Monday, 26 September 2011

What does ‘Son of God’ mean in the Hebrew Bible?

We’ve all been subjected to evangelical Trinitarian Christian material; the more you look into their claims the more you realize how far off the mark they are. The mere fact that there exists CHRISTIANS, who do not believe Jesus is God, is enough to spark further study of THEIR proof texts – the Bible. Here we can ponder upon the way evangelical Trinitarian Christians misuse the term ‘son of God’ whilst attempting to convince Muslims (and others) that a man (Prophet Jesus) is God Almighty.

The Jesus scholar, Geza Vermes, lifts the lid on the term 'Son of God' and what it actually means rather than the stuff churned out by evangelical Trinitarian Christians.

Common knowledge: ‘Son of god’ is figurative not literal

It is common knowledge that before the New Testament, the Hebrew Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls regularly speak of ‘Sons of God’ and occasionally refer to God in figurative speech as ‘begetting’ or ‘procreating’ a human being. [1]

‘Son of God’ used for ANY Jewish male who was pious

In the Bible and in writings produced during the centuries that followed the completion of the Old Testament, ‘Son of God’ occurs in a variety of meanings. In addition to the angels already discussed, among the humans ‘Son of God’ was the title of anyone believed in some way to be linked to God. Every male Israelite could pride himself on being a ‘son of God’, and reciprocally he was in a position to call God his Father. In the course of time the phrase was also applied – more and more restrictively – to the good Jews, to the especially holy Jews, culminating with the king of the Jews and finally with the Messiah, the most holy and powerful future ruler of Israel about whom we read in the Florilegium, one of the Dead Sea Scrolls, ‘I will be his Father and he shall be my Son. He is the Branch of David’ [2]

‘Son of God’ NEVER referred to a ‘man god’

Trinitarian Christians who promote Jesus to the status of God are found wanting with regards to the basic term ‘son of God’ as the scholar confirms the term does not refer to their idea of Jesus.
…It is universally agreed among experts that in Judaism the phrase [‘Son of God’] is always used metaphorically; it never designates a person who is believed to be simultaneously man and God, a human being who also shares in some way divine nature. [3]

Christian misinterpretation of Psalms

Here is another important point to be aware of whilst dialoguing with Trinitarian Christians, you may have come across some Christian missionaries citing Psalm 2:7 whilst proclaiming it as a verse denoting deity of Jesus; however, the Jesus scholar – Geza Vermes – highlights their misinterpretation

The Jewish king, while the monarchy existed down to 586 BC, and the awaited royal Messiah after the Babylonian exile, were systematically portrayed as engendered by the Deity: You are my son, today I have begotten you’, we read in Psalm 2:7 [4]

[1] The Nativity, Geza Vermes, Penguin, 2006. p53 and 54

[2] Ibid. p54

[3] Ibid. p54

[4] Ibid. p54

Feedback: yahyasnow@hotmail.com

39 comments:

Radical Moderate said...

Snowman I agree with just about everything your scholar of choice wrote.

For instance you quote him as writing...

"It is common knowledge that before the New Testament, the Hebrew Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls regularly speak of ‘Sons of God’ and occasionally refer to God in figurative speech as ‘begetting’ or ‘procreating’ a human being."

Christians agree 100 percent with that.

You also quote him as writing...

"
In the Bible and in writings produced during the centuries that followed the completion of the Old Testament, ‘Son of God’ occurs in a variety of meanings. In addition to the angels already discussed, among the humans ‘Son of God’ was the title of anyone believed in some way to be linked to God. Every male Israelite could pride himself on being a ‘son of God’..."

Then again you quote him as writing
"…It is universally agreed among experts that in Judaism the phrase [‘Son of God’] is always used metaphorically; it never designates a person who is believed to be simultaneously man and God, a human being who also shares in some way divine nature. [3]"

I agree with that too 100 percent.

You then go on to quote him as writing....

"
The Jewish king, while the monarchy existed down to 586 BC, and the awaited royal Messiah after the Babylonian exile, were systematically portrayed as engendered by the Deity: You are my son, today I have begotten you’, we read in Psalm 2:7"

I agree with this 100 percent as well.

So I'm scratching my head to figure out how your post is a attack or refutaion on what Christians have and do believe?

Anonymous said...

Keep scratching your head, Radical. This Snow guy is a chicken and won't debate anyone.

maratsafin said...

keep on scratching your head radical because common sense doesn’t come easily to you.

Yahya quoted from 2 psalms this is one of the passages christians wrongly show that jesus was mentioned in the OT as the son and is to be worshipped, but you agree with geza vermes interpretation of the verse he referenced and so you agree that the ending does not refer to jesus but to the person being spoken to ( most likely David). But with regard to to the ending of this verse i must also add that the hebrew translation has something completely different and is translated as "do homage in purity lest he be angry..." and so the christians argument fails again but since you do not believe it refers to jesus in anyway it doesn’t matter does it?

Anyway you asked me to read hebrews 9 and 10 and so i did but then to get a better understanding and context i read the whole epistle.

There are a few points i would like to make regarding this book and the book of leviticus.

1. The book of hebrews says the mosaic law was faulty( 8:7) yet God was the author of these laws and they are called perfect in psalms 19:7-9, who do you believe? it also goes onto say if wasn’t faulty there would be no reason for a second covenant.

2 It refutes the calvinistic concept of eternal salvation. hebrews 6:4-6. I ask you as a supporter of sam shamoun (if he was a christians before he made a brief conversion to nation of islam) do you reckon he is saved in light of this verse?

3.Jesus was not God but someone made higher than angels, Hebrews
1:4.
Hebrews 5:5 and 5:9, the former verse uses the passage from psalm 2 which would confirm the adoptionist view held by early christians and again would show that this psalm cannot be used as
proof of some sort of divinity for jesus.

4.Who is this mysterious Melchisedec? looked him up and it seems he is another problematic figure for christians. Also he is mentioned in one of the dead sea scrolls as having divine attributes (scroll 11Q13).

cont below

maratsafin said...

5.hebrews 10: and 10:11 says sacrifices can never take away sins!!! so why were they instituted in the first place to do such things?( it is also in direct contradiction of what it says in leviticus eg leviticus 5:10,16 and 18 says the the person will be forgiven.)
Hebrews 10:5 gives a partial quote from psalms and then totally butchers the next part to fit the doctrine of the author ( psalm 40:6)

6 Hebrews 10:12 says that jesus offered a sacrifice once and forever for sins. This contradicts leviticus 7:36 which says all the laws for sacrfice are forever. Also jeremiah 33:18 the last chapters of ezekiel,malachi 3:3 and 3:4 and many more places where it either says the sacrifices will be reinstituted or that they are forever.

7.False prophecy (although to be fair these are all through the new testament and some in the old) hebrews 1:1-2,10:25 and 10:37

btw tell obama when you go to the fundraiser that you hang out with people who think he is a muslim ,anti-american and you personally do not believe he is christian.

Radical Moderate said...

This martyrdom brought to you by the good folks of the United States, making muslims Martyrs since 2011.

al-Awalki walks warily down the street, with his turbin pulled down low.

Aint no sound but the sound of his feet. A preditor drone ready to go.

Are you ready are you ready for this, are you hanging on the edge of your seat.

Out of the sky the hell fire rips, to the sound of the beat.

Another ones gone another ones gone, another one bites the dust. Hey where gonna get you too, another one bites the dust.

maratsafin said...

So radical moron what do you make of the spat between aomin and steve hays? Man i would love to hear thier ( triabologue) opinions about you? Thier dragging jamin hubner and now james white name through the mud just because jamin criticises israel!!!!! Loooool imagine if they found out a 5 point calvinist fully supports a president ( many in thier rank would consider a socialist terrorist sympathiser and secret muslim). Im suprised by james whites response he is probably to scared to endorse jamin hubner thats why he keeps repeating that the israel stuff was not on the aomin blog. Man i never knew the hold this pariah state has over presbytarians.
Ergun caner and geisler must think its pay back time.

Radical Moderate said...

This martyrdom brought to you by the good folks of the United States, making muslims Martyrs since 2001.

al-Awalki walks warily down the street, with his turbin pulled down low.

Aint no sound but the sound of his feet. A preditor drone ready to go.

Are you ready are you ready for this, are you hanging on the edge of your seat.

Out of the sky the hell fire rips, to the sound of the beat.

Another ones gone another ones gone, another one bites the dust. Hey where gonna get you too, another one bites the dust.

Radical Moderate said...

@maratsafin

I have no idea what you are talking about.

But I am finding it funny that you think Christians in the USA have to vote for only approved people for president. For your information there is a DL where I called in and mentioned to Dr White that I voted for Obama, he didn't throw me out of the kingdom.

As far as Obama being a Muslim, I really don't care. As long as he keeps killing Muslims like Osama Bin Ladden and now Alwaki he has my vote.

Radical Moderate said...

@maratsafin

Sorry didn't notice you responded to me on this thread in regards to reading Hebrews.

I'm glad you took the time to read all of the book of Hebrews.

Before I go into your next round of accusations I just want to be clear. Did reading Hebrews 9 and 10 answer your original questions.

I have noticed that Muslims tend to follow this line of reasoning.

1. Ask a bunch of Questions.

2. When Christian answers those Questions move on to ask more questions.

3. Repeat steps 1 and 2 until you find a Christian who can not answer a question and then say "A HAA; YOU SEE YOU CAN NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION YOUR RELEGION IS WRONG."

So before moving on since you said you read all of Hebrews, can you show me what chapter and verses answers your following questions.

1. why is it in leviticus stated again and again that these sacrifices are to be carried out generation after generation but it never states they will be stopped or that they will be superseded by jesus? (Hint Chapter 9)

2. why didnt the priests slay jesus in the temple? (Hint Chapter 9 and 10)

3. You citing Psalm 51:16 (hint chapter 10)

Also I'm not sure what you are refering to that the Sacrafices will continue again. Can you show me what verses you are speaking about?

If you can not demonstrate that you are wlling to engage in the text then I will just answer you the same way I have begun to answer 1milimeter and Lobos.

"Its a wonderful Mystery" since that is all they seem to want to hear.

maratsafin said...

I gave all my reference in the first 2 posts . If you are unwiling to engage in the txt i will just stop responding. Im not childish like you to respond in the manner you do when you have no coherent answers (must be learning from mr white and sam).

Btw i cited psalms 40:6.

Also you told me to read hebrews 9 and 10 because you couldnt explain the atonement. I never asked a question i made a point about how christians take part of verse while ignoring the other ( in this case leviticus 17).

The point i was getting across is the old testament and new testament contradict each other regarding the law.

Btw i didnt now james white was your God, so he has the role in your little circle of puritans that catholics give the pope. Looool gets funnier and the answers from you are getting desperate

Radical Moderate said...

@Marastafin

Sorry I did not see your second response...

"5.hebrews 10: and 10:11 says sacrifices can never take away sins!!! so why were they instituted in the first place to do such things?( it is also in direct contradiction of what it says in leviticus eg leviticus 5:10,16 and 18 says the the person will be forgiven.)"

I thought you said you read all of Hebrews, I guess when a Muslims says "I read all of something" they really mean "I only read so I can invent an objection."

Because the answer is in Hebrews 10:1-3

"For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. 2Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? 3But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. 4For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

Hebrews 10:5 gives a partial quote from psalms and then totally butchers the next part to fit the doctrine of the author ( psalm 40:6)

Ever hear of the LXX?


6 Hebrews 10:12 says that jesus offered a sacrifice once and forever for sins. This contradicts leviticus 7:36 which says all the laws for sacrfice are forever. Also jeremiah 33:18 the last chapters of ezekiel,malachi 3:3 and 3:4 and many more places where it either says the sacrifices will be reinstituted or that they are forever.

Talk about butchering the text.
Lev 7:36 reads
"The LORD commanded this to be given them by the people of Israel, from the day that he anointed them. It is a perpetual due throughout their generations."

Yes it is due through out there generations, however it can only be done with the temple standing. So does that mean its a contradiction since it can only be offered with the temple standing and since the temple no longer stands how can it be offered?

The Answer is in the other text you "BUTCHERED"

You give a partial quote of Jer 33. I find it intersting your quoting for Jer who is prophesising the destruction of the temple and about the coming Messiah.

In Jer 33:14-17
"Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will fulfill the promise I made to the house of Israel and the house of Judah. 15In those days and at that time I will cause a righteous Branch to spring up for David, and he shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. 16In those days Judah will be saved, and Jerusalem will dwell securely. And this is the name by which it will be called: 'The LORD is our righteousness.'
17"For thus says the LORD: David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel,

Who is this rightious branch? Jesus is called the "Branch of Jesse"

But continuing on to other texts you butchered.

Malachi 3:1-4

""Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me. And the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the LORD of hosts. 2But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner’s fire and like fullers’ soap. 3He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the sons of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, and they will bring offerings in righteousness to the LORD.[a] 4 Then the offering of Judah and Jerusalem will be pleasing to the LORD as in the days of old and as in former years."

John the Baptist was the messenger who prepaird the way and the LORD who is Jesus suddenly came to HIS TEMPLE.

Radical Moderate said...

@mar

What are you talking about????

You wrote...

"Btw i didnt now james white was your God, so he has the role in your little circle of puritans that catholics give the pope. Looool gets funnier and the answers from you are getting desperate"

WHen did I ever say James White was my God. you keep making reference as if "If James white new that you voted for Obama bla bla bla"

I mentioned the fact that I did tell him on a call to the DL as is "NO BIG DEAL" lol

Man this is to funny.

You really think that Christians have to vote a certin way or there not Christians, or they can only vote for Christians.

I might vote for Mitt Romney in the next election and he is a Pagan Mormon.

Radical Moderate said...

@Mar

The total mis representations continue...

you wrote...

"Also you told me to read hebrews 9 and 10 because you couldnt explain the atonement."

LOL when did I ever say I could not explain it. I challanged you to read Heb 9-10 I guess that was a little much for you since you skipped over the explanations to the accusations you made lol

I guess Jesus was right when he quoted Isiaah about you.

"
And when he was alone, those around him with the twelve asked him about the parables. 11And he said to them, "To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables, 12 so that

"they may indeed see but not perceive,
and may indeed hear but not understand,
lest they should turn and be forgiven."

maratsafin said...

oh radical mod this is gonna be really fun.

First let me get through the james white comment, did you not say that you called in the DL told mr white about who you cast your vote for and that HE DIDNT THROW YOU OUT OF THE KINGDOM??? isnt that what the pope does according to matthew 16? did they ( roman catholics) not do that to all protestants in the council of trent??? so my comment ,although tongue and cheek and may be reffering to white as your God was a bit to far,was a fair analysis of what you said.

1. You said

"I thought you said you read all of Hebrews, I guess when a Muslims says "I read all of something" they really mean "I only read so I can invent an objection."

are you implying i lied when i said i read all of hebrews or that i only read it because i wanted to find mistakes? anyhow i dont really care.

2. First i would like to remind you my main argument against the new testament as a whole and in this case the book of hebrews.
that the hebrew bible and the christian bible contradict each other when it comes to the mosaic law. Is it ever lasting as it sayn in the OT i have given numerous quotes from the hebrew bible and i'll give one more deuteronomy 7:9 or not and its faulty as it says in the book of hebrews. Only one can be right ok?.

3.Hebrews 10:1-4 contradicts the leviticus passage i cited why is this so hard for you to understand. The author of hebrews reckons theres some sort of subliminal message in the book of leviticus about jesus,but honestly anyone who reads it without christian presupposition will find it hard to see where this "shadow" is. especially since it keeps on saying this procedures are to be carried out through out all thier genertations.

4.Hebrews 10:5. yes i just read the lxx english translation although usually i use this one , but my point of the author butchering the txt still stands, how does he go from "mine ears hast thous opened" to "a body thous hast prepared me" i have no idea.

cont below

maratsafin said...

5. Jeremiah 33 mentions about the levites and doing sacrifices continually and that this peroid of peace will be overseen by someone from davids lineage. I dont what world your living in but israel hasnt been like this for well over 200o years
Also a strong case can be made that thier situation has got worse since the advent of jesus. So this passage no only contradicts the entire theology of the new testament but also argues in my favour about the temple rituals being reinstitued.

6.Again you fail on the passage from malachai. The messenger who is to come will "refine and purify the sons of levi so that they may offer scarfices in righteousness.and that the lord may be pleased with them like he was pleased with thier sacrfices as in the days of old" paraphrased from malachi 1:3-4.
John the baptist denies being elijah john 1:21

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

what RM said LOL

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

marat said,


the hebrew bible and the christian bible contradict each other when it comes to the mosaic law. Is it ever lasting as it sayn in the OT

I say,


It is ever lasting and eternal to those it was given to. The Old Covenant theocratic Kingdom of Israel.

We Christians are not part of that Covenant So it's laws do not apply to us.

We are part of the New Covenant so are bound by it's laws.

Did you really read Hebrews?

peace

maratsafin said...

So FMM since you are not part of the old covenant why do you feel the need to have a blood sacrifice for the forgiveness of your sins?

Since in the hebrew bible it states numerously that God does not need sacrifices whats the point of your belief about jesus's unnecessary death?

Why does the author claim the covenant given to the hebrews is faulty and ,if as you claim, thier covenant still stands what was the point of the book of hebrews!??

Btw the trinity ,for all your use of lots of words,is still a polythiestic belief. The last comment by you was especially confusing , God spoke the word by the power of the holy spirit? that deserves a " what on earth are you on about"? remark .but hey bro 1mm and erik and el lobo have tried to make you see sense and failed so i wont bother.

maratsafin said...

And no i did not read hebrews i just majically knew what verses to bring up!!!! Get a grip man why would i lie about this?

Radical Moderate said...

@MASH

You wrote...

"Since in the hebrew bible it states numerously that God does not need sacrifices whats the point of your belief about jesus's unnecessary death?"

WHere does God say he does not need sacrafice?

You also wrote...

"And no i did not read hebrews i just majically knew what verses to bring up!!!! "

I dont think you did, I think you went to a website and got some canned surface leval objections which I easly delt with. I mean you didn't even know that some of your objections where delth with in the first 4 or 5 verses of Hebrews 10.

But hey it will always be a mystery to you.

Radical Moderate said...

@Mar

Tell me is everyone who is from Israel, Israel?

Radical Moderate said...

FMM

I don't know about you, but I have noticed although it was never a challange, it was somewhat fun to test my biblical knowlege and force me to look up the obscure verses and there references to refute them.

But now its gotten to where I can do this in my sleep. Its like why bother anymore.

The words of Joesph's account of the destruction of the temple rings in my ears.

"LET US DEPART THIS PLACE"

maratsafin said...

Hey man if you belive you have dealt with it whats the point of responding again and accusing me of lieing? Btw my name is marat not mash.

Some hash website is biblegateway i think thier puritans they always seem to have advertisements for books by giesler and macarthur on thier homepage mostly the latter though. But hey you as a wierd 5 point calvinist must think that sites to conservative, point me to a more liberal translation site thats approved by you and i'll check it out.

Radical Moderate said...

Mash

I'm not accusing you of lying I'm just saying your a Muslim.

What is funny is you actually think I am a liberal lol.

maratsafin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Radical Moderate said...

Marsh

Who said I was a conservative lol.
Second what is even funnier you think my politics has to do with my relgion.

Oh man this gets better and better.

maratsafin said...

yes your a conservative arent you radical? looooool.
A hardcore 5 point calvinist who supposrts a extremely liberal president ( who many among those you associate theologicaly with consider to be carrying out stealth jihad and wants americas destruction loool)

No what you are mr radical is a child in a oldmans body. You have this unhealthy obsession with this site but worse still you make no constructive posts, just childish insults.
If you think you have answered all the questions i raised why bother coming back?
Like i said earlier the questions cannot be answered coherently,only if your church fathers had followed marcion of sinope could you have thrown the old testament out.
But wanting to prove from non prophecies and extremely creative interpretations,you kept the old testament for your own inevitable destruction.

Radical Moderate said...

Marsh here I will let you in on a little secret.

Politicaly I AM A MODERATE hence the MODERATE in my NICK.

It is a RADICAL thing in the USA these days to declare yourself a MODERATE, hence the RADICAL part of my nick. GET IT.

More on my politics.

I believe that government should provide and maintain a comercial infastructure. That being roads, bridges, harbors, rail lines and air ports.

I believe government should provide and maintain a military defence. That being said I believe the War Powers Act should be repealed accpet for Nuculear deterent. And any military engagments that takes active troops larger then the size of Platoon should take a act of Congress i.e. a ACT OF WAR.

I believe NAFTA and any FREE TRADE ZONE treaties should be repealed

I believe in strong enforcement of the US soveritnty in enforcing its borders.NO ILLIGALS

I believe that the "WAR on DRUGS" should be repealed and Drug zones set up where it can be taxed and regulated. A caveat to that is NO MEDICAL Treatment is to be provided in these drug zones. (Bring out your dead should be the order of the day)

I believe that US companies should set the standard. In other words the same rights that workers enjoy here in the USA should be enjoyed by workers in forign countries that work for US companies. Also the same enviormental standards that we have here in teh USA should also apply to US companies doing buisness with forign companies.

I believe that the US goverment should provide for the health of its citizens, promoting a healthy workforce that can compete with countries that do the same.

I believe that abortion is murder, the murder of futrue US citizens, future workers, future tax payers.

I believe that the income tax should be repealed and instead a national sales tax that is linked to a NATIONAL bank that buys bonds for the tax payer who is a US citzen or perminent resident. All other goes into the general fund.

On Islam, I believe that Muslims should be allowed to practice Sharia law on themselves. Only and this is a big only if they give up their constitutionaly protected rights and live on reservations.

Thats a brief of my politics, if you want I can go in deeper into my ecomonmics but that is enough for now.

Some of those idea's would be considered right wing, others left wing and others middle of the road hence the term moderate.

Can you guess which is which?

Radical Moderate said...

Marsh

My religion is Christ, I believe the bible is the inerant word of GOD. MY GOD SPEAKS.

I believe that Man is fallen and we live in a Fallen world.

I believe that all and by all I mean everyone is under Gods wrath, and just judgment. That we are all condmend to hell and the only thing that saves us is CHRIST. We do not go to hell becasue we do not believe in Christ, instead we are not rescued from hell becasue we do not believe in Christ.

I believe that only those that the father calls, enables, draws near, will repent and believe in Christ being placed in his hands. Those that are placed in his hands he will never loose and never drive away. That God chosses his elect those that he will save, man does not choose GOD.

So thats it in a nutshell can you show me where my politics conflict with my religion?

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

RM


But now its gotten to where I can do this in my sleep. Its like why bother anymore.


I agree

I can’t believe the level of argumentation we keep hearing from the other side.

I am beginning to believe that Islam requires you to turn off your brain. For example take a look at this

Quote:

Btw the trinity ,for all your use of lots of words,is still a polythiestic belief.

End quote:

What a profound argument he gives LOL

I can almost see his fingers stuck in his ears. LOL


Is there any muslim who will even try and understand what Christians actually believe?

They were told that Christians believe in three Gods and no matter what you say they will not change their mind.

They were told that the Trinity is illogical and when you show them that it is not they just plug their ears close their eyes and say "na na na na I can’t hear you"

amazing

Peace

maratsafin said...

I made a statement not a line of argument. If i had given why i think its polythiestic that would have been my reasoning and that may have been followed by a argument etc.
your comment gives the idea that only muslims think the trinity is illogical. I think you as a christian havent read your own church history. You lot have had a lot of different beliefs about the nature of God including some profilic church leaders who have denied the trinity and some the co-equality.

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

marat says,

your comment gives the idea that only muslims think the trinity is illogical.

I say

no

It's just that Muslims are the only folks that I know of that would think the The appeal to the people fallacy constituts somekind of arguement.

Lots of folks think there is no God

Apparently in the world of Islamic apologetics that sort of thing would be considered a valid argument against God that should hold some water.

You say,


including some profilic church leaders who have denied the trinity and some the co-equality.

I say,


first appeal to the people and now appeal to authority.

It’s like you are giving us a seminar in logically invalid argumentation.

Are you doing this on purpose?

That is what I mean when I say that it almost seems like Islam requires you to turn off your brain.

I apologize for being harsh but come on man you have got to use your head.

If you can’t think of an argument right now that is fine I understand that.

What you should do in such a case is take some time study up try and understand what the other side believes.

Instead you spout fallacies and at the same time loudly pronounce your victory like the limbless knight in Monty Python

peace

maratsafin said...

When did i declare victory!?

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

you say,

When did i declare victory!?

I say:

quote:

Btw the trinity ,for all your use of lots of words,is still a polythiestic belief.

end quote;

nuff said

peace

maratsafin said...

If that line gives you the impression i somehow declared victory i take it back.
I will say this "all you have written in defense of the trinity being a monothiestic belief has not in the slightest changed my view that it is actually a polythiestic belief" end quote . I hope you do not think that was a declaration of victory.

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Hey Marat,

Now that was the action of a gentleman.

Thank you and I am truly sorry if I was short or if I treatedly you rudely in any way.

Please understand I do not believe that my humble attempt to defend my Lord would in anyway convince you to abandon your rebellion and accept the truth of God’s genuine revelation.

The only way that will ever happen is if God decides to show you mercy.

Untill that happens the Trinity and all other spiritual things will be foolishness to you.

I just hope to help you understand that when you find the things of God to be " especially confusing" it only means that God has given you up (Romans 1:28)


Thanks

Radical Moderate said...

Marsh

Correction when I wrote

"We do not go to hell becasue we do not believe in Christ, instead we are not rescued from hell becasue we do not believe in Christ."

I should of wrote...

We do not go to hel becasue we do not beleive in Christ, instead we ARE rescued from hell becasue of CHRIST

Ali said...

okay i gotta share this. this guy was the imaam at our mosque for ramadan, comes from London:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WurYsLNYH4U

T.L. Winslow (TLW), the Historyscoper (tm) said...

Yes, Jews used the term Son of God before Jesus, but when he came along he showed them what it really meant. Actually, only a fraction of them, who believed that the disappearance of his corpse along with visitations or visions by true believers proved he was the real son of God, and became little Christs or Christians. That's the way the story goes in the Christian holy books :)

Now find out how it goes in secular history with the Historyscoper.

http://go.to/islamhistory