Tags
Greetings Mushtaq, in the name of the blessed Jesus may the peace of God rest upon you. As I make a response I will place your topic numbers appropriately.
5) Early Church Fathers
You are probably aware various branches of Christians take different approaches in establishing the reliability of their beliefs. This also applies to the concept of the trinity. For some the fact their church tradition has established a concept as truth is adequate for them. I will return to this approach later.
1) Don’t say three
Apostles Write of Father, Son and Spirit as God
Ignatius 70 – 110 AD a bishop at Antioch who knew the apostles well referred to the ‘Triad’ of God.
Irenaeus 175 – 195 AD a bishop of Lyons, France spoke of “The Son and Spirit as God’s two hands”
Tertullian 220AD was first to use the term ‘Trinity’
We could also frame the Biblical revelation by speaking of the ONE God as existing in THREE ‘personal modes of being’.
Oneness and threeness can also be expressed mathematically without contradiction or illogicality. Consider a cube it has 1 height + 1 width + 1depth 1+1+1 = 3 dimensions but 1x1x1 = 1 cube.
There are many things in nature that are one which we experience in three The sun as a heavenly body, as light, as heat it all in its totality both one and three at the same time. Should we be surprised that we see in nature a reflection of it creator.
1a) Then don’t say two!
Many Islamic scholars claim that the Quran is an eternal book in heaven written in Arabic. This is deemed essential as there was never a time when Allah was without his word. But this is a great difficulty for Islam it presents two eternal entities God and his eternal written word; whereas Christianity has only one eternal entity the one God who exists in three personal modes. Jesus before His birth existed eternally as the Word of God begotten from the heart of the Father.
6) Truth is established from holy books – which was what the Fathers of the church did!
However for a Muslim I am of the opinion that to establish a concept as truth from the original Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostolic scriptures would be far more convincing for you. This is what the notes I sent you pursue.
It is not that I object to the concepts of the fathers of the Christian church but that I personally return to the same source material used by them in establishing the truth of the ‘trinity’ concept. This does open up another line of enquiry which is that of the evidence for the authenticity of the Christian scriptures. I am aware of the Islamic contention that they have been altered but consider your case totally without grounds.
The facts are clear that the original Christian scriptures penned by the apostles and their intimate associates reveal that there is God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
The categories of scriptural evidence for the three modes of God need to be searched out throughout scripture and some of these are given below being the majority of the contents page of my notes (previously sent), which supply many more texts.
(A mode is a way of being as H20 is one molecule but has three ways of existing as that molecule steam, water and ice)
The Name of God in the Old & New Testaments
THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST
The Deity of Christ in the Old Testament
God Has an Image or Likeness
Old Testament Appearances of God (frequently in the image of a man) Gen. 16:7-13, 17:1-3, 18: 1-3, 13, 17, 20-26, 33, 19:I, 24-27. 32: 24-30, Hosea 12:2-5; Exodus 3:2-6, 7, 11-18; Numbers 22:21-35; Joshua 5:13-15 & 6:1-2; Judges 6:11-24; 13:3 & 18-22; Isaiah 6:1
Jesus Is The Angel of The LORD
Titles of Yahweh Ascribed To Jesus
Divine Offices of Yahweh Ascribed To Jesus: Father, Creator, Saviour, Judge, Redeemer
Divine Characteristics of Yahweh Ascribed To Jesus
The Works or Activities of Yahweh Are Ascribed To Jesus
Texts About Yahweh Ascribed To Jesus
Spiritual Service Is Exclusively For Yahweh, But Is Rendered To Jesus
Christ, The Messiah is Identified as God in The Old Testament
Old Testament Worship to Christ (Jesus) Implies That He is God
They Will Look on ‘Me’ (i.e. in context ‘Me’ is God) Whom They Have Pierced – who was pierced?
Jesus Taught His Disciples What ALL The OT Scriptures Said About Himself
The Deity of Jesus in the New Testament
Jesus Personal Claims to Deity (I Am = Yahweh) – Jesus Is God & He is Called God – Jesus Is Lord – ‘Greek Kurios’
Divine Titles of Jesus
Jesus is declared to be The Son of God by God, by His enemies, Jewish leaders accused Jesus of blasphemy for claiming equality with God/Son of God
Worship is given to Jesus
Divine Characteristics Are Ascribed to Jesus
The Blood of God
The Deity & Personality of The Holy Spirit
The Trinitarian Formula
The Rock – an extended study of just one of Yahweh’s titles that is ascribed to Jesus
Verses Not In The Original Text Historical Contributors to Trinitarian Understanding & Current Foes of Trinitarianism
7) Unitarians
You have questioned this by reference to Unitarians and Jehovah’s Witnesses (JWs). Such sects have always been an extreme minority just as there are unorthodox Islamic sects. They did not stem from the most eminent scholarship and the JWs have added words to the holly books that are nowhere found in the original text in order to make their case and hide this fact from their followers. JW will not / cannot substantiate the scholarship behind their New World Translation of the Bible. They cannot provide the translators names or qualifications. Try as I may I cannot get them to continue in dialogue with me when I present them with evidence of their faulty translations and request this information.
2) Majestic plural is not proof of Triune God
Here no doubt you are referring to the Old Testament name for God Elohim which is a plural form. You are correct it is not a proof it is only an indication that there may be something more about the nature of God than solitariness. The creation text that refer to GOD (Elohim) creating man however give further suggestion and evidence of something more that a solitary ‘Oneness’ of GOD. We read “Let us (plural) make man in our (plural) image (singular)”. Notice there is a plurality in the creation but a singularity of image – who is this image of God in which man is created? In the New Testament further revelation informs us that “Jesus is the image of the invisible God”.
Mushtaq the weakness in your case is that you have picked out just a few scriptural facts and texts. However to establish scriptural truth you need to harmonise the whole Biblical scripture and accept its teaching.
Metaphors of God are not proof of Triune God
Again you are correct when you speak of metaphors but it is a different matter when the Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostles speak of the appearances of GOD as a man and when the apostles attribute to Jesus the functions that belong solely to GOD (See appropriate scriptural categories above and in my notes)
4) Why does the Old Testament not teach the three – why is it insistent upon the one?
You ask why the three of God is not directly spoken of in the Old Testament (the scriptures of the Jews). I would compare this with the ‘abrogation’ in the Islamic tradition of scriptural understanding. This being the standard means of interpreting the Quran. If a revelation given to the prophet Mohamed changed an earlier revelation then the latter revelation is the superior.
When considering the concept of ‘trinity’ the facts are similar the New Testament trinity theeness concept is not an abrogation of the Old Testament Oneness concept but a development and clarification of that oneness as the unity of the tree modes of the one God. What the Old Testament implies the New Testament makes specific.
The nations of old had many Gods they were polytheistic and the Lord had to establish the truth of Hid Oneness before he could reveal That He was One in Three modes.
The church arrived at this understanding by careful consideration of the whole of scripture and you may confirm it by your own study.
5) Early Church Fathers
To return to the value of church ‘tradition’; the church from the beginning taught that Father, Son and Spirit were each divine and personal. The formulation of statements of doctrine in technical terms to describe this became necessary in the face of heretical teaching originated by the heretic Arius who was only a church presbyter. One means tradition was to appeal to the collective opinion of the leaders of the churches that were established by the apostles, which leaders could trace their succession from the original apostles. This means provides a double check as it were on the understanding of the apostolic scriptures and teaching.
I do not think such a means provides absolute proof but it is strong evidence and the earlier the closer in time the statement by these fathers is to the time of the apostles the greater the likelihood of their reliability. It is in this manner that I consider and value church tradition.
All Along the Watchtower 
Very good Rob. I really liked reading that – and learning from you.
The only thing I found myself questioning was this assertion of yours: However to establish scriptural truth you need to harmonise the whole Biblical scripture and accept its teaching.
Harmonisation is not the only way to read the Bible, and indeed if one were to harmonise without reference to other sources of Truth – I’m not too sure what you mean by ‘scriptural truth’.
Just wondering if you have yet returned to the Caribbean and may have a chance to respond to the issues that I posed a couple of weeks ago to you in the comments on this blog elsewhere.
Thanks once again,
S.
LikeLike
Harmonising the Scriptures:
Yes Struans I have returned to Bim (local term for Barbados) I have had our conversation in mind and should be able to get down to some of it today. Let’s consider what I mean by harmonising the scriptures. I will write in a manner to be useful to Mushtaq, so will probably include information you are probably familiar with.
First I should explain that I have not undergone formal training qualifications in theology I have studied the Bible over many years, gathered the tools for the purpose, attended many teaching sessions and courses conducted by those with formal theological training and read a host of reliable books but selected topics that attract me and are useful in evangelistic and pastoral ministry. So that’s where I am coming from and there are probably gaps in relation to theological issues and discussion.
What I was saying to Mushtaq was that properly understood scripture cannot be used to contradict itself. It cannot teach Unitarianism and any conception of God as one in three ‘persona’ (Greek term used by Tertullian in his definition of the Trinity not an exact equivalent of the English ‘person’). Such an assertion can only be maintained by faith and evidence that the Biblical scriptures are inspired by God.
By ‘scriptural truth’ I mean those matters we would have little knowledge of apart from God’s self revelation in them – chiefly salvation through Christ.
The interpretation or explanation of scripture is referred to as exegesis. We need to follow a few principles in order interpret the Bible correctly, they include:
i) Biblical Scriptures should be understood in light of is developing revelation (particularly from OT to NT) culminating in Christ – whose teaching and example should be taken as the touchstone in interpreting any matter.
ii) The correct understanding, of any given text in the context of the passage, book and author being considered. This must take into consideration the type of literature being considered is the book / passage being considered myth, metaphor, history, poetry/song, gospel, epistle (letter) or apocalyptic (a particular vivid symbolic Hebrew style of literature).
iii) Harmonisation of one Biblical book with another should not detract from the diverse emphasis of particular authors or their historical and pastoral situation nor should one be eclipsed by treating the other as the key to the whole gospel message.
iv) The correct understanding of any particular passage in the light of all other passages in scripture dealing with the particular topic.
v) The correct harmonisation of the entire scripture on the topic with all other general principles of scripture that may throw light on the meaning of the topic.
vi) Scripture must be explained (i.e. technically we exegete) in the context of the current culture of the writer and the recipients of the text. As a topic may be referred to over many centuries, cultural changes may add further understanding to the topic.
vii) The correct understanding of the meanings of the Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek words used in the context of their general use in the society current at the time of writing but more particularly how these words are used by the author in question.
viii) Our understanding should be corporate and we should be cautious of novel interpretations (e.g. consider early tradition)
ix) The principle of ‘correspondence requires that our understanding will not be at total variance with reality i.e. Other sources of truth enable our understanding
Others may wish to add to this list of principles and I am interested in other ways you consider we may read the Bible.
I hope that provides an insight of what I meat by harmonisation
R.
LikeLike
Thanks for this long reply Rob – much appreciated. Let me make a few comments against parts of your text:
What I was saying to Mushtaq was that properly understood scripture cannot be used to contradict itself.
– Yes, I really liked this.
By ‘scriptural truth’ I mean those matters we would have little knowledge of apart from God’s self revelation in them – chiefly salvation through Christ.
– I understand what you mean, but I’m not closed to the idea that there might be or have been other ways that God self-reveals salvation through Christ other than the Bible. I’m not a sola scriptura person, and I place a certain emphasis on experience and reason in my faith – as well as scripture and tradition.
Christ – whose teaching and example should be taken as the touchstone in interpreting any matter.
– Christ as example as the touchstone, yes – however, as teacher might seem to be easily agreeable, but one does find in practice a lot of variation on this point.
The correct understanding, of any given text in the context of the passage, book and author being considered.
– Who determines the correct understanding? Of course, this is the same ‘authority’ question that has been debated many times on this blog.
Our understanding should be corporate and we should be cautious of novel interpretations
– I can understand this, but it is in the degree to which textual understanding ought to be corporate (whose corpus too) that I see an issue with this
The principle of ‘correspondence requires that our understanding will not be at total variance with reality i.e. Other sources of truth enable our understanding
– I really liked this.
However you’ve answered my point about harmonisation very fully – I originally understood that word to mean a more Scholastic and literal approach to the texts, which you have made clear is not the case for yourself.
Thanks again.
S.
LikeLike
Struans your points certainly get to the heart of a matter – they cause me to consider and verbalise my previously unspoken approach to things and in this way they are extremely valuable – thank you.
Struans replied: “By ‘scriptural truth’ I mean those matters we would have little knowledge of apart from God’s self revelation in them – chiefly salvation through Christ.
I understand what you mean, but I’m not closed to the idea that there might be or have been other ways that God self-reveals salvation through Christ other than the Bible. I’m not a sola scriptura person, and I place a certain emphasis on experience and reason in my faith – as well as scripture and tradition”.
I agree with all this and endorse each of the means of God’s self revelation you list. As a charismatic experience is also high on the agenda which is in a considerable degree different from a strictly evangelical stance; however experiences without any objective means to assess them leaves the door open to deception. Factors from all these means need to be harmonised (for want of a better term) in arriving at truth. In this way I seek to ensure my spiritual experiences (subjective) and beliefs line up with objective sources such as scripture, history, tradition, reason and observable reality (at least a reasonable relationship to it). It’s an ongoing process “until we attain the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ Eph. 4:13”. I guess we all have a long way to go yet and our discussions here may be part of the process.
I’m not ‘sola scripture’ either, if by that you mean scripture as the only source of spiritual truth, but I do not think that is what it means to anyone. I think the intent of the phrase is that scripture in itself contains enough truth for one to arrive at salvation by its application. If others take it further that’s not where I’m at.
In this regard I am not a creationist and see no problems in the acceptance of evolution. Another book by Roger Forster and Paul Marsden ‘Reason Science and Faith’ deals with the damage to the credibility of the Christian faith done by those insisting on a litereal 7x24hr days creation event some few thousand years ago.
“Christ as example as the touchstone, yes – however, as teacher might seem to be easily agreeable, but one does find in practice a lot of variation on this point.”
Obviously we are dealing with a wide ranging matter – do you chiefly mean variation in Jesus from OT; a big subject to handle just on its own. For myself I find no unexplainable contradictions or variations in scripture but my explanations may not suit or convince everyone.
“Correct understanding of the text” It would have been better to say “An acceptable understanding of a text”. Any particular text may carry a number of acceptable understandings and convey truth of various sorts.
“Whose corpus” In the final analysis we are each be drawn to the ‘corpus’ that makes most sense to us. This again is the same authority question we have debated. Tradition itself is not unanimous and in my view Augustine’s, who has had such a large affect on the theology of the west was at variance with earlier tradition in several ways. However If we take the historic creeds of the church this gives us a level of agreement between most orthodox (small ‘o’) Christians and this is the faith I seek to present here to Mushtaq.
LikeLike
Thank you Rob for making effort in replying me, but your reply is incomplete and random, your reply has following headings in this sequence:
5) Early Church Fathers
1) Don’t say three
1a) Then don’t say two!
6) Truth is established from holy books
7) Unitarians
2) Majestic plural is not proof of Triune God
Metaphors of God are not proof of Triune God (you didn’t give it #3)
4) Why does the Old Testament not teach the three
5) Early Church Fathers
I appreciate your effort. But it would be more better if you addressed ALL 11 Summary points, the SEQUENCE is not so important (It is for external beauty, internal beauty is more important). I shall be able to say something if you finish by supplying answer on remaining summary points as well.
For info, here I provide brief info & full list of 11 summary points:
Title of Dialogue Summary: Divine Sonship and Trinity
Date of Summary: 14 Sep 2013
Summary compression ratio: 20 pages summarized to 8 pages. (2.5:1)
Dialogue between: Muhummad Mushtaq Tariq & Jessica Hoff
This Summary has 11 points.
1-Don’t Say “Three” – Stop
2-Majestic plural is not proof of Triune God
3-Metaphors of God are not proof of Triune God
4-Belief in Triune God is not belief of Old nations
5-Early Church Fathers have not unique ID as Trinitarian Christians
6-Early Church Fathers are not Superior to Blessed Jesus and Prophets
7-Unitarian Christians are not Heretics
8-Triune God has three parts
9-Metaphor of St. Patrick proves three parts of Triune God
10-Trinity is Tritheism with label of Monotheism
11-Divine Sonship contradicts Trinity
Regards.
LikeLike
Thank you for your reply I have commented points on 1) to 7) as 3) Metaphors was not numbered in my response. I will attempt to consider 8) to 11) ASP. I will have to first locate your material and consider it.
In my response I began with 5) & 6) as Jess’ previous response had begun there which I addressed and took a different approach. But I take your point albeit I have limited time and respond as my own thought processes proceed.
Regards Rob
LikeLike
Thank you so much Rob! Indeed I could address even the incomplete reply sent by you, but experience has told me that, for a happy, nice and friendly dialogue, it is VERY necessary that you address each and every point of the other, (no matter how much you delay) I am happy that you got my point. I shall wait for your reply.
LikeLike
Greetings Mushtaq: I have replied to a number of sections of your script and await genuine interactive responses. In the post here I have provided an outline of some Biblical evidence drawn from the full document I have emailed to you amounting to 16,000 words on the ‘trinity’. That is quite enough material for you to be going on with and responding to for our discussion, before moving onto your further points.
I did not post my full text here as it is not the way in which I have observed point by point discussion proceeds on this site.
I do not feel bound to respond to you in the order or manner you may wish but await your response to my post or any points one by one from my email that we discuss.
LikeLike
Greetings Rob!
I am busy with many things these days. I am unable to respond you at present. However, in future, at suitable time, I shall return to this blog and will respond you.
Regards,
Mushtaq
LikeLike
Greetings Rob!
I am writing reply to your post on Summary # 1 (Summary points 1~11). It is extremely happy and nice experience for me. I am hopeful, reading my reply will also be a happy and nice experience for you as well. It will be my another post in this blog for you and for our readers in this blog to see whether I (Mushtaq) follow a prepared script or can create genuine reply? Consequently, your response will also make it clear in this blog how much are you truthful in your intention and claim of “genuine interactive responses”?
It is not my policy to insult anyone by name, I try to avoid it. Whatever, I wrote here for you, is merely to show my excitation that I am feeling in writing response to your post.
Regards,
Mushtaq
LikeLike
Dear Mushtaq, I have read your most recent post which states your intention to reply to me but have not found the actual reply to what I sent you. I will will be happy to discuss matters when I get your reply. Many ThanksRob
> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 17:11:10 +0000 > To: robcottrell28@hotmail.co.uk >
LikeLike
Rob – excellent. But as I have said to Jess, Mushtaq is working from a prepared script from which he is clearly unable to deviate. I think you are both doing a splendid job, but I doubt he will be able to respond to anything not in his template. I have seen this technique used many times. It was crafted against Christians who work on a Sola Scriptura basis, and sticks, rigidly, to the same lines. I hope I am wrong, but the signs are clear.
LikeLike
C: Thanks for the heads up on this:
I am sure that you are right and we cannot expect responses outside of his scrip. It is the same with most cults they are not taught or free to consider, think and respond accordingly they have set prescribed answers. I have attended training / teaching sessions by cults to become familiar with their techniques so what I say I know to be factual.
I have sent him 30 pages of Biblical evidence on the trinity he says he will read it if he has time.
My opinion is that at this stage he has no interest at all in the Christian faith, his aim is either to win converts to Islam or place on this sits site content in support of Islam.
Our aim I think should be to present material that the Spirit of God may take up and cause him to think and also to place it here with links for others who may visit.
Regards Rob
LikeLike
Quite right Rob. We are told to give reasons for the hope that is in us. If Mushtaq wishes to convert anyone to Islam, he is in the wrong place – and using the wrong the methods. I hope he will answer some of the points you and Jess have made; we shall see.
C 451
LikeLike
C: I should have said that the probability that he was working from a scrip did was not immediately apparent to me but I recognised this as soon as you raised it. Thank you.
The fact is that we are dealing with spiritual matters and hence spiritual forces (doctrines of demons) in such encounters and with individuals who have been blinded by them. I have found that frequently the most obvious logic cannot be followed or acknowledged. From association with others working almost exclusively with Muslims, I have learned that they never acknowledge they have been caused to consider the truth of our faith in debate with a Christian, while they may be considering a matter which leads them to conversion over a long time period.
Presenting the positive truth on this topic is a similar task as dealing with a JW I have worked on this group considerable, dealing with the errors of the Quran and Islam is another matter.
To complete my research into JWs I attended their mid week Bible studies to learn just what was going on. They basically read a passage, the same passage being considered that day worldwide. The study leader then posed questions and elicited answers – both the questions and answers were printed at the foot of the study passage.
So in debate with JW they cannot deviate from these set replies. Besides this any deviation from the view their superiors/religion is apostasy resulting in eternal damnation and in the case of Islam also a possible death sentence. This combination makes for an effective and strong control of the individuals will and reason.
LikeLike
ANSWERING ROB ON SUMMARY # 1 WITH JESSICA
TABLE OF CONTENTS (TOC) # 1 (Mushtaq VS Rob) – Highlights Mode
TOC Title = Answering Rob on Summary # 1 with Jessica
TOC Date: 10 Nov 2013
Dialogue between: Muhummad Mushtaq Tariq and Rob Cottrell
TOC Author: Muhummad Mushtaq Tariq
TOC compression ratio: 31 pages compressed to 1 page (31:1)
TABLE OF CONTENTS # 1 (Mushtaq VS Rob) – Highlights Mode
INTRODUCTION FOR ROB:
SEVEN RULES OF DIALOGUE (Ans1)
First rule: The Definition of Dialogue
Six affiliated rules of dialogue (Ans2):
Second rule: Identification of “nice friendly dialogue”
Third Rule: Action & Reaction Rule
Fourth Rule: Minimum Enough Reply
Fifth Rule: Avoid Conceal Truth & Mixing truth with False
Sixth Rule: Brief reply for readers is in Summary points
Seventh Rule: Role of Promise
DOUBLE NUMBER SYSTEM to implement Rules of dialogue
CHRISTIAN-MUSLIM DIALOGUE: MUSHTAQ ANSWERS ROB
Answer 1: (1+1+1=1 rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans7)
Answer 2: (1x1x1 rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans8)
Answer 3: Three dimensions reject Christian Trinity (Ans9)
Answer 4: The Cube example rejects Christian Trinity (Ans10)
Answer 5: (4th dimension in Einstein’s relativity rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans11)
Answer 6: (Multiple dimensions of string theory reject Christian Trinity) (Ans12)
Answer 7: (Secret number proves Islamic Monotheism, but rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans13)
Answer 1: (Pairs reject Christian Trinity) (Ans14)
Answer 2: (Sun rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans15)
Answer 3: (Electromagnetic spectrum rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans16)
Answer 1: (Definition of Word is trouble to Christians) (Ans17)
Answer 2: (Attributes of God are not God) (Ans18)
Answer 3: (Speech preventing partners of God was made partner of God) (Ans19)
Answer 4: (Word can help Christians to be Polytheists) (Ans20)
Answer 5: (Mary is Mother of 16.6% part of God) (Ans21)
Answer -6: (Is God greater than Mother of God (Theotokos / Virgin Mary)?) (Ans22)
Church of 325 badly dealt with “Is father greater than Son in age?” (Ans23)
Church of 431 also badly dealt with “Is Son greater than Mother?” (Ans24)
Nestorius Challenge & Ephesus Council of 431 (Ans25)
10 REASONS OF INJUSTICE IN EPHESUS COUNCIL OF 431: (Ans26)
REFERENCES:
Answer 7: (Due to historical trend, Church may declare Mother, wife, daughter & sister of God) (Ans27)
Answer 1: (4 & 5 in nature reject Christian Trinity) (Ans32)
Answer 2: (Daily seen states of matter reject Christian Trinity) (Ans33)
Answer 3: (States of matter in Advanced Science reject Christian Trinity) (Ans34)
Answer 4: (Three states of water reject Christian Trinity) (Ans35)
Miracles of Jesus were also preformed by Previous Prophets: (Ans41)
(Jesus was not a divine figure) (Ans42)
Answer 1: (Jesus is Son of What?) (Ans43)
Answer 2: (Others were also called gods in Bible) (Ans44)
Blood of second part of second part of God: (Ans45)
Answer 1: (You corrupted & renamed summary point) (Ans46)
Answer 2: (Trinity is man made confusion splitting Christian World in Past & Present) (Ans47)
Answer 3: (Identity of Obsolete religion fits on Christianity) (Ans48)
Answer 2: (You skipped Sultan of Oman & Queen Victoria to hide truth) (Ans50)
Answer 3: (Jesus image of invisible God is self contradictory claim) (Ans51)
Answer 4: (Harmonizing Bible rejects Trinity) (Ans52)
Answer 5: Unitarian Christians rightly understood Father & Son in Bible (Ans53)
Answer 1: (Abrogation is not for Concept of God) (Ans55)
Answer 1: (Presence of Polytheists is not justification to hide Trinity) (Ans58)
Answer 2: Church arrived at Trinity by corruptions (Ans59)
Answer 3: (Controversial illegal Church considerations to define Trinity) (Ans60)
END OF TOC # 1 (MUSHTAQ ANSWERS ROB)
INTRODUCTION FOR ROB:
Greetings Rob,
You have given me your partial & random reply to my Summary # 1 (1~11 points) and also promised “I will attempt to consider 8) to 11) ASP”.
But then you stated following “rule” of the dialogue:
“I do not feel bound to respond to you in the order or manner you may wish”.
Here you seem to be convinced that there are no rules, no regulations, no promises in a Dialogue except your own desires? No. Merely good manners & respecting each other is not sufficient for a “Nice friendly dialogue”. You have insufficient argument to define system of rules and ethics required for a dialogue to reveal truth and complete dialogue till a happy end.
In this blog, I have been working on two fronts simultaneously, one front is Christian Muslim Dialogue and second front is to formulate a Dialogue Methodology for a successful Dialogue and to determine answer to question Why truth is not revealed and Why can a Christian Muslim Dialogue fail without results? (I also invite you to think on these questions).
SEVEN RULES OF DIALOGUE (Ans1)
First rule is basic rule; remaining six rules are affiliated rules.
Rule 1: The Definition of Dialogue
Rule 2: Identification of “nice friendly dialogue”
Rule 3: Action & Reaction Rule
Rule 4: Minimum Enough Reply
Rule 5: Avoid Conceal Truth and mixing truth with False
Rule 6: Brief reply for readers is in Summary points
Rule 7: Role of Promise
The Six affiliated rules (Rule 2 to Rule 7) are in fact like viewing same basic one rule (“Dialogue is bilateral exchange of questions and answers”) from different angles/ viewpoints. So, these affiliated rules look similar, but they are branches of same tree, originating from same source; definition of dialogue.
Now, let me teach you these 7 rules of dialogue that I formulated here on this blog of Madam Jessica:
First rule: The Definition of Dialogue
Quran: Surah/Chapter 016 – An-Nahl. Verse 125.
CALL unto the way of thy Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation, and reason with them in the better way. Lo! thy Lord is best aware of him who strayeth from His way, and He is Best Aware of those who go aright.
There is only one basic rule of dialogue:
“Dialogue is bilateral exchange of questions and answers”.
It is also definition of dialogue. If you can understand and accept it, then there is nothing to prevent you from accepting remaining six affiliated rules. But unfortunately, many people deviate from this simple basic rule by offering wrong reasons and misconceptions. Therefore, I had to formulate remaining six affiliated rules of dialogue to remove various misunderstandings and providing clarifications on first basic rule:
Six affiliated rules of dialogue (Ans2):
There are six rules in dialogue for which you will feel bound to respond, if you are truthful in conducting dialogue.
Second rule: Identification of “nice friendly dialogue”
Quran: Surah/Chapter 002 – Al-Baqara. Verse 2.
This Book, there is no doubt in it, is a guide to those who guard (against evil).
This rule identifies Nice friendly dialogue by contrasting it with “Bad Hostile Dialogue”.
Needless to explain, Bad hostile dialogue is the form of dialogue which sooner or later fails dialogue, thus wasting time and efforts invested in nice friendly dialogue, with no agreed results in hand. Bad hostile dialogue must be avoided if you are serious to obtain some results. It is necessary for you to learn difference between “Nice friendly dialogue” and “Bad Hostile Dialogue”.
“Nice friendly dialogue” is “full and sequential reply”. Answers are written through honesty and hard work without concealing/mixing original script to be answered. In this case, delay in answer is not important, but answer is important to reveal truth and remove all objections. Those debaters who don’t work from a prepared script, but have capability to answer in genuine way, they can reply to each and every objection. In Nice friendly dialogue, revealing truth is more important than self victory; therefore, debater will either answer/comment each and every point, or straightaway will accept truth ignoring self victory on those points, whose answer is not available.
Bad Hostile Dialogue is “partial and random reply”. Here answers are written through dishonesty, avoiding hard work to conceal/mix truth and mislead / misguide reader. In this case, quick and incomplete answer is preferred over delayed and complete answer. This sort of behavior is usually seen from debaters who work from a prepared script, cannot answer in a genuine way and therefore they are unable to answer anything not found in their template, no matter how much time they are given. In bad hostile dialogue, self victory is more important than revealing truth; therefore, debater will not answer/comment each and every point (calling it cherry picking or something else), and will never straightaway accept truth on those points, whose answer is not available with him (claiming addressing a self forged theme instead).
Third Rule: Action & Reaction Rule
Surah/Chapter 028 – Al-Qasas. Verse 50.
But if they do not answer you, then know that they only follow their low desires; and who is more erring than he who follows his low desires without any guidance from Allah? Surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
This rule is based on Newton’s 3rd law of motion. It produces strict regulations of which you are bound (Recall your words here “I do not feel bound to respond to you in the order or manner you may wish”). It can be understood in the following ways:
(i) I like and prefer “full and sequential reply in dialogue”. I dislike and try to avoid “partial and random reply in dialogue” as it is to conceal truth and dialogue sooner or later suffers from an unhappy end. However, if you start responding as “partial and random reply in dialogue” (due to being unable to respond fully or to get rid of dialogue), then I am also free to choose same style of answering. I request you to refrain from “partial and random reply” in dialogue as it may end dialogue without results/conclusion thus destroying time and effort of both of us.
(ii) You have deleted in your response Quranic verses in my article with Summary points 1 to 11. Please also reply to these Quranic verses when you respond next time. If you don’t do so, then I shall also be free to delete Biblical verses from your reply when responding you next time.
(iii) You can keep Quranic verses “as it is” if you don’t want to comment them for any reason, e.g. if same verse repeats or any other reason that you may not want to tell.
In this case, I shall be free to return same behavior to you.
Fourth Rule: Minimum Enough Reply
Surah/Chapter 029 – Al-‘Ankabût. Verse 51.
Is it not ENOUGH for them that We have sent down unto thee the Scripture which is read unto them? Lo! herein verily is mercy, and a reminder for folk who believe.
If text to be answered is unnumbered, then reply may also be unnumbered and there cannot be defined any lower or upper limit of enough reply. However, if text to be answered is numbered (like point 1, point 2, or Answer 1, Answer 2, etc), then in this case, a minimum level of enough reply can be defined as equal to number of numbered points to be answered.
For example, Easter Challenge consists of 17 questions, now minimum 17 answers numbered corresponding to those 17 questions will be regarded as “enough” reply. Less than 17 answers will be “less than enough”, and more than 17 answers will be “more than enough”.
Background reason of Third Rule is; I had to specifically formulate this rule, when I gave multiple answers to one question of a Christian and I did it many times to demonstrate “more than enough” answers, but same Christian, when accepted 17 questions of Easter Challenge as “Easy Challenge”, answered only three questions and claimed it “more than enough reply.”
Fifth Rule: Avoid Conceal Truth & Mixing truth with False
Surah/Chapter 003 – Al-Imrân. Verse 71.
O People of the Scripture! Why confound ye truth with falsehood and knowingly CONCEAL the truth?
Reply of passages is passages, reply of text is text, reply of unnumbered text is numbered/ unnumbered text, reply of numbered text is numbered text, reply of theme is theme, and reply of scope is scope.
(i) Knowingly CONCEAL the truth: (“taking / selecting passages” and omitting/ concealing remaining passages, even numbered passages as well (ii) Confound truth with falsehood: (Write reply to these “taken / selected passages” and pretend them to be reply of omitted/ concealed passages, or even omitted numbered passages as well).
Sixth Rule: Brief reply for readers is in Summary points
Quran: Surah/Chapter 017 – Al-Isrâ. Verse 53.
Say to My servants that they should (only) say those things that are best: for Satan doth sow dissensions among them: For Satan is to man an avowed enemy.
It is true that brief reply is much less confusing for readers, but it doesn’t mean to delete parts of original script to reduce answer to facilitate readers. The right way is to provide answer to original text in detail to each and every point raised, and then provide Summary of same in form of Summary points to make it less confusing for readers. Primary purpose of dialogue is to answer opponent fully, readers are of secondary importance, and however, readers may be taken care of through numbered Summary points / points of Table of Contents. I have done same in writing Summary # 1 (1~11 points) and Summary # 2 (12~25 points). These summary points are for readers, and for debaters, is the original dialogue behind it.
Seventh Rule: Role of Promise
Quran: Surah/Chapter 004 – An-Nisâ. Verse 120.
Satan makes them promises, and creates in them false desires; but satan’s promises are nothing but deception.
It is to fulfill promises made during Dialogue. It is far better to remain silent than making false promises. Don’t make any such promise that you are unable to fulfill.
Violation of your promises can eliminates confidence of other party on your words and dialogue may be halted or terminated. If you have made some promises, then these promises should be fulfilled utilizing all possible effort and energy.
Dear Rob! You have given me your partial & random reply to my Summary # 1 (1~11 points) and also promised “I will attempt to consider 8) to 11) ASP”. So I shall wait for fulfilling your promise and reply of Summary points 8~11 along with your full reply that I am giving to you in this my post.
Similarly, if a Christian takes “easy” Easter Challenge promising to answer 17 questions of Easter Challenge, then same Christian is responsible to provide answers to all 17 questions in Easter Challenge in the light of rules of dialogue mentioned here.
DOUBLE NUMBER SYSTEM to implement Rules of dialogue
One technique that I introduced here first time is “Double Number System”. Its objective is to ensure compliance with rules of dialogue and keep our dialogue nice friendly. You will see two numbers to my same answer. First number is local number; ending number in brackets is global unique number of my answers to you. For example, you will see two numbers here:
Answer 2: (1x1x1 rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans8)
Here Answer 2 is local number; ending number (Ans8) is global unique number of my answers to you. In this document, last global Answer is (Ans63). It means, in next time my debate with you, my first answer will get global number (Ans64) and so on.
If you reply in “full & sequential way” to all 63 global answers, I shall appreciate it as your full contribution in nice friendly dialogue (though it doesn’t mean to omit unnumbered sections). You will see that TABLE OF CONTENTS # 1 (of my Dialogue with you in Highlights Mode) doesn’t contain all 63 answers. The answers included in TABLE OF CONTENTS # 1 (Highlights Mode) are special and need your special / careful consideration, on remaining global answers (not shown in Table of Contents), there will be enough to provide few remarks of your own, or you may give as much reply as suitable. I shall calculate % niceness friendliness in this dialogue as contributed from your side. The formula is:
%Niceness and friendliness = (Number of your attempted questions*100)/Total Number of questions = (Number of your attempted questions*100)/63
This % calculation is necessary as I have seen Christians give partial and random reply in the curtain of addressing “theme” and then also claim, I have addressed “fully”.
For me, you can see that I have addressed all your remarks on Summary # 1, but you have not addressed all Summary points of Summary # 1 and you have promised to provide Answer of summary points 8 to 11 “ASAP”.
Therefore, these rules of dialogue that I formulated (by considering dialogue in this blog of Madam Jessica) are;
Rule 1: The Definition of Dialogue
Rule 2: Identification of “nice friendly dialogue”
Rule 3: Action & Reaction Rule
Rule 4: Minimum Enough Reply
Rule 5: Avoid Conceal Truth and Mixing truth with False
Rule 6: Brief reply for readers is in Summary points
Rule 7: Role of Promise
Please either accept, or reject, or indicate errors in these rules of dialogues. Rules of dialogue are also part of our dialogue due to your claimed “rule” of dialogue as indicated above. Defining a set of rules of dialogue will also help other fellow believers to reveal truth and avoid misconceptions found in people regarding dialogue process.
Now I start my formal response to your article at Madam Jessica’s website:
CHRISTIAN-MUSLIM DIALOGUE: MUSHTAQ ANSWERS ROB
1-ROB:
Greetings Mushtaq, in the name of the blessed Jesus may the peace of God rest upon you. As I make a response I will place your topic numbers appropriately.
1-MUSHTAQ (Ans3):
Quran: Surah/Chapter 002 – Al-Baqarah. Verse 109.
Many of the People of the Scripture long to make you disbelievers after your belief, through envy on their own account, after the truth hath become manifest unto them. FORGIVE and be indulgent (toward them) until Allah give command. Lo! Allah is Able to do all things.
Dear Rob, I am going to address your partial reply to my Summary # 1 in the hope that you will also fulfill your promise “I will attempt to consider 8) to 11) ASP” and will send me reply of remaining Summary points after receiving my this response.
You have deleted in your response Quranic verses corresponding to my 11 summary points. These Quranic verses are linked with my 11 responses and explain them further, their response is not optional. Please also reply to these Quranic verses when you respond next time.
If you don’t do so, then I shall also be free to delete Biblical verses from your reply when responding you next time.
You can keep Quranic verses “as it is” if you don’t want to comment them, in this case, then I shall also be free to keep Biblical verses in your response without my any comments on them.
2-ROB:
5) Early Church Fathers
You are probably aware various branches of Christians take different approaches in establishing the reliability of their beliefs. This also applies to the concept of the trinity. For some the fact their church tradition has established a concept as truth is adequate for them. I will return to this approach later.
2-MUSHTAQ (Ans4):
Quran: Surah/Chapter 003 – Al-Imrân. Verse 63.
And if they turn away, then Lo! Allah is Aware of (who are ) the CORRUPTERS.
Notice how you have corrupted title of my Summary points # 5.
“5-Early Church Fathers have not unique ID as Trinitarian Christians”
You only renamed Summary point but maintained its number 5. I don’t think its fair. When you reply to somebody, you may not alter his words.
I have answered full article of Madam Jessica on early Church fathers and its link is available at her blog in a separate page:
You also say that you will return this approach later, so it is better first to read my response there and then return to this approach here.
3-ROB:
1) Don’t say three
Apostles Write of Father, Son and Spirit as God
Ignatius 70 – 110 AD a bishop at Antioch who knew the apostles well referred to the ‘Triad’ of God.
Irenaeus 175 – 195 AD a bishop of Lyons, France spoke of “The Son and Spirit as God’s two hands”
Tertullian 220AD was first to use the term ‘Trinity’
We could also frame the Biblical revelation by speaking of the ONE God as existing in THREE ‘personal modes of being’.
3-MUSHTAQ (Ans5):
Quran: Surah/Chapter 009 – At-Taubah. Verse 31+34
They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their MONKS and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One God. There is no god save Him. Be He glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)! …
O ye who believe! there are indeed many among the priests and anchorites, who in Falsehood devour the substance of men and hinder (them) from the way of Allah. And there are those who bury gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah: announce unto them a most grievous penalty-
I have answered full article of Madam Jessica on early Church fathers and available at URL:
https://jessicahof.wordpress.com/2013/09/15/dialogue-with-a-muslim-friend-early-fathers/
I have discussed in detail Ignatius and Irenaeus on part1 of my dialogue with madam Jessica, see following webpage:
https://jessicahof.wordpress.com/2013/09/08/dialogue-with-a-muslim-friend-part-1/
In Answer 4 to Jessica, I have stated 7 reasons due to which words of Ignatius of Antioch cannot help Trinitarian Christians. In Answer 5 to Jessica, I have stated 5 reasons due to which words of Irenaeus cannot help Trinitarian Christians.
Tertullian is heretic by definition of “Heresy” because Concept of God i.e. Trinity is considered basic requirement of salvation in Christianity, If Jesus had not right to define basic requirement of salvation i.e. Concept of God i.e. Trinity in his time, then how did in 220AD Tertulian got right to define basic term required for salvation i.e. Concept of God? Tertullian is heretic by standard definition of Heresy. Heretics are those who invent centuries later such new terms or concepts (related to concept of God or related to basic requirement of salvation), never spoken and heard by founders of the religion.
4-ROB:
Oneness and threeness can also be expressed mathematically without contradiction or illogicality. Consider a cube it has 1 height + 1 width + 1depth 1+1+1 = 3 dimensions but 1x1x1 = 1 cube.
4-MUSHTAQ (Ans6):
Quran: Surah/Chapter 004 – An-Nisâ. Verse 171.
O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, JESUS son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not “Three”. Cease! (it is) better for you! Allah is only One God. Far is it removed from His transcendent majesty that he should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender.
I have following SEVEN Answers (Let me see, do you work from a prepared script or can reply genuinely? It will be clear if you give seven responses corresponding to my these seven answers, then it will be sign of your genuine approach, if you cannot, then it means you work from a prepared script and you are unable to answer anything not found in your template):
Answer 1: (1+1+1=1 rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans7)
Let’s revise some example first:
“A is full and complete sheep, B is full and complete sheep, C is full and complete sheep, these are three sheep”.
1 full and complete sheep + 1 full and complete sheep + 1 full and complete sheep = 3 sheep.
The Trinity formula as formulated in 4th century is:
“Father is full and complete God, Son is full and complete God, Holy Spirit is full and complete God, but these are not three gods, but One full and complete God”.
1 full and complete God + 1 full and complete God + 1 full and complete God = 3 gods. i.e.
1+1+1=3,
but Christian reject this result and prefer to claim that these are when added together, not three gods but one God (1+1+1=1).
It is clear that 1+1+1=1 is incorrect, lie and false. Therefore, Trinity formula is incorrect, lie and false.
Answer 2: (1x1x1 rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans8)
If 1x1x1 = 1 is proof/indication of three persons in one God, then 1×1 =1 is proof/indication of two persons in God. If you reject 1×1 = 1 as “proof/indication” of two in one, then how can you accept 1x1x1 = 1 as “proof” of three in one? Also note that 1x1x1x1 = 1 proves ‘four in one’ or there are four persons in God. If you accept 1x1x1 = 1 as proof/indication of three persons in God, then 1x1x1x1 = 1 is also proof of four persons in God.
Net result is that 1x1x1 = 1 is not mathematical proof/indication of “Three persons in one God”. Similarly, this example cannot be used to show two, four, five or even more persons in God.
Answer 3: Three dimensions reject Christian Trinity (Ans9)
Three dimensions 1 height + 1 width + 1 depth in three dimensional space cannot prove Trinity. Height is 1 dimensional measured in meter, width is also one dimensional again measured in meter and depth is also one dimensional also measured in meters. But three dimensional space is not measured in meters, it is measured in cubic meters. Meter is not same as cubic meter. Meter is unit of measurement of distance and cubic meter is unit of volume.
Comparative equations are;
Three persons = three dimensions
One God = 3 dimensional Space
The Trinity states that Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not three parts of God, therefore, Trinity may be defined as:
“Father is full and complete God, Son is full and complete God, Holy Spirit is full and complete God, but these are not three gods, but One full and complete God”.
Translate same to three dimensions unit, we find
“Height (meter) is full and complete space (cubic meter), Width (meter) is full and complete space (cubic meter), Depth (meter) is full and complete space (cubic meter), but these are not three spaces (three cubic meters), but One full and complete space (cubic meter)”.
It is incorrect, therefore, three dimensions don’t prove, rather reject Christian Trinity.
Answer 4: The Cube example rejects Christian Trinity (Ans10)
Three dimensions already discussed above, mow we turn to cube. A cube having unit length, width and depth 1x1x1 = 1 cube with one volume. Is it proof/example of Trinity?
A cube not only consists of three dimensions of length, height and width, it has also six surfaces (each surface is an area, or two dimensional plane), twelve edges (each edge connects any two surfaces), eight vertices (each vertices is origin of three mutually perpendicular axes).
So if height, width and depth can be proof/indication of three persons in God, Why do you not take six surfaces of a cube as proof/indication of six persons in God? Why do you not take twelve edges of a cube as proof/indication of twelve persons in God? Why do you not take eight vertices as proof/indication of eight persons in God? These questions clearly indicate that there is no valid reason to pick three dimensions in cube as a divine indication and ignoring remaining elements of a cube. Therefore, example of cube cannot be presented as proof/indication of number of persons in God.
SEE NEXT
PART 2 OF 4
Answering Rob on Summary # 1 with Jessica
LikeLike
PART 2 OF 4
Answering Rob on Summary # 1 with Jessica
Answer 5: (4th dimension in Einstein’s relativity rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans11)
Surely a cube has 1 height + 1 width + 1depth 1+1+1 = 3 dimensions.
But do you know Albert Einstein? He is ranked among top scientists of the world. Relativity is his famous theory; Principle of Atom Bomb, nuclear reactions in sun, stars & galaxies, time travel, distortion in space & time, expansion of universe, are some famous results of his relativity theory and these results have also been verified with experimental observations. Now let’s see what is spacetime?
In physics, spacetime (also space–time, space time or space–time continuum) is any model that combines space and time into a single continuum. By combining space and time into a single manifold, physicists have significantly simplified a large number of physical theories, as well as described in a more uniform way the workings of the universe at both the supergalactic and subatomic levels.
In relativistic contexts, time cannot be separated from the three dimensions of space, because the observed rate at which time passes for an object depends on the object’s velocity relative to the observer and also on the strength of gravitational fields, which can slow the passage of time.
In cosmology, the concept of spacetime combines space and time to a single abstract universe. Until the beginning of the 20th century, time was believed to be independent of motion, progressing at a fixed rate in all reference frames; however, later experiments revealed that time slows at higher speeds of the reference frame relative to another reference frame. Such slowing, called time dilation, is explained in special relativity theory. Many experiments have confirmed time dilation, such as the relativistic decay of muons from cosmic ray showers and the slowing of atomic clocks aboard a Space Shuttle relative to synchronized Earth-bound inertial clocks.
Einstein’s relativity theory states that time is fourth dimension and term “spacetime” indicates three space dimensions and fourth dimension as time. So Modern Physics described by Einstein proves four dimensions and it also proves there are four persons in God? Answer is No. So it is also proved that three dimensions cannot prove/indicate three persons in one God.
Answer 6: (Multiple dimensions of string theory reject Christian Trinity) (Ans12)
The term spacetime has taken on a generalized meaning beyond treating spacetime events with the normal 3+1 dimensions. It is really the combination of space and time. Other proposed spacetime theories include additional dimensions—normally spatial but there exist some speculative theories that include additional temporal dimensions and even some that include dimensions that are neither temporal nor spatial (e.g., superspace).
How many dimensions are needed to describe the universe is still an open question. Speculative theories such as string theory predict 10 or 26 dimensions (with M-theory predicting 11 dimensions: 10 spatial and 1 temporal), but the existence of more than four dimensions would only appear to make a difference at the subatomic level.
In physics, string theory is a theoretical framework in which the point-like particles of particle physics are replaced by one-dimensional objects called strings. In string theory, the different types of observed elementary particles arise from the different quantum states of these strings. In addition to the types of particles postulated by the standard model of particle physics, string theory naturally incorporates gravity, and is therefore a strong candidate for a Theory Of Everything (TOE) in Physics, a self-contained mathematical model that describes all fundamental forces and forms of matter. Aside from this hypothesized role in particle physics, string theory is now widely used as a theoretical tool in physics, and it has shed light on many aspects of quantum field theory and quantum gravity.
Strings theory predicts that there are 26 dimensions in Universe. So it means God consists of 26 persons? Answer is no. Again therefore, three dimensions of space are not proof/indication of three persons in one God.
Answer 7: (Secret number proves Islamic Monotheism, but rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans13)
In Holy Quran, Quran: Surah 58, verse 7 Allah says:
“Have you not seen that Allah knows whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is on the earth? There is no secret counsel of three, but he is their fourth (with his knowledge, while he himself is over the throne, over the seventh heaven),–nor of five but he is their sixth (with his knowledge), —not of less than that or more, but he is with them (with his knowledge) whosesoever they may be; and afterwards on the day of resurrection, he will inform them of what they did. Verily, Allah is the all knower of everything.”
From above, we can get conclusion, that there is always only one hidden present in each and every collection or number. This fact has been taught in a Mathematical Method in this verse, by giving example that with three, the fourth (one Allah) is present. And with five, the sixth (one Allah) is present. Hence from this verse, a mathematical principle is concluded:
“In every number, and in zero, there is always one hidden present”
MULTIPLICATION:
2*1=2
5*1=5
A*1=A
X*1=X
DIVISION:
2/1=2
5/1=5
A/1=A
X/1=X
POWER:
21=2 (1 is in superscript, may not be shown on some web pages properly)
51=5
A1=A
X1=X
ZERO POWER:
20=1
50=1
A0=1
X0=1
FACTORIAL:
2!=2*1
5!=5*4*3*2*1
A!=A*(A-1)..1
X!=X(X-1)..1
0!=1
Principle= In every number always 1 hidden present
The number 1 occurs in two states (Hidden and apparent). Apparent 1 which is written apparently and from which counting starts, and the hidden 1 which is not written apparently , but remains present in every number with different properties. This secret number 1, provides evidence of secret existence of one (Allah) and his characteristics.
Counting starts from apparent number of 1, and before this one, zero exists. Zero means, empty, finish, mortal, nothing, nobody. But if we solve zero or take an analysis of it by taking factorial, then we come to know that
0! =1
From where this 1 came??
When there was nothing before this Universe, (was zero), At that time only one existence of Allah was present, and at last , when everything will be annihilated (will be zero) in Universe at end of its age, then only one personality of Allah will remain in existence. Therefore that personality is present permanently, Similarly, Allah is first and last as well. All of this is mentioned in Holy Quran.
“Whatsoever is on it (the earth) will perish, and the face of your lord full of Majesty and honour will abide forever”
(Quran Surah 55 verses26-27)
Consider another example:
“And indeed we have created man, and we know what his own self whispers to him . and we are nearer to him than his jugular vein (by our knowledge)”
(Quran: Surah 50 verse 16)
Therefore it is proved that nothing, no particle and no place is empty from existence of Allah, He is seeing and listening every where.
“It is the same (to Him) whether any of you conceal his speech or declare it openly, whether he be hid by night or go forth freely by day.”
(Quran Surah 13 verse 10)
There always 1 exists on every number secretly, which is known in Mathematics as Power. The number upon which there is no power, (zero power), then the number also annihilates, and on the place of this number, 1 remains (as power). See A0=1 .And since this remainder 1 is itself a POWER, therefore, upon this 1; there is no need of power of any number. From this we have discovered that secret 1 doesn’t need any number, But All numbers need this secret number.
“To him belongs, all that is in the heavens, and all that is in the earth, and he is the most high, the most Great”
(Quran: Surah 42 verse 4)
It is mentioned many times in Quran that Allah can do everything.
To Allah belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is on the earth, and whether you disclose what is in your own selves or conceal it, Allah will call you to account for it. Then He forgives whom He wills and punishes whom He wills. And Allah is able to do all things.
(Quran Surah 2 verse 284)
In this way, only one Allah, is self sufficient i.e., he does not need any one, But all others need him.
The secret 1 is the foundation of Mathematics, this number remains present in every number and every arithmetic operation constantly and secretly, never annihilates or changes. This secret 1 does not need any number; all numbers are established with the help of this number. This secret 1 is neither product nor generation of any number (Not “son” of any one), nor any number is its factor (Not “father” of any one). In the World of Mathematics, it is an incomparable, matchless and constant number, but even above restrictions of Mathematics itself. It verifies following characteristics of Allah.
112: 1. Say: He is Allah, the One!
112: 2. Allah, the eternally Besought of all!
112: 3. He begetteth not nor was begotten.
112: 4. And there is none comparable unto Him.
Of course, Allah, is present everywhere and every time, Absolute Master, The First and the Last, Apparent and Hidden, everlasting and eternal, unlimited, beyond the restrictions of Space and Time. Number 1 is present secretly in every number i.e. though it is not apparently written, but it is accepted as existent in every number, similarly, the One God is present everywhere every time secretly .He is invisible from the sights of our eyes, but can be viewed with knowledge and wisdom.
Allah bears witness that none has the right to be worshipped but He, and the angels, and those having knowledge (also give this witness); (He is always) maintaining His creation in Justice, the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.
(Quran Surah 3 verse 18)
Dear Rob, now it is your turn to prove that number three exists with every number in Mathematics secretly? Now it is your turn to prove that Trinity exists with every number? It is your turn to prove that Mathematics doesn’t bear witness to Islamic Monotheism?, but instead proves Christian Trinity? I want to see, how much are you truthful in your claim of “Genuine interactions” OR Are you merely can follow whatever is in your script and you are unable to answer anything not in your template?
You will be glad to know that there are many places (like Pure Monotheism) where Bible and Quran support or verify each other. If we focus on them, it is a great point in removing distances between our faiths. This similarity itself has been pointed in Quran as:
Quran: Surah/Chapter 003 – Al-Imrân. Verse 64.
Say: O PEOPLE OF THE SCRIPTURE (People of Bible). Come to an agreement between us and you: that we shall worship none but Allah (The God), and that we shall ascribe no partners unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside Allah. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto Him).
Old Testament of Bible:
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD (Deuteronomy 6:4)
Remarks: From Adam to Moses, no Prophet taught his nation to believe in Trinity (Concept of God i.e. basic requirement of salvation), but on ONE God. Either Trinity was not a basic requirement of salvation to be taught by prophets, or Christians must reject Old Testament.
New Testament of Bible:
“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord.” Mark 12:29
Remarks: The words “our God” indicate that Jesus (May he be blessed forever) had a higher God over him, a stronger God than him. Jesus (May he be blessed forever) didn’t say “your God,” he said “our God” which includes Jesus (May he be blessed forever) as the creation of God.
Surah/Chapter 005 – Al-Mâ’idah. Verse 72-75.
They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah (The God) is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah (himself) said: O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Lo! whoso ascribeth partners unto Allah, for him Allah hath forbidden paradise. His abode is the Fire. For evil-doers there will be no helpers. They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah (The God) is the third of THREE; when there is no Allah save the ONE Allah. If they desist not from so saying a painful doom will fall on those of them who disbelieve. Will they not rather turn unto Allah and seek forgiveness of Him? For Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) had passed away before him. And his mother was a saintly woman. And they both used to eat (earthly) food. See how We make the revelations clear for them, and see how they are turned away!
Remarks: Bible and Quran verify each other here on PURE MONOTHEISM. Trinity term and Trinity definition (Father is full and complete God, Son is full and complete God, Holy Spirit is full and complete God but these are not three gods, but one God), never spoken and heard by Jesus and Prophets, but invented in 4th century is badly beaten by Mathematics as shown above.
Unitarian Christians have identified it and are separated from Trinitarian Christians.
5-ROB:
There are many things in nature that are one which we experience in three The sun as a heavenly body, as light, as heat it all in its totality both one and three at the same time. Should we be surprised that we see in nature a reflection of it creator.
5-MUSHTAQ:
Quran: Surah/Chapter 014 – Ibrahîm. Verse 52.
This is a clear message for mankind in order that they may be warned thereby, and that they may know that He is only ONE GOD, and that men of understanding may take heed.
I have following THREE answers: (Let me see do you work from a prepared script? And can you supply three responses corresponding to my three answers in a genuine approach?)
Answer 1: (Pairs reject Christian Trinity) (Ans14)
There are many things in nature that are one which we experience in two (for example light and darkens, male and female, positive charge and negative charge, north pole and south pole, big and small, heavy and light, tall and short, hot and cold, high and low, etc.) Does this mean that there are only two persons in God? OR in Rainbow there are seven colors originating from same one white light; Does it prove/indicate there are seven persons in God? If not, then how can you claim phenomena of three are proofs/indication of three persons in God?
Answer 2: (Sun rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans15)
Sun is an incorrect example of Trinity. If you compare Sun with Trinity formula, then it becomes;
One Sun=One God
Heavenly body + Light + Heat =Three persons
Let’s revise basic requirement of salvation i.e. the concept of God i.e. Trinity
“Father is full and complete God, Son is full and complete God, Holy Spirit is full and complete God, but these are not three gods, but One full and complete God”.
Now translate it to Sun example:
Heavenly body is full and complete Sun, Light is full and complete Sun, Heat is full and complete Sun, but these are not three suns, but one sun.
It is incorrect. So also Example of Sun as Trinity formula also incorrect.
Answer 3: (Electromagnetic spectrum rejects Christian Trinity) (Ans16)
Scientists know that light (visible electromagnetic spectrum) and heat (infra red spectrum) are not the only radiations emitted by Sun, it also emits Ultraviolet rays, X rays, gamma rays etc. So Does it prove that God has four five, six or even more persons?
6-ROB:
1a) Then don’t say two!
Many Islamic scholars claim that the Quran is an eternal book in heaven written in Arabic. This is deemed essential as there was never a time when Allah was without his word. But this is a great difficulty for Islam it presents two eternal entities God and his eternal written word; whereas Christianity has only one eternal entity the one God who exists in three personal modes. Jesus before His birth existed eternally as the Word of God begotten from the heart of the Father.
6-MUSHTAQ:
Quran: Surah/Chapter 016 – An-Nahl. Verse 51.
Allah hath said: Choose not two gods. There is only ONE GOD. So of Me, Me only, be in awe.
It is not difficulty for Islam; it is difficulty for Trinitarian Christians.
I have following SEVEN Answers (Let me see, Can you answer in a genuine way by providing seven responses corresponding to my seven answers? OR Are you unable to answer any thing not in your template?):
Answer 1: (Definition of Word is trouble to Christians) (Ans17)
Here you cannot misrepresent Word of God. Before talking about Word of God, you must be very clear that “Word of God” in Islam is totally different from “Word of God” believed in Christianity.
WORD OF GOD IN CHRISTIANITY: Part of God which was “with” God but also “fully” God and then became Blessed Jesus the Son of God.
WORD OF GOD IN ISLAM: God’s command “Be!” which resulted in Blessed Jesus’
conception in the womb of Mary without the need for a human father.
You see? It is difficulty for Christians, how to justify Word of God either as second part of God or second god? Trinitarian Christians cannot impose this trouble on Muslims, we have our own definition of word of God.
Answer 2: (Attributes of God are not God) (Ans18)
Quran represents attributes of God. The brief Sura Ikhlas about Pure Monotheism, with four lines, is standard of theology. It contains four line definition of true God.
112: 1. Say: He is Allah, the One!
112: 2. Allah, the eternally Besought of all!
112: 3. He begetteth not nor was begotten.
112: 4. And there is none comparable unto Him.
No Divine claimer OR alleged partner of God (Pharaoh, Ancient Kings, Rama, Krishna, Budha, Jesus (May he be blessed forever), idols, animals etc) can pass this four line test of God, but except true God.
So Is this Surah eternal? Are its meanings eternal? Yes, it describes attributes of God and attributes of God are eternal and this Surah being part of Quran it is also eternal. Therefore, there is no difficulty in Islam if Quran is eternal. Then where is difficulty? Difficulty is in your assumption that Attributes of God can be made partner of God or equal to God. For example, God is capable of hearing and seeing (though his hearing and seeing is not like humans, not like any other alive animal on earth), does this mean that hearing God is one God and Seeing God is second God? Answer is No. So Word of God, speaking God has an attribute, and this attribute is not a separate God or a person of God.
Answer 3: (Speech preventing partners of God was made partner of God) (Ans19)
The case of Christians on making Word of God as Partner of God can be understood easily in this way.
A Prophet comes near a Christian and asks “Do not make any partner of God, there is only One God”.
Now Christian is also to obey the Prophet and also has to make a partner of God (Under strong cruel, religiously intolerant pagan influence who were in Government and power in first three centuries of Church History). How can a Christian accomplish this task? Christian will make partners of God the spoken words “Don’t make partner of God”. So Christian will claim Word of God or speech of God is partner of God, same speech which forbids making him any partner of God.
If speech of God is partner of God, then what prevents Christians from making vision and hearing of God as partner of God? What is distinction of Speech or Word of God over Vision and hearing of God?”
Answer 4: (Word can help Christians to be Polytheists) (Ans20)
Christians claim to believe in “Begotten word”, it is a big problem for Christianity that Jesus is himself “Word”, If Word is partner of God, then it is also violation of Trinity and partners of God may reach to millions with help of Word of God. Belief in Word of God as partner of God makes Christians practically polytheists, though they are unaware of consequences of making Word partner of God.
Seven problems faced by Christians due to Word are:
(i) Word also existed in past in “spoken” form from mouth of Jesus but also begotten by God at same time.
(ii) Word also exists in Printed Bibles, but also begotten by God at same time.
(iii) Word also exists in different versions of Bibles like 66 Protestant books and 73 catholic books by adding and deleting whole books of Bible, but also begotten by God at same time.
(iv) Word also exists in different versions of Bible like King James Versions VS Revised Standard versions by adding and deleting biblical verses in them, but also begotten by God at same time.
(v) Word also exists in different original Bibles like Hebrew Bible, Latin Bible, Aramaic Bible and Greece Bibles, but also begotten by God at same time.
(vi) Now Word also exists in form of recorded Biblical verses by different human voices of priests, but also begotten by God at same time.
(vii) If the Protestant Apocrypha (before Protestant Reformation) can rule over entire Christian World in disguise of true “Word of God”, then Is it possible that few centuries later, another Christian Council may declare any three Gospels (Word of God) Apocrypha to solve lots of internal contradictions and errors including 17 questions of Easter Challenge?
So Not even a Single Christian in the world can satisfy you on following five questions:
(i) What is Word of God?
(ii) How many are types of same Word of God?
(iii) Why does same Word of God is subjected to additions and deletions?
(iv) Which Word of God is eternal and which is not?
(v) Does God keep on begetting same Word again and again when new version of same Word of God is prepared on earth?
All are these problems to Christianity due to self contradictory Doctrine of Word of God:- Part of God which was “with” God but also “fully” God and then became Blessed Jesus the Son of God.
Answer 5: (Mary is Mother of 16.6% part of God) (Ans21)
Rob! You say “Jesus before His birth existed eternally as the Word of God begotten from the heart of the Father”. What? Then what was begotten from Virgin Mary? Are there two words of God? If you claim Mary is mother of Word of God, and Jesus is already eternally begotten from father, then there are two words of God.
On the other hand, if you claim Mary is not mother of Word of God, then Mary is mother of what? Is she mother of second part (human nature) of second part (Word) of God? Then mathematically she is mother of half of one third God i.e. Mary is mother of 1/6th part of God (Mother of 16.6% part of Triune God), which is incorrect, therefore Belief of Jesus being Word of God is also nonsense.
Answer -6: (Is God greater than Mother of God (Theotokos / Virgin Mary)?) (Ans22)
Theotokos (Mother of God) Contradicts Trinity
Trinity Corrupts Mother of God.
Rob! You say “Jesus before His birth existed eternally as the Word of God begotten from the heart of the Father”.
Let’s revise Christian and Muslim Definition of Jesus:
JESUS (May he be blessed forever) IN CHRISTIANITY: Second member of Triune God, Son of first part of Triune God (Son of father only, but not son of son & not son of holy spirit), and at the same time “fully” God in every respect.
JESUS (May he be blessed forever) IN ISLAM: A very elect and highly esteemed messenger of God with miracles. His mother was a saintly woman, gave birth to Jesus as Miracle on order (Word) of God. No Muslim is a Muslim if he does not believe this.
Al Quran: Surah/Chapter 005 – Al-Mâ’idah. Verse 75.
The Messiah, son of Mary (Jesus), was no other than a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) had passed away before him. And his mother (Mary) was a saintly woman. And they both used to eat (earthly) food. See how we make the revelations clear for them, and see how they are turned away!
I Corinthians 14:33 says: “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace…”
Trinity doctrine made by men create confusion.
Church of 325 badly dealt with “Is father greater than Son in age?” (Ans23)
In my last article “Solution to Easter Challenge in light of History”, we have seen how badly Church resolved Arius Challenge “Is Father greater than Son in age?” We saw how Constantine deceived the Christians, made Church fool to make it believe father and son are equal in age and at his death bed, Constantine himself accepted truth that father is greater than Son in age. But still to this day, Church follows blindly official deception approved by a non Christian and Unbaptized Emperor that father and son are “co-equal”.
Church of 431 also badly dealt with “Is Son greater than Mother?” (Ans24)
Now after treating question “Is father greater than Son in age?”, we turn to next question which is just one aspect of internal contradictions of Trinity.
“Is Son greater than Mother?”
Every man in this world, who has some part of wisdom in his brain will bear witness “No”, but these are Christians who again will not bear this witness in context of Theotokos and Trinity.
Eternal God can neither be born of a woman, nor can die on cross.
Who or what was born by Mary? Who or what died on cross?
Is Son greater than Mother?
Son of Mary was born and died on cross but Son of first *part of Triune God (*He is “full” God himself, BUT he is neither Son of himself, nor Son of Holy Spirit) always remained alive.
Son of Mary is younger than Mother of God (Theotokos/ Virgin Mary),
But Son of first part of Triune God is elder than Mother of God (Theotokos).
Although it solves problem of eternal God, but creates new problem of two Sons in Trinity??? !!!
Quran: Surah/Chapter 005 – Al-Mâ’idah. Verse 17.
They indeed have disbelieved who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of MARY. Say : Who then can do aught against Allah, if He had willed to destroy the Messiah son of MARY, and his mother and everyone on earth? Allah’s is the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them. He createth what He will. And Allah is Able to do all things.
Nestorius Challenge & Ephesus Council of 431 (Ans25)
Nestorius (386 – 450) was Archbishop of Constantinople from April 428 until August 431.
Nestorius argued that God as an eternal being could not have been born of a woman, therefore Nestorius suggested the title Christotokos (Mother of Christ) for Virgin Mary. He rejected long-used title of Theotokos, “Mother of God” because Mother is greater than Son in age, therefore, the Virgin Mary is greater than Christ in age.
Nestorius believed that no union between the human and divine was possible. If such a union of human and divine occurred, Nestorius believed that Christ could not truly be con-substantial with God and con-substantial with us because he would grow, mature, suffer and die (which Nestorius argued God cannot do) and also would possess the power of God that would separate him from being equal to humans.
Nestorius’ doctrine, Nestorianism, which emphasized the disunity between Christ’s human and divine natures, had brought him into conflict with other church leaders, most notably Cyril, Patriarch of Alexandria.
Sick of hot debates among Christians about “Is God greater than Mother of God?” the Emperor Theodosius II (401–450) was eventually induced to convoke a general church council, sited at Ephesus. Cyril (Enemy of Nestorius) took charge of the Council of Ephesus in 431, opening debate before the long-overdue contingent of Eastern bishops (supporters of Nestorius) from Antioch arrived.
A number of bishops, who were undecided between Nestorius and Cyril, did not want to give Cyril, as one party in the dispute, the right to chair the meeting and decide the agenda;
[McGuckin, p.60] however, they began to take Cyril’s side for various reasons. [McGuckin, p.60-65]
Despite three separate summons, Nestorius refused to acknowledge Cyril’s authority to stand in judgment of him and considered the opening of the council before the arrival of the Antiochene contingent as a “flagrant injustice” [Kelly, Joseph (2009) and Catholic Encyclopedia]
The 68 bishops who opposed the opening the council entered the church in protest, arriving with Count Candidian who declared that the assembly was ILLEGAL and must disperse [McGuckin, p.77-78] He urged Cyril to wait four more days for the Syrian delegation to arrive [Gibbon. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. p. 115]. However, since even the bishops opposed to opening of the council were now present, Cyril maneuvered Candidian by means of a ruse to read out the text of the Emperor’s decree of convocation, which the assembly then acclaimed as recognition of its own legality [McGuckin, p.79]
When John of Antioch and his Syrian bishops finally reached Ephesus five days after the council, they met with Candidian who informed them that Cyril had begun a council without them and had ratified Celestine’s conviction of Nestorius as a heretic. Angered at having undertaken such a long and arduous journey only to have been pre-empted by actions taken by
Cyril’s council, John and the Syrian bishops held their own Council with Candidian presiding. [McGuckin, p.59] & [J. B. Bury, pp.353]
This council condemned Cyril for espousing the Arian, Apollinarian and Eunomian heresies and condemned Memnon for inciting violence. The bishops at this council deposed both Cyril and Memnon. [Kelly, Joseph] Initially, the Roman emperor concurred with the actions of John’s council and condemned Cyril as heretic. But later the Emperor reversed his decision. What were the reasons?
Here is the answer:
Cyril was allowed to return after BRIBING various courtiers [John I., McEnerney (1998)] and then Nestorius was “officially” condemned by Emperor. Mary was “officially” declared as Theotokos (Mother of God).
Quran about style of such Council decision:
Quran: Surah/Chapter 009 – At-Taubah. Verse 31+34
They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their MONKS and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One God. There is no god save Him. Be He glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)! …
O ye who believe! there are indeed many among the priests and anchorites, who in Falsehood devour the substance of men and hinder (them) from the way of Allah. And there are those who bury gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah: announce unto them a most grievous penalty-
But the Church of the East never accepted condemnation of Nestorius. This led later to western Christians giving the name Nestorian Church to the Church of the East. Nestorian Church spread in east from Persia to as far as China and Mongolia. At time of invasion of Genghis Khan, these were Nestroian Christians who interacted with Mongol leaders in “interfaith dialogue”.
The present day representatives of Nestorian Christianity / Persian Church / Church of the East, are the Assyrian Church of the East, the Chaldean Syrian Church, the Ancient Church of the East, and the Chaldean Catholic Church. Nestorius himself retired to a monastery, always asserting his orthodoxy.
SEE NEXT
PART 3 OF 4
Answering Rob on Summary # 1 with Jessica
LikeLike
PART 3 OF 4
Answering Rob on Summary # 1 with Jessica
10 REASONS OF INJUSTICE IN EPHESUS COUNCIL OF 431: (Ans26)
The Church Council of Ephesus 431 thus very badly handled Nestorius Challenge. The problem “Is Son greater than Mother?” OR “Is God greater than Mother of God?” was solved in non-logical & unjust way. Historians have pointed out about 10 occasions, where requirements of justice were violated to reach to a biased decision already decided by one of the party in dispute.
These 10 opportunities of killing Justice are explained below as:
1.Cyril (Enemy of Nestorius) took charge of the Council.
Remarks: For Justice, A Judge is always from a neutral party. Ask from yourself, if you are in a conflict with a person, then is it justice to nominate your opponent a Judge?
2. Bishops, who were undecided between Nestorius and Cyril, did not want to give Cyril, as one party in the dispute, the right to chair the meeting and decide the agenda.
Remarks: Participants of Council were already aware of nature of expected decision. Ask from yourself, if you are in a dispute with other party, and same party is nominated a Judge, then will it be something favorite for your supporters?
3. Nestorius was correct in refusing to acknowledge Cyril’s authority to stand in judgment of him
Remarks: Everyone will refuse to accept his enemy as Judge in court. Ask from yourself, if you refuse to accept your enemy as a Judge in court, will you be justified to do so?
4. Opening of the council before the arrival of the Antiochene contingent as a “flagrant injustice”
Remarks: Cyril didn’t want the opportunity to opponent bishops to present their view point, therefore, he opened council to make decision of his own. Ask from yourself, if your enemy is chairing as Judge, and he also starts court proceeding without waiting for arrival of your lawyer, then will you not protest as “flagrant injustice”?
5. The 68 bishops who opposed the opening the council entered the church in protest, arriving with Count Candidian who declared that the assembly was illegal and must disperse.
Remarks: This Council was declared illegal and thus it is a controversial Council, (Not at all a unanimously Council with “careful” considerations of Church) due to deceptions to hide Justice. Ask from yourself, if your 68 supporters enter court protesting the start of court proceedings without wait for arrival of your lawyer, then will you not declare that “Assembly was illegal and must disperse?”
6. Count Candidian urged Cyril to wait four more days for the Syrian delegation to arrive, but Cyril refused.
Remarks: Justice was willingly killed by Cyril. Ask from yourself, when your enemy is judge and he also refuses to wait for arrival of your supporter lawyers, then will you praise your Judge for putting justice?
7. Cyril maneuvered Candidian by means of a ruse to read out the text of the Emperor’s decree of convocation, which the assembly then acclaimed as recognition of its own legality.
Remarks: The Council was of course called by Emperor, and was already legal. Cyril used decree of emperor to justify his effort of stopping Nestorian priests appearing in Council. Ask yourself, if you are fighting your case in an official court whose building and infra structure was constructed by government, and your enemy judge starts proceeding without waiting for your lawyers party, by claim that court is established by government o take decisions, then is it justice with you?
8. Council of John condemned Cyril for espousing the Arian, Apollinarian and Eunomian heresies.
Remarks: Again another action that makes this Council a controversial council of Christian World. Now your supporter party of lawyers helds his own court and condemns your enemy Judge (to clear way for a neutral Judge), then is it a rightful act in your eyes?
9. Roman emperor concurred with the actions of John’s council and condemned Cyril as heretic.
Remarks: Another action that shows that original decisions of Council were different than those accepted by Christian World. Ask yourself, if government supports your decision keeping in view all circumstances above, then is it not victory of truth?
10. Cyril bribed various courtiers and they convinced Emperor to condemn Nestorius and declare Mary as“officially” Theotokos (Mother of God).
Remarks: This was “Saint” Cyril who used bribery to purchase Justice for himself. Quran points it in following way:
Quran: Surah/Chapter 005 – Al-Mâ’idah. Verse 44.
It was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard
have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah’s will, by the
rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah’s book, and
they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for
A miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are
(no better than) Unbelievers.
Quran: Surah/Chapter 002 – Al-Baqarah. Verse 79.
Therefore woe be unto those who WRITE the Scripture with their hands and then say, “This is from Allah,” that they may purchase a small gain therewith. Woe unto them for that their hands have written, and woe unto them for that they earn thereby.
REFERENCES:
[1] Anthony McGuckin, Saint Cyril of Alexandria and the Christological Controversy (St. Vladimir Seminary Press ISBN 978-0-88141-259-8), p. 12)
[2] J. B. Bury (1958). History of the later Roman Empire from the death of Theodosius I to the death of Justinian, Courier Dover Publications. ISBN 978-0-486-20398-0.
[3] Kelly, Joseph (2009). The ecumenical councils of the Catholic Church: a history. Liturgical Press.
[4] John I., McEnerney (1998). St. Cyril of Alexandria Letters 51-110. Fathers of the Church Series 77. Catholic University of America Press. p. 151. ISBN 978-0-8132-1514-3.
[5] Catholic Encyclopedia: Ephesus, Council of
Answer 7: (Due to historical trend, Church may declare Mother, wife, daughter & sister of God) (Ans27)
Rob! You say “Jesus before His birth existed eternally as the Word of God begotten from the heart of the Father”.
Muslims believe that Mary was a noble women who saved her chastity, and gave miraculous birth to Prophet Jesus. But what nonsense WAS Christian concept of Mary? And what nonsense IS the Christian concept of Mary?
It is a careful topic as Blessed Mary is honored and respectable to both Christians and Muslims. Therefore, I shall describe it in two parts. In first part, I shall show corruptions done by Church & Christians over blessed Mary over a period of centuries, in second part, I shall show future perspective that can be accepted by Church in few years / centuries as mother, wife, daughter & sister of God.
Part 1: Marian doctrines of the Catholic Church:
There is significant diversity in the Marian doctrines accepted by various Christian churches. The key Marian doctrines held in Christianity are Mother of God, Virgin birth of Jesus, Dormition, Assumption, Immaculate Conception and Perpetual Virginity. The acceptance of these Marian doctrines by Church over the course of History (Or in other words invention of these doctrines over a period of centuries) can be summarized as follows:
Doctrine Virgin birth of Jesus (Invented in 325):
It states that Mary conceived Jesus by action of the Holy Spirit while remaining a virgin.
Church action: First Council of Nicaea, 325
Accepted by: Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, Protestants
Doctrine Mother of God (Invented in 431):
It holds that Mary, as mother of Jesus is therefore Theotokos (God-bearer), or Mother of God.
Church action: First Council of Ephesus, 431
Accepted by: Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists
Doctrine Perpetual Virginity (Invented in 533):
It holds that Mary remained a virgin all her life, even after the act of giving birth to Jesus.
Church action: Council of Constantinople, 533 Smalcald Articles, 1537
Accepted by: Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, some Anglicans, some Lutherans, Martin Luther.
Doctrine Immaculate Conception (Invented in 1854):
It states that Mary herself was conceived without original sin.
Church action: Ineffabilis Deus encyclical Pope Pius IX, 1854
Accepted by: Roman Catholics, some Anglicans, some Lutherans, early Martin Luther.
Doctrine Assumption of Mary (Invented in 1950):
It states that Mary was taken bodily into Heaven either at, or before, her death. (Dormition commemorates Mary’s “falling asleep” or natural death shortly before her Assumption).
Church action: Munificentissimus Deus encyclical Pope Pius XII, 1950
Accepted by: Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, some Anglicans, some Lutherans
So we have seen that Church has been taking years and even centuries in inventing various beliefs about “Mother of God.”. Keeping in view this historical record or trend of Church, no wonder if few years later or few centuries later, same Church declares same Mary as Mother, Wide, Daughter and Sister of God four in one and one in four i.e. a Teraid. If Word Trinity & its definition (Father is full and complete God, Son is full and complete God, Holy Spirit is full and complete God, but these are not three gods, but one God) never spoken and heard by Jesus and Prophets can be acceptable to Christians after centuries, then word Tetraid and its definition (outlined below) never spoken and heard by Jesus and Prophets should also be acceptable to Christians using same Philosophy of Trinity.
Part 2: Mother of God, Wife of God, Daughter of God and Sister of God is one and same.
Christians claim that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are Three Persons of the SAME GOD.
If Jesus and the Holy Ghost are God, if the Trinity is valid, then Jesus’ relationship to Mary is utterly paradoxical:
(1) If Jesus was born of Mary, Mary was MOTHER OF GOD;
(2) Mary “being with child by the Holy Ghost,” and Father, Son and Holy Ghost being one, Mary was WIFE OF GOD;
If God is Father and He has a Son and a Son has a mother then that makes God his biological Father (GOD FORBID)
Remember Christians do not claim MADE but claim “BEGOTTEN”, to beget is an animal act, (GOD FORBID).
(3) God, being the Father of all mankind, and God and Christ being one, Mary was DAUGHTER OF GOD.
(4) Mary, being the daughter of God, and Jesus being the Son of God, Mary was SISTER OF GOD
Mother of God, Wife of God, Daughter of God, Sister of God is one and same !!! God forbid !!!
We have seen consequences of Trinity and Theotokos the unavoidable logical consequences of ideas having internal contradictions like Trinity. Trinity is a masterpiece of internal contradictions.
So what is the truth about Jesus and his great mother Mary? It is not Trinity VS Theotokos, truth is not with Church which is expert in inventing beliefs about blessed Mary over a period of centuries, (and Church may invent new beliefs at any time or in coming centuries about Mary). The unchanging and constant truth about blessed Mary is in Holy Quran:
Quran: Surah/Chapter 003 – Al-Imrân. Verse 42-43
And when the angels said: O MARY! Lo! Allah hath chosen thee and made thee pure, and hath preferred thee above (all) the women of creation. O MARY! Be obedient to thy Lord, prostrate thyself and bow with those who bow (in worship).
Quran: Surah/Chapter 003 – Al-Imrân. Verse 45.
(And remember) when the angels said: O MARY! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a word from Him, whose name is the Messiah, Jesus, son of MARY, illustrious in the world and the Hereafter, and one of those brought near (unto Allah).
Quran: Surah/Chapter 066 – At-Tahrîm. Verse 12.
And MARY, daughter of Imran, whose body was chaste, there for We breathed therein something of Our Spirit. And she put faith in the words of her Lord and His Scriptures, and was of the obedient.
Quran: Surah/Chapter 023 – Al-Mu’minûn. Verse 50.
And We made the son of MARY and his mother a portent, and We gave them refuge on a height, a place of flocks and water springs.
Whose belief is nonsense and whose is rational?
Whose belief is ethical and spiritual and whose belief is disgusting?
Your decision!
7-ROB:
6) Truth is established from holy books – which was what the Fathers of the church did!
However for a Muslim I am of the opinion that to establish a concept as truth from the original Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostolic scriptures would be far more convincing for you. This is what the notes I sent you pursue.
7-MUSHTAQ:
Surah/Chapter 004 – An-Nisâ. Verse 163.
Lo! We inspire thee as We inspired Noah and the PROPHETS after him, as We inspired Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and Jesus and Job and Jonah and Aaron and Solomon, and as we imparted unto David the Psalms;
I have following answers:
Answer 1: (Ans28)
Why do you use term “Fathers of the church”? it is contradiction to order by Jesus.
Jesus said, “Call no man your father on earth, for there is only one who is your father which art in heaven. (Matthew 23:9)
Answer 2: (Ans29)
You can get help from your notes in responding here and paste its parts where appropriate. This response has already become long so you may deal your notes separately after responding here this current post at hand. It will make our dialogue less complex and will save time for both of us.
Answer 3: (Ans30)
I am writing here for a dialogue, I am not writing here review of your 29 pages long book. You need to learn difference between Dialogue and review of a book. Dialogue is exchange of Question and answers. A Critical review describe and evaluate the book, in terms of accepted literary and historical standards, and supports this evaluation with evidence from the text. The descriptive review of a book gives the essential information about a book. This is done with description and exposition, by stating the perceived aims and purposes of the author, and by quoting striking passages from the text. So we can see that a book review is a form of literary criticism in which a book is analyzed based on content, style, and merit, but a dialogue is a mutual exchange of questions and answers in which contributors don’t read book, but read mind of other.
8-ROB:
It is not that I object to the concepts of the fathers of the Christian church but that I personally return to the same source material used by them in establishing the truth of the ‘trinity’ concept. This does open up another line of enquiry which is that of the evidence for the authenticity of the Christian scriptures. I am aware of the Islamic contention that they have been altered but consider your case totally without grounds.
The facts are clear that the original Christian scriptures penned by the apostles and their intimate associates reveal that there is God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
The categories of scriptural evidence for the three modes of God need to be searched out throughout scripture and some of these are given below being the majority of the contents page of my notes (previously sent), which supply many more texts.
8-MUSHTAQ: (Ans31)
Surah/Chapter 005 – Al-Mâ’idah. Verse 72-75.
They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah (himself) said: O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Lo! whoso ascribeth partners unto Allah, for him Allah hath forbidden paradise. His abode is the Fire. For evil-doers there will be no helpers. They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of THREE; when there is no Allah save the One Allah. If they desist not from so saying a painful doom will fall on those of them who disbelieve. Will they not rather turn unto Allah and seek forgiveness of Him? For Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) had passed away before him. And his mother was a saintly woman. And they both used to eat (earthly) food. See how We make the revelations clear for them, and see how they are turned away!
1 John Ch 5 Verse 7 is one proof that Scriptures were changed by Christians. I already have detailed answers “Re: Dialogue with a Muslim friend: early Fathers” so no need to repeat it here.
It is obvious that my response on your reply to Summary # 1 has already become too much long and now you may take help from your notes in answering my this long response.
9-ROB:
(A mode is a way of being as H20 is one molecule but has three ways of existing as that molecule steam, water and ice)
9-MUSHTAQ:
Quran: Surah/Chapter 007 – Al-A’râf. Verse 50.
And the dwellers of the Fire cry out unto the dwellers of the Garden; Pour on us some WATER or some of that where with Allah hath provided you. They say: Lo! Allah hath forbidden both to disbelievers (in His guidance),
I have FOUR Answers. (Let me see can you supply 4 answers corresponding to these 4 points?):
Answer 1: (4 & 5 in nature reject Christian Trinity) (Ans32)
In nature, many things are found as four, they are the proof of 4 persons in God? e.g. four sides of a square, 4 sides of rectangle, 4 legs of cows, 4 legs of cats, 4 legs of sheep, 4 legs of horse, 4 forces in nature as gravitational, electromagnetic, weak nuclear and strong nuclear force etc?
We have five fingers in both hands and both feet, as billions of people have five fingers in their hands and feet, does it mean there are five persons in God?
Answer to above questions is No. Same is also true for water if it exists in three states, it not proof/indication of three persons in God.
Answer 2: (Daily seen states of matter reject Christian Trinity) (Ans33)
Matter has three states solid, liquid gas, Is it proof of three persons in God?
But modern science has discovered fourth state of matter also exists and is seen in everyday life, it is “Plasma”, Sun and stars are made of plasma, Is it proof of fourth person in God? Answer is No. Therefore, three states of matter solid liquid gas are not proofs/indication of three persons in one God.
Plasma is one of the four fundamental states of matter, the others being solid, liquid, and gas. It comprises the major component of the Sun. The presence of a non-negligible number of charge carriers makes the plasma electrically conductive so that it responds strongly to electromagnetic fields. Plasma, therefore, has properties quite unlike those of solids, liquids, or gases and is considered a distinct state of matter. Like gas, plasma does not have a definite shape or a definite volume unless enclosed in a container; unlike gas, under the influence of a magnetic field, it may form structures such as filaments, beams and double layers. Some common plasmas are found in stars and neon signs. In the universe, plasma is the most common state of matter for ordinary matter, most of which is in the rarefied intergalactic plasma (particularly intracluster medium) and in stars. Much of the understanding of plasmas has come from the pursuit of controlled nuclear fusion and fusion power, for which plasma physics provides the scientific basis.
Answer 3: (States of matter in Advanced Science reject Christian Trinity) (Ans34)
Trinitarian Christians claim that three forms of matter solid, liquid and gas are proof/indication of three persons in One God. Advanced Science rejects this claim.
States of matter in physics are the distinct forms that different phases of matter take on. Four states of matter are observable in everyday life: solid, liquid, gas, and plasma. Many other states are known such as Bose–Einstein condensates and neutron-degenerate matter but these only occur in extreme situations such as ultra cold or ultra dense matter. Other states, such as quark-gluon plasmas, are believed to be possible but remain theoretical for now. There are also many other theoretical states of matter which are of interest to scientists.
Historically, the distinction is made based on qualitative differences in properties. Matter in the solid state maintains a fixed volume and shape, with component particles (atoms, molecules or ions) close together and fixed into place. Matter in the liquid state maintains a fixed volume, but has a variable shape that adapts to fit its container. Its particles are still close together but move freely. Matter in the gaseous state has both variable volume and shape, adapting both to fit its container. Its particles are neither close together nor fixed in place. Matter in the plasma state has variable volume and shape, but as well as neutral atoms, it contains a significant number of ions and electrons, both of which can move around freely. Plasma is the most common form of visible matter in the universe.
Answer 4: (Three states of water reject Christian Trinity) (Ans35)
After addressing Solid liquid and gas in detail as explained above, now we turn specifically to Water, many times quoted by Christians as “proof/indication” of Trinity in nature.
Water is not a valid example of Trinity. One and same water cannot exist at same time in three states of solid, liquid and gas, but in Trinity, One and same God exists at same time in three persons father, son and holy spirit.
We know that water freezes below temperature 0 C. it is in liquid form in temperature range 0 C to 100 C, and at 100 C on supplying more heat, it turns to steam. Same is valid for all molecules of water i.e. H2O.
Water could be a valid and acceptable example of Trinity, if Christians could define Trinity as “Father is convertible to Son, Son is convertible to Holy Spirit and Holy Spirit is convertible to Father. There is Only One God, but only one person can exist in one time.”
10-ROB:
The Name of God in the Old & New Testaments
THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST
The Deity of Christ in the Old Testament
God Has an Image or Likeness
Old Testament Appearances of God (frequently in the image of a man) Gen. 16:7-13, 17:1-3, 18: 1-3, 13, 17, 20-26, 33, 19:I, 24-27. 32: 24-30, Hosea 12:2-5; Exodus 3:2-6, 7, 11-18; Numbers 22:21-35; Joshua 5:13-15 & 6:1-2; Judges 6:11-24; 13:3 & 18-22; Isaiah 6:1
10-MUSHTAQ:
Quran: Surah/Chapter 059 – Al-Hashr. Verse 22-24.
He is Allah, than Whom there is no other Allah, the Knower of the Invisible and the Visible. He is the Beneficent, Merciful. He is Allah, than Whom there is no other Allah, the Sovereign Lord, the Holy One, Peace, the Keeper of Faith, the Guardian, the Majestic, the Compeller, the Superb. Glorified be Allah from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him). He is Allah, the Creator, the Shaper out of naught, the Fashioner. His are the most BEAUTIFUL NAMES. All that is in the heavens and the earth glorifieth Him, and He is the Mighty, the Wise.
I have following TWO Answers.
Answer 1: (Ans36)
I wanted to discuss one by one each biblical verse and present comments on each and every verse as I have already shown in my dialogue with Madam Jessica, since in principle, I am convinced of “full and sequential dialogue”, however, if other behaves as “partial and random dialogue”, then I am also free to choose same style of answering.
It is sad that you deleted all Quranic verses from my Summary # 1 (Summary points 1~11) without any comments. In this case, I am also free to delete Biblical verses from your reply without any comments.
In the future dialogue, if you will delete again Quranic verses from your reply, I shall also be free to delete biblical verses from your reply.
Answer 2: (Ans37)
Many of these Biblical verses, I have already give comments in my dialogue with Madam Jessica. For example: Genesis 16:7-14, Hosea 12:3-4, Exodus 3, 13:21, Numbers 22:21-41, Judges 2:1-5, 6:7-24, 13:3-22 etc.
11-ROB:
Jesus Is The Angel of The LORD
Titles of Yahweh Ascribed To Jesus
Divine Offices of Yahweh Ascribed To Jesus: Father, Creator, Savior, Judge, Redeemer
11-MUSHTAQ:
Surah/Chapter 003 – Al-Imrân. Verse 79-80.
It is not (possible) for any human being unto whom Allah had given the Scripture and wisdom and the prophethood that he should afterwards have said unto mankind: Be slaves of me instead of Allah; but (what he said was): Be ye faithful servants of the Lord by virtue of your constant teaching of the Scripture and of your constant study thereof.
And he commanded you not that ye should take the angels and the PROPHETS for lords. Would he command you to disbelieve after ye had surrendered (to Allah)?
I have following THREE answers:
Answer 1: (God Man Angel Trinity?) (Ans38)
Christians believe Jesus was full God and full man at same time. i.e. Jesus has two parts/two natures/two modes/two forms. Is he also an angel in addition to being full God and full man?
Is it a heretic Trinity forged by Rob? Trinity within Trinity?
Three in one and one in three?
Full God + Full Man + Full Angel=One Jesus.
Answer 2: (It is an error to identify Jesus with name of Yahweh) (Ans39)
You wrote: “Titles of Yahweh Ascribed To Jesus”.
Fine! Now there are only two options and no third way! (Show me third option if you believe)
Yahweh and Jesus are two different names of same body, or they not.
In first case, if Yahweh and Jesus are two different names of same body, then Jesus is not second member of Triune God but he is himself Triune God, Jesus is the total Sum of father, son and Holy Spirit and when Jesus died, Father and Holy Spirit also died on cross. No need to explain that it is the end of Trinity, therefore, this first case contradicts Trinity.
Now lets see second case, Yahweh and Jesus are NOT two different names of same body. In this case they both are separate bodies and it is an error to identify Jesus with name of Yahweh. It contradicts your claim. This error is similar to identify Holy Spirit in the name of Virgin Mary.
Answer 3: (Ans40)
You wrote: “Divine Offices of Yahweh Ascribed To Jesus: Father, Creator, Savior, Judge, Redeemer”.
Jesus is “Father”. Either this father is first member of Triune God or an ordinary father. Both cases are incorrect. First case means that when Jesus died on cross, father also died on cross. In second case, if it is an ordinary father, then again incorrect because Jesus was not married and “still unmarried”, he is not father of a child.
Jesus is creator is incorrect. He or his second part (human nature/human part/human form) was created in the womb of virgin Mary.
Jesus is Savior is correct. He was a Prophet and every prophet comes as a savior, to save his nations from sins and asking them to obey God.
Jesus is Judge is correct. He was a Prophet and every prophet comes as a Judge of his nation, to decide in conflicts occurring his nation.
Jesus is Redeemer is incorrect in Christian sense of Redemption on cross. He was full God and full man as considered by Christians. Now full God cannot die, therefore, death of Jesus was ordinary death of a mortal man; it was not an extra ordinary death of an immortal God. Daily hundreds of mortal men die on earth, and so far billions of mortal men have died on earth. There is nothing special in death of an ordinary mortal man on cross and there is nothing great in alleged death of Jesus on cross. Death of an ordinary mortal man has not greatness of sacrifice of second member of Triune God and also full and complete God in every respect.
SEE NEXT
PART 4 OF 4
Answering Rob on Summary # 1 with Jessica
LikeLike
PART 4 OF 4
Answering Rob on Summary # 1 with Jessica
12-ROB:
Divine Characteristics of Yahweh Ascribed To Blessed Jesus
The Works or Activities of Yahweh Are Ascribed To Blessed Jesus
Texts About Yahweh Ascribed To Blessed Jesus
12-MUSHTAQ: (Miracles of Blessed Jesus were also preformed by Previous Prophets)
Quran: Surah/Chapter 003 – Al-Imrân. Verse 184.
And if they deny thee, even so did they deny messengers who were before thee, who came with MIRACLES and with the Psalms and with the Scripture giving light.
Lets see these “Divine Characteristics, Works or Activities” of Yahweh as Ascribed To
Blessed Jesus by Christians. We shall see from Biblical context in following seven matters:
Miracles of Blessed Jesus were also preformed by Previous Prophets: (Ans41)
(i) But Blessed Jesus could do miracles. He fed five thousand people with only five loaves and two fishes:
Elisha and Elijah did the same miracle. Elisha fed hundreds of people with twenty barley loaves and a few ears of corn (II Kings 4:44): “So he set it before them and they did eat, and left thereof, according to the word of the Lord.” Elisha secured the increase of a widow’s oil and he said to her (II Kings 4:7): “Go, sell the oil, and pay thy debt, and live thou and thy children on the rest.” See also I Kings 17:16: “And the barrel of meal wasted not, neither did the cruse of oil fail, according to the word of the Lord, which He spake by Elijah.” Also I Kings. 17:6: “And the ravens brought him (Elijah) bread and flesh in the morning, bread and flesh in the evening; and he drank of the brook.”
But Blessed Jesus could heal leprosy.
Elisha told Naaman who was a leper to wash in the Jordan river (II Kings 5:14): “Then went he (Naaman) down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God (Elisha) and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.”
(ii) But Blessed Jesus could cause a blind man to see again:
Elisha did the same: (II Kings 6:17): “And Elisha prayed, and said, Lord, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the Lord opened the eyes of the young man and he saw . . .” (II Kings 6:20): “And it came to pass, when they were come into Samaria, that Elisha said, “Lord! Open the eyes of these men, that they may see.” And the Lord opened their eyes, and they saw; and behold, they were in the midst of Samaria.”
Elisha also caused blindness (II Kings 6:18): “And when they came down to him, Elisha prayed unto the Lord, and said, Smite this people, I pray thee, with blindness. And He smote them with blindness according to the word of Elisha.”
Blessed Jesus could raise the dead.
Compare with Elijah (I Kings 17:22): “And the Lord heard the voice of Elijah, and the soul of the child came into him again, and he revived.” Compare also with Elisha (II Kings 4:34): “And he (Elisha) went up and lay upon the child, and put his mouth upon his mouth, and his eyes upon his eyes, and his hands upon his hands, and he stretched himself upon the child, and the flesh of the child waxed warm.” ie. he came alive.
Even the dead bones of Elisha could restore a dead body to life by touching it only (II Kings 13:21): “And it came to pass, as they were burying a man that behold, they spied a band of men, and they cast the man into the sepulchre of Elisha: and when the man was let down and touched the bones of Elisha, he revived and stood up on his feet.”
(iii) But Blessed Jesus walked upon the water:
Moses stretched out his arms over the sea (Exodus 14:22): “And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left.”
(iv) But Blessed Jesus could cast out devils:
Blessed Jesus himself admitted that other people could do it. (Matthew 12:27 and Luke 11:19): “And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? Therefore shall they be your judges.”
Also the disciples could cast out devils as Blessed Jesus said (Matthew 7:22): “Many will say to me on that day: Lord! Lord! Have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name cast out devils?
And in thy name done many wonderful works?”
Here is a warning to all the Christian Evangelists who say that they are doing miracles in the name of Blessed Jesus. Blessed Jesus himself will tell them:
“Get away from me, I don’t even know you!” Blessed Jesus will not tell the Muslims, Hindus and Jews to get away from him, but these “Christians” who profess to follow Blessed Jesus (pbuh) and who are bamboozling the people by claiming to do miracles in his name! The Qur’an records the conversation that will take place between Allah and Blessed Jesus on the Day of judgment, regarding the false belief of his divinity, and his refutation of those allegations. Read the Qur’an: Chapter 5.verses 116-119).
(v)Even false prophets would do wonders as prophesied by Blessed Jesus. (Matthew 24:24) “For there shall arise many false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that if it were possible they shall deceive the very elect.”
(vi) But Elijah and Elisha did wonders through praying to the Lord:
Blessed Jesus also did miracles by beseeching GOD as he himself said (John 5:30): “I can of mine own self do nothing… “ And (Luke 11:20): “But I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the Kingdom of God is come upon you.” Before every miracle that Blessed Jesus (pbuh) performed he always prayed to God.
Read the Bible and see for yourself if this is not the case. All miracles performed by Blessed Jesus had been done by previous prophets, disciples, and even unbelievers.
(vii) On the other hand, Blessed Jesus could do no mighty work where there was unbelief as stated in (Mark 6:5& 6) “And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them. And he marveled because of their unbelief. And he went around about the villages, teaching.”
13-ROB:
Spiritual Service Is Exclusively For Yahweh, But Is Rendered To Blessed Jesus Christ, The Messiah is Identified as God in The Old Testament
Old Testament Worship to Christ (Blessed Jesus) Implies That He is God
They Will Look on ‘Me’ (i.e. in context ‘Me’ is God) Whom They Have Pierced – who was pierced?
Blessed Jesus Taught His Disciples What ALL The OT Scriptures Said About Himself
The Deity of Blessed Jesus in the New Testament
Blessed Jesus Personal Claims to Deity (I Am = Yahweh) – Blessed Jesus Is God & He is Called God – Blessed Jesus Is Lord – ‘Greek Kurios’
Divine Titles of Blessed Jesus
13-MUSHTAQ:
(Blessed Jesus was not a divine figure) (Ans42)
Quran: Surah/Chapter 004 – An-Nisâ. Verse 48.
Lo! Allah forgiveth not that a PARTNER should be ascribed unto Him. He forgiveth (all) save that to whom He will. Whoso ascribeth PARTNERs to Allah, he hath indeed invented a tremendous sin.
Here you are telling about Divinity of Blessed Jesus. It is incorrect as explained below:
1. God is IMMORTAL. Can He be born by a mortal woman who died?
1. Blessed Jesus used to sleep, while God never sleeps (Psalm 121:4): “Behold, He that keepeth Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep.” Qur’an: 2:v255. “Neither slumber nor sleep over taketh Him.” God is all-powerful so how could people spit on him and crucify him as alleged?
2. How could Blessed Jesus be God if he worshiped God, as any other mortal does? (Luke 5:16) “And he withdrew himself into the wilderness, and prayed.”
3. (Luke 4:1-13) “Satan tempted Blessed Jesus for forty days” but in James 1:13 is said: “… for God cannot be tempted with evil…”
How can Blessed Jesus be God, then? We can rationalize further and ask: If you believe in the Trinity, then did all three die (including God) on the cross when this alleged crucifixion took place? The Bible, Torah and the Qur’an state again and again that God is ever living and cannot die. Furthermore, why must GOD, Blessed Jesus and the Holy Spirit go to hell after dying? If God died, then who was in control of the entire universe during that time? You can realize that all these questions lead to illogical conclusions because we all know that GOD cannot die, and neither will he put HIMSELF and Blessed Jesus and the Holy Spirit into hell. He is Merciful and just.
Here on earth no innocent person will be put to death or into prison. Only the guilty are punished. So how can it be possible that God will do injustice to Himself, Blessed Jesus & the Holy Ghost who are all innocent? It doesn’t make sense and it is illogical to believe in a Trinity of gods.
14-ROB:
Blessed Jesus is declared to be The Son of God by God, by His enemies, Jewish leaders accused Blessed Jesus of blasphemy for claiming equality with God/Son of God
14-MUSHTAQ:
Quran: Surah/Chapter 003 – Al-Imrân. Verse 64.
Say: O People of the Scripture. Come to an agreement between us and you: that we shall worship none but Allah, and that we shall ascribe no PARTNERs unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside Allah. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto Him).
I have two answers:
Answer 1: (Blessed Jesus is Son of What?) (Ans43)
In my Summary point 11 (Last point of Summary #1) and Summary point # 12 (first point of Summary # 2), I have shown that Son of God is an expired term after invention of Trinity. Blessed Jesus is Son of first part of Triune God because he is not Son of Himself and Holy Spirit is not second father in Trinity. If you reject Blessed Jesus is Son of first part of Triune God, it means you believe Blessed Jesus is Son of Triune God and therefore, Son of himself and also son of Holy Spirit.
By the way; “Blessed Jesus is Son of what?”
Answer 2: (Others were also called gods in Bible) (Ans44)
Rob! You wrote: “Jewish leaders accused Blessed Jesus of blasphemy for claiming equality with God/Son of God”. This interpretation is incorrect. Reasons are:
Others were called gods in Bible. God Almighty spoke to Moses and said, “Behold, I have made you a god to Pharaoh and out of him shall be thy prophet.” Furthermore, in Psalm 82:6 we find, “Ye are gods and all of you are the children of most high”. It shows that here in Bible when a person is called god, he is not actually God.
Similarly, one finds in 2 Corinthians 2:4 that the devil is called “the god of this world” . Everyone knows that devil is actually not god.
In John 19:31-33, Jews pick up stone to stone Blessed Jesus for blasphemy and for making himself “God”. Here Christians agree with Jews that Blessed Jesus did make such declaration, but he was entitled to it. Let’s hear what Blessed Jesus himself said. The jews said he blasphemed; the Christians said he didn’t because he was entitled to the claim. What did Blessed Jesus say?
Blessed Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?’ (John 10:34,35)
Was that blasphemous that because I said I am Son of God? In other words, I said nothing, because God has got sons by tons in Bible. Why are you trying to find fault with me? When I only said, I am the Son of God, when others are called “gods” in Bible?
15-ROB:
Worship is given to Blessed Jesus
Divine Characteristics Are Ascribed to Blessed Jesus
The Blood of God
The Deity & Personality of The Holy Spirit
The Trinitarian Formula
The Rock – an extended study of just one of Yahweh’s titles that is ascribed to Blessed Jesus
Verses Not In The Original Text Historical Contributors to Trinitarian Understanding & Current Foes of Trinitarianism
15-MUSHTAQ: (Blood of second part of second part of God)
Quran: Surah/Chapter 002 – Al-Baqarah. Verse 255.
Allah! There is no God save Him, the Alive, the ETERNAL. Neither slumber nor sleep overtaketh Him. Unto Him belongeth whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth. Who is he that intercedeth with Him save by His leave? He knoweth that which is in front of them and that which is behind them, while they encompass nothing of His knowledge save what He will. His throne includeth the heavens and the earth, and He is never weary of preserving them. He is the Sublime, the Tremendous.
I have already answered in detail above Divine Characteristics Are Ascribed to Blessed Jesus, so no need to repeat it.
Let see Blood of God in detail:
Blood of second part of second part of God: (Ans45)
Blood of God is blasphemy; God is eternal and cannot die.
God is alive of course, but his life is not like a human or like any animal with/without blood. God is one, unique and incomparable.
If from blood of God you mean blood of Blessed Jesus, then “Blood of God” is incorrect term. You must write “Blood of second part (human nature/human part/human form) of second part (Blessed Jesus) of God.”
Holy Spirit is third member of Triune God and also full and complete God, this Trinitarian definition of Holy Spirit is self contradictory as you can see. Christians can neither accept nor reject this definition because they know they are speaking lie against Holy Spirit.
Entire Trinity formula has internal contradiction
God+God+God= One God.
1+1+1=1
Rock is God’s title so what? God is beneficent, merciful, and then can any man be not beneficent and merciful? Rock has nothing to do with three parts of Triune God.
Christian world is united in belief of one God taught by Blessed Jesus and Prophets, but Christian world was divided and is divided due to man made confusion of Trrinity.
16-ROB:
7) Unitarians
You have questioned this by reference to Unitarians and Jehovah’s Witnesses (JWs). Such sects have always been an extreme minority just as there are unorthodox Islamic sects. They did not stem from the most eminent scholarship and the JWs have added words to the holly books that are nowhere found in the original text in order to make their case and hide this fact from their followers. JW will not / cannot substantiate the scholarship behind their New World Translation of the Bible. They cannot provide the translators names or qualifications. Try as I may I cannot get them to continue in dialogue with me when I present them with evidence of their faulty translations and request this information.
16-MUSHTAQ:
Surah/Chapter 005 – Al-Mâ’idah. Verse 73.
They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of THREE; when there is no God save the One God. If they desist not from so saying a painful doom will fall on those of them who disbelieve.
I have following THREE Answers:
Answer 1: (You corrupted & renamed summary point) (Ans46)
My Summary point # 7 is:
“7-Unitarian Christians are not Heretics”
My Summary point # 18 is:
“18-Christian world was & is divided due to man made confusion of Trinity”
You corrupted my Summary points # 7. You renamed it (retained same number 7), took some material from one point and mixed both of them together to confuse reader to make him false believe you have addressed both Summary points in one go.
My 7th Summary point is :
“7-Unitarian Christians are not Heretics”, I have not used name of any Christian sect in this article, neither Jehovah witness nor any other sect. I have proved in this summary point that Unitarians are true followers of Blessed Jesus and not heretics, you have not addressed those points.
18-Christian world was & is divided due to man made confusion of Trinity:
I am presenting this part for information /reference only to show that God is not author of confusion and all Christian world is united in belief of ONE God taught by Prophets & Blessed Jesus; but Christian world was divided and still is divided due to man made confusion of Trinity, here is a list of past and present Unitarian Christians, Jehovah’s Witnesses is just one of them.
Answer 2: (Trinity is man made confusion splitting Christian World in Past & Present) (Ans47)
I have not questioned this by explicitly reference to Jehovah’s Witnesses (JWs). Jehovah’s Witnesses type people have been remain present in every age of History, as I have shown in my Summary point # 18. The core argument is: “All Christian world is united in belief of ONE God taught by Prophets & Blessed Jesus; but Christian world was divided and still is divided due to man made confusion of Trinity.”
Answer 3: (Identity of Obsolete religion fits on Christianity) (Ans48)
Concept of God is basic requirement of salvation and if some nation is confused on it by various sects, it shows that religion has become obsolete.
All Islamic sects agree on Concept of God that God is ONE. Tell me name of any single Islamic sect that teaches God is not One. But All Christian sects don’t agree on Concept of God that God is One or Trinity? It is a big difference and therefore, you cannot compare Christian sects with Islamic sects.
Trinitarian Christians did not stem from the teachings of Blessed Jesus who was unaware of term Trinity and also its definition (Father is full and complete God, Son is full and complete God, Holy Spirit is full and complete God, but these are not three gods, but One full and complete God). He used Father in meanings of “Creator”, not in meanings of “first member of Triune God”.
Trinitarians have added words to the holy books (such as 1 John 5:7) that are nowhere found in the original text in order to make their case and hide this fact from their followers. Trinitarian Christians will not / cannot substantiate the scholarship behind their Trinitarian theologians. They cannot provide the Gospel’s chain of narrators and their qualifications.
17-ROB:
2) Majestic plural is not proof of Triune God
Here no doubt you are referring to the Old Testament name for God Elohim which is a plural form. You are correct it is not a proof it is only an indication that there may be something more about the nature of God than solitariness. The creation text that refer to GOD (Elohim) creating man however give further suggestion and evidence of something more that a solitary ‘Oneness’ of GOD. We read “Let us (plural) make man in our (plural) image (singular)”. Notice there is a plurality in the creation but a singularity of image – who is this image of God in which man is created? In the New Testament further revelation informs us that “Blessed Jesus is the image of the invisible God”.
Mushtaq the weakness in your case is that you have picked out just a few scriptural facts and texts. However to establish scriptural truth you need to harmonies the whole Biblical scripture and accept its teaching.
17-MUSHTAQ:
Quran: Surah/Chapter 095 – At-Tin. Verse 4.
Surely We CREATED MAN of the best stature
I have following FIVE Answers. (Let me see can you supply five answers corresponding to these five answers of mine?)
Answer 1: (Your answer is self contradictory) (Ans49)
What? Your answer is self contradictory? You on one hand, accept that:
“It is correct it is not a proof it is only an indication that there may be something more about the nature of God than solitariness.”
You don’t understand meaning of Majestic plural in spite of reading my article and accepting it here.
Answer 2: (You skipped Sultan of Oman & Queen Victoria to hide truth) (Ans50)
What your answer implies, is that Qaboos bin Said, Sultan of Oman is one person, but more than solitariness? Queen Victoria is not one person but due to Royal plural, she is something more than one person?
Ephraim, the son of Joseph (with plural noun like Elohim) in Bible is not one person but more than one person?
You neither understood my Summary point nor arguments behind original dialogue!
Answer 3: (Blessed Jesus image of invisible God is self contradictory claim) (Ans51)
New Testament claim “Blessed Jesus is the image of the invisible God” is self contradictory. Take example, Who can draw image of invisible Air? If you claim that one man has drawn image of invisible air, you will call him fool due to self contradictory claim, same is valid for claim “Blessed Jesus is the image of the invisible God”. It is self contradictory claim, like Trinity is self contradictory. 1+1+1=1.
Answer 4: (Harmonizing Bible rejects Trinity) (Ans52)
I have not picked out just a few scriptural facts and texts. I have harmonised the Biblical scripture to accept its teaching using my 25 Summary points and 5 Table of Contents. My response to you is outlined in this 6th Table of Contents. There is full detailed dialogue (between me and Madam Jessica) behind these Summary points and 5 Tables of Contents.
Read Summary #1 (Summary points 1~11) and Summary # 2 (Summary points 12~25). You will find harmonization instead of picking few verses from here and there.
Answer 5: Unitarian Christians rightly understood Father & Son in Bible (Ans53)
Rob! The weakness in your case is that you have picked out just a few scriptural verses mentioning Father, Son and Holy Spirit; you don’t read biblical verses in its context, whether Bible is calling Father in its context a “Creator” (as rightly understood by Unitarian Christians) or first member of Triune God and also full and complete God in every respect? Son as Second member of Triune God and also full and complete God in every respect? Or uses Son of God in meanings of “Loved Ones”?
However to establish scriptural truth you need to harmonies the whole Biblical scripture and accept its teaching. Read my Summary # 2 for brief, to the point info in this regard. (You are also welcome to ask questions on Summary # 2 to clarify its understandings)
18-ROB:
Metaphors of God are not proof of Triune God
Again you are correct when you speak of metaphors but it is a different matter when the Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostles speak of the appearances of GOD as a man and when the apostles attribute to Blessed Jesus the functions that belong solely to GOD (See appropriate scriptural categories above and in my notes)
18-MUSHTAQ: (Ans54)
Quran: Surah/Chapter 002 – Al-Baqarah. Verse 66.
And We made it an EXAMPLE to their own and to succeeding generations, and an admonition to the God fearing.
I have already discussed one by one, every verse presented by Madam Jessica, in detail which claim appearance of God. See my detailed reply part 1 and part 2 at Madam Jessica’s website. Summary # 1 and Summary # 2 is based on these parts, In Summaries, I have not discussed one by one each and every verse, for details, you need to read my remarks on each and every biblical verse, and if you think appropriate, then let me know and we can start dialogue from Dialogue Part 1 or Part 2 where Madam Jessica has left both part 1 and part 2 unanswered due to large complex size and to facilitate here I created 25 Summary points to divide Original Big dialogue in 25 parts and continue to reach at some results.
19-ROB:
4) Why does the Old Testament not teach the three – why is it insistent upon the one?
You ask why the three of God is not directly spoken of in the Old Testament (the scriptures of the Jews). I would compare this with the ‘abrogation’ in the Islamic tradition of scriptural understanding. This being the standard means of interpreting the Quran. If a revelation given to the prophet Mohamed changed an earlier revelation then the latter revelation is the superior.
When considering the concept of ‘trinity’ the facts are similar the New Testament trinity threeness concept is not an abrogation of the Old Testament Oneness concept but a development and clarification of that oneness as the unity of the tree modes of the one God. What the Old Testament implies the New Testament makes specific.
19-MUSHTAQ:
Surah/Chapter 004 – An-Nisâ. Verse 43.
O ye who believe! Draw not near unto prayer when ye are drunken, till ye know that which ye utter, nor when ye are polluted, save when journeying upon the road, till ye have bathed. And if ye be ill, or on a journey, or one of you COMEth from the closet, or ye have touched women, and ye and not water, than go to high clean soil and rub your faces and your hands (therewith). Lo! Allah is Benign, Forgiving.
I have following answers:
Answer 1: (Abrogation is not for Concept of God) (Ans55)
Abrogation is never carried out for basic requirement of salvation e.g Concept of God. In Islam, The Allah was one and remained one from start of revelation of Quran till end of revelation of Quran. Similarly Prophethood of Blessed Muhummad and Belief on Judgment day are also basic beliefs required for salvation and no abrogation is there.
Answer 2: (Why does Abrogation needed?) (Ans56)
It is needed for gradual transition for some (not all) teachings not as basic requirement of salvation. For example, drinking alcohol, wine is prohibited in Islam, it was not prohibited in one day, but first its demerits and disadvantages were taught to people, then later it was permanently forbidden. Drinking Wine is extremely Sinful act in Islam, but it is not among basic beliefs (Monotheism of Allah and Prophethood of Muhummad) required for salvation.
Answer 3: (Trinity cannot be justified by Abrogation) (Ans57)
In your case, Concept of God (Trinity) is basic belief required for salvation; therefore you cannot justify it by comparing it with Abrogation in Islam. If Concept of God is subjected to Abrogation, then it is corruption, not abrogation. God doesn’t change with time and Prophets of God are always fully aware of basic requirements of salvation i.e. Concept of God i.e. Monotheism, not Trinity i.e. Father is full and complete God,
Son is full and complete God, Holy Spirit is full and complete God, but these are not three gods, but One full and complete God.
20-ROB:
The nations of old had many Gods they were polytheistic and the Lord had to establish the truth of His Oneness before he could reveal That He was One in Three modes.
The church arrived at this understanding by careful consideration of the whole of scripture and you may confirm it by your own study.
20-MUSHTAQ:
Quran: Surah/Chapter 002 – Al-Baqarah. Verse 133.
Or were ye present when death came to Jacob, when he said unto his sons: What will ye worship after me? They said: We shall worship thy God, the God of thy fathers, Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac, ONE GOD, and unto Him we have surrendered.
I have following THREE Answers:
Answer 1: (Presence of Polytheists is not justification to hide Trinity) (Ans58)
Still there exist polytheists in the world. Tritheists worshipping Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva have the third largest religion in the world after Christianity and Islam. Your formula reveals that Lord must wait for these Trithesists to be converted into Christianity before revealing Trinity? No therefore, your justification that “nations of old had many Gods they were polytheistic” is incorrect as large number of polytheists still exist to this day.
Answer 2: Church arrived at Trinity by corruptions (Ans59)
The church arrived at Trinity by establishing the corruptions in Monotheistic teachings of Prophets and Blessed Jesus and in 4th Century, that basic requirement of salvation i.e. Concept of God i.e. Trinity was invented never spoken and heard by a single Prophet from Adam till Moses and even Blessed Jesus: Father is full and complete God, Son is full and complete God, Holy Spirit is full and complete God, but these are not three gods, but One full and complete God.”
Why was the Christian Council of 325 headed by a Non Christian Unbaptised Emperor (as final approving authority of Trinity formula) was more powerful and more intelligent than Prophets and Blessed Jesus to invent the basic belief required for salvation in 4th century?
Keeping in view trend or fashion of Christian Councils in Church History, No wonder, May be another Christian Council be conducted few centuries later (headed by Non Christian / Unbaptised President) to invent another such “basic belief required for salvation in Christianity” never spoken and heard by Blessed Jesus.
Answer 3: (Controversial illegal Church considerations to define Trinity) (Ans60)
It is a BIG LIE that “The church arrived at this understanding by careful consideration”. Careful? (No care for words of Blessed Jesus?) I have also described what happened in 325 Nicea Council how cruel (killer of his own family) non-Christian Constantine made Christians fool to believe that father and son are equal in age? Constantine himself accepted on his death bed that father is greater than son in age, but still Church is fooled till this day by Constantine.
In this reply, you will read 431 Council, it was not “careful” consideration but a “controversial” illegal Church consideration won by power of lie, bribery by “great” Saint of Christianity.
21-ROB:
5) Early Church Fathers
To return to the value of church ‘tradition’; the church from the beginning taught that Father, Son and Spirit were each divine and personal. The formulation of statements of doctrine in technical terms to describe this became necessary in the face of heretical teaching originated by the heretic Arius who was only a church presbyter. One means tradition was to appeal to the collective opinion of the leaders of the churches that were established by the apostles, which leaders could trace their succession from the original apostles. This means provides a double check as it were on the understanding of the apostolic scriptures and teaching.
I do not think such a means provides absolute proof but it is strong evidence and the earlier the closer in time the statement by these fathers is to the time of the apostles the greater the likelihood of their reliability. It is in this manner that I consider and value church tradition.
21-MUSHTAQ:
Quran: Surah/Chapter 004 – An-Nisâ. Verse 171.
O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Blessed Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not “Three”. Cease! (it is) better for you! Allah is only ONE GOD. Far is it removed from His transcendent majesty that he should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender.
I have following THREE Answers:
Answer 1: (Ans61)
You have corrupted title of Summary points 5 & 6. Original titles were:
5-Early Church Fathers have not unique ID as Trinitarian Christians
6-Early Church Fathers are not Superior to Blessed Jesus and Prophets
You didn’t address both Summary points separately, because then it would reveal your lie. In order to confuse reader and mislead him, you corrupted titles of my both summary points, merge them to make new title, partially addressed it to make readers falsely believe that you have addressed both summary points in one go.
Answer 2: (Ans62)
It is a repeatedly speaking Great Lie that the formulation of basic belief required for salvation i.e. Concept of God became necessary centuries later Blessed Jesus had left the earth.
Either Trinity is not basic belief required for salvation, or Blessed Jesus and his followers were unaware of technical terms required to know concept of God i.e. basic requirement of salvation. If in Blessed Jesus times, any body could remain Christian without ever speaking and hear term “Trinity” and its definition
“Father is full and complete God, Son is full and complete God, Holy Spirit is full and complete God, these are three gods and not One God”. Then Unitarian Christians are truthful in their claim that they also can remain a Christian like Blessed Jesus and his disciples without ever hearing and speaking term “Trinity” and its definition “Father is full and complete God, Son is full and complete God, Holy Spirit is full and complete God, these are three gods and not One full and complete God”.
Answer 3: (Ans63)
Full true Story of Arius I have explained in “Basics” article to Madam Jessica under heading “Solution to Easter Challenge in light of History.” It was not a double check, it was merely a tool to keep non Christian emperor Constantine happy and make Church fool in making it believe that father and son are equal in age. Every man, who has been given a little wisdom in his brain, will bear witness that father is greater than son in age.
In the end, I thank you Rob for taking time in answering me, Now I await your response.
Regards,
Muhummad Mushtaq Tariq.
LikeLike
Hey, good brother Mushtag, if you want to know who Jesus really is, ask him to show himself to you. What do you have to lose. If hes real, he will answer you. If not, well, that how it goes. Ask him to show himself to you.
LikeLike
Hey dear brother, I know you are saying it with the intention of my goodness and my betterment. OK. A good news is that you and I, we both believe in Jesus (May he be blessed forever), yes, there are differences between our beliefs, but we agree on respecting him and honoring him.
LikeLike
Rob/Chalcedon/Mushtaq
Firstly, apologies for leaving abruptly towards the end of July. I unexpectedly didn’t have internet in the place I went to – and discovered that I really was better off without internet.
I still haven’t properly returned, so I won’t be reading or posting much until mid-October.
Firstly, in response to Chalcedon – I’d say that pretty much all of us are reading from prepared scripts – even if we’ve prepared them ourselves. We all seem to have a point where we become aware that we’ve reached the position that we’ve reached – and we only ever interact with the literature in order to prove that it is wrong, or to find better ways of expressing what we already hold. If this is true of Mushtaq, then he is no different from the rest of us.
As far as the discussion of the Trinity goes – I’m surprised at the way the Christians are proceeding in the discussion, particularly Rob. There are certain truths about ourselves and about God that are only revealed to us by God through faith. If we understand these truths, then the Trinity is a necessary corollary. If we don’t understand these truths, then the Trinity does look like something that blatantly contradicts the first commandment.
So in response to Bosco – yes, you have to ask Jesus to reveal himself to you, but how do you get to the starting point where you are motivated to do this?
Firstly, to do what he had to do, his task as Mediator, reconciliation between sinners and God, Jesus had to be God. I only understand this when I begin to understand my own sinful nature – and this needs a divine revelation. (Parenthesis: Jesus did not have to strive to attain sinless perfection; Jesus came into the world and simply lived according to his nature. He did what came naturally; he didn’t have to mortify the flesh – or whatever. That immediately represents a qualitative difference between Jesus and a good man). Secondly, he couldn’t simply be the same person who decided to come down and see how his creation was getting on. Christ, the Son of God had to be a different person – otherwise the whole business of Jesus being forsaken by God simply doesn’t make sense.
Sorry to be negative – but I don’t see that a discussion over the issues as stated above is going to get anywhere at all. The discussion has to start with the Holy God on one side and sinful man on the other. Otherwise, it develops into one of those depressing ‘is’ ‘isn’t’ arguments, where everybody shows that they have read the bible and reach well argued, but opposing conclusions. That is all that we can expect.
Mushtaq – If you’re still reading this, I’d like to know how ideas such as ‘sin’ and ‘redemption’ fit in with your framework.
LikeLike
‘Triad’ of God nor “Trinity” are words you would find in the Word of God presented to us by the Holy Scriptures the Bible. According the Book of books there is only One Divine creator God, Jehovah and Jeshua or Jesus, the promised Christ or Messiah, is the son of God and not ‘god the son’ (a big difference).
LikeLike
You won’t find the words ‘New Testament’ in the Bible either. What you put forward is an old heresy called Modalism.
LikeLike
But the New Testament is just a calling of the Greek Scriptures and has nothing to do with doctrines.
LikeLike
You rested your case on the Scriptures. I ask you to show me where in Scripture it tells you the names of the Books of the New testament. If you cannot do that, then you cannot base your case on Scripture alone, you must base it on the authority which canonised scripture.
LikeLike
I would encourage you to study the Biblical material outlined in this post it is in harmony with the earliest and historic teaching of the church.
LikeLike
Pingback: The wrong hero « Stepping Toes
What we are aware of is that there are those who are not trinitarians and think they are Christian. The Church disagrees with that.
LikeLike
There is the Church Jesus founded, which does not adhere to three Gods at all. There are many posts here on that topic, and if you want to become better informed, do read them.
LikeLike
It is not because the Apostles “Write of Father, Son and Spirit” that they would consider all to be God. the Bible is very clear that there is only Only God divine Creator. god the Father is that God and the Holy Spirit is His working, Handling, Speaking, His Force but not a person. God is an eternal spirit and has no flesh, blood nor bone. Jesus about whom god said that it is His beloved son, has flesh blood and bones and could be seen by many without them falling death (God can not seen by man or they die). Jesus was tempted more than once (God cannot be tempted). Jesus could sin but did not. God can not sin. Jesus was born (had a beginning) and had an end to his life. God can not die but Jesus really did. He did not fake His death what would have been the case in case he was God. Jesus ways taken of of the dead after been three days in hell. Not able to die and having no reason to fall under the curse of death or to be in hell God could not proof anything by faking such things. Why would have God waited such a long time, having His people to continue suffering still?
LikeLike
The Church which tells us what the Bible is is clear on the Trinity. If you wish yo claim the Bible does not agree with the teaching of the Church, you have a problem.
LikeLike