Inklings and Islam is there a connection?

Bree wrote:

> Working back towards topic, suppose someone claims that he worships a God
> who appeared to most Narnians as a Lion, to the Dawn Treader people as a
> Lamb, to Orual as the Mountain God, and to others as a man in Jerusalem.

Not really relevant to the argument at hand - he's just using the Tashlan
argument. However, Muslims claim to be following the same tradition,
beginning with Abraham and going right through to Jesus. To then say that
Allah is not the same as the Christian God just doesn't make any sense.
--
derek
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection? 

On Apr 24, 8:53?pm, "John W. Kennedy" <jwke... RemoveThis @attglobal.net> wrote:
> darylg... RemoveThis @aol.com wrote:
> > On Apr 16, 2:00?pm, Steve Hayes <hayesm... RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> The so-called Apostle's Creed is exclusively Western. It is the
> so-called Nicene Creed (actually the Niceo-Constantinopolitan) that is
> more or less universal, apart from the "Filioque" controversy.

I would use both and would even lean toward adding the Athanasian
Creed, given a broad meaning to references to the Church. Whether
they are "Western" or not notwithstanding, you then know you are at
least sharing something of a common concept when you speak of God.
Despite the protestations and assertions it seems no one is willing to
address the question of how much those concepts can vary and still be
about the same God. I don't really care who has been considered
Christians and who claims to worship the same God, if their natures
are different, if their actions and directives are inconsistent, if
their basic relationship with us is grossly at odds, it astounds me
that anyone would claim they are identical.

Daryl
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection? 

On Apr 26, 7:22�am, "AJA" <ahnem....DeleteThis@optonline.net> wrote:
> <darylg....DeleteThis@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1177375870.074684.261800@b58g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>  There are existential differences
> between a God that became a man and one that was solely divine, so
> again I would ask, how are they the same God?
>
> Daryl
>
> Maybe different people, not a different God.
> I've heard it said, wisely I think, that if God had strictly defined God for
> all in the world to see and accept at once, would one continue to seek God?
>
> Blessings,
> Ann

Ah Annie, must you always be my tutor? Yet I know you have heard Him
whispering His peace through the breezes in the trees, can you imagine
Him shouting the dischord and condemnation claimed in His name? Still
the same God? Not the one I know. I can understand pictures of Him
might vary, since I am humbled at trying to grasp His majesty, I would
never claim to be able to define Him. But hasn't he revealed something
of Himself to us? If God is Love than what is not Love is not God.
When the perfect and imperfect comprimise the perfect always loses,
how far would you allow someone to depart from the One you know and
love, before you called them home? Some perhaps, but I suspect not
overmuch.

Daryl
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection? 

<darylgene.RemoveThis@aol.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:1177837640.333220.294910@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...

[snip]

> I would use both and would even lean toward adding the Athanasian
> Creed, given a broad meaning to references to the Church. Whether
> they are "Western" or not notwithstanding, you then know you are at
> least sharing something of a common concept when you speak of God.
> Despite the protestations and assertions it seems no one is willing to
> address the question of how much those concepts can vary and still be
> about the same God. I don't really care who has been considered
> Christians and who claims to worship the same God, if their natures
> are different, if their actions and directives are inconsistent, if
> their basic relationship with us is grossly at odds, it astounds me
> that anyone would claim they are identical.

No one claims that they are identical. However, even those western
Christians who regard Monophysites, Nestorians and so on as heretical don't
deny that they are Christians.

Öjevind
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection? 

On Apr 29, 4:43�pm, "AJA" <ahnem....TakeThisOut@optonline.net> wrote:
> <darylg....TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1177839397.079523.72810@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> how far would you allow someone to depart from the One you know and
> love, before you called them home? Some perhaps, but I suspect not
> overmuch.
>
> Daryl
>
> I pray about it.  Gently attempt to describe my relationship with the triune
> God.  But, can we ourselves call anyone home?  God is Love.  I can say what
> that means to me and attempt to demonstrate it in my life, however
> imperfectly.
> But God will call whomever God will, home.
> So very good to read you again, Daryl.  I've missed abcsl friends!
>
> Blessings,
> Ann

Of course you are right, God would have to do the calling, but you
know where home is Ann. You know where to turn when you need to. I
cannot be certain, I only know my own story, but I really suspect God
never stops calling us there.

Daryl
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection? 

<darylgene RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote in message
news:1177839397.079523.72810@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
how far would you allow someone to depart from the One you know and
love, before you called them home? Some perhaps, but I suspect not
overmuch.

Daryl

I pray about it. Gently attempt to describe my relationship with the triune
God. But, can we ourselves call anyone home? God is Love. I can say what
that means to me and attempt to demonstrate it in my life, however
imperfectly.
But God will call whomever God will, home.
So very good to read you again, Daryl. I've missed abcsl friends!

Blessings,
Ann
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection? 

Larry Swain (theswain@operamail.com) wrote:

> You should have. Nowhere in this discussion so far has anyone
> intimated that a Hindu is a Christian; the point has been that
> Daryl's definition of who is a Christian as in Christian religion
> is far too narrow and would automatically exclude a number of
> recognized Christian bodies. Whether an animist, Hindu, Taoist or
> Buddhist is a Christian or not was introduced by Darryl in an
> effort to win debating points rather than engage the actual data
> under discussion. So it doesn't go to the heart of anything.

Larry, it was not introduced in an effort to win debating points. It
was introduced in an effort to clarify where the line is and why. You
and others made the claim that Muslims claim to worship the God who
appeared to Abraham, so obviously they worship the same God as the
Christians. Is that a fair characterization?

--
Bill Baldwin
http://bettercovenant.wordpress.com/
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection? 

Larry Swain wrote:
> Bill Baldwin wrote:
>> Larry Swain (theswain@operamail.com) wrote:
>>> darylgene.TakeThisOut@aol.com wrote:

<snip>

>>>> BTW if that is how I DEFINE being a Christian then perforce they
>>>> are the same. If you define it differently, perhaps for you they
>>>> are not
>>>
>>> Is this what you call logic?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Responding with abuse isn't what I call logic.
>
> Asking a question is abuse? I think you are far too sensitive.

I was about to say the same thing!
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection? 

Christopher Kreuzer (spamgard@blueyonder.co.uk) wrote:
> Larry Swain wrote:
>> Bill Baldwin wrote:
>>> Larry Swain (theswain@operamail.com) wrote:
>>>> darylgene DeleteThis @aol.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>>>> BTW if that is how I DEFINE being a Christian then perforce
>>>>> they are the same. If you define it differently, perhaps for
>>>>> you they are not
>>>>
>>>> Is this what you call logic?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Responding with abuse isn't what I call logic.
>>
>> Asking a question is abuse? I think you are far too sensitive.
>
> I was about to say the same thing!
>
>

That's a curious response. I wasn't taking offense. I was just
saying that kind of tactic is pointless. Larry's clearly not asking
for a discussion of what constitutes logic. He's just belittling his
conversation partner without even offering a rebuttal. Do you think
the response is helpful in promoting understanding?

--
Bill Baldwin
http://bettercovenant.wordpress.com/
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection? 

Bill Baldwin wrote:
> Christopher Kreuzer (spamgard@blueyonder.co.uk) wrote:
>> Larry Swain wrote:
>>> Bill Baldwin wrote:
>>>> Larry Swain (theswain@operamail.com) wrote:
>>>>> darylgene.DeleteThis@aol.com wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>>> BTW if that is how I DEFINE being a Christian then perforce
>>>>>> they are the same. If you define it differently, perhaps for
>>>>>> you they are not
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this what you call logic?
>>>>
>>>> Responding with abuse isn't what I call logic.
>>>
>>> Asking a question is abuse? I think you are far too sensitive.
>>
>> I was about to say the same thing!
>
> That's a curious response. I wasn't taking offense. I was just
> saying that kind of tactic is pointless. Larry's clearly not asking
> for a discussion of what constitutes logic. He's just belittling his
> conversation partner without even offering a rebuttal. Do you think
> the response is helpful in promoting understanding?

Just for the record, despite saying in the other thread that I wasn't going
to carry on this thread, I agree that this sort of reponse is unhelpful. On
the other hand, I still think your response that characterised Larry's
response as "abuse" was over the top.

His statement "Is that what you call logic?" could have been genuine, but
the key point is that though the natural assumption is that he is "saying"
it in a disparaging way, the same kind of assumptions apply to your
response: "Responding with abuse isn't what I call logic". A natural
assumption is that you have taken offence, even though you later clarify
that you hadn't taken offence. Regardless, it looks like there is a lot more
meaning behind the words than you both were letting on, and without voice
intonation and body language, judging what you were both really saying is
hard.

Christopher
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection? 

On Wed, 02 May 2007 12:40:29 -0400, John W. Kennedy
<jwkenne.RemoveThis@attglobal.net> wrote:

> I am not sure about Bush's religion at all; he might fall into the same
> category as Robertson, or (according to some rumors) it might be all an
> act to fool the proles.

I doubt Bush has the brains to form any coherent belief of any sort. He's
too stupid to be evil.

--
Tolkien's written work is characterized by disputes over the ownership of
jewelry, and the hand injuries that occur as a result.
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection? 

Christopher Kreuzer (spamgard@blueyonder.co.uk) wrote:

> Bill Baldwin wrote:
>> Christopher Kreuzer (spamgard@blueyonder.co.uk) wrote:
>>> Larry Swain wrote:
>>>> Bill Baldwin wrote:
>>>>> Larry Swain (theswain@operamail.com) wrote:
>>>>>> darylgene DeleteThis @aol.com wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>>>> BTW if that is how I DEFINE being a Christian then perforce
>>>>>>> they are the same. If you define it differently, perhaps for
>>>>>>> you they are not
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this what you call logic?
>>>>>
>>>>> Responding with abuse isn't what I call logic.
>>>>
>>>> Asking a question is abuse? I think you are far too sensitive.
>>>
>>> I was about to say the same thing!
>>
>> That's a curious response. I wasn't taking offense. I was just
>> saying that kind of tactic is pointless. Larry's clearly not
>> asking for a discussion of what constitutes logic. He's just
>> belittling his conversation partner without even offering a
>> rebuttal. Do you think the response is helpful in promoting
>> understanding?
>
> Just for the record, despite saying in the other thread that I
> wasn't going to carry on this thread, I agree that this sort of
> reponse is unhelpful. On the other hand, I still think your
> response that characterised Larry's response as "abuse" was over
> the top.
>

Fair enough. Judging by the responses, "abuse" didn't convey what I
intended. My feelings on the subject weren't that strong.

--
Bill Baldwin
http://bettercovenant.wordpress.com/
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection? 

William Cloud Hicklin wrote:
> On Wed, 02 May 2007 12:40:29 -0400, John W. Kennedy
> <jwkenne.RemoveThis@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> I am not sure about Bush's religion at all; he might fall into the
>> same category as Robertson, or (according to some rumors) it might
>> be all an act to fool the proles.
>
> I doubt Bush has the brains to form any coherent belief of any sort. He's
> too stupid to be evil.

There, there. Calm down. Your biases are showing. Have you ever met the guy?
Anyone can choke on a pretzel, you know?
 >> Stay informed about: Inklings and Islam is there a connection?