IslamiCity.org Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Religion - Islam > Interfaith Dialogue
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Open for debate
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Open for debate

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
Author
Message
Al Masihi View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2018
Status: Offline
Points: 113
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Masihi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 April 2018 at 11:47pm
In Jeremiah 50:6, God calls Israel His people and “lost sheep.” The Messiah, spoken of throughout the Old Testament, was seen as the one who would gather these “lost sheep” (Ezekiel 34:23-24Micah 5:4-5). When Jesus presented Himself as a shepherd to Israel, He was claiming to be the fulfillment of Messianic prophecy (Mark 6:3414:27John 10:11-16; see also Hebrews 13:201 Peter 5:4; and Revelation 7:17).

Jesus’ words show an awareness of Israel’s place in God’s plan of salvation. God revealed through Moses that the children of Israel were “a holy people to the LORD . . . chosen . . . a special treasure above all the peoples on the face of the earth” (Deuteronomy 7:6). It was through the Jews that God issued His Law, preserved His Word, and sent His Son. This is why, elsewhere, Jesus tells a Samaritan that “salvation is of the Jews” (John 4:22). In Matthew 15, when the Jewish Messiah says that He was sent to “the house of Israel,” He is simply connecting His presence with God’s purpose in Old Testament history. Christ was “born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law” (Galatians 4:4-5).
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Al Masihi View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2018
Status: Offline
Points: 113
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Masihi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 April 2018 at 11:50pm
Originally posted by Niblo Niblo wrote:

Originally posted by Al Masihi Al Masihi wrote:

....


Thank you for your courteous reply.

You write: ‘Let's examine the trinity which says that the one God exists in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

The Council of Basel (1431-45 A.D.) decreed: ‘First, then, the holy Roman church, founded on the words of our Lord and Saviour, firmly believes, professes and preaches one true God, almighty, immutable and eternal, Father, Son and Holy Spirit; one in essence, three in persons……………… These three persons are one God not three gods, because there is one substance of the three, one essence, one nature, one Godhead, one immensity, one eternity……. Therefore it condemns, reproves, anathematizes and declares to be outside the body of Christ, which is the church, whoever holds opposing or contrary views. Hence it condemns Sabellius, who confused the persons and altogether removed their real distinction. It condemns the Arians, the Eunomians and the Macedonians who say that only the Father is true God and place the Son and the holy Spirit in the order of creatures. It also condemns any others who make degrees or inequalities in the Trinity.’ (Session 114).

The Church teaches that within the Godhead the Father is entirely within the Son and entirely within the Holy Spirit; that the Son is entirely within the Father and entirely within the Holy Spirit; and that the Holy Spirit is entirely within the Father and entirely within the Son. In other words, the three Persons form a single unity, indivisible and permanent. They are not three persons standing side by side, so to speak.

The Church teaches that God does not have a body. He is spirit: ‘Every corporeal thing, being extended, is compound and has parts. But God is not compound: therefore He is not anything corporeal.   With this demonstrated truth divine authority also agrees. For it is said: God is a spirit (John 4:24): To the King of ages, immortal, invisible, only God (1 Tim. 1:17): The invisible things of God are understood and discerned by the things that are made (Rom. 1:29).’ (St Thomas Aquinas: Summa Contra Gentiles - Chapter 20).

And here we have a problem, for the Church also teaches – as you know – that the Second Person of the Trinity became flesh; that is, became the very body of Christ. It also teaches that this ‘incarnation’ is for all eternity. If this is true, then the following declarations of Basle can only be false:

That the ‘Father, Son and Holy Spirit (are) one in essence…one of substance’. How can they be, if one of the three is forever incarnate as a human body?

That the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are ‘one immensity’. How can they be if one of the three is finite (no one is suggesting that Yeshua’s body is infinite).

And what do we make of this particular teaching: (That) God is not compound: therefore He is not anything corporeal.’?     

If God is not anything corporeal, then the incarnation did not take place. If the incarnation took place – and is forever – then God is a compound.

Mike Robinson (a Christian apologist) writes: ‘Jesus as the Son of Man and the Son of God has two natures found in one person……The Bible reveals the dual nature of Christ and humanity’s salvation demands that be the case. It’s a mystery, but a mystery that in selected ways not only makes sense, but is necessary for redemption. Jesus, in the incarnation, did not lose His divinity. He did not lose His authority or His deity. He voluntarily came to the earth as a human baby to live perfectly as He fulfilled the Law…..He took on our humanity in order to die in our place….’ (‘How Jesus Became God In The Flesh: The Proper Exaltation Of A Prophet From Nazareth: Bart Ehrman Refuted’).

Consider ‘Doctrine A’: Christ has two natures….one human…one divine. It is quite clear that you and Mike are in agreement with this.

And here’s ‘Doctrine B’: Christ is ‘consubstantial with us as regards his humanity; like us in all respects except for sin…’(Council of Basel: Session 13).

The 4th Lateran Council and the First Vatican Council taught that man consists of two essential parts - a material body and a spiritual soul (Denzinger 428, 1783). In short, man has but one nature (I know of no Christian doctrine that teaches otherwise).

A moment’s thought will reveal that ‘Doctrine A’ and ‘Doctrine B’ are mutually exclusive; by which I mean that if one is true then the other can’t be.

If Christ has two natures (one human and one divine) then he cannot possibly be ‘like us in ALL RESPECTS (except for sin)’.

If, on the other hand, he - like the rest of humanity - has only one nature, then he cannot possibly be God.    

Trinitarians simply cannot have it all ways.

Robinson tells us that the incarnation is: ‘…..a mystery, but a mystery that in selected ways not only makes sense, but is necessary for redemption.’

My one comment is that the doctrine of the incarnation makes absolutely no sense at all; no matter how many ways (selected or not) one looks at it.

Robinson quotes J.I. Packer: ‘The divine Son became a Jew; the Almighty appeared on earth as a helpless human baby, unable to do more than lie and stare and wriggle and make noises, needed to be fed and changed and taught to talk like any other child... The more you think about it, the more staggering it gets.’ (‘How Jesus Became God In The Flesh: The Proper Exaltation Of A Prophet From Nazareth: Bart Ehrman Refuted’).

Staggering indeed (but not in the way that Packer means!).

Perhaps it is time to move on.

You write: ‘Jesus is still both God and man, divine and human, at the same time.’

Please explain how this is possible.
Again I don't see how the councils are contradictory, esus Christ, took on a human nature, yet remained fully God at the same time. Jesus always had been God (John 8:5810:30), but at the incarnation Jesus became a human being (John 1:14). The addition of the human nature to the divine nature is Jesus, the God-man. This is the hypostatic union, Jesus Christ, one Person, fully God and fully man.

Jesus' two natures, human and divine, are inseparable. Jesus will forever be the God-man, fully God and fully human, two distinct natures in one Person. Jesus' humanity and divinity are not mixed, but are united without loss of separate identity. Jesus sometimes operated with the limitations of humanity (John 4:619:28) and other times in the power of His deity (John 11:43Matthew 14:18-21). In both, Jesus' actions were from His one Person. Jesus had two natures, but only one personality.

The doctrine of the hypostatic union is an attempt to explain how Jesus could be both God and man at the same time. It is ultimately, though, a doctrine we are incapable of fully understanding. It is impossible for us to fully understand how God works. We, as human beings with finite minds, should not expect to totally comprehend an infinite God. Jesus is God’s Son in that He was conceived by the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:35). But that does not mean Jesus did not exist before He was conceived. Jesus has always existed (John 8:5810:30). When Jesus was conceived, He became a human being in addition to being God (John 1:114).

Jesus is both God and man. Jesus has always been God, but He did not become a human being until He was conceived in Mary. Jesus became a human being in order to identify with us in our struggles (Hebrews 2:17) and, more importantly, so that He could die on the cross to pay the penalty for our sins (Philippians 2:5-11). In summary, the hypostatic union teaches that Jesus is both fully human and fully divine, that there is no mixture or dilution of either nature, and that He is one united Person, forever. 

The Triune God of the Bible has existed and reigned from all eternity, and the second Person of the Trinity, the Son, took on human flesh at a particular point in time (Luke 1:35Hebrews 1:5). God the Son added a sinless human nature to His eternally existent divine nature. The result was the Incarnation. God the Son became a man (John 1:114). Hebrews 2:17 gives the reason that Jesus had to be both God and man: “He had to be made like them, fully human in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people.” The Son of God took on human flesh to provide redemption to those under the law (Galatians 4:4–5).

At no time did Jesus ever cease to be God. Although He was made fully human, there was never a point when He abrogated His divine nature (see Luke 6:58). It is equally true that, after becoming incarnate, the Son has never ceased to be human. As the apostle Paul wrote, “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5, emphasis added). Jesus is not half-human and half-divine. Rather, He is Theanthropos, the God-man. The Lord Jesus Christ is one eternally divine Person who will forever possess two distinct yet inseparable natures: one divine and one human.

Back to Top
2Acts View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 22 March 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 109
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 2Acts Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 April 2018 at 12:16am
Originally posted by asep garut asep garut wrote:

Hi 2Acts, thank you for your reply.
You said:
“Your quotes from the Quran are interesting but I am not sure why you are quoting them as I do not believe in the Quran.”

Islamic teachings do not force people to become Muslims as in His word:

“There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path.” (2:256)

Therefore, anyone who does not believe in the Qur'an, will not be forced to believe.

“..Say: “Are those who know equal to those who know not ?” It is only men of understanding who will remember (i.e. get a lesson from Allah’s verses) – (39:9)

You said: “If you compare the modern Quran with the oldest manuscript you can see it is not accurate.”

The differences between the modern Quran and the oldest manuscript are only in the provision of a reading sign only, while the composition of the letters, verses and surah are the same.

It is made to make it easier for people to read it, whether it is read "Kasrah", "Fathah", or "Dhamah", etc. And if we have already known about the ordinance of writing and reading, it will know the purpose of every verse in the Qur'an.

You said: “What proof do you have the Jews changed Gods message? Can you prove it ? and why should I trust Allah id he cannot be trusted to preserve his message by allowing Jews to change the message ? “

 

With the existence of two statements in the Bible, as below:

1.    "Jesus answered," I am sent only to the lost sheep of the people of Israel. " (Mathew 15:24)

2.     “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations”  (Mathew 28:19)

 

Doesn't that already show any difference?

 

While in the Qur'an there is a statement of God as follows:

 “Do you (faithful believers) covet that they will believe in your religion in spite of the fact that a party of them (Jewish rabbis) used to hear the Word of Allah (the Torah), then they used to change it knowingly after they understood it ?“ (2:75)

 

And God is strongly opposed to those who make a lie to Allah by His word:

“Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and they say, “This is from Allah,” to purchase with it a little price! Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for that they earn thereby.” (2:79)

Hello Asep Garut

Thankyou for your reply. The oldest Quran found in Sanaa Yemen in the 1970s showed that the differences were a lot more thn just reading differences. Also Uthman destroyed all the original copies because of differences.

Regarding  Jesus saying, “I am sent only to the lost sheep of the people of Israel. " (Mathew 15:24)  and  “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations”  (Mathew 28:19) this is not a contradiction if you read them in context.


Back to Top
asep garut View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 November 2017
Location: Indonesia
Status: Offline
Points: 224
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote asep garut Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 May 2018 at 4:41pm
Originally posted by 2Acts 2Acts wrote:

Originally posted by asep garut asep garut wrote:

Hi 2Acts, thank you for your reply.
You said:
“Your quotes from the Quran are interesting but I am not sure why you are quoting them as I do not believe in the Quran.”

Islamic teachings do not force people to become Muslims as in His word:

“There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path.” (2:256)

Therefore, anyone who does not believe in the Qur'an, will not be forced to believe.

“..Say: “Are those who know equal to those who know not ?” It is only men of understanding who will remember (i.e. get a lesson from Allah’s verses) – (39:9)

You said: “If you compare the modern Quran with the oldest manuscript you can see it is not accurate.”

The differences between the modern Quran and the oldest manuscript are only in the provision of a reading sign only, while the composition of the letters, verses and surah are the same.

It is made to make it easier for people to read it, whether it is read "Kasrah", "Fathah", or "Dhamah", etc. And if we have already known about the ordinance of writing and reading, it will know the purpose of every verse in the Qur'an.

You said: “What proof do you have the Jews changed Gods message? Can you prove it ? and why should I trust Allah id he cannot be trusted to preserve his message by allowing Jews to change the message ? “

 

With the existence of two statements in the Bible, as below:

1.    "Jesus answered," I am sent only to the lost sheep of the people of Israel. " (Mathew 15:24)

2.     “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations”  (Mathew 28:19)

 

Doesn't that already show any difference?

 

While in the Qur'an there is a statement of God as follows:

 “Do you (faithful believers) covet that they will believe in your religion in spite of the fact that a party of them (Jewish rabbis) used to hear the Word of Allah (the Torah), then they used to change it knowingly after they understood it ?“ (2:75)

 

And God is strongly opposed to those who make a lie to Allah by His word:

“Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and they say, “This is from Allah,” to purchase with it a little price! Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for that they earn thereby.” (2:79)

Hello Asep Garut

Thankyou for your reply. The oldest Quran found in Sanaa Yemen in the 1970s showed that the differences were a lot more thn just reading differences. Also Uthman destroyed all the original copies because of differences.

Regarding  Jesus saying, “I am sent only to the lost sheep of the people of Israel. " (Mathew 15:24)  and  “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations”  (Mathew 28:19) this is not a contradiction if you read them in context.


Hi 2Acts,

I would not be surprised if anyone says that has been found the oldest Qur'an etc. because at the time of the Prophet Muhammad also there was a claiming a Prophet for example a man named Abhalah bin Ka'ab bin Ghauts Al Kadzdzab alias Al Aswadi Al Ansi, he came from Yemen, he claimed to be a prophet and spoke in the name of God, he has made the word - false words, and finally the false words vanished from the surface of the earth (61: 8)

I have faith that the original Qur'an will be preserved because God Himself speaks in His word (15: 9), while the false Qur'an will disappear from the earth's surface (17:81)

I chose the Qur'an to be believed because the original revelation language still exists that is Arabic, for example every Qur'an is always written in two languages ​​ie Arabic and translation into each country's language. And for me, thing that can determine that the Qur'an is original or fake is by checking each composition of the original revelation of the letters.

Back to Top
Niblo View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 01 September 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 16
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Niblo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 May 2018 at 12:27am
Originally posted by Al Masihi Al Masihi wrote:

..............


Sorry for the delayed reply.

The question is: How can Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) be both ‘wholly man’ and ‘wholly God’ at one and the same time?

Help me out with a little experiment:

Make a fist with your right hand. Now open that same hand as wide as you can. Repeat this process half a dozen times; and see if you can identify the principal ingredient that makes this process possible.

The principal ingredient is time. The process can happen only because each action occupies its own niche in time.

Sticking with your right hand, try making a fist and an open palm at the same time.

Can’t be done.

Welcome to the ‘law of non-contradiction’. This law states that a thing cannot be ‘A’ (in this case your fist) and ‘not-A’ (in this case your open palm) at one and the same time.

James N. Anderson and Greg Welty write:

‘(But) what exactly is the Law of Non-Contradiction about? What is its subject matter?   The simple answer here is that the Law of Non-Contradiction is a truth about truths. Specifically, it is the truth that no truth whatsoever can also be a falsehood….Anyone who insists that the Law of Non-Contradiction applies to truths about cars but not to truths about cats would rightly be considered confused.

‘In the standard terminology of possible worlds, we are observing here that the Law of Non-Contradiction is true not only in the actual world but also in every possible world. There is no possible world in which that logical law is false (or fails to be true in any other way).

‘The notion of non-contradiction lies at the core of our understanding of possibility.’ (‘The Lord of Non-Contradiction: An Argument for God from Logic).

The Persian philosopher, Avicenna, said: ‘Anyone who denies the law of non-contradiction should be beaten and burned until he admits that to be beaten is not the same as not to be beaten, and to be burned is not the same as not to be burned.’ (Metaphysics, I.8; commenting on Aristotle).

How can Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) be both ‘wholly man’ and ‘wholly God’ at one and the same time?

He can’t. And here’s why:

If we define ‘man’ as a member of the species homo-sapiens, with various physical and mental limitations, then we distinguish ‘man’ from ‘God’. If Yeshua is ‘wholly man’ then he cannot possibly be wholly not-man (God, after all is not man) at one and the same time and in the same relationship to what defines a man. If we insist that he is indeed both ‘man’ and ‘God’ – and if we preserve the integrity of the definitions of these terms – then we make him a logical contradiction.

The thing about logical contradictions is that they are never true. They are always false, because the real world never satisfies both a statement and its negation at the same time, simply by the meaning of negation. To believe in a logical contradiction is to believe a lie.

By now you may be thinking: ‘but (surely) with God all things are possible!’ (Matthew 19:26).

What you should really be thinking is: ‘All things that are possible are possible with God.’

This is quite a different matter.

C.S. Lewis writes:

‘(God’s) Omnipotence means power to do all that is intrinsically possible, not to do the intrinsically impossible. You may attribute miracles to Him, but not nonsense. This is no limit to His power. If you choose to say "God can give a creature free will and at the same time withhold free will from it," you have not succeeded in saying anything about God.

‘Meaningless combinations of words do not suddenly acquire meaning simply because we prefix to them the two other words "God can."… It is no more possible for God than for the weakest of His creatures to carry out both of two mutually exclusive alternatives; not because His power meets an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God.’ (The Problem of Pain).

Read these words again, and very closely: ‘It is no more possible for God than for the weakest of His creatures to carry out both of two mutually exclusive alternatives; NOT BECAUSE HIS POWER MEETS AN OBSTACLE, BUT BECAUSE NONSENSE REMAINS NONSENSE EVEN WHEN WE TALK IT ABOUT GOD.’

When Lewis says that God cannot ‘carry out both of two mutually exclusive alternatives’ he is referring to the law of non-contradiction. He is saying that God cannot do what is logically impossible; and in this he is supported by St Thomas Aquinas, who writes that God cannot create a man who is, at the same time, a donkey; for in the statement that a man is a donkey ‘the predicate is altogether incompatible with the subject.’ (cf. Summa Theologica: Part 1; Question 25; Article 3).

Ludwig Ott writes: ‘To God's Infinite Reality of Being there corresponds an (intensively) Infinite Power. This extends over the whole sphere of real and possible being (extensively infinite).   As God's power is identical with God's Essence, it cannot imply anything which contradicts the Essence and the Attributes of God. Thus God CANNOT CHANGE, cannot lie, can make nothing that has happened not to have happened (contrary to the teaching of St. Peter Damian), CANNOT REALISE anything which is contradictory in itself 2 Tim. 2, 13: He cannot deny himself.’ (‘Fundamental of Catholic Dogma’; page 47 - emphasis is mine).

Note: God cannot realise (i.e. bring into being) that which is contradictory in itself; for example, a man who is, at the same time, a donkey; or a man who is, at the same time, God.

Aquinas writes: ‘Whatever implies contradiction does not come within the scope of divine omnipotence, because it cannot have the aspect of possibility.’ (Summa Theologica: Part 1; Question 25; Article 3).

This means that there are certain ‘intrinsically impossible’ things that even an omnipotent God cannot do.   He cannot be finite and at the same time infinite; absolutely immutable and at the same time changeable; omnipotent and at the same time powerless.

To believe in a logical contradiction is to believe a lie. The puzzle is: why do Trinitarians do just that…why do they (do you) not see that doctrines associated with the ‘incarnation’ contain contradictions:

God is pure spirit; is not a compound; is not anything corporeal……against: Through the act of incarnation God became - and remains - corporeal; a compound of spirit and flesh.      

God is immutable……against: God became a man.

The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are ‘one immensity’…….against: One of the three is finite.

Yeshua is fully God; against….Yeshua is fully man.

Yeshua is a man like us in every respect……against….Yeshua has two natures, in one divine person.

Why do Trinitarians accept such nonsense? The answer lies in George Orwell’s concept of ‘doublethink’:

‘(Doublethink is) the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies…. and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.’ (‘Nineteen Eighty-Four; part 2, chapter 9, page 220).

The doctrine of the incarnation is a lie that owes its very existence to ‘doublethink’. No matter how hard the Trinitarians push it; no matter how often they repeat it; a lie remains a lie.

'Sometimes, silence is the best answer for a fool.' (Alī ibn Abī Tālib‎)
Back to Top
DavidC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 September 2001
Status: Offline
Points: 2398
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DavidC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 May 2018 at 4:20am
Niblo, No one can understand God or the ways of God, and there is nothing God cannot do. I believe this is accepted in Islam as well as Christianity. Human arguments simply will not stand.

Christian; Wesleyan M.Div.
Back to Top
Niblo View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 01 September 2016
Status: Offline
Points: 16
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Niblo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 May 2018 at 5:28am
Originally posted by DavidC DavidC wrote:

......there is nothing God cannot do. I believe this is accepted in Islam as well as Christianity. Human arguments simply will not stand.


Hello David.

Consider this verse:

‘It is Allāh who created seven heavens and a similar (number) of earths. His command descends throughout them. So you should realize that He has power over all things and that His knowledge encompasses everything.’ (Al-Talaq)

What follows is taken (verbatim) from the site ‘Islam Question and Answer’ - as part of a response to Question 87677: “An atheist saying “Can Allaah create a god like Himself?”.

It is worth mentioning that this site represents the ‘puritan’ wing of Islam. Its folk are by no means wishy-washy ‘moderates’ like me! Here you are:

‘That which is impossible does not exist, because it cannot exist, so it is nothing, even if the mind can imagine it. It is known that the mind can assume and imagine the impossible, the mind can imagine two opposites, such as something existing and not existing, at the same time.

‘The verse states that Allaah has power over “things” but that does not include things that are inherently impossible, because they are not things, rather they do not exist and they cannot be brought into existence.

‘Hence more than one of the scholars have stated that the power of Allaah has to do with that which is possible, for the reason that we have mentioned, which is that that which is non-existent and impossible is not a “thing”.

‘Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: As for Ahl al-Sunnah, in their view Allaah, may He be exalted, has power over all things, and everything that is possible is included in that. As for that which is inherently impossible, such as a thing both existing and being non-existent, there is no reality in it and its existence cannot be imagined, so it cannot be called a “thing” according to the consensus of the wise. This includes the idea of creating another like Himself, and so on. End quote from Manhaaj al-Sunnah (2/294).

‘Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Shifa’ al-‘Aleel (p. 374): Because that which is impossible is not a “thing”, so His Power has nothing to do with it. Allaah has power over all things and no possible thing is beyond His power. End quote.

‘And Allaah knows best.’

Very best regards.

PS: If 'Human arguments simply will not stand' they why are you here...arguing?
'Sometimes, silence is the best answer for a fool.' (Alī ibn Abī Tālib‎)
Back to Top
Al Masihi View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2018
Status: Offline
Points: 113
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Masihi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 May 2018 at 6:59am
That is simply a misunderstanding and misapplication of the Principle of Non-Contradiction. The Principle states that nothing can both be and not be at the same time in the same respect. The Hypostatic Union in no way violates this because the Hypostatic Union describes the reality that Christ has two natures (Human and Divine) united in one personhood. If we were to say that Christ’s human nature was His Divine nature or his divine nature was His human nature then that would run afoul of non-contradiction. But we don’t say that. Since there are two natures there is no contradiction. Christ is indeed God by virtue of possessing a Divine Nature and He is man by virtue of possessing a human nature. Thus when we say of Christ “that is a man” and we say of Christ “that is a Divine Being” we are not violating the principle of non-contradiction because He is not both man and divine in the same respect.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.