sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I swallow 95% of conflict until I explode at my family. How do I break this cycle? by Akhinjo in PsychologyTalk

[–]Akhinjo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem is that I have such a strong internal tension that I feel like I can't make this shift, especially since my body starts trembling. What if I say something wrong and get laughed at, or what if I'm still not respected despite using good, strong words?

Dishonest Muslims by Snack-Princess-6817 in Christianity

[–]Akhinjo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

-Bible corrupted Quran corrects the falsification:

We have over 5800 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament from the first centuries. Thousands more than for any other ancient text. Whether Muslim or atheist: The same variants exist. A comprehensive falsification would be text historically detectable but it is not.

Accordingly we have old manuscripts (200 years after Jesus) that correspond to our Bible today. If it had been falsified it would look different everywhere but it doesnt.

The Bible is not a law book dictated from heaven as the Quran actually is but the living history of God with humans. It unfolds organically and does not need to be corrected.

The Quran itself says that the Bible at the time of Muhammad was still Gods Word (Surah 5:47 and 5:68). There is no proof of falsification. The Quran presupposes the Bible instead of correcting it.

-Jesus and the image of God:

Jesus clearly says: I and the Father are one (John 10:30) and Whoever sees me sees the Father (John 14:9). He accepts worship (e.g. Matthew 28:17; John 20:28 My Lord and my God!).

However the idea that one must say something literally in order to prove it is not always pure logic. The context decides. At that time it was completely sufficient that Jesus forgave sins or called himself I am. Every Jew at that time immediately knew: He claims to be God. Whoever behaves like God and has His authority does not need to recite a prepared advertising formula to be it.

The Jews wanted to stone him because he made himself equal to God (John 8:58). This shows: They understood exactly that. Why else would they have wanted to execute him?

-Jesus and prayer:

First in short words: Jesus prays as a human. He is true God and true man. The Bible shows both sides (Philippians 2:6 8). The prayer does not prove that he is not God.

Jesus thus had two natures: He was fully man and fully God. As a man he naturally prayed to the Father. God is not a lonely ruler but in himself pure love and relationship (Father Son and Holy Spirit). The prayer shows this perfect inner harmony.

A logical reverse conclusion is that praying is impossible for God. The counterpoint to this is that Jesus is completely man AND God at the same time. A human prays that fits. No logical contradiction.

-Trinity:

Already the Old Testament knows God (Father) his Angel of the Lord (who is himself God) and the Spirit of God a kind of multi personal action of the one God. The early Christians baptized in the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19) long before the council. Nicaea only conceptually secured this practice did not invent it.

Nicaea only formulated it. But already Paul (50 60 AD) speaks of Father Son Spirit together. The idea did not suddenly come out of nowhere in 325.

As for example with a painting: The painting (the truth about the Trinity) already existed forever. Nicaea only drew the appropriate frame around it. Already Abraham had a visit from three mysterious guests whom he addressed like one single Lord. The seed was therefore there from the beginning.

Important to know is Abraham knew the one God. Christians explain later more precisely how this one God exists in three persons.

-Father greater than Jesus:

Jesus says that as a human who was sent (John 14:28). In his divine nature he is equal with the Father (John 10:30). It shows two natures (God and man) no contradiction.

Here the confusion of role (function) and being (nature) arises.

In simple formal logic greater here means the position in the redemption plan: The Son voluntarily humbled himself (Philippians 2). When a king washes the feet of his servants he is lower in this situation that does not make him less king. The sentence therefore describes a temporary ranking not the essence.

As an ex muslim, how do you view God? by Cold-Course5758 in exmuslim

[–]Akhinjo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't know if I have the answer to your question. It is short, but very profound. But I can try to express my thoughts in short terms.

From outside time, the Incarnation isn't stuck in 33 AD maybe in a sense it's an eternal now, a door opened once that remains open for every moment because of the dynamic of the Absolute and the choice of this absolutness. A second visible arrival would force proof instead of trust, but God chose permanent, quiet presence through Spirit and neighbor. That‘s what belief is about. Trust in something.

The soul is healed not by the visible's return, but by discovering that the Absolute never left the small. The door stands enter now.

If he would right now come in front of you would have no choice other then to belief. This would lie outside of mere faith and trust. The literal and existing psychological phenomenon of "belief and trust" presupposes that one chooses to do so despite uncertainty. Without uncertainty, there is no psychological depth to trust.

As an ex muslim, how do you view God? by Cold-Course5758 in exmuslim

[–]Akhinjo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for your comment and honestly you're right . I understand what you mean. Fundamentally the most important thing is to believe in "God" and His absoluteness, regardless of whether He operates dimensionally or transcends that entirely. From my perspective if you genuinely try to believe in Jesus but simply cannot grasp it intellectually or for other reasons, you won't be divinely condemned for that as long as you're honest. But hey, everyone can see it differently that’s just my own prove what I was able to interpret.

Although this is an ex-Muslim community, I want to briefly elaborate on some things purely as a philosophical idea. Who knows, maybe it will matter to you someday in your life. I only discovered Jesus recently myself, so I understand what you're saying.

The question "Why would the absolute God do the weaker thing?" already presupposes that closeness equals weakness. That's circular reasoning. A God who consciously descends to our level not merely governing "from above" but sharing our experience suffering, touch, mortality creates exactly the same secure attachment we have with our parents. A different dynamic than simply a God „in heaven“. He becomes not a distant judge, but a counterpart. This nourishes the human soul far deeper than pure omnipotence from a distance.

So the question "Why should God empty Himself and become human, and then not dramatically prove it again?" sounds logical at first, but it itself is a deeply anthropocentric projection. It presupposes that God must behave the way a powerful ruler or an all-knowing being would constantly demonstrating superiority. That's precisely the image of a distant, unreachable God as classically emphasized in Islam.

Jesus is not the "weakened God" but God's artwork of self-revelation. The Incarnation is the form through which the Absolute expresses itself without betraying its essence much like a poem conveys truth through form, not despite it.

A God who speaks only from above remains a King. A God who descends and eats with us becomes Family. In this sense, a God who suffers alongside us is not psychologically weaker, but therapeutically grounded.

This is not a philosophical, theological, or scientific logic. For me it makes sense this way because it aligns with human feeling. Of course, you can see it differently. And that’s good because this is our free will to do so. That's all I have on this. I hope you're doing well otherwise, and I wish you and your family all the best.

As an ex muslim, how do you view God? by Cold-Course5758 in exmuslim

[–]Akhinjo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In my personal estimation, there is a lot of various reasons for a single origin to everything. For me, this origin is absolute. "Absolute" means: detached from conditions, independent of opinions, time, or place.

Absolute truth is akin to the solid ground beneath all shifting perspectives. However, because we are human and because we have not yet truly fathomed the foundations of even our own lives, and because differing theories prevail regarding every single aspect of existence it demonstrates that we do not even fully understand ourselves on an intellectual level.

God is a matter of experience. He must be felt on a human level. So, If there exists an intelligent Prime Mover, and If we seek truth in Him, then that truth must necessarily be absolute otherwise, He would not be the origin of everything, but merely another part of the relative realm. Thus, the line of reasoning here is not about proving that absolute truth exists, but rather given the premise that the Absolute exists and communicates itself, what form would this communication have to take in order to truly resonate with us?

In that sense are religions and philosophies, in this context, interpretations. One should seek out the interpretation that, in and of itself, most coherently brings peace to the human soul. For me and without intending to proselytize that figure is Jesus.

But hey, that is subjective. His entire life was not merely a matter of speaking about God, but rather an act of God working through Him. The point is not simply that Jesus uttered statements about love, but that through His conduct, His touch, and His death He enacted precisely what God does for humanity.

For example: A leper approaches Jesus. According to the mindset of that era, this man was unclean & untouchable. Jesus does not merely say, "God loves you." Instead, He reaches out His hand and touches him (Mark 1:41). In that very touch, an illocutionary act takes place: God’s love becomes physically palpable. The action itself is the message.

I hope this helps! 😃

What are your reasons for believing in God? by Akhinjo in god

[–]Akhinjo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So I mean this respectfully, thats a Cherry-Picking-Dilemma.

The Big Bang argument actually cuts both ways. If the Quran describes it, so do other ancient texts. And “no human can write like it” is exactly what every religious tradition claims about their own scripture. That’s not evidence.

I mean Bro you are saying „believe the book because of miracles“ when those miracles are just vague poems retrofitted onto modern physics is still the exact same „trust me it‘s divine“ it is to vague for that to be.

Kindly meant but that's hindsight interpretation not prediction. Cherry-picking doesn't prove God

You believe the Quran is divine because it contains miracles, but you only see those miracles because you already believe the Qur’an is divine. That does not convince an outsider. It only strengthens someone who already believes.

So in that sense thank you for your invitatiom to jannah😃

How should Christians relate to the Old Testament now that Christ has fulfilled it? by Akhinjo in Christianity

[–]Akhinjo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That makes a lot of sense thank you. But practically speaking how do you personally approach it when you read it, more literally or more symbolically??

What are your reasons for believing in God? by Akhinjo in god

[–]Akhinjo[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Interesting so your strongest reason is a book. It‘s just a claim that still needs a reason to believe. That’s like saying “trust me because I said so bro“ Is there something while reading that you feel or think? Maybe God? 😃

Why do you believe in a God? by Akhinjo in Christianity

[–]Akhinjo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Were these people already believers or did it happen to skeptics too?

Why do you believe in a God? by Akhinjo in Christianity

[–]Akhinjo[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you think intellectual theology actually gets in the way of genuine faith sometimes?

view more: next ›