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

Who/What is the Holy Spirit?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

The one l wrote above, a personification,

Wouldn’t that prove what I said? Read the homily again and proverbs 8, it shows Wisdom was a person and was created. Shimon ((عليه السلام)) says that it acts as the hand of God and proverbs 8 shows that it was present during the creation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Isn't the prophet Isa (عليه السلام) sometimes mentioned in the Holy Quran as روح الله (Ruho-Lah), meaning the spirit of Allah? Maybe he is the Holy spirit but not in the Trinitarian sense.

The fact that it’s not gospel “of” Jesus shows that it’s not gospel of Christ rather the 4 gospels contain some truthful accounts of Jesus’ life. 

We don't know. Maybe it's Jibraeel,maybe not. In surah Qadr Angels and Holy spirt are mentioned separately so it can't be an angel. It is said in a tradition from Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) th

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, THREE1THREE said:

Spiritual realm, before the world was created our spirit were in the realm of Alam al-darr. 

Ok so what's the connection between that spiritual realm and laylatul qadr? 

And if it was all the souls of humankind wouldn't it be arwaa7 and not ruu7? Because mala'ika is clearly plural and ruuh not.

Edited by modaoudi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
22 minutes ago, modaoudi said:

Ok so what's the connection between that spiritual realm and laylatul qadr? 

And if it was all the souls of humankind wouldn't it be arwaa7 and not ruu7? Because mala'ika is clearly plural and ruuh not.

Yes you make a point. Could It possibly be reference to particular ruh? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
On 8/7/2020 at 8:22 PM, flyingeagle said:

Hello, I am a Christian and I would like to know what Muslims believe about the Holy Spirit.

I believe that the Holy Spirit is part of the Godhead, one of the persons of the Trinity.  He was there before the world began (Gen. 1:1), participated in the work of creation, and came upon people in specific instances during the Old Testament covenant (Judges 3:10Exodus 31:3-6, Numbers 11:17, etc.).  He inspired the authors of Scripture to write the Word of God (2 Tim. 3:16-17).  Now after Christ's life, death, and resurrection, the Holy Spirit is given to all those who believe in Jesus, to dwell in the church and work in the life of the believer to comfort, heal, empower, intercede, and convict (John 14:16-26, 1 Cor. 6:19-20, Rom. 8:26, etc.).

How does the Holy Spirit work in the Muslim faith?

the Holy Spirit in Islam is known as al-Ruh al-Quddus which means The Spirit of Purity. al-Ruh is a spirit (rih in Arabic means breeze) and al-Quddus is a name for God which means The Pure/Holy. The spirit is a creation of God/Allah and is totally under his command. It is mentioned in the Quran as descending upon Jesus (may Allah bless him) which inspired and supported him throughout his mission. There are other spirit discussed such as the al-Ruh al-Amin which is known as the truthful spirit. The other spirit is known as the al-ruh al-Amr which is the Spirit of the Divine Command which is basically the life-force responsible for divine will.

The difference perhaps may be semantics, but in Islam there is no Godhead - everything is subsumed under the command and control of Allah even beings with free-will have this enabled by God. It is ultimately God that brings life to all and death there is no Godhead or slight assocation with God - unless you are meaning in a non-literalist sense - again semantics sometimes leads to superficial differences. In Islam Allah's "essense" is uncreated and therefore cannot be compared with his creation (in this sense) like Jesus or the Holy Spirit. He transcends his creations and they depend upon him for life.

The idea is basically that the more purer a human being is the more "inspired" they become.

Shakir: And they ask you about the soul. Say: The soul is one of the commands of my Lord, and you are not given aught of knowledge but a little Quran 17:85

Edited by gharib570
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
6 hours ago, THREE1THREE said:

Wouldn’t that prove what I said? Read the homily again and proverbs 8, it shows Wisdom was a person and was created. Shimon ((عليه السلام)) says that it acts as the hand of God and proverbs 8 shows that it was present during the creation.

Personification is a literary device.

Definitions and examples aplenty on the Net.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Some people say that the Holy Spirit/Ruh al Qudus (عليه السلام) is Jibrail (عليه السلام), I don't agree it's obviously a spirit if you look at the translation. According to some, including me, the Ruh is a creation that is holier than the angles, also the Ruh helped Isa (عليه السلام) this is said in Dua al Nudba which I recommend you listen to,

وَبَعْضٌ اوْلَدْتَهُ مِنْ غَيْرِ اب

You made another one to be born without a father,

وَآتَيْتَهُ ٱلْبَيِّنَاتِ

gave him clear-cut proofs

وَايَّدْتَهُ بِرُوحِ ٱلْقُدُسِ

and aided him with the Sacred Spirit.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
21 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

I totally agree.  That's why I believe that the Holy Spirit is God.

Why exactly do you believe in the Trinity? I'm willing to debate you on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

Why exactly do you believe

Personally, l think it is not only unbelief that people prefer superstitions, but also that it gives them something to show-off with -as if they know more than what Allah -(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). has revealed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 hours ago, gharib570 said:

the Holy Spirit in Islam is known as al-Ruh al-Quddus which means The Spirit of Purity. al-Ruh is a spirit (rih in Arabic means breeze) and al-Quddus is a name for God which means The Pure/Holy. The spirit is a creation of God/Allah and is totally under his command. It is mentioned in the Quran as descending upon Jesus (may Allah bless him) which inspired and supported him throughout his mission. There are other spirit discussed such as the al-Ruh al-Amin which is known as the truthful spirit. The other spirit is known as the al-ruh al-Amr which is the Spirit of the Divine Command which is basically the life-force responsible for divine will.

The difference perhaps may be semantics, but in Islam there is no Godhead - everything is subsumed under the command and control of Allah even beings with free-will have this enabled by God. It is ultimately God that brings life to all and death there is no Godhead or slight assocation with God - unless you are meaning in a non-literalist sense - again semantics sometimes leads to superficial differences. In Islam Allah's "essense" is uncreated and therefore cannot be compared with his creation (in this sense) like Jesus or the Holy Spirit. He transcends his creations and they depend upon him for life.

The idea is basically that the more purer a human being is the more "inspired" they become.

Shakir: And they ask you about the soul. Say: The soul is one of the commands of my Lord, and you are not given aught of knowledge but a little Quran 17:85

Thank you for your explanation. It is very helpful!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
19 hours ago, HusseinAbbas said:

We don't beleive the gospels of Mark, Mathew, Luke, Jhon to be the gospels of Isa(عليه السلام), we beleive Isa(عليه السلام) came with revelation(gospel) which was lost over time, this especially isn't suprising since the gospel has been translated into multiple languages which means a lot of meanings were lost over time too, this is why a translation of the quran is not a quran and we insist it be in arabic for it to be a quran.

Ok, I think I see the difference in our standpoints.  I believe that God preserves his Word, and has sent it not just to one people, but to the whole world.  That is why the Bible is still the Word of God when translated into many different languages.

More importantly, though, if Allah is all-powerful and people are mere creations, how is the creation powerful enough to change the Word of God?  Would Allah not protect and preserve His Word?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
19 hours ago, THREE1THREE said:

The fact that it’s not gospel “of” Jesus shows that it’s not gospel of Christ rather the 4 gospels contain some truthful accounts of Jesus’ life. 

If, as you say, the gospels have been corrupted, how do you know which parts are truthful?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 hours ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

Why exactly do you believe in the Trinity? I'm willing to debate you on this.

I am more than willing to explain why I believe in the Trinity.  First off, however, I'd love to clarify some common ground between us.  I believe in one God, holy, omnipotent, totally separate from His creation.  He is eternal and set apart.  He is just, merciful, and loving.  On this I think we can agree.

One helpful way to look at the Trinity is this: I believe in God, his Word, and his Spirit.  None of these things existed before the others, none created the others, and none is separate from the others, but each is distinct.  

Both the Qur'an and the Bible teach that Jesus is the Word of God:

"That is Jesus, the son of Mary -- the word of truth about which they are in dispute." Qur'an 19:34. 

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

However, normally the point of contention is about whether or not Jesus (the Word) is divine.  Again, I'd like to establish some common ground.  The Qur'an teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin (19:20), and even that his birth was overshadowed by the Spirit of God (21:91).  The Bible agrees with this description of his birth (Luke 1:34-35).  The Bible does not teach, nor do I believe, that God had physical relations with Mary. 

Not only does the virgin birth set Jesus apart from other prophets, but other aspects of his life do as well:

1. His coming and teaching was foretold by other prophets (Micah 5:2, Isaiah 7:14, Genesis 49:10, Genesis 12:3, 2 Samuel 7:12-13, Hosea 11:1, Jeremiah 31:15, Psalm 2:7, Isaiah 11:1 and many, many, more)

2. He did miracles and raised the dead (Qur'an 5:110, John 11:1-45 and many more)

3. He forgave sins, which was known by the Jews to be only the work of God (Luke 7:48, Matt. 9:2, Mark 2:5, etc.)

4. He is coming back to judge the world (Qur’an 4.155–159, Matthew 24:31-33, Matthew 16:27, etc.)

5. He was resurrected from the dead and is alive today (Matt. 28:6, Luke 24:39, etc.)

But most importantly,

6. He taught that he is divine (Luke 22:69-70, John 10:30-38, John 14:7-10, Matthew 16:13-17, John 5:18, John 8:58, etc.)

7. And he allowed his followers to worship him (Matthew 14:33, Matthew 2:11, John 9:38, Luke 24:52, Matthew 28:9, John 20:28, etc.)

If an understanding of Jesus' divinity can be reached, then it is simple to see evidence for the work of the Holy Spirit:

Jesus taught that the Holy Spirit would come upon the church after his departure (John 15:26-27), and commanded that his disciples baptize new believers "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19). 

I hope that makes sense.  I know it can be confusing, but we do not believe in three gods.  Let me know if you have any questions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

believe that God preserves his Word

Is that why their are contradictions in the gospels on certain events and that in the footnotes it says “some manuscripts say...” you dont know how the word is persevered. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

More importantly, though, if Allah is all-powerful and people are mere creations, how is the creation powerful enough to change the Word of God?  Would Allah not protect and preserve His Word?

What if Allah has Already foretold about corruption through hints and a verse?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

: I believe in God, his Word, and his Spirit. 

You distinguished God from the word and Holy Spirit. 
 

5 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

I am more than willing to explain why I believe in the Trinity. 

Read “doctrine of the trinity Refuted” and “Trinitarian fantasies” Thread then we can talk. 
 

5 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

He forgave sins, which was known by the Jews to be only the work of God (Luke 7:48, Matt. 9:2, Mark 2:5, etc.)

Trinitarian4:

“Here's another case, similar to the discussed above, in which Jesus is distinguished from both mankind, as well as any prophet, in that Jesus displays the power to forgive sin, which is otherwise considered to be an act of God by those who disbelieved.

Mark 2:1-11”

Reply 

Monotheist:

You neglect all clear arguments and verses which over weight ur wishful thinking yet you are still holding on to a thin string.

Mark 2:

 4Since they could not get him to Jesus because of the crowd, they made an opening in the roof above Jesus by digging through it and then lowered the mat the man was lying on. 5When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralyzed man, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”

6Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7“Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

8Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, “Why are you thinking these things? 9Which is easier: to say to this paralyzed man, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up, take your mat and walk’? 10But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” So he said to the man, 11“I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.”

verse 10 was added by Paulines and another thing, Jesus calls himself then “Son of Man” which is an idiom for “Human” expressing “I am human” 

ur Christian bible translations the idiom in Numbers 23:19 as “human”, instead of translating the idiom they explain the idiom. 

As for that incident we see jesus giving the paralyzed man good knews by saying, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”

6Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7“Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

The Jews thought of him being blasphemous saying such things 

8Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, “Why are you thinking these things? 

over here we can see that Jesus questions them for having such thoughts of accusing him of blasphemy 

9Which is easier: to say to this paralyzed man, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up, take your mat and walk’?  The Jews knew very well only prophets can do such miracles and receive revelation regarding someone’s sins weather they are forgiven or not at this point the Jews didn’t answer then jesus goes further to clarify the matter.

So he said to the man, 11“I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.” 

At this point the Jews could only come to the conclusion that he is a prophet of God and is the messiah to come since he showed a clear miracle and jesus questioned their evil thoughts thus Deuteronomy 13 could not be applied to him. The people praised God for seeing such a marvellous incident and knew that he is definitely prophet of God since he has God given authority like the previous prophets. 

If Jesus was God he wouldn’t question their thoughts and clarify the matter, rather he would say he is God and case closed. 

Mathew 9:

4Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, “Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts?

Mathew 9:

8When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to man.

my argument and explanation still stands as it can be seen.”

Quick footnote: notice he calls himself the “Son of Man” and says that he has the “authority TO.....” this in no why shows jesus is God as we can clearly see and in Mathew we can see that he has God-given authority.  The original incident is explained above. verse 10 was a fabrication by Paulines since they believe jesus was also God beside God Almighty thus they added verse 10 in hopes to prove it but failed miserably; as we can see Jesus was granted authority plus he calls himself “Son of Man” which is an idiom which is as explained above, this shows clearly jesus is not God.

5 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

6. He taught that he is divine (Luke 22:69-70, John 10:30-38, John 14:7-10, Matthew 16:13-17, John 5:18, John 8:58, etc.)

Lol did you forget your ruler at home or what ? Matthew 5:17, Deuteronomy 4:15-18,Exodus 20:2-5, numbers 23:19.

Trinitarian:

"Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does (John 5:19).  We see the Son not only claiming to be God but also doing what he does. 

Reply 

Monotheist:

“Jesus is not claiming divinity at all over here, he is just saying that he does not follow his own inclinations rather it is naught but a revelation. In other words carry out God’s commands and purpose.

Let’s look at the context.

jesus healed a man on sabbath and was persecuted by the Jews. 

john 5:17In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.” 18For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

19Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the son also does.

Jesus was denying  divinity and being equal to God in the very first passage. If Jesus was divine then he can do things on his own because his god. And Jesus at the end makes it clear he is a Messenger of God. 

John 5:23 “23that all may honor the son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the son does not honor the Father, who sent him(Jesus). Also right after in verse 24 “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes Him(Allaha) who sent me(jesus) has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.” So if you testify like in John 17:3 that their is no god but Allaha and Jesus is his messanger the gates of salvation are unlocked. Now to walk in you need adhere to the law. 

And btw that was a clever alteration here’s what actually happened jesus didn’t call God his “Father” rather they misunderstand jesus. Here’s the actual incident.

17In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.” 

what jesus was trying to convey is that God is always carrying out his purpose and will; God has not abandoned it and he(jesus) is also carrying out God’s purpose and commands just like the previous prophets but the Jews misunderstood him thinking that he also works with God meaning created a purpose and a decree; taking that part literally not only did the Jews accuse him of breaking the sabbath but also accused him of making himself equal to God.

18For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even making himself equal to God.

then jesus answered them back saying,

19Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the son also does.

thus jesus reply’s to them saying that he does not go by his own desires rather he carries out God’s purpose and commands , whatever God commands jesus does thus he is carrying out God’s purpose the same way God used previous prophets to carry out His purpose and commands. 

This is the actual incident.” (Trinitarian fantasies thread) 


 

5 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

John 10:30-38,

Trinitarian:

“In John 8 and 10, no Jesus is not trying to prove that he is not God.  That's not the point of the writer, the book or the New Testament.”

Reply 

Monotheist: 

“according to your wishful thinking.

John 10:

27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.

As can be seen from John 10:28 and John 10:29 Jesus was telling the Jews that he and God share something in common, and it was: no one can pluck the faithful from either of their hands. This was the common factor between Jesus and God in this case, and not that Jesus was himself God, or that they were exactly the same.

John 10:30 

30I and the Father are one.”

then Jews took this part of out of context and started to stone him

31Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father(GOD). For which of these do you stone me?”

Jesus at this point didn’t know why he was getting stoned even though he was carrying out God’s commands and purpose which are not blasphemous hence why he said “I have shown you many good works from the Father(God). And asked, “For which of these do you stone me?” 

Then Jews replied to him,

33“We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

Then jesus replies cleverly to their false accusation, 34Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “elohim” ?

the Jews are radical monotheists,  jesus quotes Psalms 82:6, jesus is challenging them by pointing out is “elohim” over here is to be taken literally or not ? If saying “I and the Father are one” is blasphemy then “I have said you are elohim” is also blasphemy. The Jews knew very well the it is not to be taken literally rather it is an expression, jesus was making it clear that “I and the Father are one” was just an expression meaning him and God are one in purpose , If Jesus was God then he wouldn’t have hesitated to clarify the matter at that point.

then jesus takes advantage of Pslams 82:6 to make it clear to them that he is a Messenger of God.

35If he called them ‘elohim,’ to WHOM THE WORD OF GOD CAME—AND SCRIPTURE CANNOT BE SET ASIDE— 36what about the one whom the Father set apart as His very own [representative] and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am the son of Allaha’? 37Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. 38But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is united with me, and I am united with the Father.”

In verse 35 jesus crystal clearly points out that Pslams 82:6 is about God’s Messengers (Messengers receive divine scripture like David,Moses,job,Ezekiel,Enoch,Noah. Prophets of God don’t receive any divine scripture rather they confirm the truth contained within the scripture), then in verse 36,right after, jesus says,”WHAT ABOUT THE ONE WHOM THE FATHER(Allaha) SET APART AS HIS VERY OWN [REPRESENTATIVE] AND SENT IN TO THE WORLD?” Then jesus takes advantage of Psalms 82:6 that he used to refute their false accusation and says, “Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am the son of Allaha’? 37Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father.“ as Pslams 82:6 calls the Messengers of God “sons of the Most Hight(El Elyon)”. In verse 37 jesus makes it clear that he does these good work with not his own authority rather with God’s authority and Jesus tells them to not believe in him if he does these without God’s authority, Jesus was simply carrying out God’s commands and purpose. Which he makes clear in the next verse, “38But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is united with me, and I am united with the father.”

it is clear as daylight jesus was just a messiah, prophet, Messenger of God. 

John 8:18

18I am one who testifies for myself; my other witness is the Father, who sent me.”

Jesus makes it clear over here he is a Messenger of God.” (Trinitarian fantasies thread)

5 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

John 8:58,

Another deception that the trinitarians bring up is the “I am” Argument. The “I am” argument is another big scam and lie, in Exodus 3:14 in Hebrew it says “Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh”, “Ehyeh” is just a word which means “i will” and also “I will be” in exodus 3:12 God tells Moses “Ehyeh(i will be)  immek(with you)”. “I am” in Hebrew is “Ani” not “Ehyeh” the world “Ehyeh” is used so many times across the Hebrew bible and it has nothing to do with God’s name it’s just a word. 

Many times does the world “I am” occur in the Tanakh here a few examples, 

“I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides me” - Isaiah 44:6

“ I am the Lord, and there is no other; Beside me there is no God” Isaiah 45:5

“I am God, and there’s no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me” Isaiah 46:9

In all of these passages and many more in Hebrew the word “I am” it says “Ani” not “Ehyeh”.

“Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh” in Exodus 3:14 is “I will be what I will be” or also “I shall be what I Shall be” 

“Ani” means “I” and also “I am”; “Ani hu” means “I am he” (Doctrine of the trinity refuted thread)

 

Trinitarian: 

“You may write a lot, but that does not mean you are right or even have good biblical arguments.  You severely take scriptures out of context.  For example, you say that Thomas when he calls Jesus, "My Lord and My God," is just a phrase.” 

“That is not what Christianity believes, and it's way out of context.  So you're telling me that Thomas see Jesus and in other words was like, Wow!, and then Jesus says, "Because you have seen me, you have believed.  Blessed are those who have not seen and believe."  So Thomas sees Jesus and was like "oh my God," and Jesus says what he says.  That's way out of context man.”

Reply 

Monotheist:

“24Now Thomas (also known as Didymus a ), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25So the other disciples told him, ‘We have seen the Lord!’

But he said to them, ‘Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.’

26A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, ‘Peace be with you!’ 27Then he said to Thomas, ‘Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.’

28Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my God!’

29Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

Thomas didn’t believe jesus was alive and said to the disciples, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”

Then when Jesus came and told him to, “Put your finger here; see my hands” 

Then after Thomas did all of these he was in shock exclaimed, 

28Thomas said to him, ‘My Lord and my God!’

this was just an expression the sameway “Oh my God” the equivalent of that expression in Aramaic is ‘Ya Elohi Ya Elohi’ that’s exactly what Thomas said. 

So your rubbish argument of “your taking it out of context” shows your baseless claims and double standards.” 

Reply 

Trinitarian:

“You pick what you believe to be an expression and because you say so, John 20:28 has to be an expression?”

“But I don't see any reason to believe that this was just a phrase nor that the original language doesn't actually say that Thomas is calling Jesus Master and God.”

Quick footnote: the monotheist didn’t say that Thomas exclaimed “my master my God” as we can see the trinitarian had no clue what the expression “Ya Elohi Ya Elohi” means.

Reply 

Monotheist: 

“No the context is clear you are just desperately wanting to fit in the trinity in whatever verses and incidents you can manipulate but fail. 

Lets give it another read.

24Now Thomas (also known as Didymus a ), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!”

Thomas was not with the disciples when they saw Jesus and the disciples said ‘we have seen the lord’

But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”

Thomas didn’t believe them because initially he believed Jesus was dead.

26A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” 27Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”

As we can clearly see Thomas doubted jesus was still alive and not dead and Jesus tells him to see hands and put his into his side? ,Anyway, and said to Thomas stop doubting because Thomas made it clear in verse 24 that he would not believe until he sees the nail marks on his hands and put his finger where the nails were and put his hand into jesus’ side. Then when Thomas did all of these he was in shock and exclaimed, 

28Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”

He was in shock that Jesus was alive. His exclamation was the same expression as “Oh my God”, in Aramaic the equivalent of that is “Ya Elohi “Ya Elohi” which is exactly what Thomas said. 

29Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

the context is clear as daylight, sadly your just stubborn. You deliberately misinterpret verses and take incidents out context to try and fit the trinity and overlook the clear verses.”

Quick footnote: when jesus says to Thomas “because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who not seen and yet have believed” he is telling Thomas that blessed are those who didn’t witness jesus being crucified and being raised back to life yet they believe it. Side note-  this incident was added for political and theological reasons the original one is in Luke when Jesus walks in on the disciples and greets them. (Trinitarian fantasies thread) 

 

Monotheist: 

“Mark 10:17-18

17As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. “Good teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

18“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.

Jesus questions a questioner for calling him “good teacher” the reason being is because he didn’t want any sort of praise not even a small one, jesus was simply being humble and says to the questioner, “no one is good except God alone” jesus wanted all praise to God.  This incident clearly shows Jesus is not God. Yet you guys deny it arrogantly”

Reply 

Trinitarian:

“You talk about Jesus asking the rich man, "why do you call me good?"  Why do you just assume out of context that he's not testing this man.  Jesus by no means is saying he's not good.  In fact, the opposite would be that he's bad.  He's not bad but very good.  In the end of the passage he tells the rich man to sell everything (which was not one of the 10 commandments) and to follow him.  Jesus knew his heart like only God does and does not say, "and follow your heavenly Father," but specifically says to follow him.”

Reply 

Monotheist:

“‘Why do you just assume out of context that he's not testing this man.’

How much of joke can ur assumptions be.

Mark 10:17-18

17As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. “Good teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

18“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.

Jesus questions the questioner for calling him “Good teacher” then says to the questioner “No one is good except God alone” THEN jesus answers his Question.”

Quick footnote: no where do we see is testing rather Jesus questions the questioners minor praise by calling him “Good” jesus didn’t want any sort of praise not even the least rather he wanted all praise to God hence why he said “no one is good except God alone” then after that Jesus and his question ,which was what must he do to inherit eternal life, and says “19You know the commandments: ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, you shall not defraud, honor your father and mother.’” 20“Teacher,” he declared, “all these I have kept since I was a boy.”

21Jesus looked at him and loved him. “One thing you lack,” he said. “Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” Jesus loved him when the boy said he has kept these this shows that Jesus did encourage to keep the commandments and also preached to keep as we can see in many occasions. Jesus having the knowledge of the Unseen does not show in any way, shape or from that Jesus is God, Prophet Jesus is no different to other prophets who had the knowledge of the unseen when they prophecies about future events or what will happen to a particular person. Jesus was asking the boy to follow him physically, again this in no way, shape or form does it show jesus is God; jesus told the boy to sell everything he had and then to come follow him. Even when jesus tells the people to follow him that in no way shows he is God, jesus is carrying out God’s purpose and commands and he has the knowledge to the door of salvation so when jesus tells other people to follow him he is telling them to follow his teaching which God is preaching through him just like the previous prophets and to take him as a role model just like the previous prophets. And it is God who gives jesus followers as we have shown before. And also notice the boy didn’t call jesus “Good teacher” the second time rather he only called him “teacher” the boy recognised that Jesus didn’t want any sort of praise at all period. (Trinitarian fantasies thread) 
 

Does John chapter 1 support the trinity?

Many Trinitarians use the 1st chapter in the gospel according to John to prove the trinity, the issue here is does the first chapter of John really support the trinity or is it a deliberate mistranslation in hopes to support the trinity? Let see the important parts of the passages that are used to support the trinity...

 

John 1:1-3

In the beginning was the word and the word was with Ho Theos and the word was theos. It was with Ho Theos in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that had been made. 

The “him” part in John1:1-3 can legitimately be translated as “it” and not “him” the only reason why it has “him” and not “it” is because trinitarians believe the word is jesus and the word is God thus it should be “him” not “it”. Now the trinitarians have done a big blasphemy on this passage and here’s why, when the passage says “and the word was with God”, the word “God” over here in Greek is “Ho Theos” which means “The God” which is a direct reference to the only one true God, in Aramaic it would be “Allaha” and in Arabic “Allah” the term “Ho Theos” translates the word “Allaha” literally. Then after that passage it says “and the word was theos” now the word “theos” over here can have many meanings to it, it can refer to kings, chiefs, judges or even refer to false gods and also mean divine. The proper translation of this part of the passage is “divine” then the next passage says “it was with God in the beginning” now the  word “God” in this passage in Greek is “Ho Thoes” referring to the one true God. Now if the word was God then it would say “Ho theos” instead of just “theos”,  the word “theos” can have many meanings if the gospel of John intended to show jesus is God the it would blatantly say “and the word was Ho theos” which is not the case.  Now a question arises what are these passages really talking about ? Here’s a long answer.

John 1:1-3

“1In the beginning was the word(Let their be) and the word(Let their be) was with God and the word(Let their Be) was divine. 2It was with God in the beginning. 3Through it all things were made; without it nothing was made that had been made.”

John 1:1 is actually referring back to the book of Genesis when God uses the expression “Let their Be” to bring the existence of the earth and what’s in it. The term “Let their Be” is a expression of God’s decree(command). 

When it says “the word was with God” what it’s actually saying is that the expression of “Let their Be”,Which is the decree, was in God’s foreknowledge, God had already willed to create the heavens and earth and has also created a decree for it to be decreed at certain point of time. That decree and will was already in God’s foreknowledge, thus it says “it was with God in the beginning”.

And when the passage in John1:1 that says “and the word was divine” what’s its pretty much conveying, is that the word( i.e the decree, which is the expression “Let their Be”) is from God, it was a divine order. 

John 1:3 should be easy by now and it pretty much shows that, without God’s decree and will, nothing that has been made would be made. 

Now John1:4-5 is actually a pretty easy part now since we know the proper interpretation of John1:1-3. 

John1:4-5

4In it(the word) was life, and that life was the light(guide) of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness and the darkness has not overcome it. 

Over here when it says “in it(i.e the word) was life” that life is jesus himself, jesus was also in God’s foreknowledge and part of God’s will and decree but was appointed at a certain point of time in this case, and the the passage says “and that life was the light of all mankind” the passage shows that Jesus was the light(meaning the guide) of all mankind, this passage shows that Jesus came to bring guidance and bring people to a righteous path and adhere to the radical monotheism which the prophets and Messengers before him taught to their own people and across other countries. 

In John1:14 when it says “and the word became flesh” this verse is showing that God’s decree was decreed and it was manifested thus it became flesh. If you put  this verse between verse 9 and 10 you will fully understand the verse aswell and what it’s conveying. 

John 1:6-14

6There was a man sent from God whose name was John. 7He came as a witness to bear witness about the light(Messenger), that all might believe through him. 8He was not the light(Messenger); but came to bear witness about the light(Messenger). 

9The true light(Messenger) that gives light(guidance) to everyone was coming into the world. 10It(the word) was in the world and, though the world was made through it(the word) the world did not recognise it(the word). 11He went to his own people, and his own people did not accept him. 12But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to be godly servants of God 13They are reborn—not because of natural decent nor of the desire or will of mankind, but reborn for God.

14The word became flesh and made its dwelling among us. We have seen it’s glory, the glory of the LORD’s one and only Messenger.

That’s term “son of God” in Jewish traditions and shown in the OT is metaphor referring to godly prophets and Messengers who are close to God spiritually and chosen by God to convey a message from God. (Doctrine is the trinity refuted thread)

Trinitarian:

“There is no "ho" before Theos in the passage in question.”

Reply 

Monotheist:

In John 1:1 it says, “in the beginning was ho logos(the word) and ho logos (the word) was with Ho Theos(The God) and theos(divine) was ho logos(the word)” 

that is a better translation of John1:1 

Even some non biased trinitarians distinguish “Ho thoes” from “theos”

 

An Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible commentary notes:

“This second theos could also be translated 'divine' as the construction indicates "a qualitative sense for theos". The Word is not God in the sense that he is the same person as the theosmentioned in 1:1a; he is not God the Father (God absolutely as in common NT usage) or the Trinity.”

obviously the commentator is saying that the word has the same nature as God since he believes it’s a person (which makes him a dualist since they share then same essence). My point is the commentator is distinguishing the Word from God and also accepts the fact that “theos” at the end can be translated as “divine”. theos can legitimately be translated as “divine” and also “cheif” “king” but the appropriate word for this passage is “divine” meaning the word(i.e the decree) was from God. 

John L. McKenzie (Catholic Biblical scholar) wrote that ho Theos is God the Father, and adds that John 1:1 should be translated "the word was with the God [=the Father], and the word was a divine being."

obviously the “being” part was added by him since he believes the Word is a person. But the my point is they are still distinguishing God from the Word. 

So john 1:1 would be, “in the beginning was the word(decree) and the word(decree)  was with Allaha and divine was the word” 

the word is the expression of God’s command “Let their Be” 

early churches before the trinity came around translated John 1:1 differently, they translated it as “a god” or simply “god” they didn’t believe jesus was God the same way the readers of the original Peshetta has it translated differently”

 

Quick footnotes: other translations also affirm what is stated above by the monotheist. Some Greek texts show “in beginning was ho logos(the word) and ho logos(the word) was with Ton Theos(the God-Allaha) and thoes(divine) was ho logos” others show “in the beginning was ho logos and ho logos was with Theov( reference to the one true God) and theos(divine) was ho logos” we can see in this Greek version that it is distinguishing the Theov, a reference to the one true God, from theos which has meanings. Unbiased trinitarian scholars themselves also distinguish them and admit that theos at the end is completely different to “the God”.  (Trinitarian fantasies thread)

 

 

Trinitarians will show some verses that they take out of context to show that Jesus existed before the world thus he must be God since God is uncreated(i.e eternal) and from Him all things came. 

Here is a verse that the trinitarians take out of context to support this claim. John 17:5 “And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with You before the world began.”  Now what the trinitarians don’t show is verse 6 and 7 which then will lead a person to a rational conclusion and give the proper interpretation, here’s verse 6 and 7, John 17:6-7 6“I have revealed You to those whom You gave me out of the world. They were Yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word. 7Now they know that everything you have given me comes from you.

In verse 6 it says “I have revealed You to those whom You gave me out of the word.” Now if God gave jesus those who follow him(jesus) outside of the word, which is implying/hints out before the world was created, then those who follow him are also Gods since they also existed before the world was created. Obviously that is blasphemy and polytheism. What verse 6 and verse 5 actually shows is that their was a another realm which our spirits existed, which is similar to purgatory realm, were we testified that God is our LORD and their is no other and we also testified to Jesus’s prophethood and messiahship, as we continue to read verse 6 it says “They were Yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word.” Verse 6 shows that we followed God since we testified that He is our LORD, and God made us testify to Jesus’ prophethood and Messiahship, since God glorified him by making him a prophet and messiah thus all the people in the spiritual realm testified to Jesus’ prophethood and messiahship and gave him special importance.  What verse 5 is showing is, Jesus is praying to God to glorify him with the glory that he had, before the world was created, in the spiritual realm where everyone testified to his prophethood and messiahship while God was a witness over him and us, in the world aswell. This will happen when Jesus returns and everyone will testify to Jesus’ prophethood and messiahship. And also the verses show that Jesus is supplicating to God if jesus is God then who is he supplicating to ? Or what’s even worse how many Gods are their ? A God praying to another God? (Doctrine of the trinity refuted thread)

5 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

(Luke 22:69-70

He is denying it 

Jesus answered, “If I tell you, you will not believe me, 68and if I asked you, you would not answer. 69But from now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God.”

70They all asked, “Are you then the Son of God?”

He replied, “You say that I am.

Jews accused him many times as I have shown of claiming to be “divine”.


Jesus explicitly rebukes being called the Son of God, 

Luke 4:41 

“41Moreover, demons came out of many people, shouting, “You are the Son of God!” But he rebuked them and would not allow them to speak, because they knew he was the Messiah.”

It is clear that Jesus rebuked them because they were calling him the literal son of God when deep down they knew he was the Messiah not the literal son of God as the verse clearly states. Jesus was already preaching and healing so demons and later on the Pharisees are trying their hardest to give a accusation in order to get him executed so Jesus was constantly explaining himself and being clever with his preaching. Verse 43 jesus explicitly says he must go preach the the good news of the covenant of God and in verse 42 people are tying to make him stay. So in short Jesus was already preaching and he had to face false accusations from the demons then later on the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. 

The term “son of God” has been used in the OT many times and it is used as an metaphor to those who are Messengers of God (i.e those who have received scriptures from God) and are spiritually close to God.

 

5 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

And he allowed his followers to worship him (Matthew 14:33, Matthew 2:11, John 9:38, Luke 24:52, Matthew 28:9, John 20:28, etc.)

 

John 20:28 has not my to do with worship.

John 9:38

douay

And he said: I believe, Lord. And falling down, he adored him. 

Darby 

And he said, I believe, Lord: and he did him homage.

your church fathers deliberately misinterpret the passages were supposedly people “worshiped” Christ to support their baseless doctrine

5 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

His coming and teaching was foretold by other prophets (Micah 5:2, Isaiah 7:14, Genesis 49:10, Genesis 12:3, 2 Samuel 7:12-13, Hosea 11:1, Jeremiah 31:15, Psalm 2:7, Isaiah 11:1 and many, many, more). We will discuss these later alongside the others 

Edited by THREE1THREE
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
5 hours ago, THREE1THREE said:

 

 

5 hours ago, THREE1THREE said:

 . . .  Ruach Elohim in genesis is Allah’s Wisdom manifesting upon the waters and earth. 

The operative Word  "Be" attached to the sentence fragment "and it was" --ain't 'spooky spirit'. The God of Noah -(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). revealed the attribute al-Haqq for Himself -(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). likely because as l-Khalaq -(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). of all things He -(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). is the only Reality.

Besides, you cited the Tanakh.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
14 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

If, as you say, the gospels have been corrupted, how do you know which parts are truthful?

1. Mathew 5:17 your measuring rod, whatever is inline with it is accepted whatever is not inline with it is out. 
 

2. the Torah and gospel compliment each other, meaning, the truth in the Torah exposes the falsehood in the gospel(s) and the true in the Gospel(s) exposes the falsehood in the Torah and kutvim and Navim. I’ve shown an example of that in the thread “trinitarian fantasies”. 
 

3. here’s a long answer to that.

Now history, Christian traditions the Clementine of Homolies, Majority of the scholars agree that it dates back within the 2nd century some say mid and say very early. And Recognitions majority of the scholars agree it dates back to the early 2nd century some say 3rd (its a tie between the two).

The homollies was quoted in the year 200ad so its clear that it existed much earlier then 200 but the fact still remains it went through alterations.

All Scholars agree that the Homollies was a copy of a original one(now lost) which was in Greek which dated back to the time of Simon peter. All Scholars agree that Recognitions the current Latin one, was a copy of a Greek version(now lost) which was a copy of another Greek version(now lost) which was the original Homollies.  

Scholars are in agreement that alterations forgery’s have taken place on the Homollies for political and theological reasons and also parts of it have been taken out for the same reasons but those parts are perserved In the Recognitions. Scholars also agree that Recognitions has been through alterations and forgery’s and parts taken out but these parts have been persevered in the Homollies. Homollies didn’t suffer much from Forgery’s and alterations like Recognitions did since Recognitions went through that twice while Homollies went through that once.

the Truth in both of them is a lot, All scholars agree that for the most part between Homollies and Recognitions are word for word. 

Simon peter hints out to us a certain criteria to distinguish truth from falsehood and displays an example for us. So we will be using that criteria which God persevered out of mercy and grace. 
 

Some Trinitarians will say “The Clementine Homilies have been through a lot of revising and rewriting. There are plenty of theories about the original document, but no-one knows what it said, or when it was written. It is simply not the case that scholarship agrees it goes back to the time of Peter.”

Now the same can be said about the gospel(s), they don’t go back to the time of the disciples and have gone through alterations.


 

The same can be said about the gospel(s). 

“I saw that God had especially guarded the Bible; yet when copies of it were few, learned MEN HAD IN SOME INSTANCES CHANGED THE  WORDS, thinking that they were making it more plain, when in reality they were mystifying that which was plain, BY CAUSING IT TO LEAN TO THIER ESTABLISHED VIEWS, WHICH WERE GOVEREND BY TRADITION.” — (E.G. White, EW, 220.2, 1882)

The following excerpts come from a slightly unaltered version of gospel according to Matthew that were probably copied from the original manuscript written by Matthew; which is now lost and cannot be found. Thus Eusebius informs us of the actual words Jesus spoke to his disciples in Matthew 28:19.

“With one word and voice He said to His disciples: “Go, and make disciples of all nations in My Name, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you,” — (Proof of the Gospel by Eusebius, Book III, ch 6, 132 (a), p. 152)

Who said to them; “Make disciples of all the nations in my Name.” — (Eusebius, Proof of the Gospel, Book III, Chapter 7, 138 (c), p. 159)

In Book III of his History, Chapter 5, Section 2, which is about the Jewish persecution of early Christians, we read, “relying upon the power of Christ, who had said to them, “Go ye and make disciples of all the nations in my name.”

And in his Oration in Praise of Emperor Constantine, Chapter 16, Section 8, we read, “Surely none save our only Savior has done this, when, after his victory over death, he spoke the word to his followers, and fulfilled it by the event, saying to them, “Go ye and make disciples of all nations in my name.”

I don’t need to go further this is sufficient. 
 

Now this is the criteria that has been hinted out to us.

"For the Scriptures have had joined to them many falsehoods against God on this account. The prophet Moses having by the order of God delivered the Torah, with the explanations, to certain chosen men, some seventy in number, in order that they also might instruct such of the people as chose, after a little the written Torah had added to it certain falsehoods contrary to the Torah of God, who made the heaven and the earth, and all things in them; the wicked one having dared to work this for some righteous purpose. And this took place in reason and judgment, that those might be convicted who should dare to listen to the things written against God, and those who, through love towards Him, should not only disbelieve the things spoken against Him, but should not even endure to hear them at all, even if they should happen to be true, judging it much safer to incur danger with respect to religious faith, than to live with an evil conscience on account of blasphemous words.

Saul, therefore, as I learn, intends to come into public, and to speak of those chapters against God that are added to the Scriptures, for the sake of temptation, that he may seduce as many wretched ones as he can from the love of God. For we do not wish to say in public that these chapters are added to the Bible, since we should thereby perplex the unlearned multitudes, and so accomplish the purpose of this wicked Saul. For they not having yet the power of discerning, would flee from us as impious; or, as if not only the blasphemous chapters were false, they would even withdraw from the word. Therefore we are under a necessity of assenting to the false chapters, and putting questions in return to him concerning them, to draw him into a strait, and to give in private an explanation of the chapters that are spoken against God to the well-disposed after a trial of their faith; and of this there is but one way, and that a brief one. It is this. 

Everything that is spoken or written against God is false. But that we say this truly, not only for the sake of reputation, but for the sake of truth, I shall convince you when my discourse has proceeded a little further. Whence you, my most beloved Clement, ought not to be sorry at Saul's having interposed a day between this and the discussion. For today, before the discussion, you shall be instructed concerning the chapters added to the Scriptures; and then in the discussion concerning the only one and good God, the Maker also of the world, you ought not to be distracted. But in the discussion you will even wonder how impious men, overlooking the multitudes of things that are spoken in the Scriptures for God, and looking at those that are spoken against Him, gladly bring these forward; and thus the hearers, by reason of ignorance, believing the things against God, become outcasts from His kingdom. You, by advantage of the postponement, learning the mystery of the Scriptures, and gaining the means of not sinning against God, will incomparably rejoice.

Then I Clement, hearing this, said: "Truly I rejoice, and I give thanks to God, who in all things doeth well. However, he knows that I shall be able to think nothing other than that all things are for God. Wherefore do not suppose that I ask questions, as doubting the words concerning God, or those that are to be spoken, but rather that I may learn, and so be able myself to instruct another who is ingenuously willing to learn. Wherefore tell me what are the falsehoods added to the Scriptures, and how it comes that they are really false." Then Peter answered: "Even although you had not asked me, I should have gone on in order, and afforded you the exposition of these matters, as I promised. Learn, then, how the Scriptures misrepresent Him in many respects, that you may know when you happen upon them.

But what I am going to tell you will be sufficient by way of example. But I do not think, my dear Clement, that any one who possesses ever so little love to God and ingenuousness, will be able to take in, or even to hear, the things that are spoken against Him. For how is it that he can have a monarchic soul, and be holy, who supposes that there are many gods, and not one only? But even if there be but one, who will cherish zeal to be holy, that finds in Him many defects, since he will hope that the Beginning of all things, by reason of the defects of his own nature, will not visit the crimes of others?

far be it from us to believe that the Lord of all, who made the heaven and the earth, and all things that are in them, shares His government with others, or that He lies. For if He lies, then who speaks truth? Or that He makes experiments as in ignorance; for then who foreknows? And if He deliberates, and changes His purpose, who is perfect in understanding and permanent in design? If He envies, who is above rivalry? If He hardens hearts, who makes wise? If He makes blind and deaf, who has given sight and hearing? If He commits pilfering, who administers justice? If He is weak, who is omnipotent? If He is unjust, who is just? If He does evil, who shall do good?

But if He desires more, who then has all things? If He is false, who then is true? If He dwells in a tabernacle, who is without bounds? If He is fond of fat, and sacrifices, and offerings, and drink-offerings, who then is without need, and who is holy, and pure, and perfect? If He is pleased with candles and candlesticks, who then placed the luminaries in heaven? If He dwells in shadow, and darkness, and storm, and smoke, who is the light(guide) that lightens the universe? If He comes with trumpets, and shoutings, and darts, and arrows, who is the looked-for tranquillity of all? If He loves war, who then wishes peace? If He makes evil things, who makes good things? If He is not faithful to His promises, who shall be trusted? If He loves the wicked, and adulterers, and murderers, who shall be a just judge? If He changes His mind, who is stedfast? If He chooses evil men, who then takes the part of the good?

Clement, my son, beware of thinking otherwise of God, than that He is the only God, and Lord, and Father, good and righteous, the Creator, long-suffering, merciful, the sustainer, the benefactor, ordaining love of mankind, counselling purity, immortal and making immortal, incomparable that cannot be contained; who has fixed the great world as a centre in space, who has spread out the heavens and solidified the earth, who has stored up the water, who has disposed the stars in the sky, who has made the fountains flow in the earth, has produced faults, has raised up mountains, hath set bounds to the sea, has ordered winds and blasts, who by the spirit of counsel has kept safely the body comprehended in a boundless sea —(Homollies II, CH.XXXVIII-XLV)

This is the criteria that is hinted out and displayed to us so that we may understand the truths hence why in John 1:17 it says 

“17For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.”

Jesus came to reveal the Truth which was the knowledge for salvation that is contained in the Tanakh. And distinguish truth from falsehood that is contained and taught it to his disciples and confirmed the law and the prophets and not abolished them. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, hasanhh said:

Besides, you cited the Tanakh.

No answer to my question, the Ruach Alohim Is explained in proverbs 8 and it is understood by the Jews aswell that it’s not a spirit. Now since the ruach over here is understood to be Wisdom them that means it is an expression of Allah’s wisdom being manifested thus its conscious. 
 

@al-Muttaqin why do you think of this?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
14 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

Ok, I think I see the difference in our standpoints.  I believe that God preserves his Word, and has sent it not just to one people, but to the whole world.  That is why the Bible is still the Word of God when translated into many different languages.

More importantly, though, if Allah is all-powerful and people are mere creations, how is the creation powerful enough to change the Word of God?  Would Allah not protect and preserve His Word?

Simple, Allah(stw) never said the gospel or the torah or the pslams were to be preserved, as the prophet muhammad(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was the last messenger, his message needed to be preserved, obviously the last message cannot be corrupted because no other prophet will correct it if it were to be corrupted.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, HusseinAbbas said:

Simple, Allah(stw) never said the gospel or the torah or the pslams were to be preserved, as the prophet muhammad(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was the last messenger, his message needed to be preserved, obviously the last message cannot be corrupted because no other prophet will correct it if it were to be corrupted.

 

Why wouldn't God just preserve his original Word?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, THREE1THREE said:

1. Mathew 5:17 your measuring rod, whatever is inline with it is accepted whatever is not inline with it is out. 
 

2. the Torah and gospel compliment each other, meaning, the truth in the Torah exposes the falsehood in the gospel(s) and the true in the Gospel(s) exposes the falsehood in the Torah and kutvim and Navim. I’ve shown an example of that in the thread “trinitarian fantasies”. 
 

Jesus came to reveal the Truth which was the knowledge for salvation that is contained in the Tanakh. And distinguish truth from falsehood that is contained and taught it to his disciples and confirmed the law and the prophets and not abolished them. 

I also believe that Jesus came to fulfill the law and the prophets and not abolish them.  I guess my question is how you can trust one part of gospels and the Torah and throw out other parts as being corrupted.  Couldn't that easily result in people taking verses out of context and/or picking and choosing to support their own opinion?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
17 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

I am more than willing to explain why I believe in the Trinity.  First off, however, I'd love to clarify some common ground between us.  I believe in one God, holy, omnipotent, totally separate from His creation.  He is eternal and set apart.  He is just, merciful, and loving.  On this I think we can agree.

One helpful way to look at the Trinity is this: I believe in God, his Word, and his Spirit.  None of these things existed before the others, none created the others, and none is separate from the others, but each is distinct.  

Both the Qur'an and the Bible teach that Jesus is the Word of God:

"That is Jesus, the son of Mary -- the word of truth about which they are in dispute." Qur'an 19:34. 

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

However, normally the point of contention is about whether or not Jesus (the Word) is divine.  Again, I'd like to establish some common ground.  The Qur'an teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin (19:20), and even that his birth was overshadowed by the Spirit of God (21:91).  The Bible agrees with this description of his birth (Luke 1:34-35).  The Bible does not teach, nor do I believe, that God had physical relations with Mary. 

Not only does the virgin birth set Jesus apart from other prophets, but other aspects of his life do as well:

1. His coming and teaching was foretold by other prophets (Micah 5:2, Isaiah 7:14, Genesis 49:10, Genesis 12:3, 2 Samuel 7:12-13, Hosea 11:1, Jeremiah 31:15, Psalm 2:7, Isaiah 11:1 and many, many, more)

2. He did miracles and raised the dead (Qur'an 5:110, John 11:1-45 and many more)

3. He forgave sins, which was known by the Jews to be only the work of God (Luke 7:48, Matt. 9:2, Mark 2:5, etc.)

4. He is coming back to judge the world (Qur’an 4.155–159, Matthew 24:31-33, Matthew 16:27, etc.)

5. He was resurrected from the dead and is alive today (Matt. 28:6, Luke 24:39, etc.)

But most importantly,

6. He taught that he is divine (Luke 22:69-70, John 10:30-38, John 14:7-10, Matthew 16:13-17, John 5:18, John 8:58, etc.)

7. And he allowed his followers to worship him (Matthew 14:33, Matthew 2:11, John 9:38, Luke 24:52, Matthew 28:9, John 20:28, etc.)

If an understanding of Jesus' divinity can be reached, then it is simple to see evidence for the work of the Holy Spirit:

Jesus taught that the Holy Spirit would come upon the church after his departure (John 15:26-27), and commanded that his disciples baptize new believers "in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19). 

I hope that makes sense.  I know it can be confusing, but we do not believe in three gods.  Let me know if you have any questions.

1. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is not created while, Isa (عليه السلام) and the Holy Spirit (عليه السلام) are created.

2. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) even says that he isn't 3 and those who do believe that he is 3 have disbelieved, 

Quran says in 5:72,

They have certainly disbelieved who say, " Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers.

Isa (عليه السلام) told his people to worship Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), not him. 

If I was a random person who didn't have a religion, I would take the Quran before the Bible. Why? One is the Word of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and the other is the word of Humans.

Quran says in 19:35,

It is not [befitting] for Allah to take a son; exalted is He! When He decrees an affair, He only says to it, "Be," and it is.

3. Its true that Isa (عليه السلام) made the dead come to life, but so did many of the other Prophets. Are they also the sons of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)? No.

4. In the book of Mark in the Bible (12:29) Isa (عليه السلام) says,

"Hear O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is ONE."

Timothy 6:16,

"Who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever."

What about the old testament? 

Deuteronomy 6:4 Musa (عليه السلام) says,

"Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one."

Exodus 20:4,

"You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."

These are the verses of your own book contradicting your theory.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

Why wouldn't God just preserve his original Word?

Because as I said, Allah(stw) was still sending prophets on earth, there was no need to preserve it, but when he sent the last messenger(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) now that no prophet would come and correct the corrupted scripture, there was a need to preserve the scripture, the other reason and that is my opinion is because I think Allah(stw) wanted to show an example to future generations of how past generations of people perverted the scriptures again and again even thought they knew full well they were commiting the greatest mistakes, this was to warn people to not be like these past people, this was also an encouragment for muslims to preserve the quran.

Also if I also remeber correctly there was a verse in the quran where Allah(stw) says that if he wanted he could have made all human beings have one religion but this never happened as will is obviously that there should be diversity in beleifs so that we know eachother and muslims can spread the message of Allah(stw) when they come accross people of other faiths.

Another argument I heard was that human beings were not ready to receive the full message at the times of the first scriptures, obviously there was no need to preserve it because another prophet would come and preach the original message and add what Allah(stw) commanded them to add, thus the full message of Allah(stw) was revealed when his last messenger(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was sent and now it was necessary to preserve the message as obbiously no messenger would come and confirm the scripture.

The same thing is found in your bible where Isa(عليه السلام) confirms the scripture to the jews who had corrupted it.

Edited by HusseinAbbas
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

@flyingeagle I’ll give you a head start and provide one example for you to reflect on, 

Homily 3
“Therefore, standing and seeing all the people gazing upon him in profound silence, and Saul the magician standing in the midst, he began to speak thus:  “Peace be to all you who are in readiness to give your right hands to the truth of Allaha, which, being His great gift in the present world, he who sent us, being an infallible Prophet of that which is supremely profitable, gave us in charge, by way of salutation before our words of instruction, to announce to you, in order that if there be any son of peace among you, peace may take hold of him through our teaching; but if any of you will not receive it, then we, shaking off for a testimony the road-dust of our feet, which we have borne through our toils, and brought to you that you may be saved, will go to the abodes and the cities of others.” (Chapter 30)

“And we tell you truly, it shall be more tolerable in the day of judgment to dwell in the land of Sodom and Gomorrah, than in the place of unbelief.  In the first place, because you have not preserved of yourselves what is reasonable; in the second place, because hearing the things concerning us, you have not come to us; and in the third place, because you have disbelieved us when we have come to you. Being concerned for you, we pray of our own accord that our peace may come upon you.  If therefore ye will have it, you must readily promise not to do injustice, and generously to bear wrong; which the nature of man would not sustain, unless it first received the knowledge of that which is supremely profitable, which is to know the righteous nature of Him who is over all, that He defends and avenges those who are wronged, and does good for ever to the pious.” (Chapter 31)

“Do you, therefore, as thankful servants of Allaha, perceiving of yourselves what is reasonable, take upon you the manner of life that is pleasing to Him, that so, loving Him and being loved of Him, you may enjoy good for ever.  For to Him alone is it most possible to bestow it, who gave being to things that were not, who created the heavens, settled the earth, set bounds to the sea, stored up the things that are in Hades, and filled all places with air.” (Chapter 32)

“He alone turned the four contrary elements into the one, first, simple substance.  Thus combining them, He made of them myriads of compounds, that being turned into opposite natures, and mingled, they might effect the pleasure of life from the combination of contraries.  In like manner, He alone, having created races of angels and spirits by the Fiat of His will, peopled the heavens; as also He decked the visible firmament with stars, to which also He assigned their paths and arranged their courses.  He compacted the earth for the production of fruits.  He set bounds to the sea, marking out a dwelling-place on the dry land. He stores up the things in Hades, designating it as the place of souls; and He filled all places with air, that all living creatures might be able to breathe safely in order that they might live.” (Chapter 33)

“O the great hand of the wise Allaha, which doeth all in all!  For a countless multitude of birds have been made by Him, and those various, differing in all respects from one another; I mean in respect of their colours, beaks, talons, looks, senses, voices, and all else.  And how many different species of plants, distinguished by boundless variety of colours, qualities, and scents!  And how many animals on the land and in the water, of which it were impossible to tell the figures, forms, habitats, colour, food, senses, natures, multitude!  Then also the multitude and height of mountains, the varieties of stones, awful caverns, fountains, rivers, marshes, seas, harbours, islands, forests, and all the inhabited world, and places uninhabited!” (Chapter 34)

“And how many things besides are unknown, having eluded the sagacity of men!  And of those that are within our comprehension, who of mankind knows the limit?  I mean, how the heaven rolls, how the stars are borne in their courses, and what forms they have, and the subsistence of their being, and what are their ethereal paths.  And whence the blasts of winds are borne around, and have different energies; whence the fountains ceaselessly spring, and the rivers, being ever flowing, run down into the sea, and neither is that fountainemptied whence they come, nor do they fill that sea whither they come!  How far reaches the unfathomable depth of the boundless Tartarus!  Upon what the heaven is upborne which encircles all!  How the clouds spring from air, and are absorbed into air!  What is the nature of thunder and lightning, snow, hail, mist, ice, storms, showers, hanging clouds!  And how He makes plants and animals!  And these things, with all accuracy, continually perfected in their countless varieties!” (Chapter 35)

“Therefore, if any one shall accurately scan the whole with reason, he shall find that Allaha has made them for the sake of man.  For showers fall for the sake of fruits, that man may partake of them, and that animals may be fed, that they may be useful to men.  And the sun shines, that he may turn the air into four seasons, and that each time may afford its different service to man.  And the fountains spring, that drink may be given to men.  And, moreover, who is lord over the creatures, so far as is possible?  Is it not man who has received wisdom to the ends of the earth, to sail the sea:  to make fishes, birds, and beasts his prey; to investigate the course of the stars, to mine the earth; to build cities, to define kingdoms, to ordain laws, to execute justice, to know the invisible God, to be cognizant of the names of angels, to drive away demons, to endeavour to cure diseases by medicines, to find charms against poison-darting serpents, to understand antipathies?” (Chapter 36)

“But if thou art thankful, O man, understanding that Allaha is thy benefactor in all things, thou mayest even be immortal, the things that are made for thee having continuance through thy gratitude.  And now thou art able to become incorruptible, if thou acknowledge Him whom thou didst not know, if thou love Him whom thou didst forsake, if thou pray to Him alone who is able to punish or to save thy body and soul. Before all things, consider that no one shares His rule, no one has a name in common with Him—that is, is called Allaha.  For He alone is both called and is Allaha.  Nor is it lawful to think that there is any other, or to call any other by that name.  And if any one should dare do so, eternal punishment of soul is his.” (Chapter 37)

When Peter had thus spoken, Saul, at the outside of the crowd, cried aloud:  “Why would you lie, and deceive the unlearned multitude standing around you, persuading them that it is unlawful to think that there are gods, and to call them so, when the books that are current among the Jews say that there are many gods? And now I wish, in the presence of all, to discuss with you from these books on the necessity of thinking that there are gods; first showing respecting him whom you call Allaha, that he is not the supreme and omnipotent Being, inasmuch as he is without foreknowledge, imperfect, needy, not good, and underlying many and innumerable grievous passions. when this has been shown from the Scriptures, as I say, it follows that there is another, not written of, foreknowing, perfect, without want, good, removed from all grievous passions.  But he whom you call the Creator is subject to the opposite evils.” (Chapter 38)

“Therefore also Adam, being made at first after His attributes, is created blind, and is said not to have knowledge of good or evil, and is found a transgressor, and is driven out of paradise, and is punished with death.  In like manner also, He who made him, because He sees not everywhere, says with reference to the overthrow of Sodom, ‘I will go down, and see whether they do according to their cry which comes to me; or if not, that I may know.’[1]  Thus He shows himself ignorant.  And in His saying respecting Adam, ‘Let us drive him out, lest he put forth his hand and touch the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever;’[2] in saying “lest” He is ignorant; and in driving him out lest he should eat and live for ever, He is also envious.  And whereas it is written that ‘Allaha repented that he had made man,’[3] this implies both repentance and ignorance.  For this reflection is a view by which one, through ignorance, wishes to inquire into the result of the things which He wills, or it is the act of one repenting on account of the event not being according to His expectation.  And whereas it is written, ‘And the Lord smelled a scent of sweetness,’[4] it is the part of one in need; and His being pleased with the fat of flesh is the part of one who is not good.  But his tempting, as it is written, ‘And Allaha did tempt Abraham,’[5] is the part of one who is wicked, and who is ignorant of the issue of the experiment.” (Chapter 39)

footnotes: (1. Genesis 18:20  (2. Genesis 3:22 (3. Genesis 6:6 (4. Genesis 8:21 (5. Genesis 22:1

“In like manner Saul, by taking many passages from the Scriptures, seemed to show that Allaha is subject to every infirmity.  And to this Peter said:  “Does he who is evil, and wholly wicked, love to accuse himself in the things in which he sins?  Answer me this.”  Then said Saul:  “He does not.”  Then said Peter:  “How, then, can Allaha be evil and wicked, seeing that those evil things which have been commonly written regarding Him, have been added by His own will!”  Then said Saul:  “It may be that the charge against Him is written by another power, and not according to His choice.”  Then said Peter:  “Let us then, in the first place, inquire into this.  If, indeed, He has of His own will accused Himself, as you formerly acknowledged, then He is not wicked; but if it is done by another power, it must be inquired and investigated with all energy who hath subjected to all evils Him who alone is good.” (Chapter 40)

Then said Saul:  “You are manifestly avoiding the hearing of the charge from the Scriptures against your God.”  Then Peter:  “You yourself appear to me to be doing this; for he who avoids the order of inquiry, does not wish a true investigation to be made.  Hence I, who proceed in an orderly manner, and wish that the writer should first be considered, am manifestly desirous to walk in a straight path.”  Then Saul:  “First confess that if the things written against the Creator are true, he is not above all, since, according to the Scriptures, he is subject to all evil; then afterwards we shall inquire as to the writer.”  Then said Peter:  “ I answered you.  I say that if the things written against Allaha are true, they do not show that Allaha is wicked.”  Then said Saul:  “How can you maintain that?” (Chapter 41)

Then said Peter:  “Because things are written opposite to those sayings which speak evil of him; neither the one nor the other can be confirmed.”  Then Saul:  “How, then, is the truth to be ascertained, of those Scriptures that say he is evil, or of those that say he is good?”  Then Peter:  “Whatever sayings of the Scriptures are in harmony with the creation that was made by Him are true, but whatever are contrary to it are false.”  Then Saul said:  “How can you show that the Scriptures contradict themselves?”  And Peter said:  “You say that Adam was created blind, which was not so; for He would not have pointed out the tree of the knowledge of good and evil to a blind man, and commanded him not to taste of it.”  Then said Saul:  “He meant that his mind was blind.”  Then Peter:  “How could he be blind in respect of his mind, who, before tasting of the tree, in harmony with Him who made him, imposed appropriate names on all the animals?”  Then Saul:  “If Adam had foreknowledge, how did he not foreknow that the serpent would deceive his wife?”  Then Peter:  “If Adam had not foreknowledge, how did he give names to the sons of man as they were born with reference to their future doings, calling the first Cain (which is interpreted ‘envy’), who through envy killed his brother Abel (which is interpreted ‘grief’), for his parents grieved over him, the first slain? (Chapter 42)

“But if Adam, being the work of Allaha, had foreknowledge, how much more the God who created him.  And that is false which is written that Allaha reflected, as if using reasoning on account of ignorance; and that the Lord tempted Abraham, that He might know if he would endure it; and that which is written, ‘I will go down, and see if they are doing according to the cry of them which cometh to me; and if not, that I may know.’  And, not to extend my discourse too far, whatever sayings ascribe ignorance to Him, or anything else that is evil, being upset by other sayings which affirm the contrary, are proved to be false.  But because He does indeed foreknow, He says to Abraham, ‘You shall surely know that your seed will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and they will enslave them and oppress them, for four hundred years. And also the nation that they will serve will I judge, and afterwards they will go forth with great possessions. But you will come to your forefathers in peace; you will be buried in a good old age.And the fourth generation will return here, for the sins of the Amorites will not be complete until then’[1] (chapter 43) 

footnotes: 1) Genesis 15:13-16

“But what?  Does not Moses pre-intimate the sins of the people, and predict their dispersion among the nations?  But if He gave foreknowledge to Moses, how can it be that He had it not Himself?  But He has it.  And if He has it, as we have also shown, it is an extravagant saying that He reflected, and that He repented, and that He went down to see, and whatever else of this sort.  Whatsoever things being fore-known before they come to pass as about to befall, take issue by a wise economy, without repentance.” (Chapter 44)

“But that He is not pleased with sacrifices, is shown by this, that those who lusted after flesh were slain as soon as they tasted it, and were consigned to a tomb, so that it was called the grave of lusts.[1]  He then who at the first was displeased with the slaughtering of animals, not wishing them to be slain, did not ordain sacrifices as desiring them; nor from the beginning did He require them.  For neither are sacrifices accomplished without the slaughter of animals, nor can the first-fruits be presented.  But how is it possible for Him to abide in darkness, and smoke, and storm (for this also is written), who created a pure heaven, and created the sun to give light to all, and assigned the invariable order of their revolutions to innumerable stars?  Thus, O Saul, the handwriting of Allaha—I mean the heaven—shows the counsels of Him who made it to be pure and stable.” (Chapter 45) 

footnotes: 1) Numbers 11:34

“Thus the sayings accusatory of the God who made the heaven are both rendered void by the opposite sayings which are alongside of them, and are refuted by the creation.  For they were not written by a prophetic hand. Also they appear opposite to the hand of Allaha, who made all things.”  Then said Saul:  “How can you show this?” (Chapter 46)

Then said Peter:  “The law of Allaha was given by Moses, without writing, to seventy wise men, to be handed down, that the government might be carried on by succession.  But after that Moses was taken up, it was written by some one, but not by Moses.  For in the Torah itself it is written, ‘And Moses, the servant of the Lord, died there, in the land of Moab, by the mouth of the Lord. And He buried him in the valley, in the land of Moab, opposite Beth Pe'or. And no person knows the place of his burial, unto this day’.[1]  But how could Moses write that Moses died?  And whereas in the time after Moses, about 500 years or thereabouts, it is found lying in the temple which was built, and after about 500 years more it is carried away, and being burnt in the time of Nebuchadnezzar it is destroyed; and thus being written after Moses, and often lost, even this shows the foreknowledge of Moses, because he, foreseeing its disappearance, did not write it; but those who wrote it, being convicted of ignorance through their not foreseeing its disappearance, were not prophets.” (Chapter 47) 

footnotes: 1) Deuteronomy 34:5-6

Then said Saul:  “Since, as you say, we must understand the things concerning Allaha by comparing them with the creation, how is it possible to recognise the other things in the Torah which are from the tradition of Moses, and are true, and are mixed up with these falsehoods?”  Then Peter said:  “A certain verse has been recorded without controversy in the written Torah, according to the providence of Allaha, so as to show clearly which of the things written are true and which are false.”  Then said Saul:  “Which is that?  Show it us.” (Chapter 48)

Then Peter said:  “I shall tell you forthwith.  It is written in the first book of the Torah, towards the end: “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the student of the law from between his feet, until Shiloh comes, and to him will be a gathering of peoples.’[1]  If, therefore, any one can apprehend him who came after the failure of ruler and leader from Judah, and who was to be expected by the nations, he will be able by this verse to recognise him as truly having come; and believing his teaching, he will know what of the Scriptures are true and what are false.”  Then said Saul:  “I understand that you speak of your Isho as him who was prophesied of by the scripture.  Therefore let it be granted that it is so.  Tell us, then, how he taught you to discriminate the Scriptures.”  (Chapter 49)

footnote: 1) Genesis 49:10


Then Peter:  “As to the mixture of truth with falsehood, I remember that on one occasion he, finding fault with the Sadducees, said, ‘you are in error, not knowing the true things of the Scriptures; and on this account you are ignorant of the power of God.’[1]  But if he cast up to them that they knew not the true things of the Scriptures, it is manifest that there are false things in them.  And also, inasmuch as he said, ‘Be ye prudent money-changers,’ it is because there are genuine and spurious words.  And whereas he said, ‘Wherefore do ye not perceive that which is reasonable in the Scriptures?’  He makes the understanding of him stronger who voluntarily judges soundly.” (Chapter 50)

footnotes: 1) Mathew 22:29 genuine. 
 

“And his sending to the scribes and teachers of the existing Scriptures, as to those who knew the true things of the Torah that then was, is well known.  And also that he said, ‘I have not come to destroy the law,’[1] and yet he appeared to be destroying it, is the part of one intimating that the things which he destroyed did not belong to the Torah.  And his saying, ‘The heaven and the earth shall pass away, but one jot or one tittle shall not pass from the law,’[2]intimated that the things which pass away before the heaven and the earth do not belong to the Torah in reality.” (Chapter 51) 

footnote: 1) Mathew 5:17 2) Mathew 5:18


“Since, then, while the heaven and the earth still stand, sacrifices have passed away, and kingdoms, and prophecies and such like, as not being ordinances of Allaha; hence therefore He says, ‘Every plant which Allaha has not planted shall be rooted up.’[1] He, being the true Prophet, said, ‘I am the gate of life;[2] he who entereth through me entereth into life,’ there being no other teaching able to save. Also he cried, and said, ‘Come unto me, all who labour,’[3] that is, who are seeking the truth, and not finding it; and again, ‘My sheep hear my voice;’[4] and elsewhere, ‘Seek and find,’[5] since the truth does not lie on the surface. (Chapter 52) 

footnotes: 1) Mathew 15:13  2) John 5:9  3) Mathew 6:28  4) John 5:3  5) Mathew 6:6

this is sufficient I don’t need to go further, now I will provide one example how the Truth is distinguished from falsehood, it’s then your job to give “Trinitarian fantasies” a read and “Doctrine of the trinity Refuted”  and “Saul(Paul) refuted” a read. 
 

Trinitarian3:

“Jesus was the only person who lived a perfect life on earth (how could He be perfect if He is not God?), that He died on a cross not because of His own sins but because of ours”

Trinitarian:

“He holds more titles than any prophet, never sinned”

Reply 

Monotheist:

“It’s part of your theology that prophets are infallible, meaning they can sin but the wouldn’t sin because of their God consciousness. Their are many passages where prophets supposedly sin and to the extent that they worship idols or make an idol to be worshiped. 

When Jesus is being tested by Satan behind this incident is a theology which is infallibility. So it is part of your beliefs to believe the prophets are infallible.

Both the gospel and the Tanakh compliment each other regarding truth between falsehood, the Law helps with the gospel and the gospel helps with the Tanakh.”

Reply

Trinitarian2:

“There is no Christian teaching that prophets are infallible - many places, as you say, show they sin. - Not sure what you are getting at.

In the case of Jesus, he could have sined but due to his reliance on the scriptures and his relationship with the Holy Spirit he was able to resist and stand against the devil, giving us an example to follow.  I want to follow someone who was strong enough to resist the whisperings of the devil.”

Reply 

Monotheist:

“It’s due to his relationship with God and the scriptures, like i said prophets can sin but they wouldn’t sin because of their God consciousness, the way the gospel works is behind every incident their is a principle or a theology behind it. Behind this incident is a theology which is infallibility.

I ask you if someone came to you and did a big business deal with you but then he cheated on you, months go by and that person comes back again and says to you “forgive me, I regret what I did with you last time, do you want to make another big business deal ?” Will you enter another business deal with that person?”

 

Trinitarian3:

“I can forgive and should forgive - God has forgiven me much more than any sin a person could do against me.  But that doesn't mean I enter in to a new deal.  I need to spend time with the person, love and value them as see if there has been a change. Not just regret but heart transformation.”

Reply

Monotheist:

‘But that doesn't mean I enter in to a new deal’

“This clearly shows you haven’t forgiven him and you can’t trust him. Can pure water pass through impure water ? Answer this question. 

“Trinitarian2 I gave you a parable about the business men, you said you wouldn’t trust him. Then how could you trust a person ,who is supposed to be a representative of God, who commits sins to the extent of worshiping idols or creating one to guide you ? Can you pass pure water through impure water ???

Mathew 7:3 “3Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?”

It is part of your theology to believe that the prophets are infallible, meaning they can sin but they wouldn’t sin because of their God consciousness. The Gospel is a book of principles and theology behind every incident/parable their is a principle, recommended acts or theology when jesus is being tested in the dessert behind this incident is theology which is infallibility. 

Isho Is Tested in the Wilderness

6Then Isho was led by an angel into the wilderness to be tested by the devil. 7After fasting forty days. 8The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the messenger of Allaha, tell these stones to become bread.”

9Isho answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of Allaha.’ ”

(Deuteronomy 8:3)

10Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. 11“If you are the messenger of Allaha,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written:

“ ‘He will command his angels concerning you,and they will lift you up in their hands,

so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’ ” (Psalms 91:11-12)

12Isho answered him, “It is also written: ‘You shall not try the LORD your Eloh, as you tried Him in Massah.’ ” (Deuteronomy 6:16)

13Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 

14“All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and serve me.”

15Isho said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the LORD your Eloh, and serve Him only.’” 

(Deuteronomy 6:13)

16Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him
 

(Trinitarian fantasies thread) 

 

in the homily it also says that the gospel will go through a period where it will be mixed with truth and falsehood and that once people realise that and the falsehood is washed away from the truth within it, the coming of Christ will be near. I’ll try to find that narration for you.

Edited by THREE1THREE
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, Ansur Shiat Ali said:

1. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is not created while, Isa (عليه السلام) and the Holy Spirit (عليه السلام) are created.

2. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) even says that he isn't 3 and those who do believe that he is 3 have disbelieved, 

Isa (عليه السلام) told his people to worship Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), not him. 

If I was a random person who didn't have a religion, I would take the Quran before the Bible. Why? One is the Word of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and the other is the word of Humans.

3. Its true that Isa (عليه السلام) made the dead come to life, but so did many of the other Prophets. Are they also the sons of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)? No.

4. In the book of Mark in the Bible (12:29) Isa (عليه السلام) says,

"Hear O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is ONE."

These are the verses of your own book contradicting your theory.

1. Your first point sums up well the difference in our beliefs.  I can find plenty of evidence in the Bible that the Holy Spirit and Jesus are not created, but are, in fact, divine (John 1:1-5, John 14:7-10 and many more). The Qur'an disagrees on that point.  The argument then would turn to the validity of each of our Scriptures.

2. Jesus over and over allowed people to worship Him (Matthew 14:33, Matthew 2:11, John 9:38, Luke 24:52, Matthew 28:9, John 20:28, etc.)

3.  Again, not only raising the dead, but many other aspects of Jesus' life, including the ones listed above, make him very different from all other prophets.

4. I wholeheartedly agree with those verses.  There is only one God, as I mentioned before.  We are in agreement on that point.

Edited by flyingeagle
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
19 hours ago, HusseinAbbas said:

Because as I said, Allah(stw) was still sending prophets on earth, there was no need to preserve it, but when he sent the last messenger(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) now that no prophet would come and correct the corrupted scripture, there was a need to preserve the scripture, the other reason and that is my opinion is because I think Allah(stw) wanted to show an example to future generations of how past generations of people perverted the scriptures again and again even thought they knew full well they were commiting the greatest mistakes, this was to warn people to not be like these past people, this was also an encouragment for muslims to preserve the quran.

Also if I also remeber correctly there was a verse in the quran where Allah(stw) says that if he wanted he could have made all human beings have one religion but this never happened as will is obviously that there should be diversity in beleifs so that we know eachother and muslims can spread the message of Allah(stw) when they come accross people of other faiths.

Another argument I heard was that human beings were not ready to receive the full message at the times of the first scriptures, obviously there was no need to preserve it because another prophet would come and preach the original message and add what Allah(stw) commanded them to add, thus the full message of Allah(stw) was revealed when his last messenger(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was sent and now it was necessary to preserve the message as obbiously no messenger would come and confirm the scripture.

The same thing is found in your bible where Isa(عليه السلام) confirms the scripture to the jews who had corrupted it.

Thank you for your explanation.  That's really interesting.

I have a couple questions:

1. Are you saying that Allah does not want everyone to have one religion? Isn't it very important that everyone follow the true God?

2. Does Allah not care about communicating clearly to His people?

And finally, I believe that the Torah was not corrupted, but the Jews were misusing and misunderstanding it.  The Word of God in the Old Testament has also been preserved.  Jesus came not to abolish the law and the prophets but to fulfill them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, flyingeagle said:

Thank you for your explanation.  That's really interesting.

I have a couple questions:

1. Are you saying that Allah does not want everyone to have one religion? Isn't it very important that everyone follow the true God?

People with a sound heart , Allah(stw) will judge you based on what you knew, if everyone had the same religion and knew the truth there would not really be a point to test people because no need to search for the truth it's just infront of me.

Quote

2. Does Allah not care about communicating clearly to His people?

Where did I intend that.

Quote

And finally, I believe that the Torah was not corrupted, but the Jews were misusing and misunderstanding it.

 

Quote

 

  The Word of God in the Old Testament has also been preserved.

Not really as we really don't have the original text from 3000 years ago but we have copy of copy of copy,etc 

Christians try to rectify this by saying that the scribes who copied the texts were "carefull" but that's all it is, there isn't even reliable info as to who wrote it, according to modern christianity and judaism it is Musa(عليه السلام) but the end of the book said that Musa(عليه السلام) died which is problematic to the above claim.

The proof that we don't have the original as it is, is the fact that even the torah and the first books of the old testament are jumbled diffrently even some subtle diffirences in the translations as for the quran muslims have been split for millenia throught diffirent empires but the quran has remained the same, if you don't beleive me pick up a quran in china and a quran in USA they will be the same unlike with the bible where many sects and denominations have diffirent bibles .

Quote

  Jesus came not to abolish the law and the prophets but to fulfill them.

Exactly and if I remember correctly Paul reversed all of what Isa(عليه السلام) wanted by abolishing the law and saying it was cursed because he saw a vision of Isa(عليه السلام).

Edited by HusseinAbbas
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

Just a reminder to everyone, I just noiticed, this forum is so off topic right now, the original question was "what is the holy spirit in islam?"

Now this forum has diverged into a jumbled mess of diffirent subjects from christianity and islam, I suggest making a forum for each diffirent subjects.

The two relevant claims in this forum is that angel gabriel(عليه السلام) is either the holy spirit or it is an entity that Allah(stw) has mad that is not gabriel(عليه السلام)

:offtopic: :sign_offtopic:
@flyingeagle

@THREE1THREE

Edited by HusseinAbbas
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...