Allah's Creation of Earth Is Incorrect

Originally posted by dystoniac
That is a fairy tale thought up by a man who married a nine year-old girl.

No. Allah is the "God" in the Old Testament. So is Jehovah. Yaweh. He is also in the Torah. And in Al Quran. It seems you do not quite understand what monotheism is. Organized religions are just different traditions from different cultural contexts. The 'One God' is constant, and one in the same.

Originally posted by Jigtie
If you're seriously asking:

There's no middle man in the minds of Christians who believe in the
godhead, or trinity if you will. Unlike in Islam, Jesus is considered more
than merely a prophet to believers in the trinity. Jesus is the Son-part
of: Father, Son and the Holy Spectre. He is part of it, and yet all of it is
one and the same. I'm not exa ...[text shortened]... at part of
the "good" Lord Itself; the part that died in an earthly sense for our sins.

does this mean that God sacrificed a part of himself on the cross knowing full well he would be resurrected?
At one point Jesus cries out that God has forsaken him so he can't have a full understanding of what is going on in God's head all the time. So he is not privvy to God's plans.

Originally posted by FMF
Sounds prosaically convoluted. Makes a mockery of the whole idea of an omniscient being. God may perhaps have created the universe but this mumbo jumbo has got human fingerprints all over it. I find it a complete barrier to spiritual curiosity.

Hey, what do I know? Perhaps it's the only way God could reveal Itself to
mankind without us losing our minds. Perhaps, it's got "human fingerprints"
all over it, for we would not understand anything else. Then again, perhaps
it's just a load of crock. Who really knows, eh?

Originally posted by dystoniac
That is a fairy tale thought up by a man who married a nine year-old girl. God is also called Jehova.,

The fact remains, that Islam and Christianity both spring from Judaism,
and hence they have three more or less different ideas about the same
God. You can deny it all you want. It doesn't change facts, you know.

Originally posted by PawnChop
does this mean that God sacrificed a part of himself on the cross knowing full well he would be resurrected?
At one point Jesus cries out that God has forsaken him so he can't have a full understanding of what is going on in God's head all the time. So he is not privvy to God's plans.

You'd have to ask someone with more insight into the matter, but from
what I can tell: when Jesus was in the flesh he shared our weaknesses and
flaws, yet he was fully aware that he would have to suffer the pain of
mortal life and eventual agonies of death in order to be saved by Itself in
the end. It was all for us, because apparently God needed to suffer for us
so that It could then forgive us for our sins. Who knows? Maybe this was
God's way of gaining insight into just what it means to be human? But also,
maybe Bosse has it right when he suspect Jesus may have been a lunatic.
Maybe God Itself is just a lunatic. It certainly would explain a lot,
wouldn't it?

Originally posted by Scriabin
Perfect opportunity for me to ask a question that has rather bothered me, but not too much or too often:

If God is the Father, the creator of the universe, the omniscient, etc. why do Christians worship Jesus, as the Son of God, as "The Lord?"

Why isn't God the Father, the one and only Creator, the one whose name is invoked, the one to whom one prays, the one in whom one has faith? Why is there a middleman in there?

I will give it a try🙂

Firstly, this idea is ancient -just think about other so called "Sons", like ie Dionysus/ Backchus and Osiris; the concept of the "Son" is a symbol for the Enlightenment. And Enlightement is actually the change of the way of thinking of the Human (a different thinking process/ mode) to a higher level of consiousness.
If the Human is unable to connect this new level of consiousness with her/ his everyday consiousness as we understand it, ie with the consiousness that we use for our chores and for our everyday life, the Human remains with a painful memory of a sudden glimpse, of a perfect, sudden Awareness for a quite short period of time. And it is a short period because the "enlightened" Human cannot see thanks to the Enlightement itself but thanks to her/ his new level of understanding, otherwise s/he merely goes back to the point s/he were before this glimpse; therefore, if s/he has not the necessary abstract ideas/ concepts/ back up that can interact with the momentary enlightenment, her/ his mind all of a sudden just drives blind again as it was before the "en;lightenment"; and then immediately, as this glimpse of Awareness disappears, the light gives its place to the darkness/ ignorance. In that case there is not any change of the mode of the mind and the Human remains trapped in her/ his everyday consiousness. However I cannot comment further for the nature of the Enlightenment.

Now, the main idea is that the Enlightement (that the Human needs it badly in order to "be saved"😉 derives solely thanks to "God", however the Human is unable to see/ understand/ communicate with "God"; therefore, there is "nobody" to whom s/he can "pray". S/He can be in touch with "God" solely through the "Son".
The Christians believe that the Human can "see" the "Father" solely through "His" glance ("His Son"😉. Therefore, the concept of the "Son" raises the pantheistic worship of the Nature and makes the supernatural "Father" conceivable to the consciousness of the Human; this is the key behind the phrase "Whoever sees me, sees the Father", but it seems to me that there much more levels of understanding than the one offered by the Christians 😵