Can you have two religions and be faithful to both?

There are a number of different passages that explain things different ways. Which one is best I think depends on where you’re starting from. How much do you know about Christianity and the Bible? The parable in John 10, a portion of which I quoted above, is one, but it may not be one of the most readily understandable ones.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John 10;&version=31;

 

and even more different in the concept of resurrection.

 

From what I read in it it seems to talk about some of the corruptions of Christianity of the day but not to refute any of the core beliefs of Christianity. The reference to the Trinity is to deny that there is more than one God. The Trinity as originally defined states that the three are one, of course, but there were some groups of the day that believe they were separate, as do Mormons today. There are a number of references in book 5 in particular that seem to relate to some of the corruptions and Gnostic moments of the day.

005.075
YUSUFALI: Christ the son of Mary was no more than a messenger; many were the messengers that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat their (daily) food. See how Allah doth make His signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth!
PICKTHAL: The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) had passed away before him. And his mother was a saintly woman. And they both used to eat (earthly) food. See how We make the revelations clear for them, and see how they are turned away!
SHAKIR: The Messiah, son of Marium is but a messenger; messengers before him have indeed passed away; and his mother was a truthful woman; they both used to eat food. See how We make the communications clear to them, then behold, how they are turned away.

This says that Jesus was no more than a messenger, but it says that in relation to a comment about him eating food. Christians of course believe that he was a man who ate food, but there was a splinter group at about that time, the name of which escapes me, that believed that Jesus was pure spirit and did not eat, so this seems to be referring to that specific belief. There are actually a number of passages in the Qur'an which I think quite strongly confirm the Bible and the core Christian beliefs.

 

One disclaimer is that I don't claim to be Christian, but the Gospels do verify this. Here's the passages I had in mind. While they could be considered metaphorical, there are points where He says it explicitly to reinforce His parables.

John Chapter 6 verse 35

Spoiler

35Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. 36But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. 37All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. 38For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. 40For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."

The passage Grizzled mentioned about the "gate".

Spoiler

7Therefore Jesus said again, "I tell you the truth, I am the gate for the sheep. 8All who ever came before me were thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. 9I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved.[a] He will come in and go

I haven't read all of the Bible, but I liked reading the Gospels and their accounts of Jesus more than the later chapters. It makes it very interesting to see how Churches have fared in light of Jesus' very high standards.

If anything, people who are anti-organized religion should read the Gospels and in particular, what Jesus spoke about against the Pharisees.

 

Docetism is the name of the belief that Jesus was not actually a man but only appeared to be a man.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05070c.htm

 

I disagree with you because I don't think any Muslims truly understand Christianity; they are after all believers and supporters of their own faith.

I also disagree that there is a such thing as more Christian than a Christian. Either you are Christian or you are not.

 

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."

John 14:6: "Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

I think it is reasonable for people to conduct their lives the best way they personally see fit, but I disagree with a person that would believe in his own beliefs or teachings and then call them the same as a different religion.

Can I call myself an Atheist if I believe in God then?

 

I think it's impossible to do so because they contradict one another.

 

Does he ever say that doing good is not enough ... that the only way is to actively accept him as the son of God or a "savior"? Perhaps when he says "I am the way", he's speaking metaphorically. If you live your life in accordance with his teachings, than you are in essence accepting him. In some relgions, the act of doing good deeds is itself a form of prayer/devotion to God. Does Christianity not work that way?

Well, that wouldn't make much sense. But I think what you call yourself, ultimately, shouldn't really matter. Maybe she defines Christianity and Islam in a certain way, and they become compatible. Certainly, there must be a lot of overlap between the two in terms of values and philosophy.

 

Actually, there is no "self" in Buddhist philosophy.

 

Here's a quote from Romans that I think may help:

No One is Righteous
9What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. 10As it is written:
"There is no one righteous, not even one;
11there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
12All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one."[c]
13"Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit."[d]
"The poison of vipers is on their lips."[e]
14"Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness."[f]
15"Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16ruin and misery mark their ways,
17and the way of peace they do not know."[g]
18"There is no fear of God before their eyes."[h]

19Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. 20Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.

Righteousness Through Faith
21But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

27Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. 28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. 29Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. 31Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans 3;&version=31;

 

The concept of afterlife, or before life, while important to Buddhism isn't something that is necessarily essential to Buddhism. At the core of Buddhism is 4 Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path. Those in themselves have nothing to do with the reincarnation or cycle of rebirth. They are overlaid onto the older Vedic belief of reincarnation to offer an escape from that cycle to Nirvana which is also a Vedic belief.

You could take the Four Noble Truths and Eightfold Paths apart from the cycle of karma follow those while still following a Judeo-Christian or other religious tradition and there would be no contradiction. While you might not be a Buddhist in the Mahayana sense you would still be a Buddhist in the practical sense.

 

I would think that it would be very difficult to subscribe to two different faiths and be faithful to both. Each faith is very likely to be incompatible in some respect. Therefore, as to that facet, it is impossible to be faithful to both.

 

I understand where you're coming from. Because many underlying principles in most religions deal with being a moral person. But just because you live a life following similar principles doesn't make you part of that religion.

For example, I'm agnostic/atheist. But I feel I follow a lot of the principles presented in Christianity, Buddhism and even Taoism to a certain extent. I've even visited temples to help gather my thoughts. I've asked for advice from both preachers, Buddhist monks, and taoist priests.

Yet in the end, I'm still not religious. It's just that much of religion is just part of living. And what they teach applies to normal life even beyond the religion itself.

But despite the overlap there are still very definitive boundaries which makes us a practitioner of one religion or another.

 

^ I think you have to differentiate the practice of Buddhism from the religion of Buddhism particularly what is considered Mahayana Buddhism. The practice of Buddhism, the Four Noble Truths and Eightfold Path aren't just about being a moral person but about a worldview. They are philosophical but they aren't theistic in any sense that pertains to a deity. A religion like Christianity is all about the deity and by definition is faith in that deity. You could accept the worldview of the Four Noble Truths and Eightfold Path while also having faith in Jesus Christ.

To say that there are definitive boundaries from a theistic point of view yes there are and if you take Buddhism of the theistic variety then you couldn't be a Buddhist Christian since you would be violating the First Commandment. Buddhism though in general is both a practical philosophy as much as it is a religion and I'm not enough of a Buddhist sectarian or puritan to say that you have to accept both to qualify as a Buddhist.

 

I talk about morality because that tends to be the common aspect of all religions and general way of living. I realize that there's more to any religion than moral values.

I disagree. I can see how it's possible that Christianity does not interfere with Buddhism to a certain extent. As someone has pointed out, Jesus would be a great bodhisattva. And indeed his life and his teachings can be indeed consdered such.

But the reverse cannot be true. So many views of Buddhists on how to live and how to achieve enlightenment would be quite blasphemous from a Christian standpoint. The very important fact that you look within rather than to God for enlightenment. And that anyone can indeed achieve enlightenment is quite wrong.

Quite simply, one asks a supreme being to guide a person to the right path, the other asks the person himself to do so.

 

Christians are considered to be closest to Muslims (According to Islam).

I'm not sure where in the Quraan those things were mentioned. But I speak in general in telling you that trinity is polytheism according to Islam.

The Holy Spirit exists in Islam. The "Father" reffered to in the Bible is Allah in Islam. Jesus PBUH is a messenger of Allah. Therefore saying that all 3 are one God is not compatible with Islam, since they are defined seperately as three seperate entities.

 

There is no Christian I know who would argue with the notion that God is anything but ONE. Jesus made that very clear..."hear O Israel, the Lord your God is one."

From the view of a Christian, I think this is a GROSS misunderstanding of the concept of the trinity...and is comparable to being told what we believe by someone else...or having it defined by someone else. I'm sure you can understand how frustrating and potentially offensive that could be. We believe it to be manifestations of God, typically. 3 manifestations of ONE God. Not three separate gods. Being told I believe otherwise is....funny.

It's interesting to me, because the Koran includes a whole lotta WE in the early chapters discussing creation. WE created. "(Consider) that We created you out of dust".- 22:5 So its seems to me that clearly the concept of a God so big that he could be described as being plural in and of himself isn't entirely foreign to Islam.

The Koran suggests that we, as Christians, worship Mary as a god. Even in traditions of Christianity where she is revered, she is not god.

I'm with you that the Koran says that Christians are most like Muslims. But then later it rains down curses on Christians in 9:30 for believing Jesus to be God's Son.

One part I've never understood, as well, that I'm sure you can help with. Muslims believe in the virgin birth of Jesus....so if God did not beget Jesus...who did in Islamic tradition??

Thanks for helping me with this...and for the great discussion!

 

Grizzled,

Before all else, it's my duty to note that a translation of the Quraan is not the Quraan. It will have faults by nature and it can never be used as a substitute. It is important for both of us (and anyone else reading) to always have this in mind.

It is important to distinguish what the Quraan says regarding Jesus PBUH and what Christianity says regarding Jesus PBUH. From this point onwards in my post, unless I state otherwise, I'm speaking from the Islamic perspective. I am not saying what should and shouldn't be and I don't mean to offend. I am just providing some factual data regarding the beliefs of a Muslim towards Christianity.

There is technically no such thing as Christianity in the Quraan. A common phrase is that "Jesus has never heard the word Christian or its equivalent" and as far as I know that is true (correct me if I'm wrong). The Bible as you read it is also not Jesus PBUH's message. It is considered to be what remains of his message.

There is Jesus PBUH, a messenger of Allah, and his message. Somehow, his message was altered and through that his status was altered.

The significance of this is that, where the Qura'an refers to the followers of Christ, it is not reffering to the word "Christian" as you know it today. Where the Qura'an is reffering to Christ, it is obviously not reffering to Christ as you know him today. Where the Quraan refers to the message of Christ, it is not the message of Christ as you know it today.

I just wanted to make this clear because it is dangerous to reference the Quraan with the Bible. The definitions of the same things are different.

In Islam, Jesus PBUH is a Muslim. His message was submission to God and peace. That is the definition of the word Islam btw. Like several hundred people before him, he carried the message of Allah. However, these messages were not stamped with the word "Islam" as it was Allah's plan to give us religion in phases and complete it with the Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

Through these definitions, a Muslim can admire Jesus PBUH for everything that a Muslim knows he did. For everything a Muslim knows he said, etc, etc.. So, if according to Islamic definition, he is not God, then we are fully able to teach his message and learn his message (as the woman in this article wants to do). It is he who will come back to save us, not the Prophet Muhammad PBUH. He is one of Allah's chosen ones. As long as what we teach and learn about him is compatible with what Islam has told us about him, then you are fully within your boundaries as a Muslim.

I hope that was clear and not offensive. I apologize in advance if anyone is offended and please let me know if you are or if I should alter anything.

 

you are hugely respectful and the conversation is much appreciated! no offense taken at all. please hold me to the same standard you are holding yourself to.

we have to be able to disagree on these issues. at the end of the day, my understanding of the nature of God is such that he loves you IMMENSELY, whether you and I agree or not. and that He's created you in his very own image. none of that is affected by what you agree with me on.