Hello POBook and thank you for your post,
This is what I meant by looooong posts 
.
format_quote Originally Posted by
POBook
At the same time, I acknowledge that I can run out of finite illustrations to describe an Infinite GOD.
I am not asking you to illustrate for me the measure of God's attributes, which are of course infinite. I am asking you to explain to me the nature of those attributes, specifically the trinity, which I find to be logically incoherent.
What do you mean by “distinct entities”?
I suppose it is really up to Christians to define this, but basically by 'distinct entities' what is meant is that there are independent identifiable units, the father, the holy spirit, the son. Each of these three has unique characteristics which they do not share. For example, the father is unbegotten where as the son is 'begotten' (or generated) from the father and the spirit proceeds from the father. See this diagram for what is meant by distinct:
The above diagram is a perfect example of what I find logically incoherent.
H2O around the world contains all three forms of molecular structure at some point and at some time. They all co-exist.
But here we are not talking about the same substance existing in three different states. The trinity says that ONE God exists in three different persons. By analogy, you need to bring me an example of ONE entity existing as three seperate entities, each being co-equal and equal to the overall entity. Can you bring me molecules of water that exist IN ALL THREE STATES AT THE SAME TIME? Of course not. The closest to this is the triple point of water in thermodynamic equilibrium, but of course here it is different water molecules in different states, not the SAME molecules existing in all three states.
H2O is the molecular formula for a TYPE OF MOLECULE. It is not an entity in itself. God, on the other hand is a SINGLE ENTITY. 'God' is not the name of a type of entity for which there are many entities. There is only ONE God. But there is a immeasurable quantity of water molecules. The two are not analogous. The former is a single entity, the latter is the chemical classification of a number of entities.
We do not maintain only ONE God and the existence of these three ‘persons’.
GOD exists as three at the same time He exists as one.
What is the difference between these two statements?
If you have H20 liquid on the continent of Africa; H20 solid on the continent of Asia; and H20 gas on the continent of South America, do you not have the three distinct entities co-existing? While distinct entities, are they not all H20?
If this analogy works, then it means that you believe in three gods. Because there are three seperate entities, and they are all God. Can you show me how you get ONE God from the above analogy? You don't because there is not a single thing mentioned in your analogy that is only one. There are three different things mentioned that are the same type of thing. It is only comparable to three Gods - three different things, but all the same type of thing.
What does this verse of Scripture mean to you: “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God” (John 1:1)?
It doesn't mean very much to me. First of all, it is not Jesus speaking who never claimed to be God, but it is only the words of John, at best. Secondly, the context of the verse itself does not really allow for attributing divinity to anything. As Dr. Ali Ataie comments on the grammar of the verse:
In the first occurrence of the predicate noun “God,” it is preceded by the definite article “ton.” Therefore, the translation, “and the Word was with (the) God” is correct. The second occurrence of the predicate noun “God,” is not preceded by a definite article ton yet the Christians continue to render it as “and the Word was God” when in reality it should read, “and the word was a god.” According to Greek rules on grammar, however, a predicate noun that is preceded by a verb may be
translated as definite according to context. For example in John 4:19 we are told: “The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.” This verse can also be translated as “I perceive that thou art the
Prophet,” because the predicate noun “prophet” is preceded by the verb “ei,” or “art.” In John 1:21, the Jews ask John the Baptist, “Art thou the Prophet?” This is in reference to the Prophet of Deuteronomy 18:18, not
just any prophet. The Jews are asking him a very specific question. The woman in John 4:19 simply remarks that Jesus is a prophet. Again, the context is what determines the usage. Jesus never claims that he is
God in the Bible and always considers himself subordinate to Him, so while the translation offered by Christians of John 1:1 is grammatically correct, it is contextually incorrect.
So whatever meaning you wish to ascribe to the 'word' of God, it is clear that it is only as much a 'god' as Moses was.
In Exodus 3:14 we read, “GOD said to Moses, ‘I AM who I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I AM has sent me to you.’” The expression ‘I AM’ is the translation of the Hebrew word Yhwh—Yahweh—and is translated “Lord.” It was the personal name by which GOD revealed Himself. It occurs more than 6000 times in the Old Testament.
In John 8:58-59 we read, “’I tell you the truth,’ Jesus answered, before Abraham was born, I Am.’ At this, they picked up stones to stone Him, but Jesus hid Himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.” The Greek word for ‘I Am’ used here is eimi—to be. This term is not used in any context that contains limitation. ‘To be’ is eternal existence—no beginning and no end. People knew GOD existed before time. Jesus made them aware that He existed before time—that He was H2O in the molecular structure of liquid and He was also H20 in the molecular structure of solid.
To make things easier, I will once again quote Dr. Ali Ataie:
John 8:58 – Before Abraham was, I AM
The Christians claim that Jesus uses the Divine Name “Yahweh” that God gave to Moses in Exodus 3:14 as referring to himself in this oft-repeated verse. Let’s examine this claim more closely. The New Jerusalem Bible has translated this phrase “I am that I am” from “Ehe’ye asher ehe’ye” (Hebrew) as “I am He who is: Ego emi, Ho on” (Greek). The commentary of this verse states that this rendering of the original Hebrew of Exodus 3:14 is exactly how the seventy translators of the Greek Septuagint (LXX)2 understood the meaning to be, and these were highly educated Greek-speaking Hebrew scholars. Essentially God is telling Moses that “He who is” or He that can never die has sent him unto Pharaoh.
The Divine attribute is the phrase “Ho on” (He who is), yet Jesus in John 8:58 simply says, “Before Abraham was, ego emi.” He does not claim the divine attribute used in the Septuagint which educated Jews at the time of Jesus would have been aware of. Again, we have Christian word games being played here. The words in English are the same, namely “I am.” The Greek of John, however, is different than the Greek of Exodus 3:14. Let’s look at the entire passage:
“Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death. Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God: Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying. Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw [it], and was glad. Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.” – John 8:52-59.
So what does Jesus mean by “Before Abraham was, I am,” and why do the Jews pick up stones? Jesus is simply claiming his legitimacy in a very clever way. The Jews were so proud that they were the progeny of Abraham, so he (Jesus) hits them where it hurts most. He basically says, “Before Abraham was born into this earthly existence, I was in the knowledge and Will of God. When we all existed before the creation of the physical universe in spiritual form, Abraham longed to see my day, the day of the Messiah.” Jesus is saying that since God knew him and made him Christ before the creation of Abraham, he (Jesus) is just as legitimate as Abraham. God tells the Prophet Jeremiah: “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, [and] I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations” (Jeremiah 1:5). This is precisely what Jesus meant when he said: “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was”
(John 17:5). Is it unusual for a Prophet to speak like this? Did any other prophets prove their “bona-fides” by suggesting their pre-existence in the Will and infinite knowledge of God? The best of creation, the Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be peace and blessings) once said, “I am the seal the of the Prophets when Adam was in clay.” Surely this makes Muhammad more worthy of being a god-incarnate since Adam predates Abraham chronologically. Alas, the fundamentalist Christian’s programmed mind can only see in black and white.
Even the Baptist cousin of Jesus warns the Jews: “And think not to say within yourselves, we have Abraham to [our] father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham” (Matthew 3:9). - See Chapter 6 for a meaning of this verse. Your Christian friend may explode, “Then why do the Pharisees pick up stones?” The answer is because Jesus is claiming to be genuinely sent from God and His anointed. We are told in the Book of Deuteronomy 18:20 that false prophets must be killed. Turn the tables on your Christian buddy and ask him, “If the Jews truly believed that Jesus claimed to be God, then why don’t they use these ‘claims’ as evidence against him in the religious High Court of the Sanhedrin?” We are told in Mark 14:55: “And the chief priests and the whole council gathered together to find evidence that would warrant a death sentence, but failed to find any” (Revised English Bible). They couldn’t even get two witnesses to agree with each other! Having no reason to kill Jesus, the Jews pulled a “180” and changed their charge from blasphemy, a religious crime, to sedition or treason, a political crime. Why? Because they knew that Pilate, the Roman Procurator, would have little mercy on enemies of the state. After Pilate tells the hoards of Jews shouting for Jesus’ execution that he finds no fault in Jesus, the Jews very cleverly answer, “If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar” (John 19:12). Therefore, Pilate had little choice but to hand him over to be crucified.
The Christian will at this point be obstinate. He will cry, “No! They killed him because he claimed to be God, not just a prophet!” Answer this by simply asking him if any of the previous Hebrew prophets ever claimed to be God. He will say no. Then inquire as to why they were killed by the Jews? Jesus lashes out against his people: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not” (Matthew 23:37). Is it surprising that the Jews are constantly picking up stones against Jesus when many of the previous prophets were stoned, and they never claimed to be God?
Josh McDowell says in his book More than a Carpenter whose cover boasts over 10,000,000 copies printed worldwide (emphasis mine): “An analysis of Christ’s testimony shows that he claimed to be 1) the Son of the Blessed One (God); 2) The One who would sit at the right hand of power, and 3) the Son of Man who would come on the clouds of heaven. Each of the affirmations is distinctively messianic.” I agree. They were claims to be the Christ, not God. (Ataie,
In Defense Of Islam, pp. 9-12)
And from Dr. Laurence Brown:
‘Evidence’ #4 -- Jesus is recorded in John 8:58 as having said, “...before Abraham was, I AM” and Exodus 3:14 records God as having informed Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.”
First of all, according to the words of Jesus, is a person to conclude that Jesus had a pre-human existence? According to Jeremiah 1:5, so did Jeremiah. According to the Islamic religion, so did all mankind. Next, is a person to draw a parallel between the ‘I AM’ attributed to Jesus and that attributed to God? Once again the foundational text pokes fun at the translation. Jesus is not recorded to have said “...I AM” in capital ‘makes-me-look-like-God’ letters. Jesus is translated as having said “...I AM” in a ‘looks-like-God’s-words-in-Exodus, think-they’ll-buy-it?’ effort at textual synchronization. What Jesus is recorded to have said is ‘eimi’ in small, humble, uncapitalized, unprepossessing and non-exclusive (found 152 times in the New Testament) Greek letters which don’t justify capitals or comparison with the supposed words of God in Exodus (which themselves are not capitalized, either in the Hebrew ‘hayah’ or the Greek Septuagint ‘ho ohn’). By no means can the New Testament Greek ‘eimi’ attributed to Jesus be compared with the Old Testament Greek ‘ho ohn’ attributed to God in the Septuagint. By no means of honesty or accuracy, that is. Likewise, neither can either one of these phrases honestly be capitalized “I AM,” especially in light of the 151 other instances of ‘eimi’ being translated to the uncapitalized, “I am.” Why is ‘eimi’ capitalized once and not capitalized 151 times, if not due to the selective desires of the translators? To their own credit, most reputable Bibles avoid this textual games-playing, and translation of the words of Jesus are not capitalized to ‘I AM’ in the New International Version, the Revised Standard Version, the New Revised Standard Version, the American Standard Version, and many others. (Brown,
The First and Final Commandment, p. 112)
At this stage I should probably mention that in discussion of Christianity and Islam and the Bible and Qur'an, I will often quote from Dr. Ali Ataie and Dr. Laurence Brown who have authored the best works of Comparative Religion from the Islamic Perspective.
Dr. Ali Ataie, of the Muslim Interfaith Council, has written the book In Defense of Islam which is a comparative religion book for Muslims. His material is available from his website http://www.voiceforislam.com/
Dr. Laurence Brown MD, has written a encylopedic work on Christianity, Judaism and Islam entitled, The First and Final Commandment which is intended for Non-Muslims. Some of his material is available from his website http://www.leveltruth.com
I will skip over the points I've already commented on; if you feel I;ve missed something important, please let me know.
I do not equate Jesus with GOD.
When you say that God is Jesus and Jesus is God, that is equating the two, to me at least.
Are all the water molecules around the globe in the ice state, the liquid state, or the gas state? Or, can you find water molecules around the globe in each of these three states?
Likewise, are you saying that we can find differnt Gods in different states? Some Gods are fathers, some Gods are sons, and some Gods are Holy Spirits? Because that is the only thing that is analogous to what you;ve described.
I said, “I appreciate you giving me the freedom to quote Paul. Yes, GOD is immortal. But GOD never died.” You responded, “I'm glad we agree on this. So if God never died, then why do you claim that God died for your sins?” You have taken my statement out of context. GOD came to this earth in the form of Jesus Christ. In this sense, GOD died for us.
Either God died or He didn't die. You'll have to choose. The only way your water analogy works is if there are multiple Gods and only one from many of them dies.
To say that GOD suffers from indecision and hesitation suggests that indecision and hesitation have power and control over whom they effect. Carefully considering the consequences of your future actions is not the same as suffering from indecision and hesitation. These two factors involve lack of self-control. GOD was perfectly self-controlled.
God is also All-knowing. He already knows the consequences of what He will do and He is not a human to have to think them over.
First, the message of salvation is this: “God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” This is the simple message of Salvation. Jesus tried sharing this message for 3 years.
Why waste time? Just tell everyone, "Hey I'm going to die for your sins because I love you so much" and get it over with.
Many Christians have tried sharing this message for two centuries—and still people do not believe. How would they believe the message in one statement if they cannot believe it after it has been clearly shared over and over again (I suspect you will make a certain response to this…but I will wait and see).
Well I wasn't even planning on responding to this point since I have previously, but since you are anticipating a response I would just point out that nothing was said about belief in the discussion on atonement. The point was that God just had to die because someone needed to be punished for all these sins.
Secondly, there were believers before the time of Prophet Jesus who already had a perfect system of forgiveness in effect. They believed in God, they prayed, repented, made sacrifice to Him. There was no need for an atonement. And why the atonement in the middle of humanity's stay on earth? Why not at the beginning or at the end?
Second, GOD did not come to this earth begging people to kill Him. He did not need to make this request. They…all of us…were in the wings, waiting to kill Him. Our sin is what took Jesus Christ to His death. He did not have to ask.
But He wanted to be killed and seeing as that was the purpose of His vacation on earth, He should have said so immediately.
We all have a choice to accept what GOD has done or we can reject it. GOD will no longer send us to hell for our sin. Unfortunately, too many of us choose to walk right past Him, rejecting His free offer of forgiveness, and we ourselves march down the road to eternal destruction. Because He has forgiven us, does not me that He is going to impose His desire on us. We have a free choice to accept his forgiveness or reject it.
So from a Christian perspective, there is now no difference between a pious Christian and a mass-murder and rapist. Both will go to paradise because Go has paid for their sins. People should have fun and do whatever they like in this world, sinning as much as possible, because God has paid for their sins.
People who love to sin and couldn’t care less if GOD didn’t like it, are people who by their own choice are walking down the road to destruction.
What do you mena by destruction? God has paid for their sins so why will they be punished?
In Isaiah 1:18 we read, "Come, let us discuss this," says the LORD. "Though your sins are like scarlet, they will be as white as snow; though they are as red as crimson, they will be like wool.” By identity, a born-again Christian has a clean, healthy nature. The old nature of sin, guilt, insignificance, and unimportance are gone. In our heart’s, mind, and conscience we sense freedom and purity. Yes, humanity is as sinful today as it was before. But through Jesus Christ, we can have a new life—a new nature; a new sense of identity.
So from the crucifixion of Jesus the only difference that it made is that we will no longer be blamed for what Adam did (original sin)? But we still sins and still will be punished for our sins? Seems a little pointless to me.
The purpose of the crucifixion was to pay the price for our sin. It was our atonement. When we humble ourselves and accept what GOD has done for us, and ask Him to change who we are, He does it…He simply does it. I speak from personal experience. Yes, GOD has paid the price for our sins. Yes, we can still sin. But that’s our choice. GOD is not going to force us to travel down the road of forgiveness and grace. He offers this road to each of us. If we choose to travel this road, GOD removes the load of sin we carry, at no cost to us, and we are holy in his sight and we have every right to enter the Kingdom of Heaven for eternity. Or, we can say no thanks; I can do this on my own; I’m not ready. And we continue down the path to destruction. It’s simple…it’s very simple.
Let me be more specific. What happens to a Christian who rapes and steals and tortures and murders innocent people. God paid for his sins so he is set for paradise, right?
Thanks once again for your post.
Quote
riginally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl “But you told me that God died for your sins.” “But on the other hand, Christians say that God died (i.e. ceased to exist, became extinct) for their sins.”
I will respond again. Please be patient...and thanks for your patience and your continuing dialogue.
Now I will provide the universal definition as per Webster's Dictionary: vi. & vt. expiate; make reparation. And the online dictionary: 1. making of amends: the making of reparation for a sin or a mistake 
Sister Hana_Aku,
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks