Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Zavon

How do you refute Trinity?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, IbnSina said:

 

What do you mean "our religion" and "our Book"? It says your religion is "NOTHING" on your user profile.

 

interesting isn't it?

Quote

I feel like you only answer the questions you feel you have a good answer for.

That is a good start.  At least you are saying that I have good answers to the questions I choose to answer (alhamdulillah).

I feel can write a whole book in response to your questions.  But I don't think you would read it or be receptive to it.  

My point regarding "tawhid" is that the word "tawhid" is not mentioned in Quran.  In the same way the word "Trinity" is not mentioned in the Bible.  But the teaching is there as I pointed out with those verses.  

 

 

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

@eThErEaL Do you think Quran has any verses that objects trinity? or are there any verses from the Quran that objects certain concepts of Christianity?

What is your view regarding this?

Every sacred religion has an inward and an outward, an essence and a form, a kernel and a shell, an esoteric and an exoteric dimension.  The outward of every sacred religion is different but the inward of every sacred religion is in fact all One Religion (this is called sometimes as Din al-Fitrah, Din of the Hanifs, Primordial Religion or Religion of the Heart, it is Al-Islam or Universal Submission but in the most universal sense of the term ).  Quran is against almost everything outward regarding Christianity.  It has to be, because if it were not against the outward form of Christianity (if it were not against everything that distinguishes Christianity from Islam) the two religions would not be different outwardly (they would not be two different religions).  For example, a tree has to have properties which are opposed to a mountain, if they did not have any opposing properties whatsoever then they would be the same thing!  But this is not God's plan of course.  He intends to create different paths for different people.  

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, eThErEaL said:

Every sacred religion has an inward and an outward, an essence and a form, a kernel and a shell, an esoteric and an exoteric dimension

Yeah, but my point is that Allah clearly rejects the doctrine of trinity because it has no ground. You say that the idea of trinity is in the bible, and compare that with Imamat. However, bible has been altered, so how will you know whether that was the word of god?

However, the fact that Allah clearly rejects it (Quran 5:73) shows that this doctrine was was completely false. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

Yeah, but my point is that Allah clearly rejects the doctrine of trinity because it has no ground. You say that the idea of trinity is in the bible, and compare that with Imamat. However, bible has been altered, so how will you know whether that was the word of god?

However, the fact that Allah clearly rejects it (Quran 5:73) shows that this doctrine was was completely false. 

Let us assume the Quran completely rejects the Trinity (which I don't think is true since The Quran says "desist from saying three, it would be better for you") then I am fine with it based on the explanation I gave in my previous post regarding outward and inward dimensions of religion.  I am fine with it because Quran is not meant to outwardly conform to Christianity.

The doctrine of Trinity is true because it makes perfect sense when understoood from a mystical point of view (it can be verified with the heart).  Trinity is a sacred doctrine for Christians, not only because it is in the Bible but also because God cannot possibly misguide so many millions of people over successive generations.  He would not let that happen.    

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

interesting isn't it?

No, not really. I could not care less in fact, it makes no difference to me what you call yourself.

In either makes you look like you forgot to change your religion to whatever it is you believe since you are at least evidently agnostic.

Or it makes you seem like one of those super enlighten special snow flakes that loves attention and being told that they are so much smarter than others.

Either way, none of the above reasons are really interesting, just boring, you get a lot of those on the internet.

 

5 hours ago, eThErEaL said:
Quote

God died because he wanted to save men from the wrath of God so that God would not punish them and as long as you love the son of God who is God, God the father of God, not the God who died in order to save you from God, God wont send you to hell. Sounds logical to you?

It makes sense to me.  rather beautiful  I should say.  (I honestly mean it).  

It makes perfect sense to you? 

... Okay.

 

4 hours ago, eThErEaL said:
Quote

I feel like you only answer the questions you feel you have a good answer for.

That is a good start.  At least you are saying that I have good answers to the questions I choose to answer (alhamdulillah).

I feel can write a whole book in response to your questions.  But I don't think you would read it or be receptive to it.  

No. I said "I feel like you only answer the questions you feel you have a good answer for."

This does not mean that I think your answers are good but that YOU think your answers are good.

It is quite evident that you are a selective reader and also selective in what questions you choose to address. These attributes makes it pretty pointless to discuss with you since you will read what you want to read only.

I am still waiting for the answer to the rest of my questions, if you dont know the answer or feel like you have a hard time coming with a good (in accordance with you personally) answer, then please just admit it instead of avoiding them.

I dont really know if theres a point continuing this discussion with you.

 

2 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

The doctrine of Trinity is true because it makes perfect sense when understoood from a mystical point of view (it can be verified with the heart).

It makes perfect sense to you out of a "mystical point of view" and thats why its true? Thats the level of your reasoning?

With that type of reasoning everything can be announced as sensible.

 

2 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

Trinity is a sacred doctrine for Christians, not only because it is in the Bible but also because God cannot possibly misguide so many millions of people over successive generations.  He would not let that happen.  

Please give me your definition of something sacred.

You concluded that the Bible does not have the same status as the holy Quran because humans have changed it and added to it and removed from it.

Your second argument does not make much sense either because first of all God does not misguide people, He guides the ones that are humble enough to follow, it is people themselves who misguides themselves. He gives the options and encourages you to reflect and think and remain humble in order to achieve something from your reflection and thinking.

Have you heard about prophet Noa(as)? Almost all of mankind had become misguided, not because of Allah swt misguiding them but because they did not want to be guided thru his prophet and sure enough Allah swt drowned them all.

Both your arguments fail, and you base the splitting of the one God into three on such arguments?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

"desist from saying three, it would be better for you")

'They have certainly disbelieved who say, " Allah is the third of three." And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment.'

I feel there are no 'ifs' and 'buts' when it comes to this verse. Many of the tafsirs of our knowledgeable scholars indicate that this doctrine is completely wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IbnSina said:

No, not really. I could not care less in fact, it makes no difference to me what you call yourself.

In either makes you look like you forgot to change your religion to whatever it is you believe since you are at least evidently agnostic.

Or it makes you seem like one of those super enlighten special snow flakes that loves attention and being told that they are so much smarter than others.

Either way, none of the above reasons are really interesting, just boring, you get a lot of those on the internet.

 

It makes perfect sense to you? 

... Okay.

 

No. I said "I feel like you only answer the questions you feel you have a good answer for."

This does not mean that I think your answers are good but that YOU think your answers are good.

It is quite evident that you are a selective reader and also selective in what questions you choose to address. These attributes makes it pretty pointless to discuss with you since you will read what you want to read only.

I am still waiting for the answer to the rest of my questions, if you dont know the answer or feel like you have a hard time coming with a good (in accordance with you personally) answer, then please just admit it instead of avoiding them.

I dont really know if theres a point continuing this discussion with you.

 

It makes perfect sense to you out of a "mystical point of view" and thats why its true? Thats the level of your reasoning?

With that type of reasoning everything can be announced as sensible.

 

Please give me your definition of something sacred.

You concluded that the Bible does not have the same status as the holy Quran because humans have changed it and added to it and removed from it.

Your second argument does not make much sense either because first of all God does not misguide people, He guides the ones that are humble enough to follow, it is people themselves who misguides themselves. He gives the options and encourages you to reflect and think and remain humble in order to achieve something from your reflection and thinking.

Have you heard about prophet Noa(as)? Almost all of mankind had become misguided, not because of Allah swt misguiding them but because they did not want to be guided thru his prophet and sure enough Allah swt drowned them all.

Both your arguments fail, and you base the splitting of the one God into three on such arguments?

 

I don't think I can continue this conversation after what you have just said.  Inshallah some other time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

'They have certainly disbelieved who say, " Allah is the third of three." And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment.'

I feel there are no 'ifs' and 'buts' when it comes to this verse. Many of the tafsirs of our knowledgeable scholars indicate that this doctrine is completely wrong. 

I forgot about that verse.  So yes that is a verse clearly against the Trinity.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

'They have certainly disbelieved who say, " Allah is the third of three." And there is no god except one God. 

I am not a trinitarian myself but I am certain trinitarians agree with this. Maybe Muhammed was familiar with a Christian sect that believed there were three Gods, but if so, where are they today? And if not, whats the problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

'They have certainly disbelieved who say, " Allah is the third of three." And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment.'

I feel there are no 'ifs' and 'buts' when it comes to this verse. Many of the tafsirs of our knowledgeable scholars indicate that this doctrine is completely wrong. 

5:72 is pretty straight forward as well. 

There's still confusion here. The first half of 4:171 says; 

People of the Book, do not go to excess in your religion, and do not say anything about God except the truth: the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, was nothing more than a messenger of God, His word, directed to Mary, a spirit from Him. 

Note it says Jesus is, #1 a messenger, #2 His word, #3 a spirit from Him. Many things in the scriptures are mentioned in threes. 

Everybody is focusing on the messenger. The physical person of Jesus. A flesh and blood god. It doesn't matter how you look at it, the physical person of Jesus could not be anything more than a vessel, just like every Prophet, so why is Jesus given such status? How could it ever come to this?

It's a longer study but ties in with #2, "His word". Why is this here?

Does it confirm the opening of the Gospel according to John? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

I don't think I can continue this conversation after what you have just said.  Inshallah some other time. 

Sorry eThErEaL We are warned in Matthew 7 about pouring your heart out in front of those who prefer to destroy it.

Kinda tough dealing with someone who sits on the only pinnacle of truth, can say whatever they like because everyone else is beneath them. It happens every time school lets out, and a sign that prejudice is still part of the curriculum.

Edited by Son of Placid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, andres said:

I am not a trinitarian myself but I am certain trinitarians agree with this. Maybe Muhammed was familiar with a Christian sect that believed there were three Gods, but if so, where are they today? And if not, whats the problem?

Most Muslims will not be able to accept how the Trinity can possibly be reconciled with God's Oneness.  It requires a tremendous amount of patience,  open-mindedness, and not to mention (and this is perhaps the most important of all) a special fondness for Classical Medieval Mystical Philosophy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Son of Placid said:

5:72 is pretty straight forward as well. 

There's still confusion here. The first half of 4:171 says; 

People of the Book, do not go to excess in your religion, and do not say anything about God except the truth: the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, was nothing more than a messenger of God, His word, directed to Mary, a spirit from Him. 

Note it says Jesus is, #1 a messenger, #2 His word, #3 a spirit from Him. Many things in the scriptures are mentioned in threes. 

Everybody is focusing on the messenger. The physical person of Jesus. A flesh and blood god. It doesn't matter how you look at it, the physical person of Jesus could not be anything more than a vessel, just like every Prophet, so why is Jesus given such status? How could it ever come to this?

It's a longer study but ties in with #2, "His word". Why is this here?

Does it confirm the opening of the Gospel according to John? 

This is why I find Christianity very beautiful.  It is really direct in bringing out the message of God's immanence.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Son of Placid said:

Sorry eThErEaL We are warned in Matthew 7 about pouring your heart out in front of those who prefer to destroy it.

Kinda tough dealing with someone who sits on the only pinnacle of truth, can say whatever they like because everyone else is beneath them. It happens every time school lets out, and a sign that prejudice is still part of the curriculum.

In what way has he "poured his heart out"? And in what way have i destroyed it?

I have no interest in destroying anyones heart, especially since i do not gain anything in doing so. My sense of what is true and was is false is independent of his heart whether it is whole or it is destroyed.

If a person cannot stand being questioned regarding what they are saying without feeling hurt then they should remain quiet to begin with, as far as I know, we are all adults here.

I wish to understand my surrounding and in order to do so, I question my surrounding. You and others are part of my surrounding.

But I will tell you one thing, I usually refrain from discussing religion with Christians, not because I am afraid to but because I fear that in a discussion of what makes more logical sense, they will end up abandoning their religion in the end but I more so fear that their sense of pride will prevent them from adopting a religion which makes more rational sense, leaving them all together with no religion at all and I do not want that.

I believe the current religion of modern Christianity is more based on emotions than anything ells, the concept of trinity is a prime example, in this case the person in particular seems to base his sense of what is truth and sensible on "Classical Medieval Mystical Philosophy" whatever that actually means...

As I said before I am not out to hurt anyone or destroy anyones heart but I would like to expand my knowledge by asking and I would also like to increase my understanding of the answer by questioning the answer, just like Imam Ali(as) has said:

B-Rl6txCYAE5q-1.jpg

 

11 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

I don't think I can continue this conversation after what you have just said.  Inshallah some other time.

Which part of what I said makes you not be able to continue the conversation?

Your faith seems to be a mix of religions, making you a "special snowflake".

You saying you are able to write me books in response to my questions makes you deem yourself as "enlightened".

You thinking I and others would find your lack of clarity regarding your religious status "interesting" makes it look like you enjoy attention.

You call the holy Quran "our book" and at the same time you believe in trinity and at the same time you forget about ayahs who specifically condemns the concept of trinity. Is that a small thing to forget?

Me saying that I think you are a selective reader is evident from your own posts, me saying you are selective in what questions you wish to answer is evident from your own posts.

Or was it my bringing of the example of Prophet Noa(as) to show how your argument cannot hold what makes you not be able to continue?

Or was it me questioning you definition of what you yourself deem as sacred in relation to your previous statements?

 

Honestly brothers in humanity, our time to interact with each other in this short life is so limited, if you would count the seconds of interaction then perhaps we would stop beating around the bush. I do not wish to spend my short time interacting with you by trying to win your liking of me or by trying to play games. Lets be genuine and lets be straight forward.

To say that the one God is three is a huge statement, if your words could manifest, such statement would shake the mountains. You better be able to defend your statement, for sure you will be questioned about it, if not in this life by nobodies like me then in the grave by the angels and ultimately by the one and eternal God.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IbnSina said:

In what way has he "poured his heart out"? And in what way have i destroyed it?

I have no interest in destroying anyones heart, especially since i do not gain anything in doing so. My sense of what is true and was is false is independent of his heart whether it is whole or it is destroyed.

If a person cannot stand being questioned regarding what they are saying without feeling hurt then they should remain quiet to begin with, as far as I know, we are all adults here.

I wish to understand my surrounding and in order to do so, I question my surrounding. You and others are part of my surrounding.

But I will tell you one thing, I usually refrain from discussing religion with Christians, not because I am afraid to but because I fear that in a discussion of what makes more logical sense, they will end up abandoning their religion in the end but I more so fear that their sense of pride will prevent them from adopting a religion which makes more rational sense, leaving them all together with no religion at all and I do not want that.

I believe the current religion of modern Christianity is more based on emotions than anything ells, the concept of trinity is a prime example, in this case the person in particular seems to base his sense of what is truth and sensible on "Classical Medieval Mystical Philosophy" whatever that actually means...

As I said before I am not out to hurt anyone or destroy anyones heart but I would like to expand my knowledge by asking and I would also like to increase my understanding of the answer by questioning the answer, just like Imam Ali(as) has said:

B-Rl6txCYAE5q-1.jpg

 

Which part of what I said makes you not be able to continue the conversation?

Your faith seems to be a mix of religions, making you a "special snowflake".

You saying you are able to write me books in response to my questions makes you deem yourself as "enlightened".

You thinking I and others would find your lack of clarity regarding your religious status "interesting" makes it look like you enjoy attention.

You call the holy Quran "our book" and at the same time you believe in trinity and at the same time you forget about ayahs who specifically condemns the concept of trinity. Is that a small thing to forget?

Me saying that I think you are a selective reader is evident from your own posts, me saying you are selective in what questions you wish to answer is evident from your own posts.

Or was it my bringing of the example of Prophet Noa(as) to show how your argument cannot hold what makes you not be able to continue?

Or was it me questioning you definition of what you yourself deem as sacred in relation to your previous statements?

 

Honestly brothers in humanity, our time to interact with each other in this short life is so limited, if you would count the seconds of interaction then perhaps we would stop beating around the bush. I do not wish to spend my short time interacting with you by trying to win your liking of me or by trying to play games. Lets be genuine and lets be straight forward.

To say that the one God is three is a huge statement, if your words could manifest, such statement would shake the mountains. You better be able to defend your statement, for sure you will be questioned about it, if not in this life by nobodies like me then in the grave by the angels and ultimately by the one and eternal God.

 

Salamun Alaykum Dear Brother,

There is no need to get so upset.  Just relax and smile and everyone will get along just fine.. inshallah. :)  

If you can learn to do that, then we will continue to discuss inshallah.  

Ethereal

 

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

O followers of the Book! do not exceed the limits in your religion, and do not speak (lies) against Allah, but (speak) the truth; the Messiah, Isa son of Marium is only a messenger of Allah and His Word which He communicated to Marium and a spirit from Him; believe therefore in Allah and His messengers, and say not, Three. Desist, it is better for you; Allah is only one Allah; far be It from His glory that He should have a son, whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is His, and Allah is sufficient for a Protector.

Surah 4:171

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Certainly they disbelieve who say: Surely Allah is the third (person) of the three; and there is no god but the one Allah, and if they desist not from what they say, a painful chastisement shall befall those among them who disbelieve.

Surah 5:73

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/28/2017 at 9:51 PM, eThErEaL said:

Salamun Alaykum Dear Brother,

There is no need to get so upset.  Just relax and smile and everyone will get along just fine.. inshallah. :)  

If you can learn to do that, then we will continue to discuss inshallah.  

Ethereal

Ws,

I fail to see how anything of what I have said so far could be interpreted as me projecting that I am upset.

I have no reason to be upset, all I am doing is questioning your answers and then confronting your (lack of) use of relevant and consistent rhetoric.

Maybe you think I am upset because I confront you on your logic? Maybe you are not used to be questioned on what you believe, I dont know.

Anyways, I am not here to dance to someones flute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IbnSina said:

Ws,

I fail to see how anything of what I have said so far could be interpreted as me projecting that I am upset.

I have no reason to be upset, all I am doing is questioning your answers and then confronting your (lack of) use of relevant and consistent rhetoric.

Maybe you think I am upset because I confront you on your logic? Maybe you are not used to be questioned on what you believe, I dont know.

Anyways, I am not here to dance to someones flute.

 

 

:)

Alright, 

let us discuss one point at a time, inshallah.  

Which was the first thing you feel that I have been avoiding?  (I may not have gotten to some particular point you made also because I may not have had so much time).  But let us keep our posts short and confined to one particular point (as much as we can).  

 

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, wolverine said:
Quote

Certainly they disbelieve who say: Surely Allah is the third (person) of the three; and there is no god but the one Allah, and if they desist not from what they say, a painful chastisement shall befall those among them who disbelieve.

Surah 5:73

Salam Ya wolverine 

 

I was just reading this verse and it now occurs to me that this is not what the Doctrine of Trinity says.  God is not the third of three.  Maybe this verse is rejecting very crude versions of Trinity,  

So the verse that says, "don't say Three, that is better for you...."

is a far more suitable verse to use because it seems more general!   but, in this verse we find that it says "it is better for you if you stop", not that it is all together wrong.  It sounds like a discouragement (and not necessarily inherently wrong.

But in any case, like I said, even if it denounced the Trinity completely... it's fine!

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Imam al-Sadiq (as) was asked, “Why is it not permissible that there be more than one creator of the universe?” Thus, he (as) replied: …Furthermore, if you claim that there are two gods, there must be a division between them both, which has always existed, and that division would have to be a third god. However, if you claim that there are three gods, then there must be two divisions between them, leaving us with five gods, and so on ad aeternum.5

https://www.al-islam.org/principles-faith-usul-al-din-husayn-vahid-khorasani/divine-unity-tawhid#first-proof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, ali_fatheroforphans said:

'They have certainly disbelieved who say, " Allah is the third of three." And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment.'

I feel there are no 'ifs' and 'buts' when it comes to this verse. Many of the tafsirs of our knowledgeable scholars indicate that this doctrine is completely wrong. 

Salam ali_father of orphans,

I was just reading this verse and it now occurs to me that this is not what the Doctrine of Trinity says.  God is not the third of three.  Maybe this verse is rejecting very crude versions of Trinity,  

So the verse that says, "don't say Three, that is better for you...."

is a far more suitable verse to use because it seems more general!   but, in this verse we find that it says "it is better for you if you stop", not that it is all together wrong.  It sounds like a discouragement (and not necessarily inherently wrong.

But in any case, like I said, even if it denounced the Trinity completely... it's fine!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Third Proof

Indeed, Allah, the Exalted, is present without limitation. As ‘Ali (as) says: Limitation and end do not apply to Him,2 because every limited being is composed of essence and the limitation of that essence. The limitation of essence would mean absence of perfection, which is in addition to that essence.

Thus, this composition is the worst of its types, as composition can be between two existing things or between one existence and one nonexistence. The supposed composition would be between an existence and a nonexistence. However, all types of compositions are impossible for Allah, the Exalted.

The existence which has no limitation must be One for which a second cannot be conceived, because conceiving a second to Him would necessitate limiting Him. A limitation is composed of existence and nonexistence.

Every composed is in need of what it is composed of. Therefore, association in Divinity ends in making the god in need of nonexistence. The Glorified Allah is Unique in essence and attributes. Hence, He has no second to Him, neither confirmed nor conceived.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, eThErEaL said:
  14 hours ago, IbnSina said:

In what way has he "poured his heart out"? And in what way have i destroyed it?

Pointing things out doesn't work. A couple hours down the road from me is a Bible collage. Kids in their early 20's all ramped up on spreading the word of God to all nations. Embracing those who follow, rejecting those who don't. They know everything there is to know about God, and Jesus, and the trinity, and have learned all the answers, have all the bases covered. They see humanity as something they have to save from itself. Until then it has little value and no opinion. They have all the paperwork, but don't have the inner peace that comes with a personal relationship with the creator they spent so much time learning about, thus the main message is lost. They can't see value in people, nor what people value.

In reference to Matthew 7, (actually starts in Matt 5), is part of what Jesus said in His sermon on the mount. In order to properly understand His sermon one needs to acquire an empathetic nature. It played a big part in the lives of Jesus and Muhammad, and they showed many examples, but empathy is only referenced, not taught. Religions would rather keep boundaries. 

If you have trouble talking to Christians for fear they leave their religion, but don't join yours, it might have something to do with your approach. If you can convince them against that which they believe but cannot convince them of what you believe, nobody wins. They are better to stay with the faith they have. Not sure what Muhammad said, but Jesus says woe to those who cause a brother to stumble. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2017 at 5:11 AM, eThErEaL said:

So the verse that says, "don't say Three, that is better for you...." [4:171]

Salam. The Holy Qur'an is a very polite book. "don't say Three, that is better for you" acknowledges that some people have benefited from saying Three, but if they are worried about their afterlife they would stop believing it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole doctrine came after Prophet Jesus [a.s] in about 325 A.D when Constantine I tried to mix things between Pagan Romans and Christianity,hence he created Modern Christianity with is =/= of Early Christianity.

Trinity doesn't exist in Gospel.

Say, "Produce your proof, if you should be truthful. [Quran 27:64]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2017 at 11:01 AM, eThErEaL said:

:)

Alright, 

let us discuss one point at a time, inshallah.  

Which was the first thing you feel that I have been avoiding?  (I may not have gotten to some particular point you made also because I may not have had so much time).  But let us keep our posts short and confined to one particular point (as much as we can).  

 

 

How does one within the doctrines of christianity know what is from God and what is from men?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IbnSina said:

How does one within the doctrines of Christianity know what is from God and what is from men?

Why would we need to know what doctrines of other religions are from God and what are from men? 

Isn't it more important for all of us to understand our own religion first?

I am sure you will agree that there is a lot more about Islam that we need to know.

Please forgive me but I really think we are wasting our time by trying to worry about other religions when our own religion has a lot more to teach us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, baqar said:

Why would we need to know what doctrines of other religions are from God and what are from men? 

Isn't it more important for all of us to understand our own religion first?

I am sure you will agree that there is a lot more about Islam that we need to know.

Please forgive me but I really think we are wasting our time by trying to worry about other religions when our own religion has a lot more to teach us.

 

Its good to understand each other but in order to do so we must converse and ask each other questions, nothing wrong with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, IbnSina said:

 

How does one within the doctrines of christianity know what is from God and what is from men?

1

I can't speak for every single denomination within Christianity but I have an attraction towards the Eastern Orthodox Church. Having said that, I am not at all an expert on Christianity since I am not a Christian and I do not claim to be a scholar of Christianity.  I would encourage Son of Placid and other Christians to share their expertise on the subject (because I know most of the Christians here are not of the Eastern Orthodox Church).  

You are basically asking about Orthodoxy

Quote

 

What unites Orthodox Christians is the catholic faith, whose vessel is Holy Tradition, inspired through the operation of the Holy Spirit. That faith is expressed most fundamentally in Scripture and in worship,[51] and the latter most essentially through the mystery of Baptism and in the Divine Liturgy.[52] The faith lives and breathes by God's energies in communion with the Church. Inter-communion is the litmus test by which all can see that two churches share the same faith; lack of inter-communion (excommunication, literally "out of communion") is the sign of different faiths, even though some central theological points may be shared. The sharing of beliefs can be highly significant, but it is not the full measure of the faith.

The lines of even this test can blur, however, when differences that arise are not due to doctrine, but to recognition of jurisdiction. As the Orthodox Church has spread into the west and over the world, the church as a whole has yet to sort out all the inter-jurisdictional issues that have arisen in the expansion, leaving some areas of doubt about what is proper church governance.[53] And as in the ancient church persecutions, the aftermath of modern persecutions of Christians in communist nations has left behind both some governance and some faith issues that have yet to be completely resolved.[54]

All members of the Orthodox Church profess the same faith, regardless of race or nationality, jurisdiction or local custom, or century of birth. Holy Tradition encompasses the understandings and means by which that unity of faith is transmitted across boundaries of time, geography, and culture. It is a continuity that exists only inasmuch as it lives within Christians themselves.[55] It is not static, nor an observation of rules, but rather a sharing of observations that spring both from within and also in keeping with others, even others who lived lives long past. The Holy Spirit maintains the unity and consistency of the Holy Tradition to preserve the integrity of the faith within the Church, as given in the Scriptural promises.[56]

The shared beliefs of Orthodoxy, and its theology, exist within the Holy Tradition and cannot be separated from it, for their meaning is not expressed in mere words alone.[57] Doctrine cannot be understood unless it is prayed. To be a theologian, one must know how to pray, and one who prays in spirit and in truth becomes a theologian by doing so.[58] Doctrine must also be lived in order to be prayed, for without action, the prayer is idle and empty, a mere vanity, and therefore the theology of demons.[59] According to these teachings of the ancient church, no superficial belief can ever be orthodox. Similarly, reconciliation and unity are not superficial, but are prayed and lived out.

 

Quote

The shared beliefs of Orthodoxy, and its theology, exist within the Holy Tradition and cannot be separated from it, for their meaning is not expressed in mere words alone.[57] Doctrine cannot be understood unless it is prayed. To be a theologian, one must know how to pray, and one who prays in spirit and in truth becomes a theologian by doing so.[58] Doctrine must also be lived in order to be prayed, for without action, the prayer is idle and empty, a mere vanity, and therefore the theology of demons.[59] According to these teachings of the ancient church, no superficial belief can ever be orthodox. Similarly, reconciliation and unity are not superficial, but are prayed and lived out.

3

Isn't this beautiful?  Isn't this something Muslims can learn from? :)

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, eThErEaL said:

I can't speak for every single denomination within Christianity but I have an attraction towards the Eastern Orthodox Church. Having said that, I am not at all an expert on Christianity since I am not a Christian and I do not claim to be a scholar of Christianity.  I would encourage Son of Placid and other Christians to share their expertise on the subject (because I know most of the Christians here are not of the Eastern Orthodox Church).  

You are basically asking about Orthodoxy

I dont really feel like you answered the question, you just introduced something more unclear which is the concept of "holy tradition". Lets ask Paul about "holy" traditions.

You have adopted the concept of trinity which is a modern christian concept and understanding of God and you have claimed that the concept of trinity is given in the Bible.

And yet, you say that Bible has been meddled with and is not like the holy Quran.

And yet, you cannot answer the question of how you define what is from men and what is from God when its comes to the Bible.

I would like you to answer my question instead of introducing more concepts which are not really relevant to my question.

My question was:

"How does one within the doctrines of christianity know what is from God and what is from men?"

Is your answer: I do not know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, IbnSina said:

 

How does one within the doctrines of christianity know what is from God and what is from men?

That's like asking how does one within the doctrines of Islam know what is from God and what is from men?

They are intertwined so those, "within" don't recognize the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IbnSina said:

I dont really feel like you answered the question, you just introduced something more unclear which is the concept of "holy tradition". Lets ask Paul about "holy" traditions.

You have adopted the concept of trinity which is a modern christian concept and understanding of God and you have claimed that the concept of trinity is given in the Bible.

And yet, you say that Bible has been meddled with and is not like the holy Quran.

And yet, you cannot answer the question of how you define what is from men and what is from God when its comes to the Bible.

I would like you to answer my question instead of introducing more concepts which are not really relevant to my question.

My question was:

"How does one within the doctrines of christianity know what is from God and what is from men?"

Is your answer: I do not know?

I don't think I said the Bible has been meddled with.  You mind quoting me?

I suggest you to read the section on the Bible in the wiki link I sent you.  

According to the Eastern Orthodox Chirch, the Bible is not, technically speaking, the Word of God... it is Jesus himself who is the Word of God.  I quote from the wiki link:

 

"In a very strict sense, it is not entirely orthodox to call the Holy Scriptures the "Word of God". That is a title the Orthodox Church reserves for Christ, as supported in the scriptures themselves, most explicitly in the first chapter of the gospel of John. God's Word is not hollow, like human words. "God said, 'let there be light'; and there was light."[123] This is the Word which spoke the universe into being, and resonates in creation without diminution throughout all history, a Word of divine power."

 

And yet:

"Orthodox Christians hold that he Bible is a verbal icon of Christ, as proclaimed by the 7th ecumenical council.[116] They refer to the Bible as Holy Scripture, meaning writings containing the foundational truths of the Christian faith as revealed by Christ and the Holy Spirit to its divinely inspired human authors. Holy Scripture forms the primary and authoritative written witness of Holy Tradition and is essential as the basis for all Orthodox teaching and belief.[117]The Bible provides the only texts held to be suitable for reading in Orthodox worship services. Through the many scriptural quotations embedded in the worship service texts themselves, it is often said that the Orthodox pray the Bible as well as read it."

 

 

Edited by eThErEaL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...