Qur'An

[altersteve]

First, I want to make it clear that I've never read the Qur'an, though I plan to. My question, though, is whether or not a Mormon can believe the Qur'an and believe that Muhammad was a prophet and still be a believing member of the Church. Are there any major contradictions between what is taught in the Qur'an and what is taught in the standard works?

[Questing Beast]

Only cultural contradictions. Philosophically, the Koran's teachings are in line with Judeo-Christianity. It is the modern Islamist extremists who pose the problem for the rest of the world: their version of the Koran's teachings turns it into a Muslim mirror of the RCC in medieval times, i.e. into the "church militant."

Mohammed was a prophet, if such persons be. To claim that his visionary experiences were hokum allows Muslims to say the very same thing about Joseph Smith....

[ebeddoulos]

There are a lot of commonalities between the two religions ... but that was not your question. Interesting question though. I list what I believe are the two primary differences with the scriptural support for both religions below. I think they are show stoppers.

1. As Latter-day Saints examine the religious principles of Islam, we find that we hold views which are apart from the Islamic tradition of denying the need for modern prophets.

• “Prepare ye, prepare ye for that which is to come, for the Lord is nigh; And the anger of the Lord is kindled, and his sword is bathed in heaven, and it shall fall upon the inhabitants of the earth. And the arm of the Lord shall be revealed; and the day cometh that they who will not hear the voice of the Lord, neither the voice of his servants, neither give heed to the words of the prophets and apostles, shall be cut off from among the people” (Doctrine & Covenants 1:12-14)
  “Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the prophets. And Allah is ever Knower of all things.” (Sura 33:40 – Maulana Muhammad Ali, translator, “The Holy Qur’an”, Columbus, Ohio: Ahmadiyyah Anjuman Isha’at Islam, Lahore, Inc., [1998], pg. 812)

The Arabic phrase for seal of the prophets is Khatam an-nabiyyin. The vast majority of Muslims accept this expression as meaning that Muhammad was the last prophet. A related word to Khatam is Khatim, which in Arabic means end or finality.

2. Even more emphatically, Latter-day Saints disapprove of the Islamic doctrine rejecting the divinity of Jesus Christ.

• “Behold, I am Jesus Christ, the Son of God. I am the life and the light of the world. I am the same who came unto mine own and mine own received me not; But verily, verily, I say unto you, that as many as receive me, to them will I give power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on my name. Amen.” (Doctrine & Covenants 11:28-30)
  “And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. These are the words of their mouths. They imitate the sayings of those who disbelieved before. Allah’s curse be on them! How they are turned away!” (Sura 9:30 – Maulana Muhammad Ali, translator, “The Holy Qur’an”, Columbus, Ohio: Ahmadiyyah Anjuman Isha’at Islam, Lahore, Inc., [1998], pg. 391)

On the other hand, I personally believe that Muhammed might very well be a prophet. It is the misinterpretations of his teachings by his "followers", that cause the issues. The Book of Mormon teaches us that “… God is mindful of every people, whatsoever land they may be in …” (Alma 26:37)

Elder Brigham H. Roberts of the Seventy expanded on this notion: “All the great teachers are servants of God; among all nations and in all ages. They are inspired men, appointed to instruct God’s children according to the conditions in the midst of which he finds them. … So with the Arabian prophet, ... (who) turned the Arabians from worshiping idols to a conception of the Creator of heaven and earth that was more excellent than their previous conception of Deity. Wherever God finds a soul sufficiently enlightened and pure; one with whom his Spirit can communicate, lo! he makes of him a teacher of men.” (B. H. Roberts, “Defense of the Faith and the Saints,”, Salt Lake City: Deseret News, [1907], vol. 1 of 2, pg. 513)

I hope that helps.

Edited August 23, 2011 by ebeddoulos

[shalamabobbi]

source:

http://muslim-responses.com/3_misinterpreted_Ayats/3_misinterpreted_ayats_

002.065

YUSUFALI: And well ye knew those amongst you who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath: We said to them: "Be ye apes, despised and rejected."

note: the apologetic does not deny the literal transformation of some disobedient Jews into apes, but the idea that the Quran calls ALL Christians and Jews apes..

On a positive note for fundamentalist thinkers, I suppose this makes it easier to dismiss evolution among Muslims..

Edit to add: Remember that when Joseph inquired which religion he should join he was instructed to join none of them. I guess that would include Islam. Also when studying past dispensations of the gospel Mohammed is not listed among the prophets in any teachings of the LDS church..

Edited August 23, 2011 by shalamabobbi

[LeSellers]

First, I want to make it clear that I've never read the Qur'an, though I plan to. My question, though, is whether or not a Mormon can believe the Qur'an and believe that Muhammad was a prophet and still be a believing member of the Church. Are there any major contradictions between what is taught in the Qur'an and what is taught in the standard works?

Well, one of, if not, the most knowledgeable Saints in regard to the Koran is Dan'l Petereson. Had you listened to the podcast noted in another topic, you'd know that he is undecided on the issue of whether Mohamed was a prophet. I tend to the other side, but I am also agnostic on the matter.

There is a passage in the Doctrine and Covenants that tells us that there is much truth in the Apocrypha, but it must be read with wisdom (not a quote, and I'm not willing to look it up right now), because there is much that is not true, as well. I'd bet that it's the same with the Koran: some truth, some untruth. The same can be said of the Harry Potter books, or The Lord of the Rings, or "Beowulf".

I, too, am embarking on a read of the Koran. No, I am not planning on praying about its truthfulness (it doesn't ask me to), but I will be looking for truths in it. I have heard a great deal about it (mostly negative), but obviously, as there are more'n a billion people who believe it true, there must be something useful in it.

Lehi

[altersteve]

Well, one of, if not, the most knowledgeable Saints in regard to the Koran is Dan'l Petereson. Had you listened to the podcast noted in another topic, you'd know that he is undecided on the issue of whether Mohamed was a prophet. I tend to the other side, but I am also agnostic on the matter.

There is a passage in the Doctrine and Covenants that tells us that there is much truth in the Apocrypha, but it must be read with wisdom (not a quote, and I'm not willing to look it up right now), because there is much that is not true, as well. I'd bet that it's the same with the Koran: some truth, some untruth. The same can be said of the Harry Potter books, or The Lord of the Rings, or "Beowulf".

I, too, am embarking on a read of the Koran. No, I am not planning on praying about its truthfulness (it doesn't ask me to), but I will be looking for truths in it. I have heard a great deal about it (mostly negative), but obviously, as there are more'n a billion people who believe it true, there must be something useful in it.

Lehi

I agree with this. I am aware that Muslims deny the divinity of Christ and other essential doctrines, and that Muslims believe that Muhammad was the last of God's prophets. But the question came to my mind while reading Rough Stone Rolling last night. On page 101, Bushman writes, "In the Book of Mormon reading, the Bible becomes not the book of books, but the mother scripture for a brood of bibles. Divine revelation cannot be confined; it is delivered wherever people will listen. The Book of Mormon not only prepares the way for itself by ridiculing those who think the Bible is sufficient; it warns readers against restricting God to the present. Revelation may break forth anywhere at any time."

He then cites 2 Nephi 28:29–30, which says:

"Wo be unto him that say: We have received the word of God, and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough! For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have."

This verse also always catches my eye:

"Know ye not that there are more nations than one? Know ye not that I, the Lord your God, have created all men, and that I remember those who are upon the isles of the sea; and that I rule in the heavens above and in the earth beneath; and I bring forth my word unto the children of men, yea, even upon all the nations of the earth? Wherefore murmur ye, because that ye shall receive more of my word? Know ye not that the testimony of two nations is a witness unto you that I am God, that I remember one nation like unto another? Wherefore, I speak the same words unto one nation like unto another. And when the two nations shall run together the testimony of the two nations shall also run together. And I do this to prove unto many that I am the same yesterday, today, and forever; and that I speak forth my words according to mine own pleasure. And because that I have spoken one word ye need not suppose that I cannot speak another; for my work is not yet finished; neither shall it be until the end of man, neither from that time henceforth and forever. Wherefore, because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written. For I command all men, both in the east and in the west, and in the north, and in the south, and in the islands of the sea, that they shall write the words which I speak unto them; for out of the books which shall be written will I judge the world, every man according to their works, according to that which is written" (2 Nephi 29:7–11).

I know that this passage is about all the scriptures running together as one witness of Jesus Christ, and about how there are further books of scripture that are to come, but it got me thinking about how maybe the Qur'an is one of those books. Maybe Gabriel really did appear to Muhammad, but these teachings became corrupted after time. Perhaps God, as stated in 2 Nephi 28:29–30, gave Muhammad certain teachings, "line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little," without revealing the whole picture, and only revealing the truths that were needed at the time. I believe that Muhammad was an inspired teacher, that God raised him up to fight the idolatry and polytheism, and that God raises up prophets here and there throughout the world and throughout the ages even outside of His Church, since He is, as this passage states, the Ruler of all nations; so I think it's an interesting idea. I guess that if God finds it necessary, He will give us some information on this topic in the future.

And don't worry, I'm not going to apostatize and become a Muslim. I just thought it was an interesting thing to think about.

Edited to add; maybe I will read Dr. Peterson's biography of Muhammad. I've heard some very good things about it.

Edited August 23, 2011 by altersteve

[Anijen]

I do not see Mohammed as a prophet when we think of Priesthood authority, keys, or of restoring saving ordinances, or defining doctrine etc. However I do think he could have received revelation what we know as the Qur'an for a purpose unknown to us (perhaps as simple as a law that might bring them closer to the gospel etc). What they could keep and not be held more accountable with if they had a fuller sense of the restored gospel.

Did that make any sense?

[altersteve]

I do not see Mohammed as a prophet when we think of Priesthood authority, keys, or of restoring saving ordinances, or defining doctrine etc. However I do think he could have received revelation what we know as the Qur'an for a purpose unknown to us (perhaps as simple as a law that might bring them closer to the gospel etc). What they could keep and not be held more accountable with if they had a fuller sense of the restored gospel.

Did that make any sense?

Could not have said it better myself.

[BCSpace]

First, I want to make it clear that I've never read the Qur'an, though I plan to.

It's fairly short and can be read online. Here are the Surahs with three of the major translations side by side in each:

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/

My question, though, is whether or not a Mormon can believe the Qur'an and believe that Muhammad was a prophet and still be a believing member of the Church.

No. The least reason imho being the same as us not believing the Pope has any spiritual or priesthood authority.

[Maidservant]

I always like to chime in on Islamic threads, but I cannot say much more substantial than has been expressed quite well by the others in the thread, with whom I agree for the most part.

One thing I love about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that it resonates with many systems of truth . . . it brings all truth into one whole, and sheds any shackles of blindness and tares that may still be a part of the truthful systems we have on earth. As well the Church itself will continue to progress, or more accurately, be more fully revealed (a la article of faith 9). I can find the gospel in Hinduism; I can find the gospel in my statistics class (and boy, I did! had lots of personal revelation there).

Many of the values, doctrines and philosophies that distinguish the Church of Jesus Christ from sectarian Christianity are also the values and doctrines that bear a resemblance to Islam. For example, traditional Christianity has had a tradition of placing celibacy on a pedestal and eschewing the ascendant holiness of matrimony. Not all Christians, and not all times and places, but it is an element that rears its head (i.e. Jesus could not possibly be married, as that would lessen his God-ness). For Muslims, there is a saying that you are only half a Muslim if you are unmarried. Having a marriage and being a good husband or wife is 50 percent of your religion, in Islam. Of course, for Muslims, Allah does not have a body or any son or daughter or wife, as this would not make him God also (and which I ascribe as arising from the same Greek philosphy as does traditional Christianity). Anyway . . . not trying to say anything conclusive here, just some thoughts to share.

[KevinG]

I am currently reading an English interpretation of the Koran.

LeSellers said "No, I am not planning on praying about its truthfulness (it doesn't ask me to), but I will be looking for truths in it."

I want to clarify something that I think the LDS get unfairly hammered on by critics. In addition to pondering and praying about things to find if they are true, the Holy Ghost also works as a constant companion and I have found in my reading of this and other important texts my mind and spirit are ministered to constantly, helping me divine what is good and truthful from what is in error as I read and ponder. I suspect LeSellers has similar experiences but I will let him respond for himself on this point.

Given this - as I read I have found much counsel that is sound and is plausably God given. I am particularly struck by admonitions to care for the widow and orphan if one is to be considered a full human.

The main disagreement I have with the teachings I have read so far is that I believe Jesus Christ is a God. The Koran says that is not true and the "people of the book" while being generally godly are in error when they make Jesus a god.

I'm about 1/3 of the way through my copy. I'll chime in again if I have any other significant insights.

[Storm Rider]

I don't think it is possible to be a faithful Muslim and a faithful LDS. The main problem is the lack of understanding and acknowledgement of Jesus as the divine Son of God, Savior of the world, and member of the Godhead. However, I would say that we could learn a great deal about being better LDS from studying the Qur'an and knowing Muslims. They are a wonderful people and those that are faithful are generally better acting Christians than most Christians. If we believe that pure religion as defined by the Bible is important, then these are people who practice pure religion.

I have read the Qur'an and found a deep sense of adoration, respect, praise, and humility before God.

Unfaithful Muslims are the same as unfaithful members of all churches and religions. They are just as bad as others, buy they are also not true Muslims.

[LeSellers]

I don't think it is possible to be a faithful Muslim and a faithful LDS.

You are absolutely correct. However, I believe that answers a different question from the one posed in the OP.

The question is, as I understand it, whether Mohamed was a prophet, called by God to do some work or other.

As to that, I have a slightly negative opinion. In any case, he was off on at least two major points, and many smaller ones. He was not the last prophet, as he claims. And Jesus is the Christ the Son of the Living God, and God Himself, contrary to Islamic dogma.

Nonetheless, he did some good things. He did some very bad things. Many of those who follow him seem quite willing to do even worse things in the name of the god Mohamed worshiped. I am sure, having met some myself, that there are decent Muslims. I am also quite sure there are a sizable fraction who are fanatical in their devotion, and who make it impossible to distinguish between the "good" Muslims and the "bad" ones. All base their faith on the same Koran, so it is, like the Bible, subject to personal interpretation.

And each Muslim is certain that his own interpretation is what Mohamed meant when he dictated the Koran.

Lehi

Edited August 24, 2011 by LeSellers

[Robert F. Smith]

First, I want to make it clear that I've never read the Qur'an, though I plan to. My question, though, is whether or not a Mormon can believe the Qur'an and believe that Muhammad was a prophet and still be a believing member of the Church. Are there any major contradictions between what is taught in the Qur'an and what is taught in the standard works?

Sura 112:3 in the Qur'an says "God does not beget, and is not begotten," which is likely directed at Christian belief. Aside from that, Muslims clearly believe in Jesus and all the other biblical prophets, and like Christianity, clearly owe their origin to Judaism..

Those wishing to familiarize themselves with the rich history and culture of Islam and therefore of ancient Arabia will find classes at most large universities, or may seek out classes at their local mosque. They will be graciously received, and possibly even given a beautiful bilingual copy of the Qur'an free (the Saudi gov't has for years made them available throughout the USA).

[Questing Beast]

Mohammed was the prophet for the Arabic people. Until he came, they had no prophet for themselves. In a similar way, Joseph Smith could be considered an "American prophet".

This bugbear of "keys of authority" is non sequitur; because there is no way to break the deadlocked argument of who is right and the rest wrong. In my humble opinion, "authority" is to the people concerned. The pope is the highest earthly authority to RCs. The current prophet is the highest earthly authority to Mormons. Hundreds if not thousands of others are equally revered as the highest earthly authorities to their followers. To what extent these individuals "speak for God" is to be determined by each individual....

[Ahab]

My question, though, is whether or not a Mormon can believe the Qur'an and believe that Muhammad was a prophet and still be a believing member of the Church.

It depends on how you define the word "prophet", I think.

Most prophets of God "bear testimony" of Jesus Christ, either by saying what Jesus says through them or by telling others how they can know him and find out what he knows for themselves.

I don't know of any instance where Muhammad mentioned Jesus Christ by name, either in Greek or some other language, but he did say some things Jesus agrees with.

I also don't think it is necessarily Muhammad's fault that some people have chosen to worship him, although it would have been better had he simply directed them to Jesus.

[Ahab]

To what extent these individuals "speak for God" is to be determined by each individual....

... although what each individual thinks God has said isn't necessarily something God has said.

[jo1952]

Good thread, and great comments by all. I can't think of anything I can add that hasn't already been discussed.

Best regards,

jo

[Robert F. Smith]

It depends on how you define the word "prophet", I think.

Most prophets of God "bear testimony" of Jesus Christ, either by saying what Jesus says through them or by telling others how they can know him and find out what he knows for themselves.

I don't know of any instance where Muhammad mentioned Jesus Christ by name, either in Greek or some other language, but he did say some things Jesus agrees with.

I also don't think it is necessarily Muhammad's fault that some people have chosen to worship him, although it would have been better had he simply directed them to Jesus.

Actually Jesus is mentioned by name in the Qur'an many times, and is even called Christ Jesus at Sura III:45, where the word for "Christ" is naturally Arabic Masih.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

First, I want to make it clear that I've never read the Qur'an, though I plan to. My question, though, is whether or not a Mormon can believe the Qur'an and believe that Muhammad was a prophet and still be a believing member of the Church. Are there any major contradictions between what is taught in the Qur'an and what is taught in the standard works?

I was reading Acts 10 last week, in Acts 10:43 it teaches that all the Prophets knew Christ. Muhammad denies the divinity of Christ, he is therefore not a prophet IMHO.

[Questing Beast]

I said: To what extent these individuals "speak for God" is to be determined by each individual....

... although what each individual thinks God has said isn't necessarily something God has said.

Everything everyone has ever said is something that "God" has said. Nothing is separate from the reality of "God". All that manifests is of "God". Even apparent evil is of "God". We just don't comprehend it in context with infinity. "Can't see the forest for the trees" is a good metaphor of our limited perspective, caught in the mesh of good and evil occurring all the time all around us.

So when someone says, (as Joseph Smith did), "God in fact has spoken to me", it is up to each individual who hears this assertion to judge its importance and truth. Since literally thousands of people say this kind of thing every day, and always have said it in so many words, that is a lot of "God talk".

The way we define "God" talking to us is as varied as seven billion individuals are different from each other. The one thing we all share alike is our egocentricity, wherein we commune with "God" all alone, without any communication with another soul: we are cut off by our bodies, and only sense the presence of others through carnal organs: spiritually, we do not overlap or even touch. The only way that Pentecost occurred was by the senses detecting the Holy Spirit individually; the "tongues of fire" that settled upon each convert's head were SEEN; yet the tongues of fire did not affect a connection wherein those so-visited could read others thoughts or feel their feelings. The experience was singular to each person there. Similarly, the Kirtland temple dedication: where the Holy Spirit was observed manifesting, it was shared only in the sense that a congregant could exclaim aloud what they were seeing, hearing and feeling. No one saw, heard or felt what another did.

This insularity we all are afflicted with never ends. It is the way we are made. The only other mind we share is "God's". And in my cosmic or religious world view, this is how our immortality is spent: drawing ever more closely and intimately to "God". Discovering more of the infinite mind of "God" is an infinite process, worthy of immortal beings such as ourselves....

[altersteve]

I was reading Acts 10 last week, in Acts 10:43 it teaches that all the Prophets knew Christ. Muhammad denies the divinity of Christ, he is therefore not a prophet IMHO.

When I say that Muhammad was a prophet, I mean that he was a teacher inspired by God and that the Qur'an was inspired to some extent. I am not using the definition of "prophet" that we Latter-day Saints use when referring to those who were foreordained by the Lord to lead His people, individuals like Moses, Elijah, Peter, Joseph Smith, or Thomas S. Monson

[Pahoran]

I said: To what extent these individuals "speak for God" is to be determined by each individual....

Everything everyone has ever said is something that "God" has said. Nothing is separate from the reality of "God". All that manifests is of "God". Even apparent evil is of "God".

Thank you for (yet again) proclaiming your dogma.

I see this is meant to be a "take it or leave it" proposition; so I'm going to leave it.

And I will counsel the Latter-day Saints to do the same, deeming your doctrine to be false and without merit.

We have heard it many times before, and shall no doubt hear it many times in the future. The revealed doctrine of the Kingdom is that the true God -- the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob -- isn't so petty and insecure as to be unable to allow free beings with their own minds and thoughts to coexist with him.

Just so you know.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Robert F. Smith]

Mohammed was the prophet for the Arabic people. Until he came, they had no prophet for themselves. In a similar way, Joseph Smith could be considered an "American prophet".

Actually, there were many Arabic prophets before Mohammed and he mentions them in the Qur'an.

This bugbear of "keys of authority" is non sequitur; because there is no way to break the deadlocked argument of who is right and the rest wrong. In my humble opinion, "authority" is to the people concerned. The pope is the highest earthly authority to RCs. The current prophet is the highest earthly authority to Mormons. Hundreds if not thousands of others are equally revered as the highest earthly authorities to their followers. To what extent these individuals "speak for God" is to be determined by each individual....

I saw a program by and about the RC Church the other night, and they not only declared that St. Peter's Basilica is a "temple" (the most beautiful such bldg in Christendom, as long as we ignore Hagia Sophia), but they declared that the Pope is the highest moral authority on the planet and that he speaks for all mankind. He is after all defined as the Vicar of Christ on Earth, and when he speaks on morals or doctrine his words are infallible. He carries the keys of the Kingdom, and those keys are part of his personal symbol. Those not members of the RC Church are considered as "separated brethren," and subject to conversion to the true faith.

Now of course, you are right. The ayatollehs and imams of Islam would be amused by this exclusive RC notion, and Mormons are not likely to take the Pope's claims seriously. Yet in the West at least, the Pope does carry immense worldly and spiritual authority, and many other countries actually have embassies in Vatican City -- including the USA.

[Robert F. Smith]

Everything everyone has ever said is something that "God" has said. Nothing is separate from the reality of "God". All that manifests is of "God". Even apparent evil is of "God". We just don't comprehend it in context with infinity. "Can't see the forest for the trees" is a good metaphor of our limited perspective, caught in the mesh of good and evil occurring all the time all around us.

The pantheism which you put forth here does not comport with what you say below about the "insularity" of each individual human. You can't have it both ways: Either everyone and everything is part of God (contingent), or are actual individuals (necessary beings). Mormonism opts for the monistic notion that we (and all matter & energy) are coeternal with God, i.e., that each of us is a necessary being.

So when someone says, (as Joseph Smith did), "God in fact has spoken to me", it is up to each individual who hears this assertion to judge its importance and truth. Since literally thousands of people say this kind of thing every day, and always have said it in so many words, that is a lot of "God talk".

The way we define "God" talking to us is as varied as seven billion individuals are different from each other. The one thing we all share alike is our egocentricity, wherein we commune with "God" all alone, without any communication with another soul: we are cut off by our bodies, and only sense the presence of others through carnal organs: spiritually, we do not overlap or even touch. The only way that Pentecost occurred was by the senses detecting the Holy Spirit individually; the "tongues of fire" that settled upon each convert's head were SEEN; yet the tongues of fire did not affect a connection wherein those so-visited could read others thoughts or feel their feelings. The experience was singular to each person there. Similarly, the Kirtland temple dedication: where the Holy Spirit was observed manifesting, it was shared only in the sense that a congregant could exclaim aloud what they were seeing, hearing and feeling. No one saw, heard or felt what another did.

This insularity we all are afflicted with never ends. It is the way we are made. The only other mind we share is "God's". And in my cosmic or religious world view, this is how our immortality is spent: drawing ever more closely and intimately to "God". Discovering more of the infinite mind of "God" is an infinite process, worthy of immortal beings such as ourselves....

We are not "made" to be "insular," we are insular by nature. Only thus are we immortal, eternal beings, as indestructible as matter & energy, and all governed by natural law. The immanence of God in Mormon doctrine is in stark contrast to the Judeo-Christian dogma of a self-existent transcendant God, who is the only reality, and from whom all being takes shape and apart from which there is no individual being of any kind (if there is evil, only that God can be the author of it).

Do you see the internal contradictions in your dogma? It is precisely that pantheistic tendency which discredits Judeo-Christian dogma and leads to self-contradictory "death of God" theologies. No wonder that young people flee from such dogma in modern times. Indeed, Europeans generally cannot understand how Americans can be so foolish as to believe in such absurd dogma. And they are right.