Very interesting post. You mention there: "i Testimoni di Geova" which is, of course, Italian for: "Jehovah's Witnesses" (my religion). I didn't want Paul to be blamed for promoting the trinity doctrine. It was unknown in Bible times and isn't even mentioned in the Bible. But, by contrast, the trinity is mentioned in the Qur'an which came upon the scene centuries later.
Quran VS Bible , a thoroughly comparative study,arranged by items
- Thread starter Al-manar
- Start date
- Replies 886
- Views 174K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | PHP 8.4 patch for vBulletin 4.2.5
جوري
Soldier Through It!
- Messages
- 27,759
- Reaction score
- 6,095
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Islam
يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا تَغْلُوا فِي دِينِكُمْ وَلَا تَقُولُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ إِلَّا الْحَقَّ ۚ إِنَّمَا الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَكَلِمَتُهُ أَلْقَاهَا إِلَىٰ مَرْيَمَ وَرُوحٌ مِنْهُ ۖ فَآمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ ۖ وَلَا تَقُولُوا ثَلَاثَةٌ ۚ انْتَهُوا خَيْرًا لَكُمْ ۚ إِنَّمَا اللَّهُ إِلَٰهٌ وَاحِدٌ ۖ سُبْحَانَهُ أَنْ يَكُونَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ ۘ لَهُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ ۗ وَكَفَىٰ بِاللَّهِ وَكِيلًا [FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica]{171}
[SIZE=-1][Pickthal 4:171] O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not "Three" - Cease! (it is) better for you! - Allah is only One Allah. Far is it removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender.
لَنْ يَسْتَنْكِفَ الْمَسِيحُ أَنْ يَكُونَ عَبْدًا لِلَّهِ وَلَا الْمَلَائِكَةُ الْمُقَرَّبُونَ ۚ وَمَنْ يَسْتَنْكِفْ عَنْ عِبَادَتِهِ وَيَسْتَكْبِرْ فَسَيَحْشُرُهُمْ إِلَيْهِ جَمِيعًا [FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica]{172}[/FONT]
[SIZE=-1][Pickthal 4:172] The Messiah will never scorn to be a slave unto Allah, nor will the favoured angels. Whoso scorneth His service and is proud, all such will He assemble unto Him;
indeed mentioned in the negative.. the message couldn't be made more clear than this and at this stage you'll have no one but your own soul to blame on the day of recompense!
[/SIZE]
hope you reflect on those words and the gravity of the blasphemy you utter and put a spin on to suit your agenda!
all the best[/SIZE][/FONT]
DancesWithChair
Account Disabled
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 0
τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ said:
If you wish to make a point, do not quote from a book that many of us consider to be wrong.
It enhances my athiest-ism.
Have a nice evening and a peaceful tomorrow.
9
جوري
Soldier Through It!
- Messages
- 27,759
- Reaction score
- 6,095
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Islam
Did you get lost on your way out of shepard's pratt and make a wrong turn into an Islamic forum? Who gives a fig what this enhances for you? it could enhance your gynecomastia and klinefelter's for all we care.. go lick yourself and have a banana!
what a hoot!
Al-manar
Elite Member
- Messages
- 487
- Reaction score
- 90
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Thanx ,That is the true spirit of a civilized discussion with mutual respect , I was sure before initiating the thread ,that I will sometimes surprise the christians with words as (I agree with you..... you are right in that etc....)
but that is the way a discussion should be ...... why on earth I have to disgaree on everything ? why not to control my emotions ,knowing that it is just a peaceful discussion though disagreement?
Holy Quran 3:134 Those who spend (zakat), whether in prosperity, or in adversity; who restrain anger, and pardon men;- for Allah loves those who do good.
even if your opponent exceeded his limits and inflamed your anger .... never broaden the conflict just do it in moderate way ,otherwise?
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Amr:The Prophet said, "Whoever has the following four (characteristics) will be a pure hypocrite and whoever has one of the following four characteristics will have one characteristic of hypocrisy unless and until he gives it up. 1. Whenever he is entrusted, he betrays. 2. Whenever he speaks, he tells a lie. 3. Whenever he makes a covenant, he proves treacherous. 4. Whenever he quarrels , he behaves in a very imprudent, evil and insulting manner."
( Al- Bukhari 1.33)
everytime I read the posts of Bro Woodrow (and some other muslims and non-muslims) ,I remember that prophetic advice ...as he is not only the best in leading a civil discussion ,but he tried and posted again and again and again ,reminding muslims of the Quranic advice of restraining anger and be civil as much as possible....
May Allah reward him...
Hiroshi said:
I understand your belief as unitarian arguing that Paul & other writers of the NT ,were misunderstood by the majority of christians......
I respect your belief , though I consider it is exaggeration and bias to ignore the understanding ,that makes a possibe belief of NT writers of a divinity of Jesus (I won't say trinity) based on the text of the NT....
I consider being stuck to specific understanding of such texts , is like gambling.....
yes ,and the new testament (which you believe to be positive yet misunderstood) in positive and negative as well...Hiroshi said:
both items will be visited later ,InshaAllah...
all the best
Last edited:
I look forward to that.
Grace Seeker, did you get a post deleted? I'm sure that you made some comment about me arguing against the trinity doctrine but I can't find your comment now.
Grace Seeker
IB Legend
- Messages
- 5,343
- Reaction score
- 617
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Christianity
hmmm. There were a whole bunch of posts that got deleted in another thread "Christianity in 5 minutes", but I don't recall any posts from this thread being deleted.
It's no secret that you and I are on different sides with regard not just to belief in the Trinity, but even whether there is support for it to be found in the Bible. But I'm not sure how that would be relevant in this thread given the approach that Al-manar is taking. I did reply to Al-manar that I appreciated his post that showed support for my contention that the ideas that are behind NT writers speaking in a way that I believe supports the later developed idea of the doctrine of the Trinity had already formed within Judaism, even before the time of Jesus. And then I expanded on those ideas. Is that post gone?
No. Here it is, post #398. I don't think I've ever had cause to referece you in this thread though.
Last edited:
Thanks Grace Seeker. Actually though, that wasn't the post that I thought I had seen. I must have just been mistaken.
Reading books on the history of the doctrines of early Christianity, I have noticed that a major factor that contributed to the development of the trinity doctrine was the title given to Jesus in the prologue to John's gospel: "the Word" (Greek: "Logos").
An earlier Jewish philosopher named Philo had an idea that there was an intermediary between God and the created world. And he called that intermediary the Logos. He believed that this Logos was co-eternal with God.
Apologists and theologians of the early centuries of Christianity began to identify the Logos of John's gospel with Philo's Logos. Also they began to explore ideas from Greek philosopy. "Logos" was a technical term in Neoplatonic Greek philosophy that meant "plan", "idea", "mind" "rationality". They reasoned that, since God always had his rationality, then the Logos must have always existed with God.
Gradually, more and more divine character was attributed to the Logos (same "substance" with God, same "essence" with God, etc.) until by the fourth century the church was teaching that the Logos was God, meaning one of three co-equal persons in a trinity.
While there are verses in the Bible that trinitarians appeal to to support their beliefs, the development of the doctrine of the trinity relied more heavily on worldly Greek philosophical ideas than the scriptures.
Grace Seeker
IB Legend
- Messages
- 5,343
- Reaction score
- 617
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Christianity
Good information provided above, Hiroshi. With regard to your final conclusion though:
I don't wish to deny that those who ulltimately artculated the actual creeds had this Greek background, but I don't think it was the dominant cause for the development of the ideas behind the doctrine. To what degree do you wish for me to articulate why? This, I thought, was more a thread to be devoted to understanding and exploring JW beliefs than classical Christian theology or its origins.
I think I would need to change it to read: "...the development of the doctrine of the trinity was also somewhat influenced by Greek philosophical ideas."
I don't wish to deny that those who ulltimately artculated the actual creeds had this Greek background, but I don't think it was the dominant cause for the development of the ideas behind the doctrine. To what degree do you wish for me to articulate why? This, I thought, was more a thread to be devoted to understanding and exploring JW beliefs than classical Christian theology or its origins.
Well, judge for yourself.
In my book "Early Christian Doctrines" by the Canon J. N. D. Kelly on page 96 it states for example: "The Apologist's originality (their thought was more Philonic than Johannine) lay in drawing out the further implications of the Logos idea in order to make plausible the twofold fact of Christ's pre-temporal oneness with the Father and His manifestation in space and time. In so doing, while using such Old Testament texts as Ps. 33, 6 ("By the word of the Lord were the heavens made"), they did not hesitate to blend with them the Stoic technical distinctions between the immanent word and the word uttered or expressed." Emphasis mine.
The book gives pages and pages of explanations of doctrinal ideas based on philosophy but pecious little based on scripture.
Grace Seeker
IB Legend
- Messages
- 5,343
- Reaction score
- 617
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Christianity
I have no argument with your quote from Kelly. But note how that section from which you quoted begins on p. 95 (yes, I have the very same book on my shelf):
I think this actually backs up what I said: "those who ultimately artculated the actual creeds had this Greek background, but I don't think it was the dominant cause for the development of the ideas behind the doctrine." They further developed them, and that was influenced we all agree by Greek thought. But before that influence came to bear they already had as their starting point these other OT texts, prior Jewish thought, and then eventually John's Gospel. Note how page 93 presents both Clement and Ignatius (100-200 years before the creeds were formulated) as already being trinitarian in essence. (No pun intended.)
and then continuing higher up on p. 96, before what you quoted
I think this actually backs up what I said: "those who ultimately artculated the actual creeds had this Greek background, but I don't think it was the dominant cause for the development of the ideas behind the doctrine." They further developed them, and that was influenced we all agree by Greek thought. But before that influence came to bear they already had as their starting point these other OT texts, prior Jewish thought, and then eventually John's Gospel. Note how page 93 presents both Clement and Ignatius (100-200 years before the creeds were formulated) as already being trinitarian in essence. (No pun intended.)
Al-manar
Elite Member
- Messages
- 487
- Reaction score
- 90
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
where such title came from? as a christian unitarian ,you would say ,it came from God ,just it was misunderstood,mis-interpreted by the majority of christians...
but I won't buy that ...I believe The process was like that:
1- Old testament parallels gives evidence of a biblical sapiential heritage to the idea of the word of God as personified and manifested ...
Then
2- Such Old testament parallels resulted in Jewish exegetical ,speculative Jewish work ,eg the JEWISH WRITER Philo,targumic and midrashic parallels... which led finally to the idea of the word of God aka God becoming flesh....
I think some readers of the thread may need to take a look at such parrallels :
Excerpt from Word and glory: on the exegetical and theological background of John's prologue
Di Craig A. Evans
the writer summarized the point then provides the parrallels between John and the JEWISH interpretations:
:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Last edited:
Grace Seeker
IB Legend
- Messages
- 5,343
- Reaction score
- 617
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Christianity
Al-manar, given that you seem to have a different take on this than some of your brothers in Islam, enough so that you would quote a source that claims "the rabbinc writings is (sic) essentially the milieu in which many New Testament ideas would take shape," would you go so far as to suggest that perhaps not just John's prologue, but even Jesus' own message was influenced by these rabbinic writings?
It does seem evident though that fashionable Greek philosophy coloured the thinking of all the great minds and theologians of the early centuries. It was accepted without question and greatly admired.
I would compare it to the theory of evolution in modern times. I have found that if you tell people that you don't believe in evolution they are shocked. They think that you must either be a crank or extremely foolish and ignorant. Or both. A lot of people try to believe in evolution as well as the Bible. They think that God must have guided the natural process of evolution until man appeared. And they see the first few chapters of Genesis as some kind of allegory, not to be taken in a literal sense. Do you see how the idea of evolution permeates the thinking of almost everyone today? Well exactly the same was true of Neo-Platonic philosophy in the early centuries. But these worldly ideas carried people far away from the truth of the Bible.
Very good research Al-manar.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
that point will be concluded in next post....
peace
But the errors in this published reference work are as follows:
Philo's Logos was co-eternal with God. The Logos of John's gospel however was not. Proverbs 8:22, Colossians 1:15 and Revelation 3:14 all show Jesus as having a beginning. Also, John 1:1 does not identify the Logos as "God". Rather the verse states that the Logos was with God. This important observation is repeated in verse 2.
John 1:1 means that the Logos was a divine being of some kind but not the same God that the Logos was with. That is why Moffatt's translation of John 1:1 reads: "the Logos was divine" rather than "the Logos was God".
Jesus' statement "I am" in John 8:58 is often cited as a reference to Exodus 3:14 where in (bad) translations like the King James, God seems to call himself: "I Am". But there is no connection between these two verses. Jesus in John 8:58 uses a different expression ("ego eimi") to that found in the LXX Greek translations of Exodus ("Ho On"). Similarly, Hebrew translations of John's gospel use a different expression in Hebrew to that found in Exodus 3:14. This removes all basis for the claim that Jesus was quoting Exodus 3:14 at John 8:58.
Last edited:
Grace Seeker
IB Legend
- Messages
- 5,343
- Reaction score
- 617
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Christianity
I think you make a good analogy. Darwin's theory does seem to be everywhere and have permeated everything in our culture. Everything, that is, .... except what we actually think.
Consider the following:
I'm suggesting that just as the actual thoughts of people of your own day are different than what you perceive them to be, so were they 2000 years ago different than what you suppose.
Gerald O'Collins states categorically: "A theology of the Trinity that ignores or plays down the OT can only be radically deficient."
(The Tripersonal God: Understanding and Interpreting the Trinity, p. 11)
Veli-Matti Karkkainen writes:
Again, not denying the influence of Greek thought, but asserting that neither can one deny the existence of Jewish thought that predisposed the NT authors and subsequent generations of the Christians to be open to applying this Greek thought to ideas they had already been wrestling with. Here what no less of a figure than Wolfhart Pannenberg has to say on the subject:
O'Collins (The Tripersonal God) put it this way:
Yes, the later Greek speaking and thinking Christians went beyond the OT, and were certainly influenced by Greek philosophy with regard to how they expressed things, but without the prior Jewish thinking and the development of the potential for plurality of thought even with regard to a monotheistic God already done by rabbinical Judaism, there would have been no prepared ground for these Greek philosophies to have taken root. They went beyond the OT expression of faith, but not against it. Not because of the works of Greek authors, but because of Jewish thought, "they could hold on to the Shema of Israel while talking about Father, Son, and Spirit as one God" (Systematic Theology, Pannenberg, 1:277).