Hidden messages through historical texts, confused about Islam

[mattqatsi]

This is a little hard to explain right off the bat but is something that is quite important and eye-opening (at least for me.)

This is a multi-part question, it can't be asked outright and I'll reveal the question after another post or two so please bear with me. But any seeker of truth should find this interesting, if it is correct.

Also, I am legitimately looking for answers, so please respond, because this really confuses me about Islam and is one of the things that is, I guess, "holding me back" from your faith. Please help clear this up, part of me wants to go crazy because things don't add up.

1. According to Islamic belief, what is the genealogy from Adam to Noah, from creation to the first destruction? How many people were there and what were there names? Is the Islamic view the same as that of the Torah on this issue? What about after the flood? Are there any reliable genealogies?

2. I know the Torah is held to be inspired by the Islamic faith, but which parts? I know not all of it is considered inspired, but what is and isn't inspired and how do you know it?

3. What verses in the Qu'ran as well as other Islamic beliefs point to the idea that God cannot come in human form, and that Yeshua did not die?

I know some of these have probably been mentioned on the site before, but please bear with me, I would really like to get an honest Muslim to provide their scripture and not someone (me) who is having a hard time interpreting/grasping it.

[جوري]

This is a little hard to explain right off the bat but is something that is quite important and eye-opening (at least for me.)

Greetings,

This is a multi-part question, it can't be asked outright and I'll reveal the question after another post or two so please bear with me. But any seeker of truth should find this interesting, if it is correct.

Also, I am legitimately looking for answers, so please respond, because this really confuses me about Islam and is one of the things that is, I guess, "holding me back" from your faith. Please help clear this up, part of me wants to go crazy because things don't add up.

1. According to Islamic belief, what is the genealogy from Adam to Noah, from creation to the first destruction? How many people were there and what were there names? Is the Islamic view the same as that of the Torah on this issue? What about after the flood? Are there any reliable genealogies?

We don't know when Man came to be on earth with respect to the creation:

76:1- Has there [not] come upon man a period of time when he was not a thing [even] mentioned?

determining such a 'period of time' is probably one of the down-falls of Christianity. History of the Earth isn't consistent with what your bible says and generally that is believed to be because the bible is the work of men not the unerring, transcendent word of God!

2. I know the Torah is held to be inspired by the Islamic faith, but which parts? I know not all of it is considered inspired, but what is and isn't inspired and how do you know it?

In which way is Islamic belief 'Inspired' by the Torah?

Does The Qur'an Mentioning Stories Found In Previous Writings Threaten Its Credibility?

By

Bassam Zawadi

Christians love to keep pointing out that stories found in Islamic sources could actually also be found in earlier sources (see here) and by Allah's grace there have also been Muslims refuting these claims (see here).

I think what these Christians fail to realize is that Islam does teach that it has come to confirm the truth of the previous scriptures. Indeed, some true stories could have found their way into the Bible or other apocryphal books. There is nothing unbelievable or astonishing about that.

Take for example the argument regarding Thomas's Infancy Gospel and how it also contains the story of Jesus in the cradle similar to the one found in the Qur'an (Surah 19:28-34). Christians object to this story because it is not found in the Bible.

In response to this we reply back by saying "lack of evidence does not necessarily imply evidence of absence". The author of John's Gospel makes it clear that Jesus did many things (possibly miracles as well) which weren't recorded (John 21:25), therefore there is a good reason for us to believe that this miracle of Jesus was also not recorded.
I agree with John's logic; however I don't hold his Gospel to be authoritative.
It is very reasonable to believe that this story of Jesus did not find its way into the Gospels.
Someone might argue back that the Gospels teach that Jesus' ministry began later in life while the Qur'an seems to indicate that it happened shortly after he was born.

Well first of all, this begs the question that whatever the Gospels have said is true.

Secondly, it would be possible to harmonize between the two if it is necessary. Perhaps, Jesus did this initially as a baby in order to vindicate his mother from the false accusations levelled against her and show that his birth was indeed a miracle from God (if you can believe that a baby can speak then why not believe in a virgin birth?) and then later on in the future Jesus began preaching full time and this is what the Gospel authors spoke about.

Also, the author of the article states:

Muhammad was about 40 years old when he received his first revelation and it took about 23 years until it was complete. But here, as a newborn, Jesus supposedly already declares: "He has given me the Book..." That is past tense. When do you think that Jesus received his book? Has he received the Book while in the womb, before he was even born?


Imam Qurtubi cites several opinions of the meaning of Jesus' statement and the strongest one is that Jesus was intending to say that God has decreed that the Book (Gospel) will be revealed to him. So it is in the past tense in the verse since it is referring to the act of decreeing.

Similar figure of speech is found in Surah 108:1, where God says that He has given (in the past tense) the Prophet (peace be upon him) a river in heaven. Obviously, once the verse was revealed to the Prophet (peace be upon him) he was still on planet earth and didn't have the river in his possession. However, the verse is trying to signify the reality of Allah's promise and decree.

Thus, logically speaking there is no reason why we should believe that these arguments are threatening to the Qur'an's credibility.

I would like to advance three more arguments:-


1) Stating information that already exists does not imply plagiarism

Just because the Qur'an mentions stories about Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) or David (peace be upon him), which are also found in the Bible does not necessarily imply that it was copied from the Bible. It is very possible that those true stories were maintained in the Bible and the Qur'an simply came to confirm their authenticity, especially when we take into consideration that this is one of the functions of the Qur'an. (Surah 5:48)

2) How did Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) Avoid Errors if He Were Plagiarizing?

If the Prophet (peace be upon him) were copying from the Bible blindly then we would expect to see that he would have also copied some of the errors in the Bible.

The Bible mistakenly calls the king that lived during the time of Joseph 'Pharaoh' (e.g. see the book of Genesis, Chapter 41, Verses 14, 25 & 46) while he really shouldn't be called Pharaoh. This is because the Egyptians did not call their ruler "Pharaoh" until the 18th Dynasty (c. 1552 - 1295 BC) in the New Kingdom Period.

But the Qur'an correctly labels him only as 'king' (The Holy Qur'an, Chapter 12, Verses 43, 50, 54, 72 & 76) The Bible's use of the term 'Pharaoh' is an anachronism, while the Qur'an's usage of the term 'king' isn't.

For an excellent online article to read on the issue please refer to the article "Qur'anic Accuracy Vs. Biblical Error: The Kings & Pharaohs Of Egypt", available here.

The Psalmist says that nothing can escape the sun's heat (read this), mistakenly showing that he didn't understand the vastness of the universe and how things in the universe are not affected at all by the Sun's heat. The Qur'an says no such thing. As a matter of fact, the Qur'an indirectly goes against this by speaking about the darkness found in the depth of the seas in Chapter 24, Verse 40. Thus, the Qur'an speaks about some places in which there is no light.

The Bible contains genealogies scattered throughout the Old Testament, (especially in books such as 2 Chronicles) which imply that the first human being was created sometime between 6,200 and 7,300 years ago (Dr. Walt Brown., In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood, (7th Edition), Source).

However, this is an archaeological error since there are human fossils that predate this early date:

The fossilized skulls of two adults and one child discovered in the Afar region of eastern Ethiopia have been dated at 160,000 years, making them the oldest known fossils of modern humans, or Homo sapiens. (Robert Sanders, "160,000-year-old fossilized skulls uncovered in Ethiopia are oldest anatomically modern humans", UC Berkley News, 11 June, 2003, Source)
Scientists have unearthed three 160,000-year-old human skulls in Ethiopia that are the oldest known and best-preserved fossils of modern humans' immediate predecessors. (Rick Callahanm, "160,000-Year-Old Skulls Found", CBS News, June 11 2003, Source)
Human fossils found 38 years ago in Africa are 65,000 years older than previously thought, a new study says 'pushing the dawn of "modern" humans back 35,000 years. (Hillary Mayell, "Oldest Human Fossils Identified", National Geographic News, February 16, 2005, Source)


However, the Qur'an and authentic hadith are silent on this issue. Surely, we would expect to have seen the Prophet (peace be upon him) copying from these genealogies since they are so scattered across the Bible.


Thus, when we investigate the claim of whether the Prophet (peace be upon him) plagiarized from the Bible or not we can see that the evidence further supports his Prophethood and does not discredit it.

Furthermore, the assertion of Judeo-Christian borrowing raises a number of questions. Jamal Badawi puts forward the following six questions:

1. Why is it in spite of the abundance of historical material on Muhammad's (peace be upon him) life, and in spite of the extensive research on his life for centuries by his severe critics, that it was not possible to discover the mysterious teacher(s) through whom Muhammad (peace be upon him) might have learned all that?
2. It is known that Muhammad (peace be upon him) was opposed, ridiculed and persecuted for nearly 13 years by his own contemporaries. With this magnitude of severe enemies, was it not possible for them to prove to the masses that Muhammad's (peace be upon him) claim of revelation was sheer fabrication? Was it not possible for them to reveal and name the person whom they alleged to be the human source or sources of his teachings? Even some of his adversaries who had made this assertion, changed their minds later on and accused him, instead, of magic or being possessed by evil... etc.
3. Muhammad's (peace be upon him) was raised among his people and every aspect of his life was exposed to them, especially by the openness that characterises tribal life in the desert. How could the multitudes of his contemporaries, including many of his close relatives who knew him so well, how could they believe in his truthfulness if they had any doubt that he was claiming credit for ideas taught to him by some other teachers without bothering to give them credit?
4. What kind of teacher might have taught Muhammad (peace be upon him) a coherent and complete religion that changed the face of history? Why didn't he or they (if any) speak against the alleged student who continued learning from them, while ignoring them and claiming some other divine source for his teachings?
5. How could many Jews and Christians amongst his contemporaries become Muslims and believe in his truthfulness if they knew he was copying from their scriptures or learning from their priests or rabbis?
6. It is known that some of the Qur'ânic revelations to Muhammad (peace be upon him) in the presence of people. The Qur'ân was revealed over the span of 23 years, where then that was mysterious, perhaps invisible teacher of Muhammad (peace be upon him)? How could he have hidden himself for so long? Or how could Muhammad (peace be upon him) who was constantly surrounded by companions, how was he able to make frequent secret visits to that mysterious teacher or teachers for 23 years without even being caught once?

3) If It Is Good Enough To Refute The Qur'an Then It Is Also Good Enough To Refute The Bible


Christians who put forth these arguments don't realize how self referentially incoherent their argument actually is.
The assertion that allegedly "numerous" stories in the Quran are "borrowed" from Jewish Talmudic sources and Christian apocryphal writings appears to be based on the dubious underlying presumption that similarity implies "borrowing." For example, consider the similarities/parallels between certain Biblical stories and those found in the Near Eastern literature.
Some notable examples:
- Genesis creation story and Enuma Elish; (See here and here)
- The flood story (Genesis 6-8) and Atrahasis and Gilgamesh (See here and here)
- Israel's ancestors and the Nuzi texts (See here)
- Biblical laws (Exodus 21-23) and the Code of Hammurabi (laws 195-214)
- Biblical texts (the Ten Commandments and the structure of Deuteronomy) and the Hittite Suzerainty treaties and Vassal Treaty of Esarhaddon (See here and here)
- Book of Proverbs (22:17-24:22) and the Instruction of Amenemope (See here and here)
The latter are undoubtedly far earlier than the Biblical accounts and both direct and indirect connections have been posited between the two. The parallels in the last example are particularly striking, with most scholars agreeing that Proverbs 22:17-24:22 and Amenemope are clearly connected in some way (reminder: Amenemope is older than Proverbs).
We can, however, be reasonably certain that Christian apologists will not conclude based on the - at times striking - similarities that the Biblical authors "borrowed" their stories from their much older Near Eastern counterparts. However, in the case of the Quran not even a slight consideration and reasonableness is granted. Indeed, how much clearer can their hypocrisy and double standards be?



Recommended Reading

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/

http://www.load-islam.com/artical_det.php?artical_id=523§ion=indepth&subsec tion=Glorious%20Quran

3. What verses in the Qu'ran as well as other Islamic beliefs point to the idea that God cannot come in human form, and that Yeshua did not die?

Prophet Jesus in QuranPROPHET JESUS (PBUH) IN QURAN

2-87 5-73 19-21 6-85 3-45
2-136 5-75 19-35 3-55 3-49
2-253 19-19 43-64 4-171 3-59
5-72 19-20 4-157 5-116 5-17
2-87 We gave Moses the Book and followed him up with a succession of Messengers. We gave Jesus, the Son of Mary clear signs and strengthened Him with the Holy Spirit.

2-136 Say Ye "We believe in God and the revelation given to us, to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, to the tribes, to Moses, Jesus and to all prophets from their Lord." We make no difference between them, and we bow to Allah as a Muslim.

2-253 To Jesus, the son of Mary, we gave clear signs and strengthen Him with the Holy Spirit.

5-72 They do blasphemy on those who say, "God is Christ, the son of Mary". Christ said, "O children of Israel worship God my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins God with other gods will not go to heaven, the hell fire will be his resting place. These are the wrongdoers.

5-73 They do blasphemy on those who say, "Allah is one of three in a Trinity", for there is no God but one God.

5-75 Christ, the son of Mary, was no more than a messenger like the messengers that passed away before Him. His mother was a woman of truth. God makes His signs clear to them, yet they are deluded away from the truth.

19-19 Then we sent her our Angel and he appeared before her as a man in all respects, she said, "I seek refuge from thee to God most gracious." He said, "Nay I am only a messenger from thy Lord to thee with the Gift of a Holy son."

19-20 She said, "How shall I have a son when no man has touched me and I am not unchaste?"

19-21 He said, "So it will be", thy Lord saith, "That is easy for me and we wish to appoint Him as a sign unto man and a mercy from us", and so it was decreed.

19-35 It is not fitting to God that He should beget a Son. Glory be to Him. When He determines a matter He only says to it "Be" and it is. (KON FA YAKOON).

43-64 Jesus said, "For Allah, He is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him".

4-157 They said in boast, "We killed Jesus Christ, son of Mary, the messenger of God." But they killed Him not, nor crucified Him, but so it was made to appear to them. Those who differ are full of doubts with no certain knowledge. Nay Allah raise him up unto Himself.


as for anthropomorphism:
quoting directly from the Quran:

I know some of these have probably been mentioned on the site before, but please bear with me, I would really like to get an honest Muslim to provide their scripture and not someone (me) who is having a hard time interpreting/grasping it.

Hope the above answered your queries..

peace

[Supreme]

I think Gossamer answered the questions satisfactory, especially number 2, which I myself have always wondered about.

[questioner8]

This is a little hard to explain right off the bat but is something that is quite important and eye-opening (at least for me.)

This is a multi-part question, it can't be asked outright and I'll reveal the question after another post or two so please bear with me. But any seeker of truth should find this interesting, if it is correct.

Also, I am legitimately looking for answers, so please respond, because this really confuses me about Islam and is one of the things that is, I guess, "holding me back" from your faith. Please help clear this up, part of me wants to go crazy because things don't add up.

1. According to Islamic belief, what is the genealogy from Adam to Noah, from creation to the first destruction? How many people were there and what were there names? Is the Islamic view the same as that of the Torah on this issue? What about after the flood? Are there any reliable genealogies?

2. I know the Torah is held to be inspired by the Islamic faith, but which parts? I know not all of it is considered inspired, but what is and isn't inspired and how do you know it?

3. What verses in the Qu'ran as well as other Islamic beliefs point to the idea that God cannot come in human form, and that Yeshua did not die?

I know some of these have probably been mentioned on the site before, but please bear with me, I would really like to get an honest Muslim to provide their scripture and not someone (me) who is having a hard time interpreting/grasping it.

I think the islamic idea of Jesus, is very similar if not the same as the gnostic christians, who appear to have distorted and perverted the real gospel and promoted heresies:nervous:

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[جوري]

I think the islamic idea of Jesus, is very similar if not the same as the gnostic christians, who appear to have distorted and perverted the real gospel and promoted heresies:nervous:

lol.. have a look closer look at the bible you follow before quickly talking of distortions ey?

- Refuting the Argument From Prophecy (34)
- Refuting Arguments For The Resurrection (14)
- Refuting The Argument From Archaeology (5)

- Refuting The Argument From Scientific Accuracy (2)
- Contradictions and Difficulties in the Bible (2)
- Miscellaneous Errors in the Bible (2)


all the best

[questioner8]

lol.. have a look closer look at the bible you follow before quickly talking of distortions ey?

- Refuting the Argument From Prophecy (34)
- Refuting Arguments For The Resurrection (14)
- Refuting The Argument From Archaeology (5)

- Refuting The Argument From Scientific Accuracy (2)
- Contradictions and Difficulties in the Bible (2)
- Miscellaneous Errors in the Bible (2)


all the best

You just confirm the 'gnostic christian' view from which islam gets it same/similar distorted ideas!

[Woodrow]

You just confirm the 'gnostic christian' view from which islam gets it same/similar distorted ideas!

Have you ever considered the possibility that the council of Nicea distorted Christianity by deleting the gnostic gospels?

[questioner8]

Have you ever considered the possibility that the council of Nicea distorted Christianity by deleting the gnostic gospels?

That's a contradiction in itself!

http://www.allaboutreligion.org/gnos...ianity-faq.htm

Gnostic Christianity - What does the Bible say?

Let us look at what Gnosticism Christianity is before we figure out what the Bible has to say about the topic. First of all, Gnosticism is NOT Christianity. Gnostics proclaim God is both man and woman; Mary Magdalene is elevated to the status of the first and greatest Apostle, and is Jesus' wife and divine companion.

Gnosticism goes back centuries before the Christian era, possibly as early as the fifth Century, B.C. A belief system developed in ancient Syria and Persia that held salvation of the soul could be achieved by attaining a deep, mystic, and divine knowledge. According to their beliefs, humans are divided into a three-tiered hierarchy. Those possessing this knowledge, or gnosis, were a superior form of human being whose present and future destiny were not intertwined with those humans, that, for whatever reason, did not "know." Those humans too influenced by matter were doomed, and somewhere in between were those who did not yet possess the gnosis, but could yet be saved.

Rather than believe in the good of creation, Gnostics regarded matter and, in fact, the whole universe, to be a defilement of the deity -- the god of light/spirit. They taught that the ultimate end would be to overcome matter and be reunited with the parent spirit and realm of light/energy. This would not be achieved by submission to God's laws or through grace (God's forgiveness of man's sins) by acceptance of the living Christ -- the Son of God and Redeemer. Redemption or salvation would occur by awakening the sleeping gnosis (knowledge/wisdom) or "God within" -- through deep thoughts, reflection, and meditation thereby freeing the good spirit imprisoned within the evil physical body.

Gnosticism spread to Egypt during the 2nd and 3rd centuries, A.D. They presented a major challenge to orthodox Christianity. Can we say Gnostic Christianity is claimed within the pages of the Bible? Most Gnostic sects professed Christianity, but their belief sharply diverged from those of the majority of Christians in the early church. Those who did not believe the virgin birth, Jesus was the Son of God, Jesus was resurrected to Heaven, Jesus was the Creator, or that Jesus made atonement for our sins. I would say no, we couldn't, because the Bible clearly lays claim to the above statements.

Gnostics also believed that mankind was wholly evil and some sects even renounced marriage and procreation. They also believed in two gods, one evil god and one good god. Their teachings are believed to have influenced Saint Augustine in the development of his theology of "total depravity" of mankind and concept of God. For nine years St. Augustine adhered to Manichaeism, a Persian philosophy proclaimed in southern Babylonia (Iraq) that taught a doctrine of "total depravity" and the claim that they were the "elect." He then turned to skepticism.

Next, Augustine was attracted to the philosophy of Neoplatonism. He blended these beliefs with his later Gnostic Christian teachings. His teachings were in turn passed on to John Calvin in his extensive study of Augustine's writings. It is very easy to follow the trail of John Calvin's theology from the pagan religion of Mani in Babylonia to his writings in France and Geneva.

In 1945 an Egyptian peasant found 12 codices containing more than 50 Coptic Gnostic writings near Naj'Hammadi, Egypt. It has been determined that these codices were copied in the 4th century in the monasteries of the region. It is not known whether the monks were Gnostics, or were attracted by the nature of the writings, or had assembled the writings as a study in heresy. The evidence is clear that the Gnostics had a major influence in writing the Alexandrian manuscripts of the Egyptian region.

By the 2nd century, Christian Gnostic teachers mixed their mythology with Platonic metaphysical speculation and certain heretical Christian traditions. The most prominent Christian Gnostics were Valentinus and his disciple Ptolemaeus, who, during the 2nd century were influential members in the Roman Church. By the end of the 3rd century Gnosticism as a distinct movement seems to have largely disappeared.

[جوري]

You just confirm the 'gnostic christian' view from which islam gets it same/similar distorted ideas!

How does pointing out biblical distortions confirm any christian view?

your entire religion is faulty. unknown authors, no textual integrity, no chronological integrity, wrought with endless errors as only a fabled book written by men of a self-immolating mangod who couldn't choose proper apostles to shoulder the responsibility after his DEATH as such even peter 'the rock' denounced him three times before the mangod prayed in Gethsemane apparently to himself, forsake himself anyway, and so he appears to a charlatan and a known nemesis to abrogate his previous commandment.

Christianity in a nutshell, there is positively no reason to discuss little irrelevant finite details when the very basic tenets are positively mind-boggling and borrow greatly from paganism!

all the best

[questioner8]

How does pointing out biblical distortions confirm any christian view?

your entire religion is faulty. unknown authors, no textual integrity, no chronological integrity, wrought with endless errors as only a fabled book written by men of a self-immolating mangod who couldn't choose proper apostles to shoulder the responsibility after his DEATH as such even peter 'the rock' denounced him three times before the mangod prayed in Gethsemane apparently to himself, forsake himself anyway, and so he appears to a charlatan and a known nemesis to abrogate his previous commandment.

Christianity in a nutshell, there is positively no reason to discuss little irrelevant finite details when the very basic tenets are positively mind-boggling and borrow greatly from paganism!

all the best

To understand the 'trinity'(1 GOD in 3 persons)!

Here is an experiment that acts as an analogy.

Try getting some ice cubes and start to melt them in a saucepan.
As the ice starts to melt, you will still have the remaining ice along with steam/vapour and water in the pan all at the same time!

They are all water in 3 different forms existing all at the same time!

[جوري]

To understand the 'trinity'(1 GOD in 3 persons)!

Here is an experiment that acts as an analogy.

Try getting some ice cubes and start to melt them in a saucepan.
As the ice starts to melt, you will still have the remaining ice along with steam/vapour and water in the pan all at the same time!

They are all water in 3 different forms existing all at the same time!

lol.. is that what they teach you in sunday school?
god didn't split himself into two ineffectual and one untrustworthy entity prior to Christianity unless of course you are speaking of Pagan practices which in fact Christianity is very much akin to. Though the 'trinity' is a major down fall for Christianity it isn't its only downfall!

all the best

[Ramadhan]

To understand the 'trinity'(1 GOD in 3 persons)!

Here is an experiment that acts as an analogy.

Try getting some ice cubes and start to melt them in a saucepan.
As the ice starts to melt, you will still have the remaining ice along with steam/vapour and water in the pan all at the same time!

They are all water in 3 different forms existing all at the same time!

So are you saying god=ice, jesus=water, holy spirit=steam?
holy spirit must be steam, right? because he hovers?

when jesus (p) died briefly, was the water turned to ice or steam?

but if jesus (p) was ice then he melted, right? or vaporise?

and what is the mass ratio between ice:water:steam?


the mind boggles....

[Predator]

To understand the 'trinity'(1 GOD in 3 persons)!

Here is an experiment that acts as an analogy.

Try getting some ice cubes and start to melt them in a saucepan.
As the ice starts to melt, you will still have the remaining ice along with steam/vapour and water in the pan all at the same time!

They are all water in 3 different forms existing all at the same time!

Fail. Its has been completeley debunked here

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

[Woodrow]

Christianity died almost before it was born. They were numerous "books" written all alleging to be the Teachings of Jesus(as), but none lasted except those that supported the Early Catholic teaching which in turn is a modern form of Greek and Roman mythology. The Gnostic books are just as Christian as the Gospels of Mark, Matthew,Luke and John and the letters of Paul. None of which are the teachings of Jesus(as)

What is passed off as Christianity is Paulism flavored with Greco/Roman idolatry and supported by inaccurate translations of misquoted texts. The arguments most non-Catholic Christians use against Catholicism apply to all Christian denominations. Rome and Greece corrupted the Word of God(swt)

Just my opinion and personal belief. I personally find Christianity to be the biggest insult possible to Christians.

[siam]

To understand the 'trinity'(1 GOD in 3 persons)
Try getting some ice cubes and start to melt them in a saucepan.
As the ice starts to melt, you will still have the remaining ice along with steam/vapour and water in the pan all at the same time!
They are all water in 3 different forms existing all at the same time!

I've heard this one as well as the egg analogy---the egg yolk, egg white and the egg shell=3 in 1.
I've wondered---don't these analogies prove Christians believe in 3 Gods instead of One?---Take the Ice analogy---It may be H20, but it is in the form of Ice (solid) not liguid or gas---once it is seprated into 3, it cannot be put back together---the steam has already evaporated! ----the same with the egg---as long as the egg yolk and egg white are in the shell, it is an egg---once seperated---it cannot be put back together, especially the shell ! That would mean that Once God has been broken into 3, God has become "damaged" and cannot be put back together?---or else the analogies are useless in expaining something that cannot be explained.....

I've also heard another that goes 1 X 1 X 1 = 1 as an explanation for 3 in 1. with the Ones on the left representing the width, length and breadth of God!!!! ---such a concept seems to limit God to a cube?

I like the tawheed so much better, but, if one were forced to use numbers to express it, this would be it. ----1=1 ----nothing could be more sensible or more clear!!!

[siam]

To understand the 'trinity'(1 GOD in 3 persons)
Try getting some ice cubes and start to melt them in a saucepan.
As the ice starts to melt, you will still have the remaining ice along with steam/vapour and water in the pan all at the same time!
They are all water in 3 different forms existing all at the same time!

I've heard this one as well as the egg analogy---the egg yolk, egg white and the egg shell=3 in 1.
I've wondered---don't these analogies prove Christians believe in 3 Gods instead of One?---Take the Ice analogy---It may be H20, but it is in the form of Ice (solid) not liguid or gas---once it is seprated into 3, it cannot be put back together---the steam has already evaporated! ----the same with the egg---as long as the egg yolk and egg white are in the shell, it is an egg---once seperated---it cannot be put back together, especially the shell ! That would mean that Once God has been broken into 3, God has become "damaged" and cannot be put back together?---or else the analogies are useless in expaining something that cannot be explained.....

I've also heard another that goes 1 X 1 X 1 = 1 as an explanation for 3 in 1. with the Ones on the left representing the width, length and breadth of God!!!! ---such a concept seems to limit God to a cube?

I like the tawheed so much better, but, if one were forced to use numbers to express it, this would be it. ----1=1 ----nothing could be more sensible or more clear!!!

[Woodrow]

One problem many Christians have in understanding us, is their failure to comprehend we do not believe the Bible is the word of God(swt). Biblical concepts are not only invalid, some we find to be very heretical and blasphemous. Some of us, such as myself find explanations about the trinity to be very ungodlike, blasphemous and on the edge of profanity. The concept of Trinity is very anti-God and demeans the nature of the One God(swt).

[questioner8]

You have all taken my analogy too far and are trying to make it in to something literal, beyond the basic analogy!

The islamic 1 god, is not 3 dimensional and denies GOD(YAHWEH) HIS supernatural power and abilities, which go way beyond human understanding!

[Woodrow]

You have all taken my analogy too far and are trying to make it in to something literal, beyond the basic analogy!

The islamic 1 god, is not 3 dimensional and denies GOD(YAHWEH) HIS supernatural power and abilities, which go way beyond human understanding!

At least there is one point of agreement. The attributes of Allaah(swt) are far beyond human comprehension.

[Ramadhan]

You have all taken my analogy too far and are trying to make it in to something literal, beyond the basic analogy!

Well, you were the one who gave the analogy of god as ice, water and steam. Are we not allowed to further investigate why God is like ice, water and steam?

The islamic 1 god, is not 3 dimensional and denies GOD(YAHWEH) HIS supernatural power and abilities, which go way beyond human understanding!

So according to christianity (or rather, paulism), god is 3 dimensional?
like a chair?

[Woodrow]

So according to christianity (or rather, paulism), god is 3 dimensional?
like a chair?

Now that is limiting. No point in arguing, it is obvious the poster has no concept of what it means when we say Allaah(swt) has no limitations. Us humans are 3 dimensional and we are very insignificant. Why do some people persist in trying to limit Allaah(swt) by turning him into a Human?

[جوري]

You have all taken my analogy too far and are trying to make it in to something literal, beyond the basic analogy!

The islamic 1 god, is not 3 dimensional and denies GOD(YAHWEH) HIS supernatural power and abilities, which go way beyond human understanding!

The 'Islamic God' saved Jesus when he called out to him at night in prayer, unlike the god you pray to which apparently has a self-immolating complex and can't restrain a couple of provincial villagers from killing him!

5:110 : "O 'Jesus the son of Maryam! recount My favour to thee and to thy mother. Behold! I strengthened thee with the holy spirit, so that thou didst speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. Behold! I taught thee the Book and Wisdom, the Law and the Gospel. And behold! thou makest out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, by My leave, and thou breathest into it, and it becometh a bird by My leave, and thou healest those born blind, and the lepers, by My leave. And behold! thou bringest forth the dead by My leave. And behold! I did restrain the Children of Israel from (violence to) thee when thou didst show them the Clear Signs, and the Unbelievers among them said: `This is nothing but evident magic.'

[Predator]

You have all taken my analogy too far and are trying to make it in to something literal, beyond the basic analogy!

The islamic 1 god, is not 3 dimensional and denies GOD(YAHWEH) HIS supernatural power and abilities, which go way beyond human understanding!

Why did God not tell Adam that he was triune god ? Why did god tell the Jews he's one, then change his mind 1000 years later tell Christians he's a trinity? Will the Christian god change his mind again and become 9 in 1 god in the future?

[Woodrow]

Why did God not tell Adam that he was triune god ? Why did god tell the Jews he's one, then change his mind 1000 years later tell Christians he's a trinity? Will the Christian god change his mind again and become 9 in 1 god in the future?

I believe the trend for a growing number of Christian Gods began a few hundred years back with the Veneration of Saints and the very high elevation of Mary. Calling Mary the "Mother of God" is getting very close to elevating her to a Godlike status. I think they are just waiting to find a fancy catch phrase that will carry the charisma of Trinity, A quadrangle just does not quite get it. Might have to wait to get 99 parts an enneacontakaienneagon has a nice ring to it and the name can be traced back to Ancient Greek origin. Might take a while to catch on, but sects worshiping a 99 person god should be already appearing.

Let me see it took the early founders of Catholicism about 100 years to decide God(swt) was a composite being. And then a consensus of a Catholic committee to finalize how many were in this composite, being and several splits before it was agreed upon as to who is God. Most of the early Catholics seemed to have felt they were pushing their credibility if they went past a duality. But somewhere along the way they decided it had to be a trinity to stay balanced. There was a bit of a squabble over who should be the third part, Mary was the favorite choice, but an unknown contender named Holy Spirit won the vote. We must come down towards the year 360 to find the doctrine on the Holy Ghost explained both fully and clearly. It is St. Athanasius who does so in his "Letters to Serapion" (P.G., XXVI, col. 525 sq.).

And that folks is how paganism became firmly embedded in Catholicism and eventually spread to all of Christianity

Quite ironic that so many non-Catholic Christians insist on adhering to a Roman Catholic proclamation, while calling Catholicism the "Whxxxre of Babylon"

[siam]

....Mary(pbuh) "Mother of God"....as well as something that is called "The Word" which is supposed to be "co-eternal" with God and is also supposed to be Jesus Christ(pbuh), yet is not part of the "trinity".....? So some "trinitarian" Christians cannot make up their minds about the actual number of Gods......?.....

What I don't really get, is why bother with logic-defying mental acrobatics to divide 1 into 3 and call it monotheism (One God)? why not just accept the many Gods/Avatars and be happy---like the Hindus? Its, not as if Christians particularly respect the Torah----they just use it as a kind of "fortune-telling" book that "proves" the events of Jesus Christ(pbuh)....or so it seems....

[Woodrow]

You have all taken my analogy too far and are trying to make it in to something literal, beyond the basic analogy!

The islamic 1 god, is not 3 dimensional and denies GOD(YAHWEH) HIS supernatural power and abilities, which go way beyond human understanding!

a very simple law of logic. If an argument/statement can be easily reduced or expanded to the point of ridiculous, the basis of the argument/statement is probably ridiculous.

[marwen]

The islamic 1 god, is not 3 dimensional and denies GOD(YAHWEH) HIS supernatural power and abilities, which go way beyond human understanding!

What makes you say that ? The Islamic belief says that Allah (God) is ONE(just one entity, no partial gods in Him) and is UNIQUE. This does not make the assumption that Allah is not multidimensional, or not supernatural.

[siam]

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of men.

So, it would seem this "Word" is God and is co-eternal with God and is the real "creator"---therefore God is....?...an observer?
Obviously, someone needs lessons in logic!........

[Woodrow]

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of men.

So, it would seem this "Word" is God and is co-eternal with God and is the real "creator"---therefore God is....?...an observer?
Obviously, someone needs lessons in logic!........

Interesting to notice that is from John 1 and was never part of the Jewish teachings. The Author of the book of John 1, is quite interesting. From a Christian Bible study site:

"It should be noted that the problem of determining the author of 1 John is a somewhat different one from the determination of the authorship of 2 and 3 John, because in the case of 1 John the letter is anonymous – no author is specified within the work itself. The only other New Testament letter which makes no reference to the author’s name is the Epistle to the Hebrews. The second and third letters, however, designate the author as “the Elder,” and it has been long debated whether this individual is or is not to be identified with the author of the first letter and/or the Apostle John."

Duh----The council of Nicea accepts an anonymous letter as authentic and ascribes it to John, yet calls books from known authors gnostic and discards them.

[questioner8]

a very simple law of logic. If an argument/statement can be easily reduced or expanded to the point of ridiculous, the basis of the argument/statement is probably ridiculous.

You are all looking too closely at the analogy itself, rather than the meaning of it!
It's not a scientific statement!
islam limits GOD/YAHWEH to being unable to take more than 1 form at the same time!

[questioner8]

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of men.

So, it would seem this "Word" is God and is co-eternal with God and is the real "creator"---therefore God is....?...an observer?
Obviously, someone needs lessons in logic!........

The Word is 'living/eternal.'

John 1 (Amplified Bible)

John 1

1IN THE beginning [before all time] was the Word ([a]Christ), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God [b]Himself.(A) 2He was present originally with God.
3All things were made and came into existence through Him; and without Him was not even one thing made that has come into being.
4In Him was Life, and the Life was the Light of men.

[Woodrow]

You are all looking too closely at the analogy itself, rather than the meaning of it!
It's not a scientific statement!
islam limits GOD/YAHWEH to being unable to take more than 1 form at the same time!

You are giving him human limitations and assume he is required to take on a form. we have no doubt He can take on any form he desires too, but we recognize his power is so great he has no need to take on any form. It is human arrogance that wants to make him have a form. This is man trying to make a god in the the likeness of man. Egotistical arrogance beyond words.

[Woodrow]

The Word is 'living/eternal.'

John 1 (Amplified Bible)

John 1

1IN THE beginning [before all time] was the Word ([a]Christ), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God [b]Himself.(A) 2He was present originally with God.
3All things were made and came into existence through Him; and without Him was not even one thing made that has come into being.
4In Him was Life, and the Life was the Light of men.

Name the actual author/authors of the books of John. Who was it that decided they were the "inspired" word of God(swt). the books you view as being gnostic have a more believable pedigree and chain of authenticity than the books of John have.

[tango92]

You are all looking too closely at the analogy itself, rather than the meaning of it!
It's not a scientific statement!
islam limits GOD/YAHWEH to being unable to take more than 1 form at the same time!

tell me can God create something more powerful than himself? no... why are you limiting god?

[questioner8]

You are giving him human limitations and assume he is required to take on a form. we have no doubt He can take on any form he desires too, but we recognize his power is so great he has no need to take on any form. It is human arrogance that wants to make him have a form. This is man trying to make a god in the the likeness of man. Egotistical arrogance beyond words.

Where have I claimed that HE(YAHWEH) is required to take on any form?

Where have I claimed that HE(YAHWEH) needs to take on any form?

Where have I stated that anyone wants HIM(YAHWEH) to have any form?

The bible scriptures are telling about what GOD(YAHWEH) chose to do!

Who are you to limit GOD(YAHWEH) to anything?

[Ramadhan]

Where have I claimed that HE(YAHWEH) is required to take on any form?

Where have I claimed that HE(YAHWEH) needs to take on any form?

Where have I stated that anyone wants HIM(YAHWEH) to have any form?

The bible scriptures are telling about what GOD(YAHWEH) chose to do!

Who are you to limit GOD(YAHWEH) to anything?

I'd like to see passages from the bible where God declared unambiguously and unequivocally that He split Himself into three forms.

[questioner8]

I'd like to see passages from the bible where God declared unambiguously and unequivocally that He split Himself into three forms.

From the following scripture you can see the obvious:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...17&version=NIV

Matthew 3:15-17 (New International Version)


15Jesus replied, "Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness." Then John consented.

16As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. 17And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

The HOLY SPIRIT descending from heaven, the FATHER speaking from heaven, and the SON JESUS CHRIST on earth!

[marwen]

From the following scripture you can see the obvious:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...17&version=NIV

Matthew 3:15-17 (New International Version)


15Jesus replied, "Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness." Then John consented.

16As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. 17And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

The HOLY SPIRIT descending from heaven, the FATHER speaking from heaven, and the SON JESUS CHRIST on earth!

The passage you quoted shows the existence of three entities :
- GOD
- The Holy Spirit
- Jesus
(I prefer not to take the literal interpretation of the word Son, I'd rather understand it : SON = BELOVED)

But this passage doesn't say that these 3 entities are the same one. Is there something I didn't understand ?

[Ramadhan]

The passage you quoted shows the existence of three entities :
- GOD
- The Holy Spirit
- Jesus
(I prefer not to take the literal interpretation of the word Son, I'd rather understand it : SON = BELOVED)

But this passage doesn't say that these 3 entities are the same one. Is there something I didn't understand ?

Exactly.
Unless you have an overactive imagination and employ twisted logic, there is no way to think that the passages indicate the three entities are the same one.

[Woodrow]

Where have I claimed that HE(YAHWEH) is required to take on any form?

Where have I claimed that HE(YAHWEH) needs to take on any form?

Where have I stated that anyone wants HIM(YAHWEH) to have any form?

The bible scriptures are telling about what GOD(YAHWEH) chose to do!

Who are you to limit GOD(YAHWEH) to anything?

We both seem to be in agreement that God(swt) is limitless and all powerful. Where we differ is you see the Trinity as an expression of being limitless, I see it as placing limits on Him.

There is no basis for the Trinity in any of the Monotheistic teachings. This is a concept derived from the wants of man executed through the Errors of Paul and the decisions of Church councils, not a revelation or teaching from God(swt)

[questioner8]

The passage you quoted shows the existence of three entities :
- GOD
- The Holy Spirit
- Jesus
(I prefer not to take the literal interpretation of the word Son, I'd rather understand it : SON = BELOVED)

But this passage doesn't say that these 3 entities are the same one. Is there something I didn't understand ?

So let's have your spin on it?

[marwen]

So let's have your spin on it?

what ? is that a question? what spin ?

[questioner8]

We both seem to be in agreement that God(swt) is limitless and all powerful. Where we differ is you see the Trinity as an expression of being limitless, I see it as placing limits on Him.

There is no basis for the Trinity in any of the Monotheistic teachings. This is a concept derived from the wants of man executed through the Errors of Paul and the decisions of Church councils, not a revelation or teaching from God(swt)

The basis for the trinity is drawn from the balance of New Testament scripture!

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+1:34-36&version=NIV

Luke 1:34-36 (New International Version)


34"How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?"


35The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[a] the Son of God. 36Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month.

[Ramadhan]

The basis for the trinity is drawn from the balance of New Testament scripture!

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+1:34-36&version=NIV

Luke 1:34-36 (New International Version)


34"How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?"


35The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[a] the Son of God. 36Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month.

You still haven't answered what I asked for:

Is there at least one passage in the bible where God states unambiguously without a shadow of doubt that He split Himself into three entities or persons or whatever you call the three trinity units?

[questioner8]

what ? is that a question? what spin ?

My ? is.
What is your spin/interpretation of the scripture that I posted?

[questioner8]

You still haven't answered what I asked for:

Is there at least one passage in the bible where God states unambiguously without a shadow of doubt that He split Himself into three entities or persons or whatever you call the three trinity units?

Are you being deliberately awkward?

The scriptures show this and all scripture is inspired by GOD(YAHWEH)!

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...17&version=AMP


2 Timothy 3:16-17 (Amplified Bible)

16Every Scripture is God-breathed (given by His inspiration) and profitable for instruction, for reproof and conviction of sin, for correction of error and discipline in obedience, [and] for training in righteousness (in holy living, in conformity to God's will in thought, purpose, and action),
17So that the man of God may be complete and proficient, well fitted and thoroughly equipped for every good work.

[marwen]

My ? is.
What is your spin/interpretation of the scripture that I posted?

My interpretation of the Matthew 3:15-17 passage is what I said in the previous post : there is a description of 3 different Entities :
GOD, JESUS and HOLY SPIRIT .

But when you mentioned it as a response to naidamar's question :
where is the proof from the bible, that these 3 entities are the same thing ?
My interpretation is that the text you quoted does not answer his question.

[questioner8]

My interpretation of the Matthew 3:15-17 passage is what I said in the previous post : there is a description of 3 different Entities :
GOD, JESUS and HOLY SPIRIT .

But when you mentioned it as a response to naidamar's question :
where is the proof from the bible, that these 3 entities are the same thing ?
My interpretation is that the text you quoted does not answer his question.

The understanding comes by 'revelation' from the HOLY SPIRIT!

A grandfather, is also a father and a son at the same time!

1 person with 3 relational roles!

GOD(YAHWEH) has infinite power and can be 3 entities with differrent forms and roles all at the same time!

And I am sure HE could take on more forms if HE wanted/chose to!
But, HE hasn't!



Matthew 3:15-17 (New International Version)


15Jesus replied, "Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness." Then John consented.
16As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. 17And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

[Woodrow]

The understanding comes by 'revelation' from the HOLY SPIRIT!

A grandfather, is also a father and a son at the same time!

1 person with 3 relational roles!

GOD(YAHWEH) has infinite power and can be 3 entities with differrent forms and roles all at the same time!

And I am sure HE could take on more forms if HE wanted/chose to!
But, HE hasn't!



Matthew 3:15-17 (New International Version)


15Jesus replied, "Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness." Then John consented.
16As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. 17And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

Just a few questions:

Who is Matthew?

When was the book of Matthew written?

Who determined the book of Matthew was the inspired word of God(swt) and conflicting writings of the same time were determined to be gnostic?

Who wrote the Book of Matthew?

[marwen]

A grandfather, is also a father and a son at the same time!
1 person with 3 relational roles!

You're talking about a different thing : let's say Jack is the father of Marc, and Marc is the father of Stewart : so Marc is the son (of Jack) and the father(of Stewart). So Marc is a father and a son, but in different contexts. Now Stewart is the son of Marc=>Stewart is a SON, and Marc is the FATHER, but he is a SON compared to Jack. Can we say Marc = Stewart, just because Marc is a son, and Stewart is also a son? No ! they are tow different persons.
So I think the example you mentioned is about a different thing, and will not help us with this discussion.

GOD(YAHWEH) has infinite power and can be 3 entities with differrent forms and roles all at the same time!

Yes He can but He isn't (at least for me), and he doesn't say he is 3, so he isn't. He's just one.

And I am sure HE could take on more forms if HE wanted/chose to!
But, HE hasn't!

Yes, as you say, He can but He isn't.