Astronomers have spotted an exotic planet that seems to be made of diamond racing around a tiny star in our galactic backyard.
The new planet is far denser than any other known so far and consists largely of carbon. Because it is so dense, scientists calculate the carbon must be crystalline, so a large part of this strange world will effectively be diamond.
"The evolutionary history and amazing density of the planet all suggest it is comprised of carbon -- i.e. a massive diamond orbiting a neutron star every two hours in an orbit so tight it would fit inside our own Sun," said Matthew Bailes of Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne.
Lying 4,000 light years away, or around an eighth of the way toward the center of the Milky Way from the Earth, the planet is probably the remnant of a once-massive star that has lost its outer layers to the so-called pulsar star it orbits.
Read more:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/26/us-planet-diamond-idUSTRE77O69A20110826
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
166 comments:
سبحان الله
Glorious is Allah
One problem: Allah didn't make it; Yahweh did.
Frosty
Read Colossians 1
16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities-- all things have been created through Him and for Him.
17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.
18 He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.
19 For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him,
20 and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven.
Praise the Lord Jesus
In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.
[67:1] Blessed is He in Whose Hand is the dominion, and He is Able to do all things.
[67:2] Who has created death and life, that He may test you which of you is best in deed. And He is the All-Mighty, the Oft-Forgiving;
[67:3] Who has created the seven heavens one above another, you can see no fault in the creations of the Most Beneficent. Then look again: "Can you see any rifts?
[67:4] Then look again and yet again, your sight will return to you in a state of humiliation and worn out.
Snowman I thought you might like to kick in for Sam and David's apologetic trip to California.
Support the Truth about Islam Give till it hurts
Lol Sam and David asking for money again?
@Anon who wrote...
Lol Sam and David asking for money again?
Anon how much can I put you down for?
Don't forget Sm & David son't have Saudi oil money to back them up like you gusy do to build your mosques.
@ david wood wannabe (Bartimaeus)
can you shut up? do you really think we take note of what you say? you're just wasting everyone's time, even radical moderate comes up with posts that make much better sense than yours.
"can you shut up? do you really think we take note of what you say?"
Yeah, it's undeniable that you "take note" of what he says. You read his comment and replied after all....
Alexander:
"[67:1] Blessed is He in Whose Hand is the dominion, and He is Able to do all things."
Well...not exactly 'all things'. Allah can't have a son because according to your Quran he has no "consort". He also can't enter into his creation, or at least that's what all the Muslims keep telling me he cannot do. Yet another thing "Allah" can't seem to do, is prevent humans from corrupting the books he sends down to mankind.
[67:3] Who has created the seven heavens one above another, you can see no fault in the creations of the Most Beneficent. Then look again: "Can you see any rifts?
...and apparently Allah can draw near to the "lowest heaven" at times, proving that he must in fact be limited to a corporeal form and in a location.
[67:4] Then look again and yet again, your sight will return to you in a state of humiliation and worn out.
I imagine this would be the result of constantly reading the Quran and trying to glean sense out of it's nonsense....yes, worn out in deed.
@The Muslims
I'm sorry to bring you bad news, but it looks like another one of your Islamic leaders is enjoying the whores in allahs paradise.
But there is good news there are now several positions open in Al Quida.
Qualifications include the following.
Total lack of common sense
Absolutly no thinking required
Total disregard for non Muslim human life.
From what I have seen from the Muslim responses on this blog most if not all of you meet and exceed these requirments.
Ibn here.
Anon: Well...not exactly 'all things'. Allah can't have a son because according to your Quran he has no "consort".
Makes sense once you consider the Christian argument that Jesus is the son of God because he was born without a father. This is what Bodo, an 8th century Bishop who renounced Christianity for Judaism (and changed his name to Eleazar), writes about how Christians came to the conclusion that Jesus was God: As for your assertion that Christ is God, joined with the Holy Spirit, and you worship him because he had no human father, then along with him you ought to worship Adam the father of the human race, who had neither father nor mother, whose flesh, blood, bones and skin were created from clay. Breath was put in him by the Holy Spirit, and he became an intelligent being. Then too, Eve was created from Adam's rib without a father or mother, and breath came into her and she became intelligent. So worship them too
So, if Jesus was the son of God because he had no father, then how can God have a son if he has no consort? This is an excellent analogical argument in the Quran!
Anon: He also can't enter into his creation, or at least that's what all the Muslims keep telling me he cannot do. Yet another thing "Allah" can't seem to do, is prevent humans from corrupting the books he sends down to mankind.
God entering into creation is paradoxical, unless He is not Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Omniscient, etc. However, any being that lacks omnipotence and any of these other qualities cannot be logically a God. Hence the paradox.
Regarding corruption of books, how does that show a lack of omnipotence? Moreover, your assertion is question begging since it presumes that God would want to protect the bible.
Anon: and apparently Allah can draw near to the "lowest heaven" at times, proving that he must in fact be limited to a corporeal form and in a location
Even Salafis don't believe that Allah descends to the lowest heaven (since they believe the hadith about this event is inauthentic). The majority of the Muslims, who are Ashari in Aqeedah, don't take Allah's descent to be a literal event (in any case, a literal interpretation of this event is not supported by the Quran). His "coming down" is simply a metaphorical way of characterizing the intensity of His Mercy.
Anon: One problem: Allah didn't make it; Yahweh did.
You mean Yahweh the son of El Eloyn?
http://fuzzyquark.comxa.com/gods.html
@Ibn Son of ????
You wrote...
"Well...not exactly 'all things'. Allah can't have a son because according to your Quran he has no "consort".
Makes sense once you consider the Christian argument that Jesus is the son of God because he was born without a father."
Way to beat that strawman.
Christians do not believe that Jesus is THE son of God becasue he has no father. Also Christians do not believe that God had sex with Mary.
Intersting side note, Muslims at least Ibn Kather believed that Gabriel took the form of a man in "EVERY RESPECT" and blew into Mary's "FARJ" but putting that aside.
You then wrote...
"So, if Jesus was the son of God because he had no father, then how can God have a son if he has no consort? This is an excellent analogical argument in the Quran!"
Yes that is the argument that Allah puts forth, and that argument is just wrong. Thank you for proving that Alllah did not know what he or she was talking about. Since that is not what Christians believe.
We beleive that Jesus has always been always is and always will be the SON OF GOD in releation to the father. He is begotten from the father NOT CREATED. There never was a time when the SON WAS NOT.
The reason why he was born of a Virgin is becasue he had to be, in order to fullfill the blood atoment sacrafice once and for ALL. Since we inherit sin from Adam.
As far as what the Bishop beleived,he beleived in error and that is why he left Christ becasue he was never in Christ.
Hey Ibn maybe you can go back to being my secretary and correct my spelling and grammer.
Please DONT SHOOT US WE ARE ONLY MESSENGER.
Well again thank you for proving your QURAN WRONG.
Like I have said the greatest weapon against Islam are Muslims, and the greatest weapon against Muslims is Islam.
Radical Idiot: Christians do not believe that Jesus is THE son of God becasue he has no father.
I knew you were going to say that. That's why I cited Bodo letter's as historical evidence in support of my argument. I know not all Christians say Jesus is son of God because he had no father, but it cannot be denied that there ARE some who DO make this claim. Bodo's letter proves this point.
Radical Idiot: As far as what the Bishop beleived,he beleived in error and that is why he left Christ becasue he was never in Christ.
Whether Bodo believed correctly or not isn't the issue. The issue is, has there ever been Christians who believed Jesus is son of God because he had no father? The answer is yes. The Quranic argument applies to such people.
Ibn Ibn Ibn
Simply amazing, the Quran teaches that Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of GOD becasue he has no father.
This is clearly in error, this is clearly not what the bible teaches and clearly as you demonstrated someone who believes this does not stay a Christian.
So the Quran argues against what Christians should not believe in favor of what CHRISTIANS SHOULD NOT BELIEVE??????????
Only a Muslim would find logic in that.
Ohhh that ALlah he really is as clueless as you.
And that is why your a Muslim and I am not.
Radical Moderate: the Quran teaches that Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of GOD becasue he has no father.
No, the Quran responds to those who say Jesus is the son of God because he has no father. The Quran does not teach Christianity (neither does the bible for that matter) but addresses the claims of certain Christians (thereby recognizing that Christianity is not a monolith). As I said before, there are Christians who do believe that Jesus is son of God because he had no father. I have provided historical evidence of this.
Radical Moderate: This is clearly in error, this is clearly not what the bible teaches and clearly as you demonstrated someone who believes this does not stay a Christian.
Oh please! Don't pretend you speak for all Christians or you alone know what the bible teaches and what it does not. Who made you the Pope? There are literally hundreds of Christian sects. Am I to believe they all interpret the bible in the same way? In any case, you are trying to go off topic. The issue is not what the bible actually teaches or whether those who believe Jesus is god because he had no father are right or wrong.
With the name of Allah, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance form their Lord.
As salamu 'alikum wr wb my dear respected brother Yahya! EID MUBARAK TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY!
May Allah continue to bless you and bless thousands, and millions through you! May Allah bless all the sisters and brothers who contribute at this great site to further understanding.
To all the not-yet-Muslims may you continue to benefit by the seeds of hope that our good Lord is planting in your hearts day by day.
Sincerely,
thegrandverbalizer19
سم الله الرحمن الرحيم
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
Amīn ya Rabb al-Alamin
@ Br. TGV.
Taqaballahu minna wa minkum(May Allah accept the prayers and all good deeds from us and you)
Also to Br. Yahya, RA17 and brothers and sisters in this site.
EID MUBARAK TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY
والسلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
As usual, Ibn is misrepresenting sources. The quote he posted from Bodo is an argument against the divinity of Jesus. Read again:
"As for your assertion that Christ is God, joined with the Holy Spirit, and you worship him because he had no human father, then along with him you ought to worship Adam the father of the human race, who had neither father nor mother, whose flesh, blood, bones and skin were created from clay."
Bodo is arguing against the assertion that "Christ is God" "because he has no father", then he goes on to argue that this should make Adam divine as well. Ironically, this same bogus argument can be seen recorded in Ahmed Deedat lectures today. Ibn then blatantly misrepresents the source and the argument claiming that it is an argument against the Sonship of Christ.
So again, the Quran argues that Allah has no son because he has no consort to make a son with. Bodo argues that if Christ having no father makes him God, then Adam would be God as well. These are not the same arguments.
It's quite telling how Muslims have to twist and misrepresent not only the Quran but outside sources as well in their attempt to defend Islam.
Anon: Bodo is arguing against the assertion that "Christ is God" "because he has no father"
Do Christians argue Jesus is God because he had no father?
Ironically, here is a Christian apologist website confirming that the virgin birth of Jesus points to his divinity:
"As we have seen, Jesus was not born of Adam, but only of Eve (a woman). Because Jesus had no human father He is exempt from the imputation of Adam's sin.....The virgin birth demonstrates that Jesus is both human and divine."
http://debate.org.uk/topics/trtracts/t15.htm
@Christian ANON
Whats taht you say, a Muslim miresprenting and lying? I'm shocked. I figured he was doing as much but I really did not feel like chasing down that red hearing. Good catch.
To IBN SON OF A .....
The answer to your question is NO, and niether do we argue that Jesus is the Son of God becasue he had no earthly father.
So spank and double spank.
And Ibn does it again...
He writes...
"As we have seen, Jesus was not born of Adam, but only of Eve (a woman). Because Jesus had no human father He is exempt from the imputation of Adam's sin.....The virgin birth demonstrates that Jesus is both human and divine."
Are you really this dense. Jesus born of virgin becasue WHY? hmmm lets look at the quote.
"He is exempt from the imputation of Adam's sin"
So what does the virgin birth demonstrate? Well lets look at the quote....
"demonstrates that Jesus is both human... "
wow Jesus was born of a virgin, with out the sin of adam and he is a human .... AMAZING
In the section called the Divinity of Jesus, the section you left and hid with elipses.
The write quotes Isiah 7:14
"The Lord Himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel."
The write then explains
Finally, through the virgin birth came a child who was Immanuel. This was no ordinary name for this was no ordinary child. Immanuel means God with us. God Himself was to come through this virgin birth.
The reason for the virgin birth is so that God entering into Human flesh would not be stained with the stain of Adam. So that he may be the perfect un blemished guilt offering, the Lamb that is provided by God in place of Issac.
The virgin birth is the meens that God had to enter into the world. THe virgin birth does not make him God, since he was GOD before during and after the Virgin Birht. The virgin birth just makes him Human.
So with all this the writer ties it all together when he writes...
"The virgin birth demonstrates that Jesus is both human and divine."
Or put another way, God entered into the world through the virgin birth there by proving he is both Human and Divine.
Ibn you have hit the tri fecta, TRIPLE SPANK.
Dont shoot us we are only Messenger.
Rad Idiot: The virgin birth just makes him Human.
Nice try. But the you missed the part where the authors emphasize on "like produces like". Given that like produces like, the implication that Jesus is God's Son (or God) because he was born sinless as God is sinless whereas the typical man is Adam's son because he is born with sin, it leaves little doubt as to what they meant when the authors EXPLICITLY said that Jesus' virgin birth demonstrates BOTH his divinity and his humanity. Here's the thing. They did not write, "The virgin birth just proves his humanity" as you claim, but that "The virgin birth demonstrates that Jesus is both divine and human", in their own words. It is just as Bodo argued.
Thus, there are some Christians do who believe the virgin birth is central to the divinity of Christ as attested to by the letter of Bodo as well as the apologetic website I linked to earlier.
Ibn Ibn Ibn son of ????
I thought you had a Master degree in something un Islamic. You really can not be this reading comprehentionaly challanged.
First you are still on BOBO, you were exposed totally distorting what BOBO wrote. Please stop embarrasing yourself, give it up you were exposed. I don't expect you to admit you were wrong and lied. But I don't think it is to much for you to NEVER mention this lie of yours again.
Now moving on to the website.
Really man can you not comprehend what the writer is writing? That GOD the SON who has eternaly existed as GOD the SON (thats the like) entered into human flesh through a virgin (that again is teh like) he is the son of GOd because he has always been the son of GOD, and he is man because at his incarnation through Mary he became flesh.
Tell you what, maybe what the writer is writing is a little to complicated for your simple muslim mind. So why don't we just settle this.
Why not get my email from snowman, send a email to the writer and copy me on it, asking him the question.
Did you mean to say that Jesus became the on of God becasue he was born of a virgin with out a father?
or
Did you mean to say that the eternal son of God became a man through a virgin?
Radical Idiot: First you are still on BOBO, you were exposed totally distorting what BOBO wrote.
What did he say, that Christians believe Jesus is God because he had no father? BTW its Bodo, not BOBO you idiot!
Radical Idiot: Now moving on to the website. Really man can you not comprehend what the writer is writing
I comprehended all right. "The virgin birth demonstrates that Jesus is both divine and human" which contradicts what you said earlier that the virgin birth only proves Jesus' humanity. It is clear that you are the one who doesn't understand what either Bodo or the authors were getting at.
Here's the thing. Are you going to deny that some Christians believe Jesus is son of God or God because he had no father, irrespective of whether this conviction is supported by the bible or not? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Please don't post just for the sake of posting so as to give the impression that unless you have the last word nobody will think you've won. Answer the question above.
IBN IBN IBN
Not only can you not comprehend what the writer of the website is writing, you can not comprehend what I wrote, and worse yet you CAN NOT EVEN COMPREHEND WHAT YOU WROTE.
You wrote...
"Makes sense once you consider the Christian argument that Jesus is the son of God because he was born without a father. This is what Bodo, an 8th century Bishop who renounced Christianity for Judaism (and changed his name to Eleazar"
You then now change it to...
Christians believe that Jesus is GOD becasue he had no fatehr wich is what Bodo argued against. (thanks again for being my secretary, you should stick to that becasue this theological stuff is way over your head)
So now then I will repeat for the last time what Christians beleive, and what the writer of the article was trying to convey.
Christ before his incarnation as Jesus Christ eternaly existed as teh SON OF GOD in relation to the father. He is GOD from the begging since Like produces LIKE. He was never created teh SON OF GOD, nor was he Created GOD. There was never a time when the SON was not.
That the Son of God entered into Human flesh and became the incarnate human Jesus Christ through his mother a virgin named Mary.
He had to enter into the world this way so he would not be stained with the sin of Adam.
The author is not arguing I repeat NOT arguing that Jesus is teh son of God becasue he had no father or that he is God becasue he had NO FATHER.
Instead we argue as the author did that Jesus Christ is the uncreated SON OF GOD who is GOD who entered into humanflesh born of a virgin. This demonstrates that Jesus Chrsit is both human (since he was born of a virgin woman) and God since he was eternaly begotten by the father and not made.
I will not continue this any furher unless you get my email fron snowman and send a email with me cc'd asking him the questions I stated above.
I asked Blithering Idiot the following question:
Are you going to deny that some Christians believe Jesus is son of God or God because he had no father, irrespective of whether this conviction is supported by the bible or not? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Can anyone point to me where in his latest response he addressed this question? Thanks!
Ibn
Don't worry I will respond to your question which will show you just how pathetic your Quran really is.
uh oh the holy spirit in radical moderate is upset, better give it a cookie or something.
Ali: uh oh the holy spirit in radical moderate is upset, better give it a cookie or something.
More like the Holy Demon. We have evidence that Radical Moderate is motivated by lust and blood thirst.
Since you guys like blaspheming the Holy Spirit of the Living God, I wonder how you like it when people speak of that wicked, unclean spirit who met your prophet in a dark, dank cave and gave MOMO the ancient equivalent of a UFC smackdown when the dummy said he couldn't recite? You know, the same spirit that would cause MOMO to flop around, foam at the mouth, hear buzzing and ringing in his ears, all while he would moan like a camel.
With as dumb as your false god and prophet are, at least they smartened up after mocking the pagans and finding out that they couldn't take it as good as they could give it.
@ anonymous
is the holy spirit upset inside you? want to give it a cookie?
This is hilarious. Ibn, in typical fashion, is so far off on a tangent now. Remember, he began by attempting to respond to my assertion that the Quran says Allah has no son because he doesn't have a "consort" with which to make a son. You still haven't explained why the Quran offers this nonsensical argument. The Bible doesn't teach that God produced a son with a consort. They idea that God produced a son in a procreative way is and always has been completely anathema to Christianity, yet for some reason the author of the Quran offers a polemic against the Sonship of Jesus by saying it can't happen because Allah has no consort.
Keep treading water Ibn. It's entertaining to watch. Keep mocking the Holy Spirit Muslims (at your own peril), but realize that it only exposes the spirit that is actually at work in you and in Islam.
I so love it when Muslims beg for their own destruction.
Ibn you asked "Are you going to deny that some Christians believe Jesus is son of God or God because he had no father, irrespective of whether this conviction is supported by the bible or not? A simple yes or no will suffice. "
Now whether there are Christians who either through error, believe that Jesus is God or the Son of God because he had no father, or after they are corrected they continue in error and turn that error into heresy only goes to prove that there are or where groups that are in error and or heretics.
On another post as well as this one it has been proven time and time again that Allah Ibn Mohamed did not know what Christians believed. Instead Allah Ibn Mohamed in the Quran allegedly rebukes pagans, heretics and people who are in error. But it never rebukes what Christians believe.
So the point has been proven thanks to my Muslim friends that Allah Ibn Mohamed did not know what he was talking about.
The Quran says we worship three Gods. We don't. Even if you find some groups of people who may of believed this it only proves that they are in error and or are heretics.
Christians do not believe that Mary is GOD, even if you find some pagan goddess worshiping group. That incorporated Mary into their pantheon, only proves that there where pagans who worshiped Mary along with other pagan goddesses. Even if you miss understand and miss represent what Catholics believe about Mary it only proves that Catholics are like in other things WRONG.
Christians do not believe that Jesus is the Son of God because the Father took Mary as a "Consort" or that Jesus is God or the Son of God because he had no father. Even if you find some groups or individuals who believes this like those groups mentioned above, only proves that they are in error and or are heretic's.
All these false beliefs if I or other Christians encounter, we have and do correct.
So the Quran rebukes or corrects pagans, heretic's and those that are in error, but it does not rebuke or correct what Christians rightfully and correctly believed before Mohamed, what Christians rightfully and correctly believed during the time of Mohamed, and what Christians rightfully and correctly believe to this day.
So my Question to you Ibn and other Muslims.
If Christianity is wrong according to Islam and the Quran, then why doesn't it correct or rebuke what we really have and do believe? Instead of rebuking and correcting what we don't believe. The very same things that we have and do correct when we find others who believe in these false teachings and miss understanding's.
We have the stupidest Christian posters.
Anonymous: The Bible doesn't teach that God produced a son with a consort.
How many times have I written that what the bible actually teaches is not the issue? How many times have I made it clear that the issue is are there Christians who believe Jesus is the divine son of God because he had no mother? I can't believe how retarded your Holy Spirit is!
@Ibn son of a ?????
You wrote....
"How many times have I written that what the bible actually teaches is not the issue?"
How many times have I made it clear that the issue is are there Christians who believe Jesus is the divine son of God because he had no mother? I can't believe how retarded your Holy Spirit is!"
So it doesn't matter what the bible teaches. If the bible teaches something and people claim to be christians but don't beleive what the bible teaches are they CHRISTIAN??????
In the same way if the Quran teaches something say that Jesus was not crucified and a Muslim believes that he was crucified and died are they a MUSLIM????
So now Jesus is divine becaue he had NO MOTHER?
Really Ibn if you look up RETARDED and or STUPID in the dictionary there should be a note "See IBN".
@Ibn son of a ?????
My post most of been more devasting then I thought, since after posting it the only thing you could do was insult someone else and the holy spirit.
Well it was fun playing rope the dope with you and then watching you beg over and over again to get knocked out.
I asked Radical Dumbass whether there are Christians who regard Jesus as the divine son of God because he had no mother. He replied:
"Now whether there are Christians who either through error, believe that Jesus is God or the Son of God because he had no father, or after they are corrected they continue in error and turn that error into heresy only goes to prove that there are or where groups that are in error and or heretics. "
In other words, yes. However, according to him, these are not true Christians since true Christians should not hold such a view. This is a no-true-Scotsman fallacy but that's okay since his admission implies that the Quran is not in error for addressing people who, in his view, erroneously believe that Jesus is the divine son of God because he had no mother or Mary is worthy is worship, etc. Radical Idiot's contention is that the Quran is wrong for calling them as Christians.
I made a mistake. In two of my posts, I said there are some Christians who believe Jesus is God because he had no mother. Clearly that was an egregious error on my part. It should have been father, not mother.
Eid Mubarak to you Yahya and all the Muslims who visit this blog.
This is a bit off topic I know but an interesting article worth reading none the less.
http://bloggingtheology.wordpress.com/2011/08/30/leviticus-1711/
Ibn Ibn Ibn.
50 Million sperm and the one that made you was the fastest????? You should look into getting a lawyer, you obviously got the short end of the stick on that deal.
You really fail to understand how bad it is for your Quran. Let me break it down to you in simpler terms.
If the Quran does not condemn what Christians actually believe and practice then how can you say that Christianity is corrupt or false?
The Quran and Islam teach that Christianity is at best a corrupt religion at worse a false religion. But the only thing it condemns is either what pagans believe, what people who are in error believe or what heretics believe. NOT WHAT ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS believed before Mohamed, during Mohamed and after Mohamed. The same things the Quran condemns is what orthodox Christians would correct and then condemn if continued.
So the question is, if Christianity is false, then why can't Allah Ibn Mohamed condemn what Christians actually believe instead of condemning what Christians themselves will condemn as error, false teachings and heresy?
There is one thing that is universal to all Christians, from Orthodox, to those in error, to Heretics, to even pagan's like the Mormons we all practice it in some form or another, and some more then others. But there is no mention of it in the Quran. WHY?
Ibn I bet even you know what that is, it being so offensive to Muslim and even Jews. If you know what it is then why didn't Allah ibn Mohamed know about it?
Let me put it to you another way. If Christianity is false then why doesn't the Quran condemn what Christians actually believe or practice instead of what people in error, heretics and pagans believe?
I repeat
More importantly if the Quran does not condemn what Christians actually believe and practice then how can you say that Christianity is corrupt or false?
I would like you to answer that question.
radical moderate ,
From you :
'..So my Question to you Ibn and other Muslims. If Christianity is wrong according to Islam and the Quran, then why doesn't it correct or rebuke what we really have and do believe? Instead of rebuking and correcting what we don't believe. The very same things that we have and do correct when we find others who believe in these false teachings and miss understanding's..'
The Quran did address this issue and have been thoroughly explained. You are just ignoring the explanation and continue to spin and playing the game of who shouts the loudest.
Simple question : Why do you believe that biblical jesus was / is god? What godly characteristics did he possess that led you to such belief?
We will test your answers using the bible and Quran.
"More importantly if the Quran does not condemn what Christians actually believe and practice then how can you say that Christianity is corrupt or false?"
Come on now, Allah certainly does condemn Christian beliefs as heresy in the Noble Quran.
"They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, "Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?" And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah is over all things competent." (Noble Quran 5:17)
Allah here presents a simple challenge to prove that Jesus Christ isn't God; Who could stop Allah from destroying Jesus?
Rad Mod: If the Quran does not condemn what Christians actually believe and practice then how can you say that Christianity is corrupt or false?
which version of christianity?
Mahadi wrote….
"Come on now, Allah certainly does condemn Christian beliefs as heresy in the Noble Quran.
"They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary."
Before I can respond to this first sentence I need to know your understanding of this verse from the bible.
Jesus said to her …."'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'" John 20:17
My question is the Father that Jesus is talking about in your understanding to be Allah?
You then go on to quote…
Say, "Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?" And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah is over all things competent." (Noble Quran 5:17)"
And then you ask this question
"Allah here presents a simple challenge to prove that Jesus Christ isn't God; Who could stop Allah from destroying Jesus?""
I can answer that from the bible. Isaiah prophesizing about Jesus's death on the cross writes…
"But the LORD was pleased
To crush Him, [l]putting Him to grief;
If [m]He would render Himself as a guilt offering, " Isaiah 53:10
So the Lord not only destroyed him on the cross but he was pleased to do so.
This verse demonstrates again that Allah ibn Mohamed did not know what he was talking about.
Muslims believe that the crucifixion of Christ was a attempt by the Jews to foil Allah's plan. When in fact the crucifixion was Allahs plan, it was his will, and it pleased him to do so for the salvation of his people.
The bible also teaches that Jesus is the Creator of all things, that all things where created through him by him for him and in him all things hold together.
Jesus is given dominion over all things, authority over all flesh. So again thank you for proving that Allah Ibn Mohamed did not know what he was talking about.
Anon wrote...
"Rad Mod: If the Quran does not condemn what Christians actually believe and practice then how can you say that Christianity is corrupt or false?
which version of christianity?"
Obvioulsy the ORTHODOX Christian belief.
BTW which version of Islam does the Quran promote?
Rad Mod: Obvioulsy the ORTHODOX Christian belief.
According to who? Mormons? Nestorians? Ebionites? Arians? Jehovas Witnesses? 7th day Adventists? Why are these groups wrong but your version right?
Rad Mod: BTW which version of Islam does the Quran promote?
From my reading of it, broadly speaking, the Quran addresses mainstream Trinitarians, Gnostics and a "heretical" sect which worshiped Mary.
Sorry, I misunderstood your question. The Quran promotes the same version of Islam as was preached by Jesus, Moses, Abraham; basically all of God's prophets prior to Muhammad (God's blessings be on them all).
annon said,
According to who? Mormons? Nestorians? Ebionites? Arians? Jehovas Witnesses? 7th day Adventists?
I say,
acourding to the Bible.
This is the only legitimate way to determine orthodoxy.
quote:
We are from God. Whoever knows God listens to us; whoever is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the Spirit of truth and the spirit of error.
(1 John 4:6)
end quote:
You say,
Why are these groups wrong but your version right?
I say,
Because they don't follow the teachings of Jesus and his apostles as recorded in the Word of God.
Peace
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
RM,
The Qur'an never condemn your version of "true' Trinity Orthodoxy.
Nowhere it says that the Trinity is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit or Mary (p) or whoever His creation is..
In fact, the Qur'an itself condemns all sorts of idol whorshiping or shirk, i.e., associating partners with Allah.
It would not matter if the Trinity was composed of any permutations and combinations of the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit or the Mary or even Calvin or Joseph Smith. It would still be considered as associating partners with Allah.
If you look at the verses in the Qur'an which say about of Trinity it is verse 4:171
..walā taqūlū thalāthatun..
(...وَلَا تَقُولُوا ثَلَاثَةٌ...)
..And (do) not Say Three..
The imperfect verb ثَلَاثَةٌ is in the present continuous tense fi'il mudhāri' (فعل مضارع).
http://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=4&verse=171#(4:171:1)
God forbid people to fall into Trinitarian mentality in the past now and in the future.
Let us whorship the One and True God. The Almighty God Who created Jesu (p) as it is still equally clear in the Old Testament & The New Testament that the God is one God without any partners.
Wassalam
Eric said,
it is still equally clear in the Old Testament & The New Testament that the God is one God without any partners.
I say,
Right
No orthodox Trinitarian Christian ever ascribed partners to Yahweh so when Muslims parrot the writings of Muhammad and preach against this practice they are not addressing Christians.
That is the whole point
you say,
It would not matter if the Trinity was composed of any permutations and combinations of the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit or the Mary or even Calvin or Joseph Smith. It would still be considered as associating partners with Allah.
I say,
No Trinitarian Christian ever held that God was a combination or permutation of anything.
The Christian doctrine of divine simplicity explicitly rules that sort of thing out.
When you speak againist a strawman like that you are not addressing us.
That is the whole point.
If someone is going to reject Christianity it would be a good if they could at least articulate what it actually teaches.
If I produced a book claiming to be scripture that condemend Islam because it believed in a “Trinity” of Ali, Muhammad and Salman al Farsi you would be justified in being skeptical of my claim to revelation.
If when called on it I pointed to the beliefs of the Alawi as justification for my charge this would not help my case.
God would surely know that the Alawi were not orthodox Muslims and their beliefs are not representative of Islam.
Any Christian can see that Muhammad’s writings display a profound ignorance of Christanity and this ignorance is carried over to his followers as witnessed by the comments on this very thread.
please take a little time to understand what you are condemning or only people who share your ignorance will be able to take you seriously
peace
So it looks we now have Christians trying to argue that they don't believe in the Trinity, yet they'll confidently tout that Jesus is God, Yahweh is God and the Holy Spirit is also God. You see brothers and sisters Allah swt made it clear in the Quran that they follow nothing but conjecture as we can clearly see in these posts.
Regardless, to RadMod, Isaiah 53:10 is not speaking about the alleged crucifixion, but about the state of the children of Israel. Nothing more.
Jesus was not God. He was a human being who ate food, drank water, slept and answered the call of nature. He didn't have authority over all things, he (Jesus) clearly said that he had no knowledge of the hour, which proves he wasn't God. If your conviction is that God was a human being he did all of those things while running for his life from King Herod (his own creation), then I really don't know what to say.
You're arguing about something that we have little to no evidence to support.
I also find it strange that Christians keep referring to God as Yahweh when Jesus never even uttered those words. Jesus spoke Aramiac/Hebrew, and the Aramiac/Hebrew word for God is Allah.
"About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"—which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46)
How come Jesus didn't say Yahweh but Allah/Eloi instead? Jesus was using Allah long before Muslims were.
Here's the thing: Christians say Jesus was fully god and fully human. His human properties were obvious: he ate, drank, slept, etc. But what about his godly properties? Judging from his actions alone, one cannot logically come to the conclusion that he was fully god. I challenge Christians to prove he was God from his actions alone, not his statements or what others have said about him.
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"If I produced a book claiming to be scripture that condemend Islam because it believed in a “Trinity” of Ali, Muhammad and Salman al Farsi you would be justified in being skeptical of my claim to revelation."
FMM, your average Christian flock most likely have no idea THE BIBLE never record Jesus (p) say "O you who believe I AM IN FACT MYSELF GOD" OR EVEN "BELIEVE IN THE TRINITY AND YOU SHALL BE SAVED" apart from just blind faith?
There is also no explicit teachings of the apostles which teach Christ is God.
So my position is justified to challenge your scriptural misinterpretation of a doctrine never taught by the apostles (peace be upon them all).
Can you show me explicit teaching of the apostles without employing inference and extrapolation?
The Quran is always explicit about who is God
هُوَ اللَّهُ الَّذِي لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ الْمَلِكُ الْقُدُّوسُ السَّلَامُ الْمُؤْمِنُ الْمُهَيْمِنُ الْعَزِيزُ الْجَبَّارُ الْمُتَكَبِّرُ ۚ سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ
He is Allah , other than whom there is no deity, the Sovereign, the Pure, the Perfection, the Bestower of Faith, the Overseer, the Exalted in Might, the Compeller, the Superior. Exalted is Allah above whatever they associate with Him. (Q 59:23)
Wassalam
eric said:
There is also no explicit teachings of the apostles which teach Christ is God.
I say,
quote:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.........
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
(John 1:1-2 and 14a)
"Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel" (which means, God with us).
(Matthew 1:23)
To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.
(Romans 9:5)
And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true; and we are in him who is true, in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.
(1 John 5:20)
waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,
(Titus 2:13)
peace
mahdi said,
So it looks we now have Christians trying to argue that they don't believe in the Trinity
I say,
When did anyone say that?.
What we are saying is that Muslims following their leader Muhammad don’t understand what belief in the Trinity means.
you say,
How come Jesus didn't say Yahweh but Allah/Eloi instead?
I say,
In this paticular instance Jesus said 'êl(not Allah) because he was quoting a very specific prophecy about the crucifixion (psalm 22)
On the other hand most of the time his favored term was “Father” a term that was never used by your leader or found in your book as far as I know.
peace
@Anon
You wrote….
"According to who? Mormons? Nestorians? Ebionites? Arians? Jehovas Witnesses? 7th day Adventists? Why are these groups wrong but your version right?"
As FMM has pointed out it is the scripture that determines. The same can be said to you what makes your version of Islam right, why are the Ahamadians, the Alawaits, the Ishamlites, the Twelvers and all there various sub sects wrong.
You also wrote
"From my reading of it, broadly speaking, the Quran addresses mainstream Trinitarians, Gnostics and a "heretical" sect which worshiped Mary."
Why I agree with you the Quran address Gnostics and heritical groups however no where does it address mainstream Trinitarians. And that is the problem
You also wrote as a correction….
"The Quran promotes the same version of Islam as was preached by Jesus, Moses, Abraham; basically all of God's prophets prior to Muhammad (God's blessings be on them all)."
Really how do you know?
@Erik wrote…
"The Qur'an never condemn your version of "true' Trinity Orthodoxy.
Nowhere it says that the Trinity is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit or Mary (p) or whoever His creation is.."
Yes that’s the problem it never condems it. BTW my version of "True Trinity Orthodoxy" is the same version that Justin Martyr wrote about in 160 AD
"We rightfully worship the father, and his son being the second, and the prophetic spirit as the third"
This is the "True Trinity Orthodoxy" that the Nicean Creed (325 AD) begins with
"We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible."
So as you can see from the quote from Justin Martyr that and the actual Nicean Creed that the Doctrine of the Trinity was well known hundreds of years before Allah Ibn Mohamed.
You also wrote….
"In fact, the Qur'an itself condemns all sorts of idol worshiping or shirk, i.e., associating partners with Allah."
There in lies the problem. The doctrine of the Trinity does not associate partners with God, instead the doctrine of the trinity is GOD. Jesus is not the partner of GOD, he is GOD, the holy spirit is not the partner of God he is GOD, and the Father is not divided into thirds.
Now since this is known and was known long before Mohamed then why doesn't Allah know about it. Why does he get it so very very wrong?
You also wrote and quote the Quran again demonstrating the problem
"not Say Three".
Say not THREE WHAT? Taking that verse just on the surface just says not to say the number Three. Is the Quran saying that there is no number three in the Arabic numeral system? So say not three what? Three GODS? Three Cheese pizza, Three bean Chili, THREE WHAT.
It demonstrates again that Allah did not know what he is talking about.
@Mahadi
You wrote...
So it looks we now have Christians trying to argue that they don't believe in the Trinity,."
When did FMM or I ever argue against the doctrine of the Trinity? We argue agaisnt ALlahs and your ignorance of the doctrine of the trinity.
You demonstrated your ignorance when you wrote...
" yet they'll confidently tout that Jesus is God, Yahweh is God and the Holy Spirit is also God"
YHWH is GOD, the FATHER IS YHWH, JESUS is YHWH, and the Holy Spirit is YHWH, that in a nut shell is the doctrine of the trinity.
@Mahadi
You wrote...
"Regardless, to RadMod, Isaiah 53:10 is not speaking about the alleged crucifixion, but about the state of the children of Israel. Nothing more. "
That is the Rabinical Jewish interpretation, specificaly Rashi's interpretation. Those same Jews that deny that Jesus is the Messiah.
So if Isaiah is writing about the state of Israel, then Israel has done no violence, there is no deciet in Israel, and the Palastinians are actually being healed by Israel?
@FMM
I think from now on I'm just going to write...
"Yeah what FMM wrote..." LOL
What happened to IBN we Lost IBN
@The Muslims
Can you show me a verse in the Quran that condems or even mentions "Comunion"?
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
John 1:1-2 and 14a
-----------------------
Logos, which is translated as “Word” in John 1:1 does not refers directly to Jesus Al Masih, We muslims believe Jesus (p) is Kalamullah (meaning the "word of God") uttered at the moment of Jesus' conception. But this is a recognition of Jesus' status as a messenger of God, speaking on God's behalf:
قَالَتْ رَبِّ أَنَّىٰ يَكُونُ لِي وَلَدٌ وَلَمْ يَمْسَسْنِي بَشَرٌ ۖ قَالَ كَذَٰلِكِ اللَّهُ يَخْلُقُ مَا يَشَاءُ ۚ إِذَا قَضَىٰ أَمْرًا فَإِنَّمَا يَقُولُ لَهُ كُن فَيَكُونُ
She said, "My Lord, how will I have a child when no man has touched me?" [The angel] said, "Such is Allah ; He creates what He wills. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, 'Be,' and it is. (Q 3:47)
In the beginning, God had a plan, a purpose, which “became flesh” when Jesus was conceived.
John 1:14 does not hint anything that Jesus (p) existed before he was born and was called “the Word.”
Matthew 1:23
-----------------
The name can be translated as, “God with us” or “God is with us.” Of course we believe that that God was with the people through Jesus (p) his messenger, and Jesus himself said that if one had seen him, he had seen the Father.
Romans 9:5
-----------------
I wonder why FMM choose to interpolate his interpretation.If we use different translating committees, the meaning vary greatly :
RSV: “to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed forever. Amen.”
Moffatt: “the patriarchs are theirs, and theirs too (so far as natural descent goes) is the Christ. (Blessed for evermore be the God who is over all! Amen.)”
You choose wording to make Christ into God, and others go on the contrary into a type of eulogy or doxology referring to God the Father.
1 John 5:20
-----------------
This also show that FMM, try to reconcile the final sentence in the verse, “This is the true God,” to refer to Jesus (p) , since the closest noun to “This” is “Jesus Christ.”
However, since God and Jesus are both referred to in the first sentence of the verse, the final sentence can refer to either one of them.
The word “this,” in its context, not always be the closest noun or pronoun.
eg Acts 7:18 and 19 :
Titus 2:13
-----------------
Sincere person will understand the verse is talking about saying “no” to ungodliness while we wait for the appearing of Jesus (p), who is the glory of God.
The absence of the definite article before “our Savior Jesus Christ” is adequate enough that the scripture refers to two beings—both the “Great God,” and the “Savior,” Jesus Christ.
FMM,
Why don't you worship God, the one and true Lord of the Universe. Why not accept the explicit teaching of the Scriptures rather than trying to reconcile with inferences and extrapolations?
Scripture is always explicit concerning God that the Lord our God is one Lord' (Deuteronomy 6:6, Mark 12:29) never describing God as 'three in one'.
- Al Masih declared that it is eternal life to
knowthe Father as the only true God
(John 17:3 )
- The apostles repeatedly taught that
God is one, not the second, the third etc. 1 Corinthians 8:6
-God is shown as one person, not three
Exodus 24, Ezekiel 1, Daniel 7, Acts 7, and Revelation 4-5.
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
RM,
Instead of preaching blind faith misrepresentation of God and prophet Jesus (peace be upon him), why dont you show your evidence?
You insist your version of Christianity believed in one God. But you keep saying that, there is three distinct Godhead ? What are you talking about? Do you really think Muslims will find this coherent?
I pray you will find hidaayah someday God-Willing
Wassalam
At least you're not claiming this was described/predicted in the Qur'an.
Good job old Maurice Bucaille isn't still alive otherwise I'm sure he'd be frantically searching for some vague sura he could twist into saying so.
Eric,
You ask for explicit scriptures I give you explicit scriptures.
Then you wax on and on trying to make the explicit scripture not say what they explicitly say. This is a pattern with you.
It's like Bill Clintion trying to explain that that it all depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
There are literally hundreds of passages from the Bible OT and NT that read in context prove Jesus is God but you don’t see this because you reject the genuine revelation of God and instead look to a book that has no internal context at all.
The only way you know to look at scripture is to proof text.
It would be like me looking at JK Rowlings books for one sentence quotes where Harry potter explicitly says that he is a wizard. It’s just silly
Again I challenge you to actually read God’s genuine revelation in context a book at a time and then we can discuss what it means.
eric says,
In the beginning, God had a plan, a purpose, which “became flesh” when Jesus was conceived.
John 1:14 does not hint anything that Jesus (p) existed before he was born and was called “the Word.”
The Word of God in context however says,
The word was God and was with God in the begining.....and the Word became flesh and we have seen his glory.
Peace
@Eric
You wrote...
"You insist your version of Christianity believed in one God. But you keep saying that, there is three distinct Godhead ?"
What????? When did I ever write that there were 3 Godheads?
You ask for proof, what do you want proof of, that the doctrine of the trinity is not what the Quran says it is?
I have done that.
That the doctrine of the Trinity existed hundreads of years before Mohamed and would of been well known since it was a creed?
I have done that.
That long before Nicea, Justin Martry wrote "We rightfully worship the father, and his son being the second and the prophetic spirit the third". (160 AD)
Do you want me to prove to you that Ignatious, Polycarp, Justin Martry, Ireaneous and others writing in the first century all say we worship One GOD, Who is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. That Jesus is GOD in Man, that he pre existex and entered into human flesh to be crucified on Calverys cross that he was reserected on the third day, all for the salvation of his people?
I can do that.
So what do you wnat me to prove?
@Erick one more thing.
I'm not asking you or any other Muslim to believe in the Doctrine of the Trinity. I'm not even asking you to understand it. But I do not think it is to much for you to realize that what Allah Ibn Mohamed condems in the Quran is not even close to the doctrine of the trinity.
I also do not think it is to much to ask for you to realize that no where does Allah ibn Mohamed condem what "Mainstream" christians beleived before Islam, during Islam and after Islam beleived.
Can you accept that?
RM said,
I think from now on I'm just going to write...
"Yeah what FMM wrote..." LOL
I say,
I apologize for butting in on your homerun derby it’s just that I can’t resist swinging at the easy pitches that the competition are throwing.
LOL
peace
@Erick one more thing, you wrote..
"Instead of preaching blind faith misrepresentation of God and prophet Jesus (peace be upon him), why dont you show your evidence?"
First off in your exchange with FMM you are the one who mis represented God and Jesus and yes he was a prophet.
Your attempted refutation of John 1:1 has to be the worst refutation I have heard from a Muslim.
According to Islam we are all created by the word of GOD, everything is created by "BE" so that is not saying much for Jesus to simply say that he is created with Gods word.
Second to say that John 1:1 does not refer directly to Jesus is beyond poor reading comprehension.
Although my brother FMM did a excellent job in explaining this to you I would like to add a few things.
Lets take a look at John 1:1
"In the begging was the word"
So in the begging the WORD existed, it's not a plan, it is something tangable since it continues on.
"and the Word was with GOD" So the Word existed from the begging, it was physicaly with GOD and ...
"Tthe word WAS GOD" so now we have the WORD IS GOD, not his plan, not his for knowing not anything other then GOD himself. Unless your going to say hat "BE" is GOD.
But it continues. "HE was in the begging with GOD" So this word is a HE it is a person that exists not a plan, or forknowlege or anything other then a PERSON, but it continues on...
ALL THINGS CAME INTO BEING THROUGH HIM and apart from HIM nothing came into being that has come into being". So HE the WORD, that existed with God from the begging who is GOD created everything.
"IN HIM, (person) was life and the life was the light of Men. The light shines in the darnkess and the darkness (YOU AND OTHER MUSLIMS AND NON BELIEVERS)did not comprehend it."
How can you come up with "In the beginning, God had a plan, a purpose, which “became flesh” when Jesus was conceived.
John 1:14 does not hint anything that Jesus (p) existed before he was born and was called “the Word.”
He was not called the word when he became flesh he is called the WORD THAT PRE EXISTED WITH GOD BECUSE HE IS GOD AND HE CREATED ALL THINGS. To say otherwise goes way off the reservation of reasoning.
@FMM
Oh brother thats perfectly ok it was welcome releif feel free to butt in anytime. lol
It just amazes me that we do not even know each other are probobly different in many ways and yet when it comes to the word we are perfectly in tune.
Now back to Erik
You projected your blind faith on to me. Lets examine your blind faith.
The Quran and Islam taeches that there were pre Mohamed followers of Jesus. These pre Mohamed Islamic followers of Jesus had to beleive a few things.
1. Jesus was born of a virgin.
2. Jesus was not divine he was only a prophet and the Jewish Mesiah.
3. Jesus did not die on the cross it was only made to appear that he was. (What ever that means)
So I challange you find me a group that existed that beleived in all three of these things.
The only answer I get from Muslims is "well the quran says so, so it is true" or I have heard this many times...
"If history disagrees with the Quran then it is history that is wrong not the Quran."
Sir that is BLIND FAITH.
RM says,
It just amazes me that we do not even know each other are probobly different in many ways and yet when it comes to the word we are perfectly in tune.
I say,
Its called the fellowship of the gospel and the unity of the Holy Spirit. I see it all the time somtimes it gives me goose bumps.
It is nothing less than a miracle of God that absent any magisterial or ecclesiastical authority Christians from all kinds of cultural and denominational backgrounds spontaneously believe the same things in essential matters with out ever being taught.
Quote:
that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.
(1 John 1:3)
But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie--just as it has taught you, abide in him.
(1 John 2:27)
End quote;
This spontaneous fellowship of the Holy Spirit is yet more evidence of the truth of Christianity.
Peace
eric
In my haste I almost missed this one.
You list the following verses,
(John 17:3 )1 Corinthians 8:6
Exodus 24, Ezekiel 1, Daniel 7, Acts 7, and Revelation 4-5
I'm shocked that you would choose these paticular passages
Since you did so I guess I'll paste a little Islam destorying context from these very passages
quote:
and seated above the likeness of a throne was a likeness with a human appearance.............Such was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD And when I saw it, I fell on my face, and I heard the voice of one speaking.
(Ezekiel 1:26-28)
The glory of the LORD dwelt on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days. And on the seventh day he called to Moses out of the midst of the cloud. Now the appearance of the glory of the LORD was like a devouring fire on the top of the mountain in the sight of the people of Israel.
(Exodus 24:16-17)
"I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.
(Daniel 7:13-14)
When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, "Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do. And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.
(John 17:1-5)
yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.
(1 Corinthians 8:6)
And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit."
(Acts 7:59)
saying with a loud voice, "Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!" And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, "To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!" And the four living creatures said, "Amen!" and the elders fell down and worshiped.
(Revelation 5:12-14)
All I can say is wow. How did you miss all that? It's like a gift to the Trinatarian
now I know that you are not actually looking at what you are posting.
peace
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"That the doctrine of the Trinity existed hundreads of years before Mohamed and would of been well known since it was a creed?"
RM, prophet Muhammad (p) teaches that God Almighty is One. This is in sync with genuine previous revelation.
If you claim that the Trinity was taught as essential creed from the beginning, why don't you show Trinity explicitly declared as creeds from the earliest form of Christianity (the apostolic age).
Trinity was developed as as creedsin much later era by Athanasius of 5-6th century.
Why would you accept the legitimacy of such a doctrinal statement, made by uninspired men who lived hundred years after the apostolic era?
I also found it silly you denied saying God is three but quote the following:
"We rightfully worship the father, and his son being the second, and the prophetic spirit as the third"
Your reasoning is that A is X, B is X, and C is X, but there is only one X is a logical fallacy.
This alone demonstrates that the reasoning is false.
Accurate reasoning from the Scriptures should not result in logical fallacies.
No matter what you choose to beliebe the facts remain nowhere does the Bible describe God as three persons in one being – on the contrary, He is consistently described as one person.
RM, you rest your faith on something being the product of long and gradual development over time, amid decades of disputes, bickering, disagreement, and even violence.
Wassalam
Eric says,
Your reasoning is that A is X, B is X, and C is X, but there is only one X is a logical fallacy.
I say,
Not at all
You are confusing person with nature.
You’re assuming X equals person when in this particular instance X equals nature.
Let me illustrate what I mean.
Adam is human
Eve is human
Cain is human
But
there is only one human nature “X” that all humans and only humans share.
This is perfectly logical reasoning.
Use your head man
Peace
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"All I can say is wow. How did you miss all that? It's like a gift to the Trinatarian "
Whats your point? did you actually look at the passages you quote? The passage say nothing about Trinity or Jesus (p) is being God we are discussing.
You may try to show that these verse implying something against Islam but there should be addressed separately.
The point was God is mentioned as one person. God is distinguished from his Creation in His throne.
Wassalam
eric says,
you rest your faith on something being the product of long and gradual development over time, amid decades of disputes, bickering, disagreement, and even violence.
I say,
I can't speak for RM but I would not doubt he would agree with me
My faith rests only in the triune God as revealed by the person of Jesus Christ.
I have directly and personaly experienced the love of the God the Father displayed in the passion of the God the Son by the power of God the Spirit.
Three persons one God.
I believed in the Trinity before I ever heard the word before I knew what a church father was before I knew there was such a thing as councils and creeds.
Long before I could articulate the doctrine properly. Long before I could even begin to get my head around all the nuances of this great truth.
I believed it based only on the revelation of God in the schripture and in my heart.
It was only later that I happily discovered that Christians have been discovering the same wonderful truth since the beginning and just like me had struggled to articulate it properly and explore it‘s nuances.
The Trinity is not the result of a gradual process the gradual process is simply evidence for the Gloriousness and of Awesomeness of God.
Peace
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"Let me illustrate what I mean.
Adam is human
Eve is human
Cain is human
But
there is only one human nature “X” that all humans and only humans share.
This is perfectly logical reasoning. "
I use my head trying to understand your reasoning and in an utter confusion now.
Who was tempted and fell from Heaven, was He Adam (p) or Eve or even Cain since they were all the *same* human or weren't they?
[scratching head]
Alhamdulillah I'm a Musllim
Wassalam
you say,
The passage say nothing about Trinity or Jesus (p) is being God we are discussing.
I say,
what? in the passages you mentioned Jesus is
worshiped
prayed to
given everlasting dominion
called by terms reserved for God
shown to be prexisting in Glory
and...
God is shown to enter his creation while at the same time remaining God.
and you somehow believe they say nothing about the Trinity.
amazing
peace
You say,
Who was tempted and fell from Heaven, was He Adam (p) or Eve or even Cain since they were all the *same* human or weren't they?
I say,
Adam is the "who" who fell the what is all humanity.
you are confusing a "who" with a "what"
a person with a nature.
use your head man.
When Adam sined Eve and Seth and me all fell together in the one humanity.
peace
FMM wrote...
"I can't speak for RM but I would not doubt he would agree with me "
My response
"Yeah what he said...."
@Eric sorry going to bed but I will respond to you on the morrow
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
" in the passages you mentioned Jesus is worshiped, prayed to, given everlasting dominion"
1 Kings 1:23
And they told the king, “Nathan the prophet is here.” So he went before the king and bowed with his face to the ground.
Nathan (p) was a prophet of God. Does it make him God when David (p), i.e., bowing down before him?
People honored and respected Jesus but necessarly make him God.
Other ex: 2 Samuel 14
Amazing
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"you are confusing a "who" with a "what" a person with a nature.
use your head man. "
Yes Im confused.
Still in your reasoning, in this world we need "who" as we need "what", they cant be separated.
"What" in a "FMM" is different to "What" in an"Erik", that is why we need Who?
Wassalam
you say,
Still in your reasoning, in this world we need "who" as we need "what", they cant be separated.
I say,
who is trying to separate them? I’m merely pointing out that “who” and “what” are not the same concept.
I agree we need both concepts your confusion results in your inability to understand that they are not equivalent.
You say,
"What" in a "FMM" is different to "What" in an"Erik", that is why we need Who?
I say,
The human nature in FMM is not different than the human nature in an Erick.
Our differences are in secondary properties like skin color and height not in nature.
All humans share the same nature we are all homo sapiens “thinking animals“. That goes for RM and Muhammad and Justin Beiber.
The nature of the ice cube in my glass is the same as the ice cube in your glass. They are both frozen H2O.
The nature of the fire in my fireplace is the same as the nature of the fire in my gas stove they are both the “rapid production of light, heat, and flames from something that is burning”
Etc etc etc
The same principal holds with the Father and the Son and the Spirit. They (and only they) share the same divine nature.
They are God.
Three whos one what!!!!!!!
No one said we don’t need the concept of “who” I'm just pointing out that it is not the same thing as the concept of what.
Use your head man
Peace
you say,
People honored and respected Jesus but necessarly make him God.
I say,
Giving someone honor and respect do not necessarly mean you think they are God.
Praying to them and worshiping them and calling them God necessarly do.
peace
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"Praying to them and worshiping them and calling them God necessarly do.."
I have some reservations the way original the Greek and Hebrew words that are translated “worship” the way the Greek and Hebrew words for “worship” have been translated into English.
I dont think we can learn correctly about worship from an English version of the Bible.
In the Quran, the Arabic triliteral root for verb "to worship" is ʿayn bā dāl (ع ب د). I can show you where these verb occurs 122 times in the Quran consistently denote worship to something considered as God .
eg:
وَاعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ وَلَا تُشْرِكُوا بِهِ شَيْئًا ۖ
*Worship Allah* (wa-uʿ'budū l-laha) and associate nothing with Him (Q 4:36)
وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا نُوحًا إِلَىٰ قَوْمِهِ فَقَالَ يَا قَوْمِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ مَا لَكُم مِّنْ إِلَٰهٍ غَيْرُهُ ۖ أَفَلَا تَتَّقُونَ
And We had certainly sent Noah to his people, and he said, "O my people, *worship Allah* (uʿ'budū l-laha) ; you have no deity other than Him; then will you not fear Him?" (Q 23:23)
Can you find me an explicit passages like the one I cited above in the Bible to showcase the command people to worship Jesus (p) ?
Also provide the original Greek (Proskyneo; proskuneo) and Hebrew words (shachah) and how they are translated for consistently in many Bible versions when the words are used of person to Jesus (p) and to God more than just "Giving someone honor and respect"
Wassalam
Well its the monring and I see Erik is still twisting in the wind.
Since my brother has answered you on every point only to see you twist the meaning and context of scripture there is no need for me to respond at all.
@Erik I do find it interesting that FMM and my self have answered all of your questions but you have yet to answer a single one of mine. Why is that?
You accused me of having blind faith but yet it is you who have blind faith in your quran.
Can you answer my quesitons please.
1. Show me a verse that condems or even mentions Christians practicing Comunion.
2. Show me from history the pre mohamed islamic followers of Jesus. Who where they what where they called what scripture they followed etc...
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...The same principal holds with the Father and the Son and the Spirit. They
(and only they) share the same divine nature.
They are God.
Three whos one what!!!!!!!... "
You explain in so roundabout way just to arrive at the conclusion that God is one but tree.
If I and you the same "what" (not exactly true) but different "who", it is simply different of us ..
Why FMM why?
I find it quite Inapprehensible the reason not to believe that simple message of the correct biblical understanding not to include the idea of a triune God.
Wassalam
eric said:
If I and you the same "what" (not exactly true) but different "who", it is simply different of us ...
I say,
could you rephrase this for me? I'm not sure what you trying to comunicate.
you say,
Can you find me an explicit passages like the one I cited above in the Bible to showcase the command people to worship Jesus (p) ?
I say,
You are still expecting God’s genuine revelation to be like the non-contextual Quran.
The Bible has context. There are stories and complex arguments.
It’s is not intended to be proof texted but to be read and studied.
When you make demands that God format his revelation in a manner that you prefer you put your put yourself in the place of God.
Read the Bible in context a book at a time and you will see that Jesus is revealed to be God and the only appropriate response to this revelation is worship.
But just tease you a little bit check this out
And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him."
(Hebrews 1:6)
Peace
You say,
I find it quite Inapprehensible the reason not to believe that simple message of the correct biblical understanding not to include the idea of a triune God.
I say,
the reason is simple.
I do not rely on the speculations of a man living hundreds of years after Jesus for my understanding of God.
I rely on the Word of God.
peace
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
Hebrews 1:6 did not command people to worship Jesus (p)
God ordered the angels to bow down before Jesus (p) because he is superior to the angels just as prophet Adam (p) (as there is similar instance in the Qur'an)
وَإِذْ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ أَبَىٰ وَاسْتَكْبَرَ وَكَانَ مِنَ الْكَافِرِينَ
And [mention] when We said to the angels, "Prostrate before Adam"; so they prostrated, except for Iblees. He refused and was arrogant and became of the disbelievers. (Q 2:34)
But muslims never succumbed to a temptation to attribute divinity to Adam (p).
We have a situation here where Trinitarians are not being honest with the translation to support the case that the word "worship" in the religious sense. Please check that other Bible versions use word "bow" , "adore" or "obeisance" in place of "worship"from the Greek word "proskyneo/proskuneo".
If you argue the context In this case, the adjacent verse, Hebrews 1:9, says, “therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions.”
Thus, Jesus (p) cannot be the supreme God, because the supreme God does not have a God. Furthermore, Jesus’s God “set” him above others and “anointed” him.
This makes it clear that Hebrews is not referring to Christ being the supreme God worthy of worship, but rather a man with great authority under God like many great prophets of God.
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...eric said:
If I and you the same "what" (not exactly true) but different "who", it is simply different of us ..."
I simply said that if I and you are the same "what" but different "who"
then
we are distinctively a *different* being.
God is not the same as Jesus (p).
See how your reasoning is confusing yourself.
wassalam
Eric please slow down and explain what you are trying to communicate.
I'm not sure why perhaps because of frustration but at times I don't understand what you are saying.
You said :
we are distinctively a *different* being.
I say,
please elaborate
Who is the “we” you are talking about?
What do you mean by “being“?
You say,
God is not the same as Jesus (p).
I say,
The Father is not the same person as the Son.
However since both the Father and the Son share the same Divine nature. They are both God.
This is not rocket science it's logic 101
Peace
You say,
Thus, Jesus (p) cannot be the supreme God, because the supreme God does not have a God. Furthermore, Jesus’s God “set” him above others and “anointed” him.
I say,
Do you believe is a hierocracy of god’s?
Christians believe that there no such thing as a supreme God.
A God is supreme or he is not God.
Angels aren't allowed to worship men. Men don't worship phrophets.
All creatures worship God
quote:
Then I looked, and I heard around the throne and the living creatures and the elders the voice of many angels, numbering myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice, "Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!" And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, "To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!" And the four living creatures said, "Amen!" and the elders fell down and worshiped.
(Revelation 5:11-14)
end quote:
The person Jesus had two natures one human one divine. His human nature is not the same thing as his divine nature. Because he has a human nature the person Jesus can be set above others and anointed by the Father.
This in no way changes the fact that he also has a divine nature and therefore is God.
You say,
Please check that other Bible versions use word "bow" , "adore" or "obeisance" in place of "worship"from the Greek word "proskyneo/proskuneo".
I say,
Again with the Bill Clinton like hair spliting.
The exact same greek word is used repeatedly in the Bible in commands to Worship that no Muslim would take to mean anything but "worship".
for example,
quote:
"Fear God and give him glory, because the hour of his judgment has come, and worship him who made heaven and earth, the sea and the springs of water."
(Revelation 14:7)
end quote
Worship includes things like bowing and adoreing and obeisance.
But the bible makes it clear that only God is to be worshiped
quote:
When Peter entered, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him (same Greek word). But Peter lifted him up, saying, "Stand up; I too am a man."
(Acts 10:25-26)
end quote:
Please don't play with words.
Peace
I all most forgot this
quote:
Then Jesus said to him, "Be gone, Satan! For it is written, "'You shall worship (same Greek word) the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.'"
(Matthew 4:10)
peace
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...You said :
we are distinctively a *different* being.
please elaborate
Who is the “we” you are talking about?
What do you mean by “being“? ..."
Forgive my English, I am saying that you (FMM) and me (Erik) is a different "being/thing"
because
as you said
You and I are of the same "what" but different "who"
This is something very obvious. We are not the same being as we live in different location, we have different brain/body, we are different being
Do I make myself clear? I am using your reasoning and your terminolgy
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"..Worship includes things like bowing and adoreing and obeisance.."
Of course it does however, the point is Trintarian employ selective translation techniques in order to impress upon the reader a man-made doctrine.
It should be clear to any reasonable person that the Greek word used is generally used to bow down with respect to any higher authority.
This word is translated both as "to bow down before" as well as "worship" in the NT.
In 1 Samuel 25:23-24 when Abigail "fell before" king David (p)
Was she "worshipping" him?
Was she "praying" to him? When she addressed him as "my lord,"
Did she mean that he was her God?.
Similarly in 2 Kings 4:37, Genesis 50:18 and 2 Samuel 19:18
So it illustrates clearly serious problem with your claim of Divinity of Jesus (p).
Those who play with words with such sublime manipulation of the translation in order to establish a man-made doctrine was exposed by God in the Qur'an:
وَإِنَّ مِنْهُمْ لَفَرِيقًا يَلْوُونَ أَلْسِنَتَهُم بِالْكِتَابِ لِتَحْسَبُوهُ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَمَا هُوَ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَيَقُولُونَ هُوَ مِنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ وَمَا هُوَ مِنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ وَيَقُولُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ
"And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, "This is from Allah ," but it is not from Allah . And they speak untruth about Allah while they know." (Q 3:78)
Wassalam
You say,
Forgive my English, I am saying that you (FMM) and me (Erik) is a different "being/thing"
I say,
Oh now I understand what you are getting at.
No need to ask for forgiveness. Thank you for elaborating I just wanted to make sure I understood.
Yes we are different persons and because human nature is divisible we are different beings.
The Divine nature on the other hand is not divisible by definition.
There can't be two Gods but there can be two humans.
Therefore the Father and The Son and the Spirit while being different persons are the same being.
Being is not the same as person.
You say,
as we live in different location, we have different brain/body, we are different being
I say,
The Divine nature is not confined to space and time in the universe so these “differences” don’t apply to God.
The Father does not live in a different location from the Son for example.
The things that are different between me and you are secondary properties like location and age we share the same essence (nature) we are both human.
In the same way the Father and Son share the same nature they are both God.
I hope that helps
Peace
you say,
This word is translated both as "to bow down before" as well as "worship" in the NT.
I say,
actually, this word occurs 60 times in the NT and is translated worship every time.
There is no Greek word that can be more accurately translated worship. If you know of a better word feel free to let me know
In the NT It means worship there is really no debate on this subject.
You say,
Was she "worshipping" him?
I say,
I can’t read her mind but I would never let the actions of a women fearing for the life of her family be normative of how a person should conduct himself before mere mortal men.
You say,
Was she "praying" to him? When she addressed him as "my lord,"
I say,
If you can't see the difference between a frightened woman addressing a superior right in front of her and this incident involving Stephen and the Glorified Christ then I can’t help you,
Quote:
And he said, "Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God." But they cried out with a loud voice and stopped their ears and rushed together at him. Then they cast him out of the city and stoned him.........And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." And falling to his knees he cried out with a loud voice, "Lord, do not hold this sin against them." And when he had said this, he fell asleep.
(Acts 7:56-60)
End quote:
Peace
eric,
Compare these uses of the same greek word
Then I looked, and I heard around the throne and the living creatures and the elders the voice of many angels, numbering myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice, "Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!" And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, "To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!" And the four living creatures said, "Amen!" and the elders fell down and worshiped.
(Revelation 5:11-14)
With this
And the twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped God who was seated on the throne, saying, "Amen. Hallelujah!"
(Revelation 19:4)
with this
Then Jesus said to him, "Be gone, Satan! For it is written, "'You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.'"
(Matthew 4:10)
If you think you can brush the implications of this aside with word games and obscure translations I can't help you.
peace
Repeat
@Erik I do find it interesting that FMM and my self have answered all of your questions but you have yet to answer a single one of mine. Why is that?
You accused me of having blind faith but yet it is you who have blind faith in your quran.
Can you answer my quesitons please.
1. Show me a verse that condems or even mentions Christians practicing Comunion.
2. Show me from history the pre mohamed islamic followers of Jesus. Who where they what where they called what scripture they followed etc...
Jesus explicitly told Israel that God is one (Deuteronomy 6:4). Nowhere does it mention anything about Trinity.
As a result we now have Christians resorting to vague, implicit verses and laughable analogies to try and explain what the Bible doesn't even teach. If Jesus himself didn't preach Trinity then why are you preaching it? What, did you discover something about you religion that Jesus failed to discover?
At the same time these are the Christians who want us to leave Islam for a shallow Religion made up of conjectures and logical fallacies.
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...There can't be two Gods but there can be two humans.
Therefore the Father and The Son and the Spirit while being different persons are the same being..."
FMM, you keep keep coining new phrases, employing clever semantics why?
God cant be two Gods but yet you say God 1, God 2 and God 3 are the same being..
[I am scratching my head]
You said it don't need rocket science to understand your logic, I tell you I have double degree in Aerospace Engineering from UK universities (I am a real persona you can check my resume in the internet), but still your logic is much more confusing than Astrophysics.
There is no escape from logical falacy
Why presume that God's being is 'one' while you follow man-made doctrine that God is Three?
I have given you examples from the Quran clear and simple passage to describe what is God and who should be worshipped.
I as a muslim with presupposition that there is still genuine revelation in the teachings of the Bible survice today (the same taught to Adam, Abraham, Moses peace be upon them all) can still see clear message of God unity like in Shema
but you FMM
You try to take away that message.
You try to make it appear that we need to have deep knowledge of theological and philosophy to understand this simple message.
Jesus(p) was just a simple shepherd tending to simple people
Listen to simple essence of the Unity of God with open mind:
Allah is the Almighty, Creator and Sustainer of the universe, who is similar to none and nothing is comparable to Him.
God Describes Himself in the Qur'an in clear term:
قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ
“Say: He is Allah, the One; Allah,
اللَّهُ الصَّمَدُ
the Eternal, Absolute;
لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ
He begetteth not, nor is He begotten,
وَلَمْ يَكُن لَّهُ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌ
and there is none like unto Him.”
[Al-Qur’an 112:1-4]
What more straightforward than that about what/Who is God?
I asked you to provide evidence from Scripture *in clear term* that God is Tri-God and that Jesus (p) saying that he is God and the command to worship him but yet you fail to do so.
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...Can you answer my quesitons please.
1. Show me a verse that condems or even mentions Christians practicing Comunion.
2. Show me from history the pre mohamed islamic followers of Jesus. Who where they what where they called what scripture they followed etc..."
RM,
Perhaps is it just me but I found it is really diffcult to understand your questions ?
I am at loss here..
Christians practicing Comunion?
islamic followers of Jesus?
What is it actually you trying to convey?
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
Some more thoughts on the Tri-deity (while I have some time to add)
"...The Divine nature on the other hand is not divisible by definition..."
Yet you claim
"...Therefore the Father and The Son and the Spirit while being different persons are the same being..."
What is this?
I try to be fair
Premise 1: There is one DIVINE NATURE.
Premise 2: Father, Son, Holy Spirit, are each the one DIVINE NATURE.
Lets presume your position (premise 2) is correct: The three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the one DIVINE NATURE.
This argument seems TRUE.
Now when the Bible says that there is one God, is it referring to a WHO or a WHAT (divine nature). It is referring to a WHO, a personal IDENTITY?
Premise 1: There is one WHO. TRUE
Premise 2: Father, Son, Holy Spirit, are each that one WHO. FALSE
Conclusion: The three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the one WHO. FALSE
Thus the Tri-deity/Trinity is FALSE.
God only does "Godly" things
1. God is non divisble
2. Humans are divisible
3. Therefore God cannot be Human
Something cannot be non-Divisible while at the same time divisible
You see, it is plain truth that
1. Humans are 100% Human
2. God is 100% God
3. Mathematically you cannot exceed being 100% of who you are
4. Thus Jesus (p) cannot be 200% of who he is. (Both God & Human)
Let's worship the one true God, and this God was Jesus (p)' one and only God.
Let's Worship no other God than the God's Jesus (p) worshiped and served.
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...actually, this word occurs 60 times in the NT and is translated worship every time.
There is no Greek word that can be more accurately translated worship. If you know of a better word feel free to let me know
In the NT It means worship there is really no debate on this subject..."
You miss the point.
While the Greek word is ambiguous, the problem is when the Hebrew or Greek words for worship refer to men “worshipping” men, you immediately point out that as an act of respect.
However, when the act of worship is toward Jesus, then you quickly suggest that the English word “worship” in their Bibles which make people to understand “worship" in religious sense.
Muslims find no problem if it is used toward God.
Besides there is no evidence that Jesus command people to worship for the sake of him (as his right) as a religious duty like the command to worship God in the Quran:
إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ فَاعْبُدِ اللَّهَ مُخْلِصًا لَّهُ الدِّينَ
"Indeed, We have sent down to you the Book, [O Muhammad], in truth. So worship Allah, [being] sincere to Him in religion." (Q 39:2)
Wassalam
You say
I tell you I have double degree in Aerospace Engineering from UK universities ........, but still your logic is much more confusing than Astrophysics.
I say,
No offence but to understand the simple things of God requires the Spirit of God.
As long as you are in rebellion against God spiritualthings no matter how simple will seem like foolishness to you. It’s part of God‘s judgment against you.
you say,
Now when the Bible says that there is one God, is it referring to a WHO or a WHAT (divine nature). It is referring to a WHO, a personal IDENTITY?
No it is referring to the what. One what three whos.
If it was referring to the “who” the statement would be meaningless and redundant .
There is no need to say “Eric is one” a person is singular by definition. use your head man
You say,
You try to make it appear that we need to have deep knowledge of theological and philosophy to understand this simple message.
I say,
Just the opposite all you need is a Bible and the Holy Spirit to understand the message.
I know lots of little children who understand it. I understood it before I entered junior high school.
Your problem is you are trying to understand it with out submitting to God while you are still in rebellion.
Peace
you say,
1. God is non divisble
2. Humans are divisible
3. Therefore God cannot be Human
I say,
Correct no Christian ever said God was human.
What Christians believe is that the Person Jesus has two natures one human one divine.
you say,
4. Thus Jesus (p) cannot be 200% of who he is. (Both God & Human)
I say,
Jesus is not 200% anything he is 100% Jesus
The person Jesus had two natures one human one divine.
Christians have no problem understanding this because it is similar to our own experience.
We have two natures one fallen human nature we call the flesh that is passing away and one new holy nature that has been given us by God when we were born again.
The only difference is that the two natures of Jesus are perfectly united and in unity and my two natures are in constant conflict.
Peace
@Erik
you wrote...
"While the Greek word is ambiguous, the problem is when the Hebrew or Greek words for worship refer to men “worshipping” men, you immediately point out that as an act of respect."
WOW, the Greek word proskyneō
is used 60 times in the New Testemant. Each and every time it is used in terms of Worship of God, GOds, Satan, and Jesus.
Once it is used when men bow down to Peter and he says "DO NOT DO THAT,"
Another time John bows down to worship the angel and the angel responds "DON"T DO THAT WORSHIP GOD ALONE".
When Satan tempts Jesus he says "All these things I will give you if you will bow down and Worship me" (Are you saying Satan was telling Jesus just to pay him respect and honor?)
Jesus rebukes Satan ""Be gone, Satan! For it is written, "'You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.'"
Are you going to say that what Jesus really means her is just to give respect to God?
Now I'm not really sure on this, but could you point out of the 60 times the word proskyneō is used it refers to men paying respect to other men?
You say,
While the Greek word is ambiguous, the problem is when the Hebrew or Greek words for worship refer to men “worshipping” men, you immediately point out that as an act of respect.
I say,
I’m not sure how I can be more clear about this than the Word of God
Keep in mind this is the same Greek word.
quote:
I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I heard and saw them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed them to me, but he said to me, "You must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers the prophets, and with those who keep the words of this book. Worship God."
(Revelation 22:8-9)
end quote:
nuff said
Peace
@Mahadi and Erik
Mahadi you keep quoting the SCHEMA
"Shama Yisra'el YHWH elohiym YHWH ECHAD"
"Hear O Israel your the Lord is your GOD, the Lord is ONE".
The word for ONE in Hebrew is ECHAD.
Another place this Hebrew word for one is used is in Gen 2:24
"For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become ONE (ECHAD) flesh."
Tell me how does two seperate people become ONE FLESH?
@Erick You asked
"Perhaps is it just me but I found it is really diffcult to understand your questions ?
I am at loss here..
Christians practicing Comunion?
islamic followers of Jesus?
What is it actually you trying to convey?"
Comunion is the Lords supper, it is the practice of sharing the bread and wine, the blood and body of Jesus, it is only for believers, if you are not a believer and partake in the Lords supper you add to your own missery.
This is universly practiced by all Christians, even hertics, and psedo Christian pagans.
I'm asking where is it condemed or even mentioned in teh Quran.
The next question has to do with the Quran and Islamic teaching that there where pre mohamed followers of Jesus.
Can you point to any group in history and say "Those are the real pre mohamed followers of Jesus?"
I hope that has clearified my question for you.
Hey RM
A great passage to look at in this regard is Matthew 18 23-35.
The wicked servant displays the improper form of respect for man in 26 (proskuneō)worship.
and the proper form of respect is shown by his fellow servant in 29 (piptō alone)
The second servant fell down in respect but not in worship so the word proskuneō is not used.
I agree that in the Septuagint translation sometimes the word is ambiguously.
That is why translations are not perfect.
I'm open to the possiblity that I've missed somthing in the NT but the burden of proof is on those who claim that worship does not mean worship.
peace
FMM
Thanks for the passage. I agree that that the onious is on Erick and other Muslims who claim Worship is not worship.
Eric,
you said,
While the Greek word is ambiguous
I say,
I’ve been thinking about this.
There is no word in any language that is unequivocal. Take the three words in simple short phrase we are discussing right now
"God is one"
God
Do we mean Allah or Yahweh? Do we mean the supreme God or the Greek God Zeus or the pantheistic universe of the Hindus ?
Is
The American president Bill Clinton famously proved that this word can have multiple meanings and used this fact to avoid being impeached for perjury.
One
Do we me ontological oneness? Do we mean oneness of purpose?
Etc etc etc
The only solution to definitional ambiguity is context
It bears repeating
The only solution to definitional ambiguity is context. Let this sink in please
As long as you treat the Bible like it is a series of one sentence pronouncements to use as proof texts for your own pet opinions you will never understand it.
The Bible is not like the Quran it has internal context you can read the verses before and after and the work as a whole to gain an understanding of what words mean.
We don’t need to rely on Hadiths and other human texts to provide context. The context is in the book itself
Please read the genuine revelation of God in context a book at a time and let it interpret itself.
Peace
What happend to IBN, where did IBN go?
Eric,
I just heard about the earthquake in your country.
I hope you and your loved ones are alright
You are in my prayers
Peace
EarthQuake? Is that why he went dark all of a sudden?
BTW where is Snowman, havent seen any posts from him since the London Riots.
"...I just heard about the earthquake in your country.
I hope you and your loved ones are alright..."
FMM, Alhamdulillah, we are fine thanks.
Indonesia is a vast archipelago. The quake was in a remote area North-west of off coast of Sumatra island. No fatalities I heard..
I live in capital city thousand miles away.
Its like if u live in LA while Tornado rip through Mississippi
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
Premise 1: There is one DIVINE NATURE.
Premise 2: Father, Son, Holy Spirit, are each the one DIVINE NATURE.
Conclusion: The three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the one DIVINE NATURE.
Now when the Bible says that there is one God, is it referring to a WHO or a WHAT (divine nature). It is referring to a WHO, a personal IDENTITY?
"...No it is referring to the what. One what three whos..."
Sorry my man, you dont use your head, you use your ego.
It's Fallacious reasoning that is using a word with two different definitions in the same argument does not result in a logical conclusion.
It is referring to a WHO, a personal IDENTITY. The one God is a LORD, a personal identity, a personal authority, a personal identity to be worship. The one God cannot simply a "divine nature" that is possessed by three persons. Divine natures do not created universes, The who does such a thing. The one God is a Lord of the people of God, a personal authority figure to be served.
There is always one WHO.
"...Your problem is you are trying to understand it with out submitting to God while you are still in rebellion. .."
FMM, You said you can’t read Abigail mind when she "worship" David (p)
now
You appear you can read my mind and judge me that I don't submit to God..
O cmon Man.
I put my head on the ground to worship my Lord
I ask my Lord for protection against Evil recited the Ta`awwudh تعوذ
أعوذ بالله من الشيطان الرجيم (A`ūdhu billāhi min ash-shaitāni r-rajīmi)
meaning:
"I seek refuge in God from the Evil spirit, the accursed one."
everytime before reciting the scripture or beginning any task
then I continue to say the Basmala:
Like I did for every post
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
meaning:
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
I do it with my outmost sincerity to submit to God and not to rebell against HIM
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
RM,
1) I understand what Christian communion is but what is the relevance for this discussion?
Muslims do not care / think much about this ritual, we think that this is part of the shirk belief anyway. As for my experience most muslims found this believe that christians eat the meal which symbolizes the body and blood of Jesus (p) to be remnants of Pagan customs.
2) I dont understand what are you going to prove / disprove with "the pre prophet Muhammad (p) followers of Jesus (p)" and the relevance for this discussion?
Anyway muslims believe that Islam is the complete and universal version of a primordial faith that was revealed at many times and places before, including through Abraham, Moses and Jesus, whom we consider prophets .
Previous messages and revelations have always have been continuous but partially changed or corrupted over time, and we believe the Qur'an to be both the unaltered and the final revelation of God.
The "Islamic" follower of Jesus (p) didnt mean that they practiced exatcly the same form of worship and ritual like the Muslims now practise as it had not been finalized yet but I believe that those rightheouss people who submit to the will of God (lingustically "muslim" in Arabic) and adhered to core the same continuous core creed (in Islamic theology called Aqīdah عقيدة ) those are belief in monotheism (one and only God), the Last Day and the angels and the scripture and the prophets (Q 112:1-4, Q 2:177, Q 2:285) can be considered muslims.
Of course they may not call themselves muslims as muslim but some consider early Christian group like the Ebionites could be such people due to the facts that the Ebionites were and understood themselves to be Jewish followers of Jesus (that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah sent from the Jewish God to the Jewish people in fulfilment of the Jewish Scriptures).
Jewish law and ritual are very close to Islam (keeping the kosher, circumcising all males etc.) There is also reports that the Ebionites continued to reverence Jerusalem, evidently by praying in its direction during their daily acts of worship then the Ebionites could be considered "the pre prophet Muhammad (p)" muslims.
Wasssalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...the burden of proof is on those who claim that worship does not mean worship..."
FMM, RM
Please, proskuneo is ambiguous:
It can mean Worship. (I agree that proskuneo is the word most frequently translated worship in the New Testament).
But it can mean Obeisance, homage, bowing down to a superior, for instance, a king.
Matthew 18:26 FMM cited confirms that proskuneo can mean, simply to bow down.
This usage of proskuneo is also found in the Greek Septuagint:
Genesis 23:7: Abraham bowed to his people
1 Kings 1:23: Nathan's bowed to King David
Genesis 33:3: Jacob bowed to his brother Esau
Exodus 18:7: Moses bowed to his father-in-law
Ruth 2:10: Ruth bowed to Boaz
1 Samuel 20:41: David bowed to Jonathan
1 Samuel 24:8: David bowed to King Saul
1 Samuel 25:3: Abigail bowed to David
Daniel 2:46: Nebuchadnezzar bowed to Daniel
how can the we decide whether to render the word "worship" or "act of respect?
I use Qur'an for guidance, Alhamdulillah
- When the object of the verb proskuneo is God: the rendering 'worship' is obviously appropriate, we muslims won't disputes it.
- where the verb's object is an idol, an image, or a false god, such as the devil, the demons, the rendering 'worship' is still appropriate, because the one performing the action is attributing (wrongly) to the thing worshipped they believe to be their chosen God.
- where the verb's object is a human or a prophet we should understand this as one performing the act of obeisance but certainly not worship.
Like, in Matthew 18:26, quoted above, it would simply be wrong to translate the word as 'worship'. The slave was not attributing any divine qualities to his master; he was simply throwing himself on his mercy.
FMM is crying about context but the truth is his theological bias which determine the context.
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
RM,
On Shema..
Jesus (p) stressed the vital importance of the Shema:
One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”
“The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’There is no commandment greater than these.”
Well said, teacher,” the man replied. “You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”
When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” And from then on no one dared ask him any more questions.
(Mark 12:28-34).
Now you must ask yourselves why the Lord our God the Lord is one "HIM" and there is no other God but this one "HIM."
Is it reasonable to suggest this Jesus (p) taught to worship a Triune God?
Open your heart man.
Wassalam
Eric,
I’m glad you are ding well and the earthquake did not effect you. I was not aware of where it was centerd or the extent of it's reach.
You said,
Premise 2: Father, Son, Holy Spirit, are each the one DIVINE NATURE.
Conclusion: The three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the one DIVINE NATURE.
I say,
I never said that The Father The son and the Spirit are the divine nature. I said that they share the divine nature.
They are divine(God).
You and I aren’t the human nature we are human
Do you not understand the difference?
You say,
The one God cannot simply a "divine nature" that is possessed by three persons. Divine natures do not created universes, The who does such a thing. The one God is a Lord of the people of God, a personal authority figure to be served.
I say,
I never said the divine nature did anything. The what in this case is not the divine nature it is God.
When I say Mankind sinned against God I don’t mean human nature sinned I mean mankind sinned.
This is simple logic it should not be difficult for a man of your intellect.
You say,
You appear you can read my mind and judge me that I don't submit to God..
I say,
I’m not reading your mind I’m reading your actions and your words.
and
I’m not judging you, God is when he withholds such rudimentary spiritual knowledge from you.
quote:
For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools,
(Romans 1:21-22)
end quote:
You say,
I do it with my outmost sincerity to submit to God and not to rebell against HIM
I say,
Slavishly performing rituals and chanting mantras is not submitting to God.
If it is then Buddist monks and Hindu gurus are the most submited people on earth to God
In fact rituals and mantras are often a sign of pride and rebellion.
Peace
Peace
You say,
Please, proskuneo is ambiguous:
I say,
like I've already demonstrated this can be said of all words.
The way to determine meaning is context not theological presuppositions.
A translation of the OT is not relevant to our discussion The OT was written in Hebrew not Greek.
Every time in the NT this word is used it means worship.
In the NT we are expressly commanded not to worship(proskuneo) prophets and apostles.
Apostles are shown rejecting (proskuneo) because it is something reserved for God.
Never once in the NT is anyone comended for worship(proskuneo)to any creature.
Yet repeatedly in the NT people worship Jesus. The angels are comanded to worship Jesus
in fact we are told all creation will worship Jesus.
quote:
And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation, and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth." Then I looked, and I heard around the throne and the living creatures and the elders the voice of many angels, numbering myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice, "Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!" And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, "To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!" And the four living creatures said, "Amen!" and the elders fell down and worshiped.
(Revelation 5:8-14)
end quote:
you say,
FMM is crying about context but the truth is his theological bias which determine the context
I say,
Actually it’s just the opposite.
Only your strong theological bias can cause you to miss the plain meaning of a passage like the one above.
There is simply no way you can honestly interpret what is happening in this scene as "bowing down to a superior".
especially given that the very same book repeatedly condemns giving proskuneo to anyone other than God.
That is what I mean by context
peace
Eric said,
Like, in Matthew 18:26, quoted above, it would simply be wrong to translate the word as 'worship'. The slave was not attributing any divine qualities to his master; he was simply throwing himself on his mercy.
I say,
This proves you are still using the Bible like a collection of one sentence pronouncements.
Here is how one uses context....
simply ask yourself
In the parable who is the “master“ supposed to be?
You say,
how can the we decide whether to render the word "worship" or "act of respect?
I use Qur'an for guidance
I say,
So you use a text written hundreds of years after the NT by a man who has been proven to be ignorant of basic Christian beliefs.
It would be like me looking to the writings of an english peasant from the middle ages for guidance on how to interpret the Quran.
Such a thing is totally with out warrant and a prescription for misunderstanding.
No text is ever interpreted in this way and you would rightly cry foul if I treated your book with such disrespect.
Peace
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...I never said the divine nature did anything. The what in this case is
not the divine nature it is God. ..."
You changed the premise again, it is not logic. It is illusion!!!
If the "what" is not the nature it never works.
Now according to your reasoning, Erik and FMM then simply one human being not two being belong to the same human nature
Let me help you:
according to your definition
God is a divine nature. True, it is a "what"
God is a being. True, it is a "who"
Premise 1: There is one DIVINE NATURE.
Premise 2: God 1, Son, God 2, God 3, are each the one DIVINE NATURE.
Conclusion: The three persons, God 1 God 1, Son, God 2, God 3, are the one
DIVINE NATURE.
==> 1 what
Premise 1: There is one WHO.
Premise 2: God 1, Son, God 2, God 3, are each different WHO.
Conclusion: God 1, Son, God 2, God 3 are not the one WHO.
==> 3 Whos
But now you change it again:
Conclusion: God 1, Son, God 2, God 3 are the same one WHO but the one what
Cmon man, a word with two different definitions in the same argument does not result in a logical conclusion.
Trinitarianism is source of confusion and is false.
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...This proves you are still using the Bible like a collection of one sentence pronouncements.
Here is how one uses context....
simply ask yourself
In the parable who is the “master“ supposed to be?.."
The the debtor is pleading for mercy from his human lord. So?
FMM, the truth is plain to see. People all over the Bible are bowing down before higher authorities who are not God.
"...So you use a text written hundreds of years after the NT by a man who has been proven to be ignorant of basic Christian beliefs..."
FMM, on the contrary this man (p) were sent by God to spread the Original Holy Word of GOD Almighty, a bringer of Good News which were corruptted and a Warner.
This man (p) was totally submitted to the God’s word, when God tells him:
‘And We caused Jesus, the son of Mary, to follow in the footsteps of those earlier prophets, confirming the truth of whatever there still remained of the Torah; and We vouchsafed unto him the Gospel, wherein there was guidance and light, confirming the truth of whatever there still remained of the Torah, and as a guidance and admonition unto the God-conscious.’
‘Let, then, the followers of the Gospel judge in accordance with what God has revealed therein: for they who do not judge in the light of what God has bestowed from on high – it is they, they who are truly iniquitous!’ (Q 5:46-47)
and further:
Step by step has He bestowed upon thee from on high this divine writ, setting forth the truth which confirms whatever there still remains of earlier revelations: for it is He who has bestowed from on high the Torah and the Gospel aforetime, as a guidance unto mankind, and it is He who has bestowed upon man the standard by which to discern the true from the false.
Behold, as for those who are bent on denying God’s messages – grievous suffering awaits them: for God is almighty, an avenger of evil.
(Q 3:3-4)
This man (p) among other things guided by God have mission to remind people the very essence of Jesus (p) message and reject false teaching elevating him to the status of divinity.
This man (p) understood Jesus (p) taught by his God the same way the apostles understood Jesus (p):
The apostles teaching in Acts (assuming for the sake of argument its’ authenticity by the light of the Quran) we read in Peter’s very first sermon the following:
“You that are Israelites, listen to what I have to say: Jesus of Nazareth, was a man attested to you by God with deeds of power, wonders, and signs that God did through him among you, as you yourselves know” Acts 2:22
‘Therefore let the entire house of Israel know with certainty that God has made him both Lord and Messiah’ Acts 2:36
And every day in the temple and at home they did not cease to teach and proclaim Jesus as the Messiah. Acts 4:22
He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one ordained by God as judge of the living and the dead. Acts 10:42
This teaching suggests that Jesus was a man who:
i) did miracles by the power of God
ii) was made lord and messiah by God
iii) was believed to be the messiah by his first followers
iv) as a man was appointed to be judge of the living and the dead by God.
Nothing of Peter’s teaching in Acts suggests that Jesus (p) was believed to be God Incarnate or the Second Person of the Trinity. Jesus(p) was a man, a servant like David (p)
FMM, this man is certainly anhything but ignorant of the true message of Jesus (p)
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...Slavishly performing rituals and chanting mantras is not submitting to God.
If it is then Buddist monks and Hindu gurus are the most submited people on earth to God
In fact rituals and mantras are often a sign of pride and rebellion..."
Chanting mantas?
I dont know which language you use to pray but muslims are using cassical Arabic, a sacred semitic language share the same ancestry to language Jesus (p) spoke.
Muslims are pious enough to keep prayers in language which has special status with God no matter what their native language.
If anything should be called a matra surely it is something out of a collection of writings which were written decades after the true messenger of God by authors who had not themselves witnessed any of the events of that messenger’ life in the language not spoken by that messenger..
Wassalam.
Eric you said,
You changed the premise again, it is not logic. It is illusion!!!
If the "what" is not the nature it never works.
I say,
What are you talking about the what is God.
The whos are the Father the son and the spirit
it works just fine
You say,
Now according to your reasoning, Erik and FMM then simply one human being not two being belong to the same human nature
I say
No Eric and FMM are two persons who are human because they posses the human nature
The logic works just the same
1) Eric is human
2) FMM is human
3) Eric and FMM are not the same person
1)The Father is God
2) The Son is God
3) The Father and the Son are not the same person
simple straitfoward and logical
you say,
according to your definition
God is a divine nature. True, it is a "what"
God is a being. True, it is a "who"
I say,
When did I ever say such nonsense
That is not part of my definition go back and read it again.
The Father is God "what" because he posseses the Divine nature.
Just like Eric is human "what" because he posesses a human nature
You say,
Premise 1: There is one DIVINE NATURE.
Premise 2: God 1, Son, God 2, God 3, are each the one DIVINE NATURE.
Conclusion: The three persons, God 1 God 1, Son, God 2, God 3, are the one
DIVINE NATURE.
==> 1 what
I say,
no one ever said anything remotely like that.
Would you like me to point you to my original stament???
Actual Premise 1: there is one divine nature
Actual Premise 2: The Father The Son and the spirit each possesses the Divine nature
Conclusion The Father The Son and the Spirit each are God
====> what
You say,
Premise 1: There is one WHO.
Premise 2: God 1, Son, God 2, God 3, are each different WHO.
Conclusion: God 1, Son, God 2, God 3 are not the one WHO.
==> 3 Whos
I say,
Are you even paying attention?
Actual premise 1) The Father the Son and the Spirit are each different a different person.(who)
Actual premise 2) The Father the Son and the Spirit are each God (What)
Conclusion: ========> The Biblical doctrine of the Trinity is logical simple and true
You say,
But now you change it again:
Conclusion: God 1, Son, God 2, God 3 are the same one
I say,
NO Change
That is what I along with all Christians since the beginning have been saying all along.
3 whos 1 what
For some reason you are unable to see what is right infront of you.
You say,
Trinitarianism is source of confusion and is false.
I say,
It is only confusing if you don’t understand simple basic logic or if your mind has been subjected to futility in judgement.
Peace
eric said,
I dont know which language you use to pray but muslims are using cassical Arabic, a sacred semitic language share the same ancestry to language Jesus (p) spoke.
I say,
Repeating phrases in a language you don’t understand is not praying.
It’s just superstitiously parroting empty words like a pagan’s incantation of abraca cadrabra hocus pocus.
God is not impressed by mantras
Being God he has no problem understanding your native tongue.
quote:
"And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do, for they think that they will be heard for their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.
(Matthew 6:7-8)
end quote:
God is looking for a different kind of worship
But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him.
(John 4:23)
you say,
The the debtor is pleading for mercy from his human lord. So?
I say,
In the parable who does the master represent?
you say,
iii) was believed to be the messiah by his first followers
I say,
What does it mean to be the Messiah?
you say,
Nothing of Peter’s teaching in Acts suggests that Jesus (p) was believed to be God Incarnate or the Second Person of the Trinity.
I say,
Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing.
(Acts 2:33)
you say,
‘Let, then, the followers of the Gospel judge in accordance with what God has revealed therein: for they who do not judge in the light of what God has bestowed from on high – it is they, they who are truly iniquitous!’ (Q 5:46-47
I say,
exactly!!!!!!
The Quran is to be judged by the Bible not the other way around.
If we judge the Quran by that standard it will be rejected like all the other books from wannbe prophets because it conflicts with and contradicts God‘s genuine revelation.
You admit as much yourself when you reject every single book of the Scripture and instead use God's word like a Buffet in which you pick a sentence here and there that tickles your fancy and leave the rest on the cutting room floor
peace
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...Repeating phrases in a language you don’t understand is not praying.
It’s just superstitiously parroting empty words like a pagan’s incantation of abraca cadrabra hocus pocus.
God is not impressed by mantras
Being God he has no problem understanding your native tongue..."
Of course God understand any language but it is an act of piety to preserve the same exact words God revealed in the scriptures to be used for prayer rather than unstandardized-you-can-chant-anything kind of prayer which can easily fall into devilish incantation
and btw I do understand the what it means when I pray using Arabic, my Arabic may sound less sopthisticated than my english but I can read and understand it with little problem
muslims are obliged to sacred words of Arabic now matter how little they are able to do it as part of good deeds.
"...God is looking for a different kind of worship..."
I tell you a proper way of praying:
Jesus (p) himself put his head on the ground when praying and he spoke Aramaic He prayed to Alaha (God in aramaic).
Please go ahead to worship you like according to practices your likes singing, dancing, music.
I go the Jesus (p) way, 5 times a day
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...The Quran is to be judged by the Bible not the other way around.
If we judge the Quran by that standard it will be rejected like all the other books from wannbe prophets because it conflicts with and contradicts God‘s genuine revelation..."
Think the following concept of unbroken true Monotheistic God from patriach Abraham (p) (whose name muslims mention in 5 mandatory prayers) in previous revelations:
1) There is never a belief that the God of Abraham is triune in nature.
2) There is never a belief that the God of Abraham has a divine son.
3) There is never a belief that God reveals himself to us through a divine son.
This being the case how your belief conflicts with and contradicts God‘s genuine revelation.
"...You admit as much yourself when you reject every single book of the Scripture and instead use God's word like a Buffet in which you pick a sentence here and there that tickles your fancy and leave the rest on the cutting room floor ..."
It is you who reject clear pasages of the Scripture and instead use play trick to force your absurd claim the "three persons in one God" stuff.
You believe something the Scriptures fails to mention.
Like what muslims believe, the scriptures is the account of humanity's relationship to God and how God prophets is teaching humankind all things into goodness. God is the Supreme Being the Creator.
Yet you believe of a three person God. Something never described anywhere in pages of the Scriptures. Not in the Torah, not in the books of NT, not in the Qur'an
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...
1)The Father is God
2) The Son is God
3) The Father and the Son are not the same person
simple straitfoward and logical ..."
Man, it is a fallacy of Equivocation
You arrive at an invalid conclusion because you compare two different word with no prior definition for your argumentation.
"...Actual premise 1) The Father the Son and the Spirit are each different a different person.(who)
Actual premise 2) The Father the Son and the Spirit are each God (What)
Conclusion: ========> The Biblical doctrine of the Trinity is logical simple and true..."
It is a flaw in the structure of your argument, the "what" is the attrbute of who.
it can not be both "whos".
Here you are using a word with more than one meaning in an argument.
Impressive!!
Here is basic logic:
Premise 1: There is one DIVINE NATURE.
Premise 2: God 1, God 2, God 3, are each the one DIVINE NATURE.
Conclusion: The three persons, God 1, God 2, God 3 are the one DIVINE NATURE.
Premise 1: There is one WHO. TRUE
Premise 2: God 1, God 2, God 3 , are each that one WHO. FALSE
Conclusion: The three persons, God 1, God 2, God 3 are the one WHO. FALSE
The Trinity is FALSE.
Wassalam
You say,
Man, it is a fallacy of Equivocation
I say,
I have equivocated nothing. I think I’m been very specific and precise. I’ve offered analogies and explanations yet you still have trouble understanding. I wonder why that is?
You say,
You arrive at an invalid conclusion because you compare two different word with no prior definition for your argumentation.
Please explain. I do not understand your objections What "two different word" are you talking about?
I think I have been extremely clear and this is extremely simple stuff logically speaking
The Father is God (what)
The Son is God (what)
The Spirit is God (what)
There is one God (what)
There are three persons (whos)
Three whos one what
Why is this so difficult for you to get your head around?
Peace
FMM said,
"Why is this so difficult for you to get your head around?"
Very simply, because it doesn't follow logic.
annon says,
Very simply, because it doesn't follow logic.
I say,
Simply claiming somthing does not make it so. Please point out what part of my explanation is illogical and why.
peace
You say,
You believe something the Scriptures fails to mention.
I say,
That is simply not the case.
The doctrine of the Trinity is just short hand for 5 truths that are clearly expounded in scripture
1) There is one God
2) The father is God
3) The Son is God
4) The Spirit is God
5) The father Son and Spirit are not the same person
If you like I can provide ample evidence scriptural evidence for anyone of these truths that any honest reader will grant
You say,
It is you who reject clear pasages of the Scripture,
I say,
please present evidence of a passage of Scripture that I reject or apologize for this slander.
you say,
and instead use play trick to force your absurd claim the "three persons in one God" stuff.
I say,
What "play trick" are you talking about? You need to be specific and provide evidence
peace
You say,
but it is an act of piety to preserve the same exact words God revealed in the scriptures to be used for prayer
I say
How do you know this? God is the one who determines what an act of piety is not you and God never commanded this strange ritual.
You say,
Jesus (p) himself put his head on the ground when praying
I say,
Jesus prayed in lots of different positions including hands extended while nailed to a cross. His father heard him no matter what position he was in at the time
You say,
and he spoke Aramaic He prayed to Alaha (God in aramaic).
I say,
How do you know what language he spoke?
His preferred address was Abba Father a term that no Muslim that I know of uses.
The fact is that you ignore everything Jesus says about prayer and substituted human tradition
and then you have the nerve to call it submission to God
peace.
FMM
I swear your like the engergizer bunny. I got bored with them along time ago lol
Keep up the good work.
FMM I find it ineresting that Muslims say Jesus prayed like they did. Becasue one instance of him praying in the Garden before he was to be arrested and then crucied and die (A fact that Muslims deny) he fell to his face.
Well lets take a look at that statement. Did Jesus pray like Muslims in the Garden of Gethsemene?
1. Stand raise hands up and say ALLAH AKBAR. Nope he didnt do that.
He didn't do that.
2.Standing with hands folded over chest, recite the first chapter of the Qur'an in Arabic. Then recite any other verses of the Qur'an that you would like.
He didn't do that.
3. Raise hands up, saying "Allahu Akbar." Bow, reciting three times, "Subhana rabbiyal adheem" (Glory be to my Lord Almighty).
Nope he didn't do that either.
4.Rise to standing while reciting "Sam'i Allahu liman hamidah, Rabbana wa lakal hamd" (God hears those who call upon Him; Our Lord, praise be to you)
Nope didn't do that either.
5.Raise hands up, saying "Allahu Akbar." Prostrate on the ground, reciting three times "Subhana Rabbiyal A'ala" (Glory be to my Lord, the Most High).
NOPE.
6.Rise to a sitting position, saying "Allahu Akbar." Prostrate again in the same manner.
Didn't do that.
7.Rise to a standing position, saying "Allahu Akbar."
And still nope.
8.This concludes one rak'a (cycle or unit of prayer). Begin again from Step 3 for the second rak'a.
Yeah he didn't do any of this.
But how did Jesus teach us to pray lets have a look.
How did Jesus teach us to pray.
Mathew 6:9-13
“Pray, then, in this way:
‘Our Father who is in heaven,
Hallowed be Your name.
10 ‘Your kingdom come.
Your will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven.
11 ‘Give us this day [e]our daily bread.
12 ‘And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.
13 ‘And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from [f]evil
Is that how Muslims pray? NOPE DON"T THINK SO.
Lets see Jesus also said when your pray do it in a soft voice and in private. Is that how Muslims pray when they make a big spectacle of themselves?
How could I forget Jesus Condems the way Muslims pray...
Mathew 6:1
“Beware of practicing your righteousness before men to be noticed by them; otherwise you have no reward with your Father who is in heaven.
Mathew 6:5-6
Speaking of the way Muslims Pray
“When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites (MUSLIMS); for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues (Mosques) and on the street corners(or in the street or parking lot) [d]so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. 6 But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you"
Mathew 6:7-8
Speaking of Muslims reciting words in Arabic from the Quran which most Muslims do not understand.
"And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles(Muslim Pagans) do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words. 8 So do not be like them; for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him. "
Yeah Jesus did not pray like a Muslim
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...The Father is God (what)
The Son is God (what)
The Spirit is God (what)
There is one God (what)
There are three persons (whos)
Three whos one what ..."
Your argument is flawed:
The Father is God (what)
The Son is God (what)
The Spirit is God (what)
There is one God (what)
If:
Cat is animal (what)
Dog is animal (what)
Horse is animal (what)
There is one animal (what)
Even a kid will spot that this is a false conclusion
The problem is When you conclude There are three persons (whos) one God (what) you intruce new word "person", you must define this word first into another set of argument and see of the argument coherent with the previous argument logically
Besides it is Wrong to say that three persons make up the only true God.
In the Bible there is only one true God (John 17:3). It excludes Jesus (p) or any other from being God that no one else is God.
I'm sure you understand it you're ignoring it in an attempt to preserve your blind faith.
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
RM,
Alhamdulillah you can correctly identify the ritual of the Salah (Ar. صلاة) (prayer)
Now, I dont think any muslims in this forum will disagree with you
You see in Islam we do this same rituals for all muslims.
You think you Christians do the right kind worship ritual?
I am sure you will problem identifying which one *is* a christian worship and ritual as there is no agreement When it comes to Christian prayer ritual in Christian Church.
Islam is not a new religion. Literally meaning “submission to the Will of God”.
Islam is not named after a people, a place, or an individual. It is the religion of all of the prophets including Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Jesus, and Muhammad (peace be upon them all).
Wile the exact ritual like you mentioned and Fiqh of prayer was only finalized in the time of the lat prophet Muhammad (p), the Muslim prayer method of standing, bowing, kneeling, and prostrating in worship are essentially in the manner given in the Torah and the Gospel.
Moses, Joshua, Aaron, and Abraham (peace be upon them all) and the angels worshipped the One True God through prostration and bowing.
In Matthew 26:39 Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) also puts his face to the ground in humility before God.
I rarely seen Christians who follow what Jesus did.
What I see a noisy kind of whorship with people jumping, clapping and shouting..
You are being arrogant not to bow down and prostrate to God.
Wassalam
@Erik you said...
"I rarely seen Christians who follow what Jesus did. "
Since Jesus told us to
"when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you"
Since you don't see Christians doing that, I would say that means that Christians are doing exactly what Jesus commanded them to do.
You said...
"You think you Christians do the right kind worship ritual?"
Since Christ condemed ritual worship I would say I HOPE NOT.
You wrote...
"I am sure you will problem identifying which one *is* a christian worship and ritual as there is no agreement When it comes to Christian prayer ritual in Christian Church"
Not at all I can identify Christian worship. It is the Lords Prayer.
Our Father who are in Heaven
Holy is your name (Praise)
"Your Kingdomcome your will be done on earth as it is in Heaven" (More Praise)
"Give us this day our daily bread" (We are dependent on the father he is the provider of all things)
"Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors" (We pray to be forgiven for the transgresions against GOD, to be forgiven of the blood debt that is owed to God, as we forgive those that have transgressed against us)
"Lead us not into temptation but delever us from evil" (I think that is self explanitory)
So yes I can identify Christian worship, just as I can identify the false worship of Muslims that Jesus condemed.
You said,
Cat is animal (what)
Dog is animal (what)
Horse is animal (what)
There is one animal (what)
Even a kid will spot that this is a false conclusion
I say,
Eric I thought we already covered this.
The divine nature is not like feline nature.
The divine nature is not divisible. There can not be three Gods
Because of that fact. When we are speaking of the divine nature a better analogy would be
Adam is married (what)
Eve is married (what)
There is one marriage (what)
You say,
The problem is When you conclude There are three persons (whos) one God (what) you intruce new word "person", you must define this word first into another set of argument and see of the argument coherent with the previous argument logically
I say,
Looks like we are back against that language barrier.
I have no idea what you are trying to say here.
The definition of person is..
any human (or non-human) agent which:
(1) possesses continuous consciousness over time; and
(2) who is therefore capable of framing representations about the world, formulating plans and acting on them.
This definition fits perfectly well in my argument and is logicly coherent.
You say,
Besides it is Wrong to say that three persons make up the only true God.
I say,
Why? Just claiming something does not make it so. You need to explain why your opinion is correct.
You say,
In the Bible there is only one true God (John 17:3).
I say,
All Christians agree there is One true God.
The Bible also says
The Word is God (John 1:1)
The Spirit is God( 2nd Corinthians 3: 16-18)
The Father is God (Matthew 5:48)
You say,
It excludes Jesus (p) or any other from being God that no one else is God.
I say
Of course you know this this is incorrect.
Instead of excluding Jesus the Bible makes it clear that the Son is God.
peace
RMM said,
I can identify Christian worship, just as I can identify the false worship of Muslims that Jesus condemed.
I say,
I think I'm just going to say
"What RM said" from now on
lol
peace
@Erick
You made that claim that Jesus prayed like a Muslim. Since I demonstrated that he did no such thing. Can you please explain how you came to the conclusion that Jesus prayed like a Muslim and site the verses and number of times he prayed like a Muslim.
Thank you
While we are on the subject the differences between Islamic human tradition and worship that God commands.
Here is another passage showing what God thinks of ritual prayers in public
"Beware of the scribes, who like to walk around in long robes, and love greetings in the marketplaces and the best seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at feasts, who devour widows' houses and for a pretense (show) make long prayers. They will receive the greater condemnation."
(Luke 20:46-47)
While we are at it I would like to point out that Muslims just finished a month long exhibition of public communal fasting while God’s genuine revelation says,
But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, that your fasting may not be seen by others but by your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
(Matthew 6:17-18)
It is obvious that God is not impressed with the kinds of traditional ritual that define Islam.
Quote:
Now when the Pharisees gathered to him, with some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem, they saw that some of his disciples ate with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands, holding to the tradition of the elders, and when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other traditions that they observe, such as the washing of cups and pots and copper vessels and dining couches.) And the Pharisees and the scribes asked him,
"Why do your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?" And he said to them,
"Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, "'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men."
(Mark 7:1-8)
End quote:
No offence but A person who believes the empty rituals condemned by God are a sign of ones piety can't be described as anything but a rebel against God.
Peace
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
"...
Since Jesus told us to
"when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you..."
RM,
Alhamdulillah,
You are now closer to understand the true Message of Jesus (p)
So, now you know that never did Jesus think he was God and ask his follower to pray to him.
Jesus told us to pray to the Father (God Almighty the One and only God)
How?
Put your head on the ground in humbleness and prostate like Muslims do when praying during the night in quietness...
وَمِنَ اللَّيْلِ فَتَهَجَّدْ بِهِ نَافِلَةً لَّكَ عَسَى أَن يَبْعَثَكَ رَبُّكَ مَقَامًا مَّحْمُودًا
“And (during part) of the night, abandon sleep and keep vigil to pray Salat, in addition to the regular obligatory prayer. Your Rabb (the Sustainer) may (as a reward) elevate you to the position of High Distinction, Glory and Praise.”(Q 17:79)
So, now you know that never did Jesus think he was God and ask his follower to pray to him.
You know know there was no evidence suggested he was no other than a prophet of God and a devout keeper of the law of orthodox Jew and not the dying and rising saviour god of later Pauline Christianity.
Praise God!
Wassalam
Apologize if I cant address all your points I am kinna busy spending quality times with my wife and kids this time around
Just wanted to wish all my Muslim friends a Happy Jihad/Dawah day.
I hope you all remember the 19 Muslims who died on 9-11. I know I will never forget.
Just wanted to wish my Muslim friends a Happy Jihad/Dawha day.
And remind everyone that Muslims did die on 9-11, there were 19 that i know of. A fact that I will never forget.
Where is SNOMAN, did the evil jinns get him, is he in jail, did he blow up?
are there any new posts coming soon? kinda getting desperate! david wood needs to be refuted again, he's running away with the anti-islam boat.
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm
The problem is When you conclude There are three persons (whos) one God (what) you intruce new word "person", you must define this word first into another set of argument and see of the argument coherent with the previous argument logically
"FMM say,
Looks like we are back against that language barrier. "
No,
We are back against common sense barrier, try to get a course in fundamental logic.
It is a logic so basic that sincere truth seeker should be easy to recognize:
God is a divine nature. True, it is a “what”
God is a being. True, it is a “who”
Premise 1: There is one DIVINE NATURE.
Premise 2: God 1, Son, God 2, God 3, are each the one DIVINE NATURE.
Conclusion: The three persons, God 1 God 1, Son, God 2, God 3, are the one DIVINE NATURE.
==> 1 what
Premise 1: There is one WHO.
Premise 2: God 1, Son, God 2, God 3, are each different WHO.
Conclusion: God 1, Son, God 2, God 3 are not the one WHO.
==> 3 Whos
Logical conclusion must be:
God 1, Son, God 2, God 3 are the same one WHAT but different WHO
But you came to a laughable conclusion that:
God 1, God 2, God 3 are the same one WHO but the one what
Wassalam
Bismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm,
"If the Son were to express omniscience during the incarnation the sacrifice of Jesus his would not be genuine. In order for Jesus fulfill his role as the Covenant head of his people he had trust that God would honor his obedience.
If he was all knowing during his time on earth trust would be impossible "
O dear, do you think this sort of explanation will convince any truth-seeking people?
God incarnation!? sounds Hinduism to me man..
You dont seem to read the Bible.
According to the Bible God knows all things (1 John 3).
It means forever. It doesn't say God knows all thing at some point.
But you claim that God nature was changed by inacarnating with human nature.
So God in your imagination has multiply personalities. One person all -knowing, who is nonetheless 100% God who must therefore know all things.
This latter “individual” who is also 100% God is rather short in memory and suffer amnesia not knowing information about the date of the end of the world.
Well I am personally confused, but let everyone judge whether this makes sense.
My awesome God Never be a contradiction, ...Subhanallah ...Glory be to God
I invite you to free yor mind from false concept of polytheistic God and come to the understanding of the haneef حنيف true monotheism the way it was taught by father Abraham (p)
“He is the One God: God the Eternal, the Uncaused Cause of All Being.
He begets not, and neither is He begotten; and there is nothing that could be compared with Him.” (Q 112)
Wassalam
Post a Comment