted to kill her (because she was pregnant and not married), Mary got married to basically give a baby a father. Still they maintain god doesn't have children in a sense of physical children, but all the things that exist are in essence his children.

I made some phone calls yesterday :tongue_smilie:.

 

In which faith is there a belief that Mary's family wanted her killed and that she got married to give the baby a father? Muslims don't believe Mary ever got married; the marriage to Joseph is a Christian belief as far as I know. In Islam, the baby Jesus spoke soon after birth when people gathered to say that Mary had done something wrong; he declared he would be a prophet and essentially testified to his mother's morality, and people left her alone, realizing the miracle of a newborn baby speaking. (Surah Maryam, 19:30-33).

 

The Quran makes it clear that Christians (and Jews) worship the same God, but the rejection of the trinity makes it clear that Muslims don't worship Jesus but regard him as a prophet.

 

I saw something about a Chrislam group in Nigeria on Religion and Ethics News Weekly on PBS, in 2009.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/february-13-2009/chrislam/2236/

[Kate in Arabia]

It is not a "Muslim" issue; it is a linguistic issue. It's not that Muslims reading the Bible would see "Son of God" and assume something s3xual. It's that the actual vocabulary used for the most common word for "Son" in certain languages (not all languages in Muslim countries, just certain ones) contain a semantic connotation of s3xual intimacy between God and the mother of the "Son." This is extremely offensive, particular to people with a Muslim background (but honestly it would be offensive to me as well). This is difficult to understand if you don't have a linguistic background, because in English the word "son" does not carry this meaning, so it is hard to imagine how it could be true in another language.

The suggestion made here was that "Muslims" have this issue with Christian belief, as if it is a generally held opinion, and I can tell you from my own experience and knowledge this is not the case (and I don't have that opinion, and I am Muslim -- don't know if I count). Perhaps there is a specific group somewhere who has this issue, but not that I have ever heard of; there are hadiths and stories in Islamic history where the commonality of belief between Muslims and Christians over the Immaculate Conception is stressed.

 

..and I just asked my dh if he had ever heard of that; he is a born Muslim and was raised in Saudi Arabia and has also a wide range of Muslim acquaintances.. he has never heard of that either.

Edited March 2, 2012 by Kate in Arabia

[Ohdanigirl]

:iagree:

We really have two choices in this world. Christians, Jews and Muslims can be "ecumenical" and accept that each of the other faith groups sincerely attempt to worship God in their own ways (even if said person believes they are wrong in fundamental aspects of their beliefs) and attempt to live in peace and with mutual respect, or they can listen to those who would declare all the other religions (but their own) the worship of false-gods.

 

The latter course won't make for a very peaceful world.

 

Bill

 

Well said.

 

The suggestion made here was that "Muslims" have this issue with Christian belief, as if it is a generally held opinion, and I can tell you from my own experience and knowledge this is not the case (and I don't have that opinion, and I am Muslim -- don't know if I count). Perhaps there is a specific group somewhere who has this issue, but not that I have ever heard of; there are hadiths and stories in Islamic history where the commonality of belief between Muslims and Christians over the Immaculate Conception is stressed.

 

..and I just asked my dh if he had ever heard of that; he is a born Muslim and was raised in Saudi Arabia and has also a wide range of Muslim acquaintances.. he has never heard of that either.

 

Thank you for sharing.

 

Danielle

[tntgoodwin]

Clarification from Rick Warren:

 

http://www.edstetzer.com/2012/03/rick-warren-interview-on-musli.html

[Roadrunner]

In which faith is there a belief that Mary's family wanted her killed and that she got married to give the baby a father? Muslims don't believe Mary ever got married; the marriage to Joseph is a Christian belief as far as I know. In Islam, the baby Jesus spoke soon after birth when people gathered to say that Mary had done something wrong; he declared he would be a prophet and essentially testified to his mother's morality, and people left her alone, realizing the miracle of a newborn baby speaking. (Surah Maryam, 19:30-33).

 

The Quran makes it clear that Christians (and Jews) worship the same God, but the rejection of the trinity makes it clear that Muslims don't worship Jesus but regard him as a prophet.

 

I saw something about a Chrislam group in Nigeria on Religion and Ethics News Weekly on PBS, in 2009.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/february-13-2009/chrislam/2236/

 

quoting a Muslim, but not a practicing one. His choice of words maybe not what they should be? :001_huh:

[Ipsey]

This exactly. Obviously the literal interpretation is preferred. But in languages where the most commonly used term for "Son" implies that God had s3x with Mary, translators try to find a different term that avoids the s3xual connotations while preserving the familial relationship between God and Jesus.

 

 

 

It is not a "Muslim" issue; it is a linguistic issue. It's not that Muslims reading the Bible would see "Son of God" and assume something s3xual. It's that the actual vocabulary used for the most common word for "Son" in certain languages (not all languages in Muslim countries, just certain ones) contain a semantic connotation of s3xual intimacy between God and the mother of the "Son." This is extremely offensive, particular to people with a Muslim background (but honestly it would be offensive to me as well). This is difficult to understand if you don't have a linguistic background, because in English the word "son" does not carry this meaning, so it is hard to imagine how it could be true in another language.

 

There is a debate going on right now about how best to handle Divine familial terms on those few situations where a literal translation of the most commonly used term for "son" would lead to not just offense, but actual inaccuracy (since the Greek word does NOT include these s3xual implications). However, all parties involved in the debate are involved because they care deeply about preserving the accuracy of the Bible. There is no big conspiracy to deny the family relationship in order to make it "easier" to convert Muslims.

 

 

I was provided with the same information you're using here when I was an Evangelical Christian and missionary. I was taught there were two words for "Son" and I should use one and not the other so I didn't give Muslims the impression there was something sexual about Jesus' birth.

 

Funny, when I met actual Muslims and tried to talk about this, they had no idea what I was talking about.

 

Now, I teach at a school that's over 50% Muslim now, but now religion is the last thing that interests me.

 

I've learned not to trust much of what Christian evangelistic literature says about other people's faith.

[TXBeth]

I was provided with the same information you're using here when I was an Evangelical Christian and missionary. I was taught there were two words for "Son" and I should use one and not the other so I didn't give Muslims the impression there was something sexual about Jesus' birth.

 

Funny, when I met actual Muslims and tried to talk about this, they had no idea what I was talking about.

 

Now, I teach at a school that's over 50% Muslim now, but now religion is the last thing that interests me.

 

I've learned not to trust much of what Christian evangelistic literature says about other people's faith.

 

From what I understand, this debate has nothing to do with the Muslim faith. An English-speaking or even Arabic-speaking Muslim would not have this issue. Would they be upset at the idea that Jesus is God's physical Son? Of course, just as a Christian would be upset at the idea that anyone other than Jesus is God's physical son.

 

However, what I am referring to is a linguistic issue in certain languages that happen to be situated in traditionally Muslim areas. These are minority languages, and it is highly unlikely that anyone here (including me) has met anyone who speaks one of them. The word "Son" itself might mean, for example, "the child born from my s3xual partner" (this is strictly an example as I have not done any research into these languages). In that instance, it would not be a good idea to translate "Son of God" using this word, as it strongly suggests that God had s3x with a human, which is not implied by the Greek "uios." In those few languages, it is much more clear and accurate to use a different word that would still emphasize the familial relationship between God the Father and Jesus, while avoiding the false implication that God had s3x with Mary.

 

This practice (of using a word other than the most common, literal translation of "son") is not a standard procedure that is intended to be used in all Muslim areas. The literal translation is much preferred except those rare instances when it would convey wrong meaning. The goal is not to avoid offense, but to promote true understanding.

 

Am I making any sense at all?

[Lovedtodeath]

Clarification from Rick Warren:

 

http://www.edstetzer.com/2012/03/rick-warren-interview-on-musli.html

Thank you!

[mytwomonkeys]

Yes, I was coming to post the same thing. He sent out letter saying this (with the interview attached).

 

_________________________________________________________

Dear friends,

A few days ago, an article appeared in the Orange County Register that included some outrageous statements about Saddleback that were incorrect. Of course, the media rarely gets everything right, and there’s no way we could respond to every false statement made about us. But I felt this article created so many misperceptions that I agreed to do an interview in response. The interview transcript is included below. Please read it all and then forward it to everyone you know who would be interested.

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Clarification from Rick Warren:

 

http://www.edstetzer.com/2012/03/rick-warren-interview-on-musli.html

[Heather in Neverland]

Clarification from Rick Warren:

 

http://www.edstetzer.com/2012/03/rick-warren-interview-on-musli.html

 

I am actually really glad you posted that. I love honesty.

 

So Rick Warren states in no uncertain terms that Christians and Muslims worship a DIFFERENT God. And that he has every intention of evangelizing his Muslim friends.

 

Not so ecumenical after all.