Hall of FameHall of Fame  Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp  chatChat
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin
InterReligious Dialogue
 Whyislam.org Forums : General : InterReligious Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: Conversion from Christianity to Islam: wh(Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 9 Next >>
Author Message
scruggnut  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Location: Canada
Religion: Unknown(Unknown)
Posts: 3914
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 22 April 2008 at 5:31pm
Originally posted by hamayoun

Salam

Good grief... why is this so difficult to understand?  Here is a description of the Islamic concept of God.  Is there anything here that does not fall under the category of 'logical' ???

  • God, and God alone, created the universe and everything in it.
  • God is the sustainer and maintainer of the universe.
  • God is the absolute controller of the universe and all actions occurring within it.
  • God has complete power over all things.
  • God is not dependent on anyone or anything, whereas everyone and everything is dependent on Him.
  • God does not have a "family" : no wife, no children, no parents.
  • There is nothing like God.
  • God is transcendent above His creation.
  • God cannot be manifested in any of his creation.
  • God does not become incarnate in any of his creation.
  • God is the only being who can hear our prayers.
  • God is the only being who has the power to answer our prayers, since He is the only one who can control the actions of the universe and of everything within it.
  • God is the only entity who deserves to be worshipped.
  • Humans do not need any intercessor or intervener between themselves and God when worshipping or praying to Him, but should turn directly to God.


Ummm, how about all of the above.
The last thing that any religion would be, is logical.  I'm well aware that you think it is, but then, a racist thinks that his hatred of another race is just as logical...in both cases one would be wrong.
However, religion being an illogical thing does not dictate whether a god truly exists.
Waiting an eternity for an apology from one who never apologizes but always demands one.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Janet Waters  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Location: United States
Religion: Christian(Mormon)
Posts: 3617
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 26 April 2008 at 1:33am
Originally posted by hamayoun

The point of the thread is to show, contrary to bayleaf's claim, that when people leave Christianity for Islam, the #1 reason is because the concept of God in Islam is much more logical and far less confusing than that in Christianity.


I would have to agree with hamayoun....
that the reason for Christians to leave Christianity to join Islam.......
is because of their concept of God is illogical and/or confusing........
which concept about God is.....
THE TRINITY THEORY.

I have heard this over and over again. 

However, one point I'd like to reiterate.....is that not all Christians are trinitarians.  If a Christian has a problem with the trinity theory....that person is a member of the wrong church....for not all Christian churches teach the Trinity theory.





No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
struggle  
Undergraduate
Undergraduate
Avatar
Religion: Other(Other)
Posts: 1898
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 26 April 2008 at 4:25am

No Wrong Church! Church fits better for a individual. Its for Man not for God, The Bible is for God...

EYE FOR EYE
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Damo808  
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4266
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 26 April 2008 at 6:31pm
Hi Amy... sorry for coming back on this a little late, i never realized you'd responded as i haven't really being following the thread much.
 
 
Damo :
"Hi Amy.
 
 Taking a step aside from both our faiths for a sec. Whether God is one individual or three distinct individuals in one Godhead we are talking about the Divine. Man is man and imperfect in nature. God on the other hand is perfect in relation to all things . If God truly is 3 distinct individuals in one Godhead, then to suggest friction ( for want of a better word) between them is to suggest something less than divine, or weakness in one being in comparrison to the other, a corruptability if you like. Other than that i think its risky to dis-regard that which we dis-agree about God when reasoned by human logic. Strictly speaking God is not a logical concept." 
 
Amy :
It's not friction which suggest something less than divinity, it is saying that God exists as more than One individual. To say God is two or three or more distinct individuals is what suggests something less than divine. That is the weakness.
 
Damo:
You said that for God to be three, individuals equates to something less than divine. I can't understand why thats the case. Divinity is Divinity regardless.
  
Amy:
If God makes himself as "father" and "son" then that is an analogy to humanity. But is a father the same as the son? Do the father and the son always agree?
 
 Damo:
Its you who uses the human analogy here when relating to the Divine relationship between God the Father and God the Son. Being Divine then would automatically suggest that there is also a divine co-eternal harmony between the Father and the Son they are the essence of each other, of exact nature there is no imbalance. If God is the Father and the Son why is it problematic because it relates to humanity. Which came first God or Humanity. Did God not say in Genesis , Let Us make man in Our image ?
 
 Amy:
Or does one have to bow and respect the other? Isn't one inferior to the other? Naturally. So there's no sense in using an analogy that is already flawed? Or isn't that an analogy already in use. So I'll use it too.
 
 Damo:
It is again flawed if we attribute to God the familiarities of humanity. If you could at least consider what a co-eternal divine relationship between the Father and Son means. In humanity, a son inherits that of his father after his father passes away. However God both the Father and the Son being eternal that which is the Father's is likewise the Son's.
 
Amy:
If there is One purpose, then there is Only One God. But if you split that up, there is friction. It's not because humans are flawed, but in fact the very analogy is flawed. The only logical conclusion is that God is One.
 
Damo:
 Its flawed ....... because ....why ? Where is the friction in a divine relationship.
 
Amy:
And it is logical, of course. It is the conclusion which most people will independently arrive at.
 
 Damo:
Most people who believe in the Abrahamic God infact di-agree given the numbers already. Logic is irrelivent when the very aspect of God defeats any logic.
 
Amy:
For who do they call on in their moment of absolute peril? "Oh God!" When someone is confronted with death--who do they call on? "Oh God!" Just God. Just One. The Only One who can help. This is natural, it is a natural inclination really, that people tend to. What is illogical is to distort the natural inclination, which your body and your soul tell you, and to make things up about God that aren't true.
 
Damo :
Amy ... c'mon... because people say ohh God in a moment of anxiety is sound argument against the Triune God ?
 
 
 P.S Sorry for the way its posted... i'm useless at using the quotation boxes.
 
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
jamilahz  
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
in exile
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 2176
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 26 April 2008 at 6:44pm
Originally posted by Damo808

 
Damo :
Amy ... c'mon... because people say ohh God in a moment of anxiety is sound argument against the Triune God ?
 
 
 


Why not? 
www.hudastore.com

www.theoneislam.com
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Damo808  
Mureed
Mureed

Religion: Christian(Catholic)
Posts: 4266
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 26 April 2008 at 7:10pm
Originally posted by jamilahz

Originally posted by Damo808

 
Damo :
Amy ... c'mon... because people say ohh God in a moment of anxiety is sound argument against the Triune God ?
 
 
 


Why not? 
 
 
 Well i don't think a woman exclaiming "ohh God" , when she snaps one of her high heels on a cracked paving stone on the sidewalk is sound argument against the Triune God.
 Ok i'm being simplistic.
 But even the apostals as well as the early church fathers refered to "God", in the Triune sense when reffering to God in general, they didn't di-sect the nature of God when referring to Him. Though none the less they acknowledged Jesus as God... as well as the Father as God.
out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel: and his going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:5
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Janet Waters  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Location: United States
Religion: Christian(Mormon)
Posts: 3617
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 28 April 2008 at 1:53pm
Originally posted by struggle

No Wrong Church! Church fits better for a individual. Its for Man not for God, The Bible is for God...

 
I'm not making a statement of which church is "true" and which ones are "false."  I'm stating which church is right for the individual.  If a person has certain beliefs that are not reflected in their present church....then that church is the wrong church for that individual to be in. 
 
We are saying the same thing here. 
 
If I didn't believe in the doctrine that was being taught in my church.....then I'm trying to fit myself into something that I don't agree with.
 
First I would study and pray about those things and if I got different direction than what is being taught in present church....I would come to the conclusion that I needed to move on.  If I was a Christian.....then I would look into other Christian Churches to find a better fit.  For there are more Christian churches than one.
 
 
 
 


Edited by Janet Waters - 28 April 2008 at 1:59pm
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Janet Waters  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Location: United States
Religion: Christian(Mormon)
Posts: 3617
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 April 2008 at 12:39pm
Originally posted by hamayoun

The point of the thread is to show, contrary to bayleaf's claim, that when people leave Christianity for Islam, the #1 reason is because the concept of God in Islam is much more logical and far less confusing than that in Christianity.


Originally posted by Janet Waters

I would have to agree with hamayoun....
that the reason for Christians to leave Christianity to join Islam.......
is because of their concept of God is illogical and/or confusing........
which concept about God is.....
THE TRINITY THEORY.

I have heard this over and over again. 

However, one point I'd like to reiterate.....is that not all Christians are trinitarians.  If a Christian has a problem with the trinity theory....that person is a member of the wrong church....for not all Christian churches teach the Trinity theory.



No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
yishmael  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member
Avatar
Chairman Meow
Religion: Atheist(Atheist)
Posts: 309
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 April 2008 at 3:57pm
Originally posted by Janet Waters

Originally posted by hamayoun

The point of the thread is to show, contrary to bayleaf's claim, that when people leave Christianity for Islam, the #1 reason is because the concept of God in Islam is much more logical and far less confusing than that in Christianity.


Originally posted by Janet Waters

I would have to agree with hamayoun....
that the reason for Christians to leave Christianity to join Islam.......
is because of their concept of God is illogical and/or confusing........
which concept about God is.....
THE TRINITY THEORY.

I have heard this over and over again. 

However, one point I'd like to reiterate.....is that not all Christians are trinitarians.  If a Christian has a problem with the trinity theory....that person is a member of the wrong church....for not all Christian churches teach the Trinity theory.





Is it your contention that people who leave Christianity would be better off in another Christian church than Islam?

I guess I don't understand the point of all this repetition. I don't consider us (LDS) to be Christians, though I understand you do, and it seems like your underlying message is that Christians should give Mormonism a try before wandering away to the mosque, temple or synagogue. Feel free to clarify or correct if I have misinterpreted.


Edited by yishmael - 30 April 2008 at 3:58pm
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Janet Waters  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Location: United States
Religion: Christian(Mormon)
Posts: 3617
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 April 2008 at 8:20pm
Originally posted by yishmael

Is it your contention that people who leave Christianity would be better off in another Christian church than Islam?


I don't have a "contention."  I said what I said.  If a Christian had a problem with the trinity theory....there are other Christian Churches who don't teach that theory.  Plain and simple...you sure do like trying to incite contention in others...is that your intention?

Originally posted by yishmael

I guess I don't understand the point of all this repetition. I don't consider us (LDS) to be Christians, though I understand you do.....


In case you forgot..... atheists do not consider themselves to be Christians.  However the Latter-day Saints do.  But since you identify yourself as an atheist.....I guess that you think..... that you and I have something in common.  Well....we don't.

From the very beginning, it has always been "Mormon doctrine" to teach of Christ and his doctrine....as Nephi who lived in 600bc states plainly:


Book of Mormon | 2 Nephi 25:23 - 26
23  For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.
24  And, notwithstanding we believe in Christ, we keep the law of Moses, and look forward with steadfastness unto Christ, until the law shall be fulfilled.
25  For, for this end was the law given; wherefore the law hath become dead unto us, and we are made alive in Christ because of our faith; yet we keep the law because of the commandments.
26  And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins.


Originally posted by yishmael

and it seems like your underlying message is that Christians should give Mormonism a try before wandering away to the mosque, temple or synagogue. Feel free to clarify or correct if I have misinterpreted.


If a person was truly a Christian (Believer in Christ) to begin with, they would continue to look to Christ as the central figure from whom a remission of sins is made possible (even when they didn't understand how these things were possible or understand what the attributes of God were).

But since you have identified yourself as an atheist who does not believe in Christ, and who does not claim to be a Christian....you are not of the LDS belief as stated above.


 


Edited by Janet Waters - 30 April 2008 at 8:33pm
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
yishmael  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member
Avatar
Chairman Meow
Religion: Atheist(Atheist)
Posts: 309
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 April 2008 at 8:36pm
Janet,

I'm sorry if I caused offense. None was intended. I simply asked you to clarify and expand on your article, which was nothing more than a repeat of an earlier article you wrote.

I remember being very young and being taught that I was not a Christian, I was a Mormon. Calling oneself a Christian was close to being a taboo.

I remember the very day (it was during sacrament meeting, sometime in the early 1980s) that it was announced that we were allofasudden "Christians". Quinn suggested at one point that this change was due to a desire to join various ecumenical movements, which were only open to Christian and Jewish groups. Calling ourselves Christians allowed us to apply for membership, apparently.

Janet sez:
I don't have a "contention."  I said what I said.  If a Christian had a problem with the trinity theory....there are other Christian Churches who don't teach that theory.  Plain and simple...you sure do like trying to incite contention in others...is that your intention?

My intention is simply to seek clarification. A casual reading of basic Mormon doctrine suggests that "all other creeds are abominations in His (G-d's) sight". I'm a little bit confused as to the hierarchy of abominations that you've innovated all of a sudden. From my own Mormon perspective, if a Latter-Day Saint wandered away, it wouldn't matter too much if he became an Episcopalian, a Muslim, a Scientologist or a Satanist. An abomination is an abomination.

My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right that I might know which to join." It continues to say that, "I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong and the personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were abominations in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt..."
Joseph Smith History 1:18-19


If that doctrine has changed recently, I'd consider it great news, as I don't think that we should be so judgmental. I would like a source for the change, if you've got one...

Best,

Yishmael
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Janet Waters  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Location: United States
Religion: Christian(Mormon)
Posts: 3617
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 April 2008 at 9:30pm
Originally posted by yishmael

I remember being very young and being taught that I was not a Christian, I was a Mormon. Calling oneself a Christian was close to being a taboo.


Since when???  Where in the heck are all these people who taught you all these contrary things?  Surely it was the way you perceived and interpreted their comments. 

From comments that you have made to me, in the past, you state one thing, and then you turn around and say the opposite thing.  I have questioned your interpretations as being contradictory and yet you don't seem to see any contradiction.  You would start out by saying that you were confused and when I agreed with you....you were offended and would say that I was the confused one.  There seems to be a pattern here.  Or are you just pulling my leg again?  Either way....we aren't going to play this game again.


Originally posted by yishmael

I remember the very day (it was during sacrament meeting, sometime in the early 1980s) that it was announced that we were allofasudden "Christians". Quinn suggested at one point that this change was due to a desire to join various ecumenical movements, which were only open to Christian and Jewish groups. Calling ourselves Christians allowed us to apply for membership, apparently.


You would have been 10 at the time, well I was older than you....and nothing of the sort "all of a sudden" took place.  If anything, you received a correction to what you thought was doctrinal, whether or not others were also confused with this as well.  Not to worry, that is how we learn, when we misunderstand something and then hear it again we have the chance to reconstruct what we thought was the case.  Hence the need for repetition!!


Originally posted by yishmael

My intention is simply to seek clarification.


Hense my repetition....stating something in a different way...because someone previously misunderstood my earlier comment.....thus to make sure there was no misunderstanding.  That individual thought I was trying to make a statement that I was not.  Just like you have done in the past.

Originally posted by yishmael

A casual reading of basic Mormon doctrine suggests that "all other creeds are abominations in His (G-d's) sight". I'm a little bit confused as to the hierarchy of abominations that you've innovated all of a sudden. From my own Mormon perspective, if a Latter-Day Saint wandered away, it wouldn't matter too much if he became an Episcopalian, a Muslim, a Scientologist or a Satanist. An abomination is an abomination.


I've innovated all of a sudden? 
Yea right.  More like the things that you thought were correct...aren't.  So when was I suppose to have talked about a "hierarchy of abominations?"  Obviously you aren't talking just to one person here.....because you are attributing things to me that I "supposedly" discussed with you.

Concerning "the creeds"....The question here is what exactly is a "creed" which is considered an abomination to the Lord.

creed  
  1. A formal statement of religious belief; a confession of faith.
  2. A system of belief, principles, or opinions: laws banning discrimination on the basis of race or creed; an architectural creed that demanded simple lines.

So in other words.....a creed is a belief/faith that one espouses.  To have faith in something that is not true....is an abomination to the Lord.  For true faith is believing in the "unseen" which is true.

Originally posted by yishmael

Joseph Smith History 1:18-19
My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right that I might know which to join." It continues to say that, "I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong and the personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were abominations in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt..."
If that doctrine has changed recently, I'd consider it great news, as I don't think that we should be so judgmental. I would like a source for the change, if you've got one...


If we go on to quote the whole statement we will find the answer....

Pearl of Great Price | JS-History 1:19
.....that those professors were all corrupt; that: "they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof."

To restate:  Why were the professors of Joseph's day all corrupt?  "Because they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me!"  That they teach their own commandments and play them off as Doctrines of God. 

Now we must ask why are they saying what they are saying when they don't believe in their own words?   Whose glory are they seeking?  For what purpose?








Edited by Janet Waters - 30 April 2008 at 9:38pm
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
yishmael  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member
Avatar
Chairman Meow
Religion: Atheist(Atheist)
Posts: 309
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 April 2008 at 10:03pm
Janet,

This response from you is typical. I asked a simple question: Upon what do you base the belief that Christians should join the Mormon church rather than investigating Islam.

This question is simple, easy to understand, relevant to both your (multiply repeated) contribution and to the original article.

It does not require an incomprehensible, multicolored word-salad, full of thinly veiled insults, ego-projection and non sequitur. It requires a simple answer. I simply want to know where your contention originates, not your life story, and not your endless attempts to personalize things.

Thanks in advance for answering my original question...whenever you're ready.

Yishmael
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Janet Waters  
Mureed
Mureed
Avatar
Location: United States
Religion: Christian(Mormon)
Posts: 3617
Forum Rating: 0
bullet Posted: 30 April 2008 at 10:31pm
Originally posted by yishmael

Janet, This response from you is typical. I asked a simple question: Upon what do you base the belief that Christians should join the Mormon church rather than investigating Islam.


Did I state to join the LDS Church?  You know there are other churches than mine....who don't teach the trinity theory as well. 

Originally posted by yishmael

This question is simple, easy to understand, relevant to both your (multiply repeated) contribution and to the original article.
Here you go again.....................................

Originally posted by yishmael

It does not require an incomprehensible, multicolored word-salad, full of thinly veiled insults, ego-projection and non sequitur. It requires a simple answer. I simply want to know where your contention originates, not your life story, and not your endless attempts to personalize things.  Thanks in advance for answering my original question...whenever you're ready.


Like I stated before....I do not have a "contention" and I am not the one who is "contentious" here. 

Are you now trying to transfer you "personalizing things" about your "life stories" to me and my experience?  Especially when I have not even stated anything that could be considered my "life story."   

I think that the other personality is coming out!  Watch-out here we go again!!!  It is a good time to log out while you cool off a bit.  Good night.







Edited by Janet Waters - 30 April 2008 at 10:33pm
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 9 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums version 8.03
Copyright ©2001-2006 Web Wiz Guide
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed by members of the Whyislam Forum do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of the Whyislam Team, or any of its subsidiaries, or parent organizations.