In this piece I am not taking sides on the issue whether Muslims and Christians venerate a similar God. Many have effectively made statements that Muslims and Christians do, or don’t, adore a similar God.

For instance, I as of late saw that Franklin Graham, President and CEO of Samaritan’s Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, said something regarding the debate: “Islam denies that God has a Son. They deny that Jesus is God. They don’t have faith in a Triune God–Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,” Graham proceeded. “I can let you know – Islam and Christianity unmistakably don’t venerate a similar God.” That is unquestionably a reasonable and unambiguous explanation of his position.

Different Christians, notwithstanding, make a similar claim with comparable contentions put forward by Franklin Graham. What concerns me about such articulations is that in the event that one says Muslims and Christians don’t venerate a similar God since Muslims dismiss Jesus as God, and in addition the convention and reality of the Trinity, at that point we should likewise say Jews and Christians don’t love a similar God.

Wouldn’t we be asserting that the God trusted in by the Jews for a considerable length of time, as depicted in the Old Testament, is not the genuine God? At the point when God chastised the Jews for floating into excessive admiration, doesn’t it recommend that at one point Jews did venerate the genuine God, however at another point in time, they didn’t? That is, they moved from genuine conviction into excessive admiration. A few Christians guarantee Jews don’t love the genuine God, or an indistinguishable God from the Christians. In any case, couple of zealous Christians really go that far. As far as anyone is concerned, Franklin Graham has not said that. As a messianic Jew and a teacher of logic, I have dependably had confidence in the genuine God, however it was just when holding onto Jesus as Messiah, was I honored with the totality of God. Maybe I am wrong and need to rethink this all the more truly.

Notwithstanding, as a savant I additionally realize that I must know about my presumptions, and the suspicions of different Christians and Jews.

Question 1: Is it sensibly feasible for somebody to have faith in the genuine God without recognizing all the genuine properties of God? Expressed fairly in an unexpected way, are there basic properties of God, with the end goal that on the off chance that one doesn’t put stock in them, one doesn’t have confidence in the genuine God?

Question 2: Could it be that somebody appoints false credits to God, but then the individual has confidence in the genuine God?

Question 3: Could somebody be confounded about the genuine and fundamental properties of God, yet still put stock in the genuine God, in spite of psychological perplexity?

Question 4: Is there a distinction between effectively dismissing a fundamental characteristic of God and basically not having faith in the genuine God? In what manner may this distinction affect whether the individual has confidence in Him?

Question 5: Is tolerating and trusting the traits brought up by Franklin Graham both fundamental and adequate for a person to have confidence in the genuine God?

Speculative circumstance: Let us accept that affection is a basic trait of God. Imagine a scenario in which an individual trusts that God is love additionally trusts that God is cherishing, yet not continually adoring. Is that individual just confounded about the way of being a cherishing God, or does this individual both reject a fundamental trait of God and credit a false ascribe to God? Does that individual along these lines neglect to have faith in the genuine God?

Theoretical circumstance: If somebody is confounded about the significance of any fundamental property of God and in light of that misconception rejects a basic characteristic, has that individual rejected the genuine God, or essentially dismisses the misconstrued trait? For truth, wouldn’t it be imperative to decide if the individual rejects God, or basically what was already misconstrued about Him?

Question 6: what number genuine traits of God must one acknowledge to have faith in the genuine God? What number of bogus qualities of God would someone be able to acknowledge without neglecting to trust in the genuine God? For instance, imagine a scenario where somebody acknowledges all the genuine properties of God additionally has confidence in some false characteristic. Would that individual have confidence in the genuine God, or not? My speculation is that this last question applies to numerous people sitting in the seats of houses of worship who distinguish themselves as outreaching Christians. Why is this question even vital? Would it be able to be that we might be mixed up that somebody genuinely acknowledges Jesus as Lord and Savior since we have not done an aggregate stock of every one of their convictions in reference to the genuine God?

Descartes, the renowned rationalist, contrasted convictions with apples inside a barrel. Our errand as per Descartes is to examine each apple/conviction to ensure there are no spoiled apples/convictions that would ruin alternate apples/convictions in the barrel. Must a Christian experience a comparable procedure to decide if all credits credited to God are genuine characteristics, and when taken together, are thorough of the traits of God? We savants call the total of interconnecting convictions held by an individual, one’s doxastic framework. On the off chance that there would one say one is awful confidence in a person’s doxastic framework with respect to God, does that individual neglect to put stock in the genuine God?

These are troublesome inquiries with immense ramifications. Hence, I am extremely mindful about pronouncing whether somebody trusts in the genuine God. I like to supplicate that the individual comes to have confidence in the completion of God. In Acts 17, Paul at the Areopagus pronounces Athenians who are befuddled about the genuine credits of God to be exceptionally religious. He delightfully expresses that the genuine God is near them and that they live, move, and have their being in Him.

I like Paul’s approach, which is adoring, rationally sufficient and pragmatic regarding adjusting befuddled people who have faith in the shadow of God yet need to know His completion.

What we frantically require in the fervent world today is another Paul.