Sometimes it's helpful in trying to understand an issue to be able to view a dialogue about it between those who are coming at the issue from many perspectives. Below is a blog "conversation" between the American Bedu blog, Dr. Daniel Janosik and several other readers. It's in reference to his work originally posted on this blog "Is the Allah of Islam the same as Yahweh of Christianity?".
Jerry M, on May 14, 2012 at 7:20 am said:
Janosik is using the kind of argument that shows a willingness to be ignorant. Yes, the idea of God in Christianity is different than the idea of God in Islam but there is no denying the Christianity adopted the scriptures of Judaism and the Jewish idea of God is no more a trinity than the God of Islam.
Dr. Janosik, on May 14, 2012 at 5:38 pm said:
It is always interesting following comments on a blog issue that you write. It reveals that some people actually try to engage with the ideas, but it also, unfortunately, demonstrates that a lot of the responders have not even read the article but merely respond to the title. As I said, this is unfortunate, because this issue between Allah and Yahweh is of immense importance, if the Bible is true. If the New Testament is not true, then as one of responders alluded to, we should all “eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die.” However, if the Bible is true, then there are eternal consequences, whether you believe what it says or not. That is why I take these things seriously.
Without reproducing the whole introduction, let me comment on the following selection:
“But wait a minute, some will say. What about the Arabic Christians who call the God of the Bible “Allah”? Doesn’t this illustrate the fact that Allah and Yahweh are referring to the same God? Actually, when the Arabic Christians refer to “Allah” in their translation of the Bible, they believe that “Allah” is the father of Jesus and they believe that “Allah” is triune. Therefore, the Allah of the Arabic Christians cannot be the same Allah of the Muslims! This semantic [shibboleth] strangulation can be cleared up if we remember that words have both a denotative and a connotative meaning. Denotation refers to a dictionary definition, so it would be correct to say that Yahweh and Allah both refer to the concept of God, especially for their respective language groups. However, the connotation is determined by what a person conceives about the object of that word. For example, an Arab Christian may still use the word “Allah” to denote God, but his understanding of that term would be starkly different from a Muslim, for the Christian would recognize that Jesus Christ is God (Allah) whereas the Muslim would never consider that connotation. Thus, denotatively the word “allah” merely refers to “god, deity, etc.” However, we understand the denotative use by our connotative presuppositions. Therefore, “Allah” for the Muslim cannot be reconciled with the “Jesus is Allah” of the Arabic Christians. There is still a world of difference between the content of the word (connotation), even if the denotation is the same. Without this very important distinction made when we refer to “Allah” and “God” (Yahweh), a lot of Christians will be confused.
After comparing the Allah of the Qur’an and the Yahweh of the Bible, it should be apparent that they could not be referring to the same God. Either the Muslim Allah is the true God or the Christian Yahweh is the true God, or neither is true. As the Law of non-Contradiction teaches, they both cannot be true. One thing should be sure, though, the God of Muhammad cannot be the Father of Jesus.”
In brief, then, while “Allah” in a denotative sense can refer to the God of the Bible, in a connotative sense you cannot make the “Allah” of the Qur’an out to be the same “Yahweh” of the Bible, for, as I said above, the God (Allah) of Muhammad cannot be the Father of Jesus.
Also, Jerry seems to want to understand how the Trinity fits together in the Old Testament as well as the New Testament. If you are really interested, here is a link to a lecture that I did titled “How to Explain the Trinity to a Muslim.” (
).
Aafke-Art, on May 15, 2012 at 12:54 am said:
Dr Janosik you said *because this issue between Allah and Yahweh is of immense importance, if the Bible is true. If the New Testament is not true……*
You forget that the Abrahamic faiths are not the only option, there are lots of other option, lots of other religions, older and more recent with just as much validity (or invalidity) as the Abrahamic God of War. Nor does a non-religious stance equal some sort of orgiastic anarchy.
On the contrary, reality in our current time shows that the less religion in a country, the more civilized, advanced, prosperous, educated, and happy the people are. (especially women)
Dr. Janosik, on May 15, 2012 at 1:19 am said:
Aafke-Art,
If there is only one true God, then there is only one true religion. Unfortunately there are a lot of examples of degeneration and corruption that have brought about the many forms that we have today. If you are interested in this topic, then you may want to listen to my lecture on the Origin of Religion found here:
As far as your last statement is concerned, “On the contrary, reality in our current time shows that the less religion in a country, the more civilized, advanced, prosperous, educated, and happy the people are. (especially women),”
if you study a bit of history you will find that the best, and the worst, societies are the ones based on following religious views. However, the truly intelligent person will realize that religion is mostly about man searching for God. I am most interested in the God who has found me, and loved me so much that he has died for my sins so that I can enjoy the richest of all lives for eternity. No religion can provide that — only a relationship!
Aafke-Art, on May 15, 2012 at 1:54 am said:
*If there is only one true God*
But why should there be only one? There could be many, a great number of humans have in history and today many do believe there are lots of Gods. And this faith in God or Gods and Goddesses is believe without evidence.
More and more people start to think rationally, evaluate the myths and the (non) evidence for invisible all powerful beings and come to the conclusion that there are no gods at all.
If you study the state of countries today you will find that the more religious, and the less secular, the more humanitarian abuse, the less educated, the less (if at all) inventions and discoveries, the more wars, religious murder, the more misogyny and abuse of women and children, and the less happy the people living in those countries are.
You will have to deal with the fact that what history teaches us is that religion is not good, not moral, and causes stagnation of human development.
Dr. Janosik, on May 15, 2012 at 3:00 am said:
Aafke-Art,
If there is an infinite, omnipotent, omniscient God, then logically there can only be one. Man in his limited understanding creates many gods, with himself as the final god, and therefore no god at all. It is better to stick with the real God, who has revealed Himself to us and died for us so that we can know Him and worship Him as the true God. Otherwise, men believe in anything and nothing.
If you are really interested in this topic and you want to look at some evidence rather than just words (without evidence), please listen to my lecture on the Origin of Religion found here:
American Bedu, on May 15, 2012 at 3:17 am said:
I think one of the biggest areas of challenge and confusion is that Christians believe Jesus is the son of God or even God himself and Muslims only recognize Jesus as a Prophet. Therefore it creates confusion on whether Muslims and Christians at least worship the same God.
Christians believe that one must accept Jesus as their Savior in order to enter heaven whereas Muslims do not. Many Christians believe that anyone who has not accepted Jesus as their Savior will not gain entry to heaven regardless of how pious.
Dr. Janosik: What do you say/think, please?
Dr. Janosik, on May 15, 2012 at 3:38 am said:
American Bedu (Carol),
This is an excellent question!
I think the best way to approach an answer is for us to first realize that if the Bible is correct in its assessment of man, then we are all sinners (i.e., we have all rejected the one true God) and deserve separation from God for eternity. This is why we cannot accuse God of being unfair, for if he were fair then we would get what we deserve — eternal separation. It also short circuits the arguments of those who say that God is unjust for sending people to hell if they have never heard of Christ, for God does not send people to hell for not believing in Christ, but rather people are eternally separated from God because they are sinners (and they have chosen rebellion instead of salvation).
This is why it is so important to see the centrality of Christ in this whole dilemma. The Bible tells us that Jesus Christ came in order to restore us to a proper relationship with God. He is the only one who could do that because our rebellion put us in a situation that only God could pay for our sins against Himself. This would be impossible for God to accomplish unless He also became man and took on our sins (our rebellion against Him) and died for those sins. Thus, the only one who could accomplish this is the God/man Jesus Christ, God the Son, the Second person of the Trinity. No man-made god could reconcile us to God or take on our sins. That is why I believe that Jesus Christ is the only one who can save us from eternal separation from God.
American Bedu, on May 15, 2012 at 3:53 am said:
Thank you for your response, Dr. Janosik. But what does your answer mean then in regards to Muslims? I’m sure I am not alone when I say that I know many pious, pure and beautiful Muslims (my late husband among them) and could not fathom them (and him) anywhere but heaven (Jannah).
Dr. Janosik, on May 15, 2012 at 4:07 am said:
I understand. This is the hardest part about answering your question. As a Christian I am bound to the revelation given to me in the Bible. It is sufficient for salvation; but we also need to remember that God exists on many dimensions above our three-dimensional world and our limited understanding (“My ways are not your ways, says the LORD”). I also know that God promises to reveal Himself to any who desire to know Him. He often begins this process through nature and the world around us (see Romans 1 in the Bible) and then leads us to specific revelation about Himself. I have heard of many Muslims who have come to Christ through dreams and visions of Christ coming to them and revealing himself to them. Perhaps Christ came to your husband in this way before he died. I do know that Christ also said that he came to save the ones he was sent to save and that he would not lose any of them (John 18:9).
American Bedu, on May 15, 2012 at 4:41 am said:
Thank you, Dr. Janosik.
Aafke-Art, on May 16, 2012 at 1:08 am said:
The problem with Jesus being the son of God is that he wasn’t, and that bit of doctrine was introduced hundreds of years after he died after a vote . A small majority voted to have Jesus as the ”son of God” from then on.
And now all Christians believe Jesus is the son of God, before that became doctrine many Christians did not believe so. And if the vote had gone the other way none of the Christians today would believe jesus is the son of God. This is literally religion in the making. Religion and who’s god and who isn’t is decided by the ruling clergy.
The same goes for Islam, actually islam shows even clearer how mohammed changed his mind and his politics as he got more power. Not to mention that although all men were allowed only 4 wives he of course was allowed many more. (besides his slaves)
Why is it not clear to everybody that these are made up stories?
I’ve said it before, all religious people can see quite clear why all other different religions are wrong, except the one they are in, that is the one where they wear the blinders and don’t see how silly it really is.
The real difference between A-theists and religionists is that A-theists do not wear blinders. Most A-theists become A-theists because they have really, actually read the magic books, and studied religions. The more you learn about any religion, and where it came from, and who constructed it, the more chance you will become an A-theist.
Dr. Janosik, on May 16, 2012 at 2:57 am said:
Aafke-Art,
It is unfortunate that you believe that the council of Nicea in 325 AD was the origin of the doctrine of the deity of Christ. I guess Dan Brown's influence is more prevalent than we think! Actually, if you read the history of the first three centuries of Christianity, and especially through the primary sources of the early Church Fathers, you would understand clearly that the deity of Christ was never in doubt from the time that he walked the earth through our present time. Part of my doctoral dissertation was tracing the development of the understanding of the Trinity from the first century AD through the eighth century. One thing I came to realize is that I should never say anything concerning historical matters unless I have actually read the history from the people who lived during that time. When you do that you will better understand why the Dan Browns of this world may have their 15 seconds, but then they will fade away into obscurity. On the other hand, one of the reasons that one-third of the world's population still believes that Jesus Christ is God the Son is because the evidence is overwhelming, especially when you consider something like the resurrection of Jesus. Even scholars who are not Christian will attest to these five facts from history: 1) Jesus died by crucifixion, 2) Jesus' disciples believed that he rose and appeared to them, 3) The church persecutor Paul was suddenly changed, 4) the skeptic James, brother of Jesus, was suddenly changed, and 5) the tomb was empty. Gary Habermas, one of the world's experts in this area, states that these "minimal facts" "are so strongly attested historically that even the majority of nonbelieving scholars accept them as facts." (The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus, 75). So, when you want to speak historically, go back to the earliest sources and make sure that you deal with the facts. (15 seconds really isn't that much time).