Unitarian Christians

[malayloveislam]

Not to waste the space, here is what Allah had told us in Glorious Quran about the inhabitants of the cave in Ephesus, since we had encountered about the apostles were sent to the city Ephesus in the below post, it had shown us that there are early Jesus followers, or the follower of Monotheism concept of One Allah who do not adhere to Trinity concept, they are earlier follower of Jesus (pbuh) even earlier than Paulus:

I had read somewhere, I think in an article from a magazine in my country that the Cave is in Jordan today 7km from Amman, the capital of today Jordan. Previously the area of that cave was called as Ar-Raqim by the locals, means the Record, the Carved, the Number. This word had been mentioned in Glorious Quran, some Quranic interpreter interprete the word as the name of the dog which accompanying the young men who hide in the cave and some interprete it as inscription. Allah told us about those young men in Surah Al-Kahfi verses 9-26. They are 7 young men, who had ran away from their polytheist people and family who worshiped idols. They hide in a cave and Allah had made them asleep in order to save their faith until they can't hear any voice for 309 years (lunar calender) and 300 years (Gregory calender). Muslim and Christian both are using the guidance from Glorious Quran and Bible to dig up the history. In Islam, those things of searching the location or the time of those men or any other things mentioned in Quran is not as important as adhering to the basis principal of Monotheism, where Allah is the One and the Only God, no other than Him. These stories are actually good lessons for Muslim, and the later community to defend our faith and not to associate Allah with any creature.

Muslim scholars had two hypothesis about when the event of those young men who are the first followers of Jesus (pbuh) hiding in the cave, they are not important for Muslims, we already believe in Glorious Quran, God knowledge is beyond the time boundaries:

1) This event happened during the reign of Roman Emperor, in Arabic his name is uttered as Diqyanus and in Latin it is Decius who had his control on Amman and rule over the area near Amman around 249-251 CE. Diqyanus is notorious as among those who hate the teaching of prophet Jesus (pbuh) and he had tortured the early followers of prophet Jesus (pbuh) in his Kingdom. Those young men are not common civilians but the sons of the ministers and officials in Decius government. Those young men fell asleep in the cave once they escape from the imprisonment and they wake up again (raised) in the time of Theodocius II (reigned in 450-521 CE).

2) This event happened during the reign of Emperor Trajan (98-117 CE). He is a staunch idolater and he killed those who had opposed his faith. Historical manuscripts had indicated that he had decreed the law about his faith as official and his subjects must stick to the official religion or risked being killed. Those young men was said being raised from their long sleep in the reign of Theodocius (408-450 CE).

The controversy about the location of the Cave:

Scholars had stated that the location might be in Turkey, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia or Spain. In Turkey itself, there are 4 locations being claimed as the location where those young men fell asleep (Ephesus, Tarsus, Kahramanmaras, and Mardin). The writer of the article had the opportunity to visit 3 locations that were claimed as the place where those young men fell asleep. They are in Abu Alanda, Jordan. Ephesus, in Turkey, and Jabal Qassiyun in Syria.

The writer of the article had made conclusion from his reading and through observations that those two locations in Ephesus and Jabal Qassiyun didn't prove much that the event happened there. He refer to Glorious Quran about the nature of the cave and he said that it is resembling the cave which is in Abu Alanda, in Jordan. He said, that three things observed by him through the assistant of Quranic verse are:

1) Surah Kahfi verse 17

"And you will see the sun when it rises, leaning to the right of their cave, and when it sink, leaving them to the left, while they are in a space of the cave..." (sorry for poor translation, this is literal, please refer to authoritative translation)

2) Surah Kahfi verse 21

"Thus, (some of them) they said: build up a building above (the cave), their God knows every matters that they are going to commit. And said those who are in charge on the matter (King's representative): "we wanted to build a mosque (place of worship)."

3) Surah kahfi verse 17

"...while they are in a space of the cave..."

The cave in Abu Alanda is wide and with space, it is also not deep.

The writer said that, above the cave, there is a place of worship constructed at that time after the young men were raised up from their long sleep. He said that the place of worship is actually the place of the followers of Jesus (pbuh) pray. The place had been turned into a mosque in the reign of Umawiyah Caliphate.

Archeological artifacts in Abu Alanda Cave:

1. There is writing carved at the curval line of the door at the eastern wall of the place of worship build above the cave saying: "the mosque had been renovated in 117 H, referring to the reign of Hisyam Ben Abdul Malik Ben Marwan of Umawiyah Caliphate. This had proven that before this the mosque was previously used by the follower of Jesus (pbuh). The remaining prove that still can be seen is the Mihrab (place of facing our face when we pray) directing toward Jerusalem.

2. Khat Kufi calligraphy carved had indicated that the second mosque at the cave had been renovated in the reign of Khomarumiah Ben Ahmad Thouloun from Abbasiah Caliphate. The second mosque here refers to the mosque constructed in front of the cave after the first mosque was renovated from the previous place of worship in Umawiyah period.

3. Nawawis remaining in the cave. Nawawi in Mu'jam Wasit (page 962) means the grave of Christians or sepulcher. At the Nawawis, there is a symbol of star with eight sharp edges pointing to the period of Rome-Byzantine rule in 3rd C. According to the customs at that time, the corpse of the dead will be kept in a sepulcher. It is possible that those who had managed the corpse of those men had buried them according to their customs and way at that time.

4. The founding of fine-earthenware, silver and bronze coins, lamps from various periods (Umawiya, Abbasiah, Uthmaniyya) in the cave and the area around. It had shown that the place had been guarded since long time ago.

5. Al-Waqidi in his book Futuhat Sham had wrote that he and his friends had stop by in Ain Ma' near the cave of the young men. They took ablution, prayed, and sleep for a while before continuing their journey tomorrow to Palestine. Ain Ma' is located 70 m from the cave.

6. An olive tree grown in front of the cave since thousand years ago. The tree was dead and the cut of the tree trunk had been displayed in the mini museum in the cave.

7. The finding of skeletons in the Nawawis (sepulchers). It is said that those skeletons belong to those young men.

From the archeological artifacts, it is possible that those young men told by God to us in Surah Kahfi had been asleep in the cave of Abu Alanda in Jordan for 300 years.

In the end, Wallahu A3lam, God knows the best.

 

[malayloveislam]

It had been said that Maar Barnaba is the one who had accepted Paulus after a while he had repented. He had never received the teaching of prophet Jesus (pbuh) directly but being classified as among the apostles (disciples). But since he himself had claimed to be among the apostles of Jesus (pbuh), thus the teaching that he had taught to the Greeks and Romans too had been claimed as "God Revelation," (Galatian 1 : 11-12).

We can interprete "God Revelation" of Paulus as God the Son who Revealed it or Revealed by God the Father or revealed by both God the Son and God the Father. We Muslim only believe that Revelation is Revealed by Allah to His messengers and prophets through the emissary of Archangel Gabriel, only prophet Moses was revealed directly which only Allah knows how did they communicate, we always hold on this statement.

Prime Christians today might be interpreting God Jesus the incarnation of God the Father who revealed the scriptures. No offence, this is just a comparison through Muslim view.

Paulus admitted that the Gospel that he had taught is not the Gospel that had been brought by the apostles other than him. Paulus said in Galatians 1:6-9:

6. I marvel that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

7. Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the Gospel of Christ.

8. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

9. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Here, we also can see Paulus attitude who narrated the gospel which is different from those that had been narrated by the apostles. Paulus had been furious and condemning everyone who do not believe in the gospel which had been narrated and hold by him. He asked everyone to just accept what had been brought and taught by him. In Islam we call this as taqlid, means accepting without further researches. He also asked everyone to believe that he is among the apostles with the argument that his reputation is no lesser than those listed apostles other than him.

Paulus said in II Corinthian 11:4-5:

4. For he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

5. For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.

It had been recorded in the scripture that the apostles (disciples) are trying to avoid Paulus until one of them who is Maar Barnaba put his trust on him and protecting him. Through Maar Barnaba, Paulus was accepted by those apostles (disciples) of prophet Jesus (pbuh) and his name Saulus was changed to Paulus.

Those whom Jesus son of Mary sent, both disciples and those who came after them, in the land were: Peter the disciple and Paul with him (Paul belonged to the followers and was not a disciple) to Rome. Andrew and Matthew to the land of the cannibals; Thomas to the land of Babel, which is in the land of the east; Philip to Carthage and Africa; John to Ephesus the city of the young men of the cave; James to Jerusalem which is Aelia the city of the sanctuary; Bartholomew to Arabia which is the land of Hijaz; Simon to the land of Berbers; Judah who was not one of the disciples was put in place of Judas.

Along the journey of spreading the teaching of prophet Jesus (pbuh), Maar Barnaba had been accompanied by Paulus, thus his notorious reputation as the killer of the prophet followers transformed into the image of the most loyal follower of the honorable prophet (pbuh). Paulus started to use the term "slave of Jesus" and "apostle of Jesus" at the beginning of his epistles.

The nature of maar Barnaba and Paulus had been portrayed in the Acts of Apostles 13:1-2:

1. Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.

2. As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.

In the list of prophet Jesus (pbuh) disciples, Lucas had mentioned Maar Barnaba at the first list and Saulus/Paulus at the last.

Because they had been chosen to co-operate, the apostles (disciples) scattered, and Maar Barnaba, Paulus, Marcus had traveled together to preach prophet Jesus (pbuh) teaching in Greece. James the son of Mary with Joseph her husband and Petrus was left behind to lead the followers.

In the Acts, it had been narrated that those apostles (disciples) sometimes were stoned in few places. Maar Barnaba and Paulus had both been successful in spreading the teaching of prophet Jesus (pbuh). Their reputation as the human-messenger of God (Jesus??) had been shining too.

In Surah Yaa-Sin, Allah had told us about a follower of prophet Jesus was stoned in Antioch. He died and he was called as Habib An-Najjar (Surah Yaa-Sin 36: 13-29, Juzz 22 and 23) , a very sad event. This man had begged his tribe to accept the teaching of the apostles (disciples). There are three disciples who had been in charge to teach those inhabitant of a town in Antioch (Antaqiya). Habib An-Najjar is among those who had accepted the teaching in Antioche. For me Habib An-Najjar is a Muslim not a Christian.

 

[malayloveislam]

Oh yeah when talking about Greeks I recall that Greeks too had entered ancient India through Alexander the Great military expansion, they might have sharing ideas in philosophy with Indians.

This had happened post-vedic time. Indian civilization had been contributed a lot to SEA, our ancestors in South East Asia had first received Brahmanism (Vedic Hinduism Cult) from India before Buddhism thrived in and then Hinduism. Only in 8th C Islam had illuminating our area. So, if you are reading the history of SEA, you can see that we have a lot of Indian influenced customs and tradition syncretised with traditional animism and shamanism.

I had remembered that I had read something about Shri Krishna Govindaswamy. He is actually a man but had been deified and Hindus claimed him as the incarnation of Vishnu Narayan. Krishna was said born by virgin Devaki and his father was said a carpenter. His birth was attended by angels, wise men, and shepherd. He was presented with gold, myrrh and frankincense. Later, he was persecuted by a tyrant who ordered the slaughter of thousands of infants.

Traditional belief based on scriptural details and astrological calculations gives the date of Krishna's birth, known as Janmashtami, as either 18 or 21 July 3228 BCE. Krishna belonged to the royal family of Mathura, and was the eighth son born to the princess Devaki, and her husband Vasudeva. Mathura was the capital of the Yadavas (also called the Surasenas), to which Krishna's parents Vasudeva and Devaki belonged to. The king Kamsa, Devaki's cousin, had ascended the throne by imprisoning his father, King Ugrasena. Afraid of a prophecy that predicted his death at the hands of Devaki's eighth son, he had locked the couple into a prison cell. After killing the first six children, and Devaki's apparent miscarriage of the seventh, being transferred to Rohini as Balarama, Krishna took birth.

Krishna is from a royal descendant and he was baptized in the river Ganges. Since he is a god, he works miracles, raised the dead and healed lepers, cured deaf and the blind. Krishna used parables to teach the people about charity and love. He lived poor life and loved the poor. He was transfigured in front of his disciples. In some traditions he died on a tree or was crucified between two thieves (1200 BC). He rose from the dead and ascended to heaven. Krishna is called the "Shepherd God" and "Lord of lords," and was considered "the Redeemer, Firstborn, Sin Bearer, Liberator, Universal Word." He is the second person of the Trinity (Trimurthi), and proclaimed himself the "Resurrection" and the "way to the Father." He was considered the "Beginning, the Middle and the End," ("Alpha and Omega"), as well as being omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. Krishna is to return to do battle with the "Prince of Evil," who will desolate the earth.

This summary is based on details from the Mahābhārata, the Harivamsa, the Bhagavata Purana and the Vishnu Purana. The scenes from the narrative are set in north India, mostly in the present states of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Haryana, Delhi and Gujarat.

Krishna is an incarnation of the second personality of Hindu Trinity who is Vishnu Narayan. Vishnu is the Lord of Love, the Preserver and his skin is dark blue. Vishnu has 10 Avatars or Incarnations (Dashavataram). I remebered I had watched a Tamil movie from India with the actor Kamal Hassan being the incarnation. I don't know if this person is a Muslim, Muslim are prohibited from playing any role as gods or divinity whether in movie, theatre, dramas, etc.

 

[malayloveislam]

To understand about how the philosophy of India too being shared by the Greeks and Romans, we have to understand about the invasion of Ionians and other barbarous classified tribes into India BC. Here are the proof that they had been in India.

"Yona" is a Pali word used in ancient India to designate Greek speakers. Its equivalent in Sanskrit is the word "Yavana". "Yona" and "Yavana" are both transliterations of the Greek word for "Ionians" (Homer Iāones, older *Iāwones), who were probably the first Greeks to be known in the East.

Direct identification of these words with the Greeks include:

1. The mention of the "Yona king Antiochus" in the Edicts of Ashoka (280 BCE)

2. The mention of the "Yona king Antialcidas" in the Heliodorus pillar in Vidisha (110 BCE)

3. King Menander and his bodyguard of "500 Yonas" in the Milinda Panha.

4. The description of Greek astrology and Greek terminology in the Yavanajataka ("Sayings of the Yavanas") (150 CE).

5. The mention of "Alexandria, the city of the Yonas" in the Mahavamsa, Chapter 29 (4th century CE).

Although the association with eastern Greeks seems to have been quite precise and systematic until the beginning of our era (other foreigners had their own descriptor, such as Sakas, Pahlavas, Kambojas etc...), these terms came to designate more generally "Europeans" and later "foreigners" in the following centuries.

Reference:
The shape of ancient thought. Comparative Studies in Greek and Indian philosophies, by Thomas Mc Evilly (Allworth Press, New York 2002) ISBN 1-58115-203-5

Try google up these for further details:

1. Greco-Buddhism

2. Yavana Kingdom

3. Names of the Greek

4. Kambojas

 

[sur]

I find it interesting that the Ahmadi use the same Qu'ran as Sunni and Shi'a Muslims, yet they have radically different beliefs regarding what it means to be Muslim.

but our concepts of divinity of GOD Almighty r same...

=========================
I'd like to contribute ti this thread:-
http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=6014259&highlight=unitarian
http://www.ccg.org/english/s/P268.html

 

[rpwelton]

From what I've read about the Ahmadis, they are sort of like the equivalent of the Mormons to Christianity.

The Ahmadis believe in prophets after Muhammad (peace be upon him) and additional revelation that they've incorporated into traditional Islamic teachings.

So in that sense, they are not the same as Unitarians being considered Christian because as far as I know, Unitarianism (maybe not the name but the general belief) existed from Day 1 of Christianity, whereas Ahmadism came about just a few centuries ago.

 

[sur]

:exhausted

I hear this a lot. Muslims <a onMouseOver="javascript:window.status='writing';return true;" onMouseOut="javascript:window.status='';return true;" href="http://dingalone.info/?v=3%2E03&ss=writing">writing</a> that Paul introduced, even invented, the concept of Trinity. And then in the next post I will read where someone likes to point out that the word Trinity can't even be found in the Bible. These seem like contrasting views that can't both be relevant. (Notice I didn't say that they can't both be true.)

Anyway, since you assert that Paul introduce the Trinity concept, can you please identify for me where you see that he did this?

most quoted verse refering to trinity in bible (1John:5:7) was an interpolation/fabrication:-
http://av1611.com/kjbp/faq/holland_1jo5_7.html

*Paul admit here that he was the 1st one given "Mystery" about Jesus:-
EPH 3:3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) 5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed......


*Other disciples who met Jesus in his life-on-earth, bitterly opposed Paul in many things who "NEVER" even met Jesus:-
Gal:2:11 When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong.
1COR 3:4 For while one saith, I follow Paul; and another, I follow Apollos; are ye not carnal?




*Paul did invent gospels- Did any other disciple claimed like “MY Gospel”???
ROM 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
ROM 16:25 Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
1COR 7:17: ….this is the rule I(Paul) lay down in all the churches

 

[sur]

From what I've read about the Ahmadis, they are sort of like the equivalent of the Mormons to Christianity.

The Ahmadis believe in prophets after Muhammad (peace be upon him) and additional revelation that they've incorporated into traditional Islamic teachings.

So in that sense, they are not the same as Unitarians being considered Christian because as far as I know, Unitarianism (maybe not the name but the general belief) existed from Day 1 of Christianity, whereas Ahmadism came about just a few centuries ago.

there r at least 2 main groups in Ahmadis, one take Mirza Ahmad as prophet while other group(Lahori Group) takes him as "Wali" (Saint) & not as prophet.

 

[جوري]

I find it interesting that the Ahmadi use the same Qu'ran as Sunni and Shi'a Muslims, yet they have radically different beliefs regarding what it means to be Muslim.

Actually they don't use the same Quran!

cheers

 

[جوري]

Name of Questioner

Muslimah - Indonesia​

Title

Qadyaniyyah in Focus​

Question

Dear scholars, As-Salaam `Alaykum
Would you please shed some light on the Ahmadiyyah or Qadyaniyyah movement? Jazakum Allah khayran.
​

Date

06/Jul/2002​

Name of Counsellor

Islam Online Fatwa Editing Desk​

Topic

Ideologies, Movements & Religions​

Answer​

Wa`alykum As-Salaamu Warahmatullahi Wabarakaatuh.

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger.

Dear sister in Islam, thanks for showing great keenness on understanding the teachings of your religion and we pray to Allah to keep us firm on the Straight Path.

As regards the question you posed, we quote for you the fatwa issued by Islamic Fiqh Academy on Qadyaniyyah, with slight additions from other sources. It goes as follows:

Definition:

Qadyaniyyah (also known as Ahmadiyyah) is an Indian-based movement that was established under the patronage of the British colonial powers in 1900 for the aim of driving Muslims away from their religion and, most definitely, the religious duty of Jihad, which, they feared, might be used to stage rebellion against the British occupation. The mouthpiece of the movement was Religions, a magazine that was issued in English at that time.

Dogmas and Ideology:

Ghulam Ahmad, the founder of the movement, began his activities as an Islamic caller to attract as many supporters as he could. Later, he claimed himself a reformer and a divinely-inspired man. Afterwards, he said that he was the awaited Mahdi. Later on, he claimed prophethood and even said that his prophethood was much better than that of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him.

The followers of this group believe that Allah, Glorified be He, performs some acts befitting the mortals, like fasting, praying, sleeping, and even committing mistakes. But Allah Almighty is Far Exalted above what they say!

A Qadyani believes that his lord is English as he speaks to him in English. He also believes that Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, is not the seal of Prophets and that Allah Almighty sends new prophets according to time and need, and that Ghulam Ahmad is the greatest prophet. The followers of this sect also believe that Angel Gabriel used to come to Ghulam Ahmad and convey revelations to him. In addition, they say that the only accepted book is the book presented by Ghulam Ahmad, his words are the only accepted words and that all prophets stand under his control. Furthermore, they believe that their book, known as Al-Mubeen is a heavenly-revealed one.

They continue spreading their false ideas by saying that they have a new religion totally different from all other religions and that the companions of Ghulam Ahmad are like the Prophet’s Companions. Moreover, they say that Qadyan, their leader’s place of birth, is like, or even better than, Makkah and Madinah, so they take it as their prayer direction and a center of pilgrimage. They call for ignoring Jihad and showing complete obedience to the British empire, because it represents the ruler to whom obedience is due. To them, every Muslim is a Kafir (disbeliever) until he converts to their belief, and that anyone who marries a non-Qadyani is considered an unbeliever. They also allow wine, opium, intoxicants and drugs.

In 1914 the followers of Ghulam Ahmad were divided into two groups. The overwhelming majority of his followers belong to the first group known as Qadyanis and were headed by Bashiruddin Mahmud, the second successor of Ghulam Ahmad. The second group known as Lahori, and founded by Muhammad ‘Ali Lahori, is a minority among the followers of Ghulam Ahmad. The second group have a less striking tone of their principles by claiming that they do not believe in Ghulam Ahmad as a prophet in the real sense of the term but as Mujaddid (a renovator). However, they still believe him to be true in all other claims, which led Muslims to regard them also as outside the pale of Islam.

Qadianiyah in the Eyes of Muslims:

On the month of Rabi` Al-Awwal 1394 A.H. (April 1974 A.C.) a large conference was held in the Muslim World League headquarters in Makkah and was attended by many representatives of international Islamic organizations. The communiqué issued by this conference branded this group as Kafirs (unbelievers). It also recommended that all Muslims should stand to face this group and never deal with its members and not to bury them in Muslim cemeteries.

Moreover, Qadyaniyyah followers have good relations with Israel that helped them issue a special magazine (that stands as their mouthpiece) and many other pamphlets that are distributed all over the world.

Conclusion:

Based on the above-mentioned facts, we can say that Qadyaniyyah is a deviant group that has nothing to do with Islam. Muslims are to be aware of them especially after they have been branded as Kafirs by all scholars.


For more information, you can read the following:

- Muhammad Iqbal, Islam and Ahmadism, Lahore-Pakistan, 1976.
- Syed Abul Ala Maudoodi, The Qadiani Problem, Karachi, 1956.
- Ehsan Elahi Zaheer, Qadiyaniat: An Analytical Survey, Lahore-Pakistan, 1976.
- Mahmood A. Ghazi, Qadiani Problem and Position of the Lahori Group, Islamic Book Foundation, Islamabad, 1991.
- Bashir Ahmad, Ahamadiyya Movement: British Jewish Connections, Islamabad, 1994.

- Mane`Bin Hammad Al-Juhani, Al-Mawsu`ah Al-Muyassarah fi Al-Adyan wal Madhahib Al-Mu`asirah.

​

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...h-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544300


they use a modified Quran, and actually believe that Ghulam was christ re-incarnate, so perhaps they should be considered a christian sect instead, considering their conception was also at the hands of christian brits?


I'd ask the mods not to remove this post because it is the most concise and excellent explanation of the kaffir agenda against Islam

 

[Whatsthepoint]

...

 

[Grace Seeker]

Unitarianism (maybe not the name but the general belief) existed from Day 1 of Christianity, whereas Ahmadism came about just a few centuries ago.

I disagree. Unitarianism as it presently exists did not exist as a part of Christianity "from Day 1." Let us look at the first sermon given on the birthday of the Church, which was Pentecost. The sermon is given by Peter (notice, not Paul) and is recorded in the Book of Acts, chapter 2:

Acts 2

1When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.
5Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? 8Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? 9Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome 11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs-we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!" 12Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, "What does this mean?"

13Some, however, made fun of them and said, "They have had too much wine."

14Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: "Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say. 15These men are not drunk, as you suppose. It's only nine in the morning! 16No, this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:
17" 'In the last days, God says,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people.
Your sons and daughters will prophesy,
your young men will see visions,
your old men will dream dreams.
18Even on my servants, both men and women,
I will pour out my Spirit in those days,
and they will prophesy.
19I will show wonders in the heaven above
and signs on the earth below,
blood and fire and billows of smoke.
20The sun will be turned to darkness
and the moon to blood
before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord.
21And everyone who calls
on the name of the Lord will be saved.'
22"Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 23This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. 24But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. 25David said about him:
" 'I saw the Lord always before me.
Because he is at my right hand,
I will not be shaken.
26Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices;
my body also will live in hope,
27because you will not abandon me to the grave,
nor will you let your Holy One see decay.
28You have made known to me the paths of life;
you will fill me with joy in your presence.'

29"Brothers, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. 30But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. 31Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay. 32God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. 33Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear. 34For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said,
" 'The Lord said to my Lord:
"Sit at my right hand
35until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet." '

36"Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ."

37When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, "Brothers, what shall we do?"

38Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call."

40With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, "Save yourselves from this corrupt generation." 41Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

Notice that Peter refers to "the Lord" as "our God" (verse 39) and also says that God has made Jesus "both Lord and Christ" (verse 36). So, the use of the term "Lord" in reference to Jesus not the equivalent of saying "sir", but of referencing Jesus as "God". This is further substantiated by the reference to the "coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord" (verse 20), a reference taken from the Tanakh that speaks of God's day breaking forth on the earth. Plus we are told that "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved" (verse 21). For Jesus to be not just Christ (or Messiah), but also Lord is tantamount to Peter equating Jesus with the God of the Tanakh.

To cap this off, Peter notes that the prophecy says that it is those who call on the name of the Lord (i.e. the God of the Jews) who will be saved, and when the Jews who have gathered in the Jerusalem hear his sermon the ask Peter what it is that they need to do (verse 37). But Peter's answer is not to call on the name of the Lord, but rather to "repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ" (verse 38). It is then, after they have made such an identification with Jesus (who Peter says is not just the Lord's anointed but the Lord himself), that they are to receive God's gift of the Holy Spirit in their lives.


Finally, please note that the allusions to the Holy Spirit are written as if it is God himself at work in people's lives.

These are not the views of what passes today for Unitarianism, but they are the views of the very first Christians on "Day 1"!

 

[Grace Seeker]

If I might go beyond "Day 1", for what purpose do you think it was that...

Saul [i.e., Paul] was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord's disciples. [Or that Paul] went to the high priest and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any there who belonged to the Way [i.e., Christianity], whether men or women, he might take them as prisoners to Jerusalem.

If the eariliest Christians were in fact good monotheistic unitarians, what objection would the Jews have had against them?

The fact is that it is a myth that the earliest Christians were Unitarians. Though later these ideas began to infiltrate the church, they were not present in the beginning.

 

[rpwelton]

If I might go beyond "Day 1", for what purpose do you think it was that... If the eariliest Christians were in fact good monotheistic unitarians, what objection would the Jews have had against them?

The fact is that it is a myth that the earliest Christians were Unitarians. Though later these ideas began to infiltrate the church, they were not present in the beginning.

When I say Unitarian, I basically mean believing that Jesus is only a prophet and not God incarnate. Obviously today's Unitarians do not follow the Jewish law, but their core belief of holding Jesus as a prophet goes all the way back to the foundations of Christianity.

I am going to research this further and get back to you with some evidence. However, for now I will say that there were a group of Jews that followed Jesus' brother James and they practiced strict Judaism.

 

[Grace Seeker]

When I say Unitarian, I basically mean believing that Jesus is only a prophet and not God incarnate. Obviously today's Unitarians do not follow the Jewish law, but their core belief of holding Jesus as a prophet goes all the way back to the foundations of Christianity.

Again, I disagree. That was not a core belief that goes back to the foundations of Christianity. Read Peter's sermon again and you won't find that view expressed there in what is the founding sermon of the Christian faith.

You might also want to check out the Didache, which was the teaching of the church, argued by some to have been in use even before the first book of what became the New Testament was written. It is the most Jewish of all Christian writings, and perhaps for this reason, while some sought to include it as part of the New Testament, it was ultimately not included as part of the canon. Nevertheless it is definitely both Christian and Trinitarian -- just check out the baptismal formula: "Concerning baptism, baptize in this way : having first rehearsed all these things, baptize in the Name of the Father, the Son and of the Holy Spirit, in living water" (The Didache, 7:1).

I am going to research this further and get back to you with some evidence. However, for now I will say that there were a group of Jews that followed Jesus' brother James and they practiced strict Judaism.

Well, as along as any group was practicing strict Judaism, then they weren't Christian. It is what you do with Jesus that delineates pure Jews from Christians-Jews.

As to James, tradition holds that the Lord had a brother named James who did become a leader of the church, based in Jerusalem, and that he was the author of the book of James in the Bible. That book is clearly the most Jewish of all of the books in the New Testament. I still see Jesus lifted up as Lord in it and then the the Lord and God being used as equivalent terms. But another thing you will want to look at in your research is that according to Galatians, the earliest book of the New Testament...

James, Peter and John, those reputed to be pillars [of the Church], gave me [Paul] and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me [to preach the Gospel of Jesus]. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews.

And we all know exactly what it was the Paul preached regarding Jesus. So, if James was in agreement with Paul regarding this, as Paul claims he was, then it seems that James was every bit as Trinitarian as Paul. And this is independently backed up in the book of Acts. James rules over the Council of Jerusalem in which Paul was brought before the Apostles for redress by elements in the Church that by then were pressing that any Gentile converts to Christianity must become Jews first in order to be considered part of the Church. After hear all sides, James makes the following decision that Gentiles should honor what are considered the Noahide commands of the Tanakh for non-Jews to be considered righteous, but that they do not have to become Jews. Further, he sends Paul and Barnabas back to out on the mission field with a letter that includes the following line: "So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 15:25-26). In other words, James is calling Jesus Lord. In the context of the book of Acts, that means that James is calling Jesus God, just as Peter had done in Acts chapter 2.

Again, I'm not saying that you don't have some who try to turn Christianity back into a unitarian religion fairly early in the life of the Church. But such views simple do NOT represent the foundational beliefs of the Church. And when they were first met, they were vigorously opposed across the board by the likes of Peter, James, and John, not to mention Paul (who was perhaps the last of that list of persons to come to the conclusion that Jesus was Lord).

 

[جوري]

Matthew 16:13-19 Now when Jesus came into the parts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, “Who do men say that the Son of man is?” And they said, “Some [say] John the Baptist; some, Elijah; and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.” He said unto them, “But who do you say that I am?” And Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered and said unto him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-jonah: for flesh and blood has not revealed it unto you, but my Father who is in heaven.” And I also say unto you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
However, immediately after this Peter is strongly reprimanded and called Satan.
Matthew 16:20-23 Then he charged the disciples that they should tell no man that he was the Christ. From that time Jesus began to show unto his disciples, that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, be killed, and the third day be raised up. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, “Be it far from you, Lord: this shall never be unto you.” But he turned, and said unto Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: you art a stumbling-block unto me: for you have in mind not the things of God, but the things of men.”
I believe that this latter response by Jesus was actually his response to Peter in the first quote above but the scribes placed it out of context to change the meaning.


on a seprate note.. did Jesus actually refer to peter as peter? doesn't sound like a very 'Jewish' name

cheers

 

[Keltoi]

Matthew 16:13-19 Now when Jesus came into the parts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, “Who do men say that the Son of man is?” And they said, “Some [say] John the Baptist; some, Elijah; and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.” He said unto them, “But who do you say that I am?” And Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered and said unto him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-jonah: for flesh and blood has not revealed it unto you, but my Father who is in heaven.” And I also say unto you, that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
However, immediately after this Peter is strongly reprimanded and called Satan.
Matthew 16:20-23 Then he charged the disciples that they should tell no man that he was the Christ. From that time Jesus began to show unto his disciples, that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, be killed, and the third day be raised up. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, “Be it far from you, Lord: this shall never be unto you.” But he turned, and said unto Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: you art a stumbling-block unto me: for you have in mind not the things of God, but the things of men.”
I believe that this latter response by Jesus was actually his response to Peter in the first quote above but the scribes placed it out of context to change the meaning.


on a seprate note.. did Jesus actually refer to peter as peter? doesn't sound like a very 'Jewish' name

cheers

No, Christ's response to Peter in this verse is directed at Peter's belief that Jesus would not be taken, tortured, and killed in Jerusalem.

When Christ says: "Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do." He is accusing Peter of attempting to deflect Christ from His God-appointed course. Something that Satan attempted to do during the Temptation.

As for Peter's name, he was actually called Simon son of Jonah, but was given the Aramaic name Cephas by Jesus or the early Church. The name means "rock" and was translated into Greek as "Peter."

 

[جوري]

No, Christ's response to Peter in this verse is directed at Peter's belief that Jesus would not be taken, tortured, and killed in Jerusalem.

When Christ says: "Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do." He is accusing Peter of attempting to deflect Christ from His God-appointed course. Something that Satan attempted to do during the Temptation.

Sure.. whatever tickles your fancy

As for Peter's name, he was actually called Simon son of Jonah, but was given the Aramaic name Cephas by Jesus or the early Church. The name means "rock" and was translated into Greek as "Peter."

I know what his real name was, it was a rhetorical questions to highlight how not just names but the religion evolves by Chinese whispers ..

petrosal indeed denotes (rock like or calcified) thanks for stating the obvious

cheers

 

[Keltoi]

Sure.. whatever tickles your fancy

...and the same would apply to your imaginative conclusion

I know what his real name was, it was a rhetorical questions to highlight how not just names but the religion evolves by Chinese whispers ..

petrosal indeed denotes (rock like or calcified) thanks for stating the obvious

cheers

Oh forgive me, I mistakenly took your question seriously.

As for the changing names, this was the Hellenistic world. The Greek language was the language of commerce and scholarship. The fact that Peter recieved a Greek name has no bearing on Christianity whatsoever...outside of your obvious need for it to be so.

 

[جوري]

...and the same would apply to your imaginative conclusion

A strange thing, this gift called logic & and reasonable sound judgment!

Oh forgive me, I mistakenly took your question seriously.

Judging by your constant lack of cohesion and replies that have no relevance whatsoever to the questions, I am not surprised you are unable to distinguish satire from true inquiry!

As for the changing names, this was the Hellenistic world. The Greek language was the language of commerce and scholarship. The fact that Peter recieved a Greek name has no bearing on Christianity whatsoever...outside of your obvious need for it to be so.

Again, whatever tickles your fancy.. If you'll make Gods of men divide them by three, with alter egos and mothers and the anticlimax of eating sins, a name change hardly seems like the sore spot in that heap of mess...

cheers