[InvertedLayman]

(Original post by Indian_Princess)
you'd rather be an Atheist than worship the God that Muslims believe in i.e. the God that Christians believe in? wow, really shows the weak faith of Christians these days..

Some. Christians. I'm sure many devout Christians do worship God in better light.

[i_hate_ucas]

it depends on the individual within the faith. Exclusivists believe that their religion is the only true religion and all others are wrong therefore no they arent the same god, inclusivists believe that their religion is the best while others have elements of truth so others are worshipping different gods but it is in fact just the one, and pluralists believe that all religions are simply different means to the same end

[.eXe]

(Original post by Indian_Princess)
you'd rather be an Atheist than worship the God that Muslims believe in i.e. the God that Christians believe in? wow, really shows the weak faith of Christians these days..

Maybe take a second to read some of my subsequent posts where I have stated that muslims don't believe the same God that Christians do.

My entire stance is based off that first premise.

So your entire post is nonsense to me.

[Ps3SuperSRG]

YES.

they are all the same except for small differences in which profet they consider the messiah;jews still waiting!

This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my GT-I9100

[InvertedLayman]

(Original post by .eXe)
Maybe take a second to read some of my subsequent posts where I have stated that muslims don't believe the same God that Christians do.

My entire stance is based off that first premise.

So your entire post is nonsense to me.

We are referring to the "main" or "central" idea of God. Not any human representations.
Even if you believe a man to be part of the creator (God forbid), you still must believe in the main, central part of God. This is the same God that Muslims and Jews believe in with Christians.

You are correct though, Muslims and Jews do not believe in the trinity.
Are you satisfied?

[saberahmed786]

YES.

[PianoKeys4]

(Original post by InvertedLayman)
Wait so you don't understand why it is absurd to believe that a God lets himself "die for our sins"? What's next, you're going to say I'll never get it lest "the holy spirit" touches me?

I would say that it is beyond awe (rather than 'absurd') that God sent His only son to die for our sakes. But that is the strength of God's love- He is not only loving, but is love itself.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

If I was a king, and you killed two sheep from another mans farm, and I could either sacrifice myself in their place to "die for your sins", somehow filling a pleasure of said man, or give two sheep to that man and "forgive" you for your sins, which would I do?

No man can forgive someone else's sin 'on behalf' of another. God is able to forgive all sin, as sin (by definition) is against God: it's breaking His divine law and rebellion against Him.

The king in your analogy wouldn't be able to forgive the man's sins as they were not against him, and even if they were, his forgiveness wouldn't equal God's forgiveness. He could pay the man's penalty, thus allowing the man to avoid being punished by the laws of the land, but this not forgiveness (mercy, perhaps, but not forgiveness). As God is eternal, all sin is eternally against Him, which means that it requires eternal punishment. Only God can forgive what is eternal.

Also note that I gave life to myself somehow, and my "true" self is my father. I am both the son and father of myself. I am somehow going to officially kill myself. I am going to be able to kill myself even though I seem to have divine powers. And appently I killed myself to forgive you.

The Godhead is three distinct Persons, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, who are One God. The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is not the Father. Jesus is fully divine (which is why He was able to sacrifice Himself for the sake of humanity), but also fully human (which is why He was able to be crucified). Also, although it was within God's will for Him to be killed, Jesus didn't kill Himself- it was the Romans who killed Him and the Jewish people who wanted Him to be executed.

Jesus' death and resurrection achieved our salvation, which is an undeserved gift of God given through faith in Christ and repentance. His death doesn't mean that we are automatically forgiven (forgiveness must be sought), but that we can be delivered from eternal punishment (i.e. have salvation).

Oh wait apparently you are all sinners at birth.

It is misleading to say that we are 'sinners at birth', as when many people say 'sinner' they mean 'someone who sins'. Though we are not born sinning, we are born with a sinful nature, inherited from Adam. We are not sinners because we sin, but we sin because we are sinners.

Yall peeps lucky some guy killed himself for your sins apparently, dayum otherwise he wouldn't have told himself to forgive you. The deity that created you had to feel pain as himself/son/self(oh crap this paradox is weird) to forgive you.

Jesus didn't have to 'feel pain' (as you put it) to forgive us. He had to die on the cross and be resurrected so that we could be delivered from eternal punishment.

Not only that, the concept of "that guy is dead, I believe he is dead so I am now forgiven" is the stupidest fallacy that has ever came to this world.

This concept does seem stupid: because it is simply not true. No one is forgiven for believing that Christ died. You can't be living in and enjoying your sin and then say that you're forgiven because you believe that Jesus died. We are forgiven when we repent- when we recognise that we have sinned, seek forgiveness from God and turn away from our sin. We must also forgive others, as God will not forgive our sins if we refuse to forgive wrongs against us.

Actually nay, worshipping other than one God, the true God, is the stupidest fallacy to every come to the world.

You keep calling things out as fallacies, but I do not see how anything you've described is based on improper reasoning, especially as most (if not all) of what you've said is based on a completely false representation of Christianity.

Hey and I'm not propagating Islam or anything or even Judaism or any other form of monotheism. But if any religion is true, it sure aint Christianity.

What you've described cannot be called Christianity.

[InvertedLayman]

(Original post by PianoKeys4)
I would say that it is beyond awe (rather than 'absurd') that God sent His only son to die for our sakes. But that is the strength of God's love- He is not only loving, but is love itself. - You're dodging the fact that apparently he is his own son. He let himself die through his own will, you cannot back out of that unless you back out of your belief.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.



No man can forgive someone else's sin 'on behalf' of another. God is able to forgive all sin, as sin (by definition) is against God: it's breaking His divine law and rebellion against Him. - It's called an analogy because it's just that, an analogy. Not something to be taken into context of your Christian dogma. You were supposed to suppose that the king was a God figure.

The king in your analogy wouldn't be able to forgive the man's sins as they were not against him, and even if they were, his forgiveness wouldn't equal God's forgiveness. He could pay the man's penalty, thus allowing the man to avoid being punished by the laws of the land, but this not forgiveness (mercy, perhaps, but not forgiveness). As God is eternal, all sin is eternally against Him - what kind of crap, you people believe this?, which means that it requires eternal punishment. Only God can forgive what is eternal.



The Godhead is three distinct Persons, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit, who are One God. The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is not the Father. Jesus is fully divine (which is why He was able to sacrifice Himself for the sake of humanity), but also fully human (which is why He was able to be crucified). Also, although it was within God's will for Him to be killed, Jesus didn't kill Himself- it was the Romans who killed Him and the Jewish people who wanted Him to be executed. - In that case, Christianity is not a monotheistic religion. And Jesus cannot be the same God as God himself, he can only be another God. By that I mean he cannot be of the same "spirit" as God or the "Holy Ghost". He can only be as Greek "Gods" supposedly have subordinate "Gods"

Jesus' death and resurrection achieved our salvation - How exactly? Don't tell me the Holy Spirit will explain it.., which is an undeserved gift of God given through faith in Christ and repentance. His death doesn't mean that we are automatically forgiven (forgiveness must be sought), but that we can be delivered from eternal punishment (i.e. have salvation).



It is misleading to say that we are 'sinners at birth', as when many people say 'sinner' they mean 'someone who sins'. Though we are not born sinning, we are born with a sinful nature, inherited from Adam. We are not sinners because we sin, but we sin because we are sinners.



Jesus didn't have to 'feel pain' (as you put it) to forgive us. He had to die on the cross and be resurrected so that we could be delivered from eternal punishment. - If you can't justify what you just wrote here with completely logical explanation, you and your misconceptions of God are obviously a waste of time. Go on, try it. Because this doesn't make sense. Not because I don't "understand" it, it's because it is just stupid and can never make sense. Some things that I don't believe in do make sense but I just don't believe in them. This thing doesn't make sense so I will never believe in it. And no, the "Holy Spirit" touching your heart is not a viable explanation of why you believe this.



This concept does seem stupid: because it is simply not true. No one is forgiven for believing that Christ died. You can't be living in and enjoying your sin and then say that you're forgiven because you believe that Jesus died. We are forgiven when we repent- when we recognise that we have sinned, seek forgiveness from God and turn away from our sin. We must also forgive others, as God will not forgive our sins if we refuse to forgive wrongs against us.



You keep calling things out as fallacies, but I do not see how anything you've described is based on improper reasoning, especially as most (if not all) of what you've said is based on a completely false representation of Christianity.



What you've described cannot be called Christianity. -Obviously, it can.

Mark 10:17-18: "As he [Jesus] was setting out on a journey, a man ran up and knelt before him, and asked him, 'Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?' Jesus said to him, 'Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone."

Surat Al-Ikhlas: "Say (O Muhammad (SAW)): "He is Allâh, (the) One. (1) "Allâh-us-Samad (السيد الذي يصمد إليه في الحاجات) [Allâh the Self-Sufficient Master, Whom all creatures need, (He neither eats nor drinks)]. (2) "He begets not, nor was He begotten; (3) "And there is none co-equal or comparable unto Him." (4)"

[.eXe]

(Original post by InvertedLayman)
We are referring to the "main" or "central" idea of God. Not any human representations.
Even if you believe a man to be part of the creator (God forbid), you still must believe in the main, central part of God. This is the same God that Muslims and Jews believe in with Christians.

You are correct though, Muslims and Jews do not believe in the trinity.
Are you satisfied?

Well if you are talking about the "main idea" of God...then it can be argued that pretty much all theists believe in the same God.

But the fact of the matter is...we aren't "just" talking about a giant, inexplicable idea of GOD, but rather, unique representations of God specific to certain ideologies.

And considering the Holy Trinity is the God of Christianity, yes I am most satisfied.

[InvertedLayman]

(Original post by .eXe)
Well if you are talking about the "main idea" of God...then it can be argued that pretty much all theists believe in the same God.

But the fact of the matter is...we aren't "just" talking about a giant, inexplicable idea of GOD, but rather, unique representations of God specific to certain ideologies.

And considering the Holy Trinity is the God of Christianity, yes I am most satisfied.

Okay cool. I don't think we should argue harshly just because we disagree on each others beliefs as a whole. We should only be like that in the context of the discussion.

So yes if you are talking about the trinity then yes we believe in different Gods. But that's another reason why the Abraham religions are "religions" and not a religion: They are related in base principles but differ after that.

"then it can be argued that pretty much all theists believe in the same God." - I have to disagree there. Islam, Christianity and Judaism all claim relation to a common point. In comparison, Sikhism and even other religious "systems" such as Shinto quite clearly do not believe in the same God. You can all believe in a central God but if you do agree in any of his supposed scriptures or attributes with another group of religions I'd classify that as believing in a different God.

[.eXe]

(Original post by InvertedLayman)
Okay cool. I don't think we should argue harshly just because we disagree on each others beliefs as a whole. We should only be like that in the context of the discussion.

So yes if you are talking about the trinity then yes we believe in different Gods. But that's another reason why the Abraham religions are "religions" and not a religion: They are related in base principles but differ after that.

"then it can be argued that pretty much all theists believe in the same God." - I have to disagree there. Islam, Christianity and Judaism all claim relation to a common point. In comparison, Sikhism and even other religious "systems" such as Shinto quite clearly do not believe in the same God. You can all believe in a central God but if you do agree in any of his supposed scriptures or attributes with another group of religions I'd classify that as believing in a different God.

Well no I said "theists", not religious people. Many religions don't have a God (for example Buddhism) so I was referring to only theists rather than religions.

I can see your point somewhat and here is what I understand it to be.

Christians/Jews/Muslims all believe in the same God, but not necessarily in the same way. Jews may believe certain thing and reject others and it's the same for muslims and Christians. But you are of the opinion that the overall God is the same.

Here is where I take issue though and I'll try to explain it.

The reason I disagree with your argument is because the characterization of a deity is 100% dependent on what the relevant books says about them. Here I am only referring to the 3 beliefs concerned in this thread. If the Bible says x,y and z about God and the Torah says x,y and p, while the quran says a,b and y...how can it be argued that they are all talking about the same God?

Our belief is God is very restricted by what the books tell us of God. Therefore, if you believe in one book...then you ONLY believe in the God of that book. If another book mentions certain characteristics of God, which your book also happens to have...that doesn't automatically mean that both books are talking about the same God!

I can describe a cat as black with stripes. You can describe it as white with stripes. Just because we have "stripes" as a common element in our description does not mean we are talking about the same cat.

This is the point I am trying to make.

All 3 books refer to and describe a God in a specific way. But then there is a book (Quran) which rejects pretty much everything that is inherent to a Christian God. How then can we say that they are following the same God...based on a few stories that are common between the Quran and the Bible?

The thing is...the Quran came 700 years after the Bible and several more centuries after the Old Testament.

I don't see it a big deal that the Quran has many parallels to the Old and New Testaments. I am of the belief that it is a copied book but that's a different thread.

[PianoKeys4]

(Original post by InvertedLayman)
You're dodging the fact that apparently he is his own son. He let himself die through his own will, you cannot back out of that unless you back out of your belief.

I'm not dodging any fact. You said that it is absurd to think that God would die for our sins. I said that I think it is beyond awe and a testament to his overwhelming love for us.

The Father is not His own Son. He is a separate, distinguishable and individual Person of the Godhead. Yes, Christ allowed Himself to die on the cross, through His own will. Of course I can't back out of that, because that is part of my belief.

It's called an analogy because it's just that, an analogy. Not something to be taken into context of your Christian dogma. You were supposed to suppose that the king was a God figure.

If you're making an analogy to a Christian belief, then of course I have to look at it within the context of Christian teachings. What's the use in trying to make an analogy to the Christian teaching of forgiveness, if I can't say why it doesn or doesn't reflect it? (And do I know that analogies tend to have weaknesses.)

The way you described the king, I interpreted him as a human, not as a 'God figure'. Even then, it is God as described by Christian teaching (not just any god) who freely gives salvation through faith in Christ and repentance.

what kind of crap, you people believe this?

Of course I believe this. Sin is against God's will. It separates us from Him and it is rebellion against Him. As long as we live in sin, we are apart from God. We live in a finite world for a finite amount of time, so all sin can seem to end. However, God exists outside of time. He is infinite. Our sin against Him is infinite because He is infinite. Our sin against each other seems finite because we live in a finite world.

I understand that as we clearly do not have the same beliefs on this, you find this idea more than objectionable.

In that case, Christianity is not a monotheistic religion. And Jesus cannot be the same God as God himself, he can only be another God. By that I mean he cannot be of the same "spirit" as God or the "Holy Ghost". He can only be as Greek "Gods" supposedly have subordinate "Gods"

Jesus is the same God as the Father. I think that you see just the Father as being God, and Jesus and the Holy Spirit as being 'extras'. God is one Essence made of three Persons. He is not three gods. So of course Jesus is the same God as 'God Himself'- God is not just one part of the Trinity, but all three.

How exactly? Don't tell me the Holy Spirit will explain it..,

If you can't justify what you just wrote here with completely logical explanation, you and your misconceptions of God are obviously a waste of time. Go on, try it. Because this doesn't make sense. Not because I don't "understand" it, it's because it is just stupid and can never make sense. Some things that I don't believe in do make sense but I just don't believe in them. This thing doesn't make sense so I will never believe in it. And no, the "Holy Spirit" touching your heart is not a viable explanation of why you believe this.

To be fair, I wouldn't find 'the Holy Spirit will explain it' or 'the Holy Spirit touches your heart' as a very satisfying answer either.

Christ's blood was like a 'ransom' paid for our lives, by which we are delivered from sin and from its punishment. Sin deserves to be punished, so we deserved to punished for our sin. However, when Christ sacrificed His life, he paid this penalty and took the punishment of sin so that we wouldn't have to. This doesn't mean that we can automatically avoid punishment because of what Christ did on the cross. It means that we can chose to accept salvation and because Christ paid the penalty, we are forgiven and not punished. If you reject it, you not only refuse salvation, but you also refuse what Christ did and thus have to pay the penalty yourself.

If you want to read more on this, these are a good set of articles on salvation.

If you think I have misconceptions about God, I am genuinely interested in what you believe about God (if you believe in God).

If you want me to write a 'completely logical explanation', you'll have to specify what kind of thing you're looking for. Logic isn't necessarily black and white, and what one person deems as logical, another deems as completely irrational.

Obviously, it can.

What you wrote simply cannot be called Christianity. None of it accurately represented Christian beliefs.

[InvertedLayman]

(Original post by .eXe)
I am of the belief that it is a copied book but that's a different thread.

Well if you could kindly show me where Muhammad (Peace be upon him) read the Biblical cannon or even tell me when he learnt to read, that would be great.

[InvertedLayman]

(Original post by PianoKeys4)
I'm not dodging any fact. You said that it is absurd to think that God would die for our sins. I said that I think it is beyond awe and a testament to his overwhelming love for us. - So God loves us to much that he "dies" for our sins? Yes you are dodging the fact that it is impossible for God to be killed. If God can die, he is not God, he is just a powerful entity.

The Father is not His own Son. He is a separate, distinguishable and individual Person of the Godhead. Yes, Christ allowed Himself to die on the cross, through His own will. Of course I can't back out of that, because that is part of my belief. - Actually, the father is his own son in accord to Christian teachings. If you could leave your protective bubble for a minute and think of what we are discussing impartially, that would be nice. So once again, what I described is Christianity because you just confirmed that my comparison to Greek "Gods" is correct. He is either as I said it or the other way I said it, that is, His own son/father/son/father (paradox again..) or a separate entity with God powers.



If you're making an analogy to a Christian belief, then of course I have to look at it within the context of Christian teachings. What's the use in trying to make an analogy to the Christian teaching of forgiveness, if I can't say why it doesn or doesn't reflect it? (And do I know that analogies tend to have weaknesses.) - No, I was making an analogy on Christian teachings which lead to your belief. Please next time read my argument as discussing teachings that lead to your belief, if you get what I mean.

The way you described the king, I interpreted him as a human, not as a 'God figure'. Even then, it is God as described by Christian teaching (not just any god) who freely gives salvation through faith in Christ and repentance. - If Christians only said what you said here, then your belief would be more legitimate. God is the one who forgives? Sounds good. Belief in a Prophet? Sounds legit. Oh wait, you think that the Prophet is actually God manifest/son/father/spirit/son/spirit/father/son/spirit...



Of course I believe this. Sin is against God's will. It separates us from Him and it is rebellion against Him. As long as we live in sin, we are apart from God. We live in a finite world for a finite amount of time, so all sin can seem to end. However, God exists outside of time. He is infinite. - in·fi·nite/ˈinfənit/
Adjective:
Limitless or endless in space, extent, or size; impossible to measure or calculate: "an infinite number of stars".
Noun:
A space or quantity that is infinite.

Noun:
The action or fact of dying or being killed; the end of the life of a person or organism.
An instance of a person or an animal dying.

Please explain how death can be brought upon something that is infinite?
Our sin against Him is infinite because He is infinite. Our sin against each other seems finite because we live in a finite world. - No, you said it as if our sins somehow harm God. Just as you believe that somehow God can die.

I understand that as we clearly do not have the same beliefs on this, you find this idea more than objectionable.



Jesus is the same God as the Father. I think that you see just the Father as being God, and Jesus and the Holy Spirit as being 'extras'. God is one Essence made of three Persons. He is not three gods. So of course Jesus is the same God as 'God Himself'- God is not just one part of the Trinity, but all three. - No, I was scrutinisng what you see. You see him as all three at once, but then: "The Father is not His own Son. He is a separate, distinguishable and individual Person of the Godhead." If you do not accept how badly you have destroyed your won argument here, then I can see that your mind is truly too blank.



To be fair, I wouldn't find 'the Holy Spirit will explain it' or 'the Holy Spirit touches your heart' as a very satisfying answer either.

Christ's blood was like a 'ransom' paid for our lives, - So apparntly God ransoms himself to forgive us? Riiiight. by which we are delivered from sin and from its punishment. Sin deserves to be punished, so we deserved to punished for our sin. - Yes.. and? However, when Christ sacrificed His life, he paid this penalty and took the punishment of sin so that we wouldn't have to. - So God took his own punishment so we wouldn't have to? RIIIIGHT.. This doesn't mean that we can automatically avoid punishment because of what Christ did on the cross. - Okay so then why did God manifest have to let himself die in the first place? This is ignoring the fact that such an occurrence is impossible. It means that we can chose to accept salvation and because Christ paid the penalty, we are forgiven and not punished. If you reject it, you not only refuse salvation, but you also refuse what Christ did and thus have to pay the penalty yourself.

If you want to read more on this, these are a good set of articles on salvation.

If you think I have misconceptions about God, I am genuinely interested in what you believe about God (if you believe in God). - I believe that there is one God that is ever living, with no relations.

If you want me to write a 'completely logical explanation', you'll have to specify what kind of thing you're looking for. Logic isn't necessarily black and white, and what one person deems as logical, another deems as completely irrational. - Well trying again at refuting my commentaries onto your beliefs and claims would be nice.



What you wrote simply cannot be called Christianity. None of it accurately represented Christian beliefs. - It did, and you just confirmed it. I'm not someone who won't admit when something makes sense or is right, I even agreed that a couple of aspects of your belief that you have professed are legitimate. To this end, I encourage you to explain to me the things that you believe in response to me, and when you know you are wrong, to admit it.

Response^^.

"Allah the Almighty said:

‘O son of Adam, so long as you call upon Me and ask of Me, I shall forgive you for what you have done, and I shall not mind. O son of Adam, were your sins to reach the clouds of the sky and were you then to ask forgiveness of Me, I would forgive you. O son of Adam, were you to come to Me with sins nearly as great as the earth and were you then to face Me, ascribing no partner to Me, I would bring you forgiveness nearly as great as it.’"

If you read the two quotes from Holy Books from my last post it might be clearer what my beliefs are.

[Matthew12]

(Original post by Matthew12)
No religious Jews with the exception of the Karaites try to pronounce the Shem Ha Morpsheh(The Divine Name or the Tetragramaton( the four letters) rather religious Jews say Hashem in casual speech and Adonai in Tefillah (prayer)

Also Islam pretty much identifies Allah with the God Of Israel see( Q 29:46

This post ex.e i mean

[FatCharlie]

(Original post by M'Ling)
Well if it is the same God, somebody's worshipping Him wrongly.

If a religious person says all three can't worship the same God because of the different forms of worship, then they also say that the other two's Gods don't exist. They are, therefore, due to all being monotheistic, in danger of divine arrogance; they must give reasons for why their particular worship is more authentic, more true, than the other two.

Or all of them are doing it wrong or right. What if God is real and have given different people at different times indications on how God want's people to worship and they all got it a bit wrong. So God tried to correct it and people still got it wrong everytime, so God kind of gave up on correcting people?

[FatCharlie]

(Original post by .eXe)
Don't ask me gibberish before understanding what Christianity is.

There is no Jesus' God.

Jesus is God for Christians...as part of the Holy Trinity. Father/Son/Holy Spirit. All are the same thing.

Saying "Jesus' God" is an oxymoron.

Really? As far as I know and what I've been brought up with is that Jesus is not God, but the son of God - a part of God but not God. Jesus was but a man, but concived with divine help. I was also taught that Jesus was a Jew, following the Jewish God and teaching a version of those belifs.

Are you saying that my priests were wrong?

[M'Ling]

(Original post by FatCharlie)
Or all of them are doing it wrong or right. What if God is real and have given different people at different times indications on how God want's people to worship and they all got it a bit wrong. So God tried to correct it and people still got it wrong everytime, so God kind of gave up on correcting people?

Interesting, but I would question whether Jews believe in an afterlife. I'm not aware that the Old Testament mentions an afterlife, whereas Christians and Muslims, of course, do. So that would suggest, if God was evolutionary, that He invented the afterlife sometime between the end of the Old and New Testaments.
Also, would a God who 'gives up' on people be worth worshipping? I'm not sure, there are arguments for both sides

[FatCharlie]

(Original post by M'Ling)
Interesting, but I would question whether Jews believe in an afterlife. I'm not aware that the Old Testament mentions an afterlife, whereas Christians and Muslims, of course, do. So that would suggest, if God was evolutionary, that He invented the afterlife sometime between the end of the Old and New Testaments.
Also, would a God who 'gives up' on people be worth worshipping? I'm not sure, there are arguments for both sides

Yes, tha'll be a quite fundamental difference - the idea of an afterlife. Jews do believe that the soul is infinite, so it must go somewhere when the body has died?
Exodus Rabbah 15:7 states, for instance: "In the Messianic Age God will establish peace for the nations and they will sit at ease and eat in Gan Eden." This, I guess would possibly refer to an afterlife, but can just as well just be where all the righteous people where allowed to go after the Messiah comes. I haven't read as much about Judaism as Islam/Christianity sadly.

I agree. But perhaps God figured God had more important things to do for a while, than to send prophets and sons to us when we kept getting it wrong the whole time. Because if God is almighty and fully divine, I'm quite sure he got more than one world to look after and most likely there's moste creatures on this planet that needs taken after other than just the people.

[M'Ling]

(Original post by FatCharlie)
Yes, tha'll be a quite fundamental difference - the idea of an afterlife. Jews do believe that the soul is infinite, so it must go somewhere when the body has died?
Exodus Rabbah 15:7 states, for instance: "In the Messianic Age God will establish peace for the nations and they will sit at ease and eat in Gan Eden." This, I guess would possibly refer to an afterlife, but can just as well just be where all the righteous people where allowed to go after the Messiah comes. I haven't read as much about Judaism as Islam/Christianity sadly.

I agree. But perhaps God figured God had more important things to do for a while, than to send prophets and sons to us when we kept getting it wrong the whole time. Because if God is almighty and fully divine, I'm quite sure he got more than one world to look after and most likely there's moste creatures on this planet that needs taken after other than just the people.

I don't know much about Judaism, either, however I know there is such a stance in which one can define oneself as a 'secular Jew', so it's interesting. Interesting theory, and one which, without knowing whether organisms capable of religious understanding exist elsewhere in the universe, is unprovable. My own reaction would be to suggest that He, if God does exist, tolerates all His creations; He would understand Man's reasons for religious diversity, as well as understand why some people don't believe in Him.