Who is the Trinity to Christians & Muslims?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Redeemed
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 1K
  • Views Views 108K
OK. I'll accept the discussion of the similarities of the names for God of Elohim and Allah. And though Jews also avoided using Elohim, we know that on at least one occassion that Jesus referred to himself as "I AM", the primary Heberew name for God. So, I will withdraw that particular objection, as I said, it might be an issue of translation, and it sounds like it is. (Pun unintended.)

As to my thoughts, it still sounds like the stuff of myth, legend, and fable to my ears.
 
Salam,

Getting off topic
it's worth discussing though, don't u think so?

but why should they?

because Mary get pregnant without marriage.

True, many might have not accepted a story of the virgin birth,

it seems, coz you said so.

but it would have been Joseph's place to say that she should have been put to death, no one else had that right

Why? is Joseph superior than God's laws?..

Also, if others were going to usurp Jospeh's right and act anyway, they would have done so long before Jesus was born.His speaking as an infant would not have helped Mary avoid being stoned to death during her pregnancy.

Didn't they supposed to wait after Mary giving birth first.

if i'm true it's another similarity with Islamic rules of stoning.
If i'm wrong it's unjust because innocent baby will get killed too,
as far as i know God is Just.

:?
 
Last edited:
MustafaMc said:
What are your thoughts on the Quranic story of Jesus miraculously speaking as an infant?

Quran 19:27 Carrying the baby, she came back to her people. They said: "O Maryam! You have brought something hard to believe! O sister (a woman from the noble family) of Haroon! Your father was not a bad man nor your mother an unchaste woman". In response she merely pointed towards the baby. They said: "How can we talk to a babe in the cradle?" Whereupon the baby spoke out: "I am indeed a servant of Allah. He has given me the Book and made me a Prophet. His blessing is with me wherever I go. He has commanded me to establish Salah and give Zakah as long as I shall live. He has exhorted me to honor my mother and has not made me domineering, hard to deal with. Peace be upon me the day I was born, the day I shall die and the Day I shall be raised to life again".

"My thoughts."
Not beyond the realm of possibility, but highly improbable that if true it was not recorded any place else. I also would find it very strange for any person, let alone a Jewish infant in the first century to even use the name "Allah" to refer to God. If Jesus had done so then, why did he not do so throughout the rest of his life? (Perhaps this is a translation issue.) Still, I take it as nothing more than myth, legend and fable, on par with stories of a toddler Jesus making clay pigeons and then turning them into live birds that flew away.

I would agree that it is nothing more than myth, legend or fable. Sounds like something from an apocryphal book written long after His life and rejected by the church as noncanonical and one of the so-called "Lost Books of the Bible." But the Quran gives it as a true story, apparently, so that would tend to cast further doubt on the validity of the Quran.

Regardless, do all Muslim scholars believe it is true? If so, do they have any commentary on it, and in particular on Jesus' death and resurrection, which the child refers to?
 
Salam.

would agree that it is nothing more than myth, legend or fable. Sounds like something from an apocryphal book written long after His life and rejected by the church as noncanonical and one of the so-called "Lost Books of the Bible." But the Quran gives it as a true story, apparently, so that would tend to cast further doubt on the validity of the Quran.

just like that huh?

Don't you think without answering my questions, that verse might be true?

:?

btw...i love your signature...and plz don't change it...it's sound so islamic.
 
Last edited:
I would agree that it is nothing more than myth, legend or fable. Sounds like something from an apocryphal book written long after His life and rejected by the church as noncanonical and one of the so-called "Lost Books of the Bible." But the Quran gives it as a true story, apparently, so that would tend to cast further doubt on the validity of the Quran.

Regardless, do all Muslim scholars believe it is true? If so, do they have any commentary on it, and in particular on Jesus' death and resurrection, which the child refers to?
I believe that you err in stating "that is nothing more than myth". You can justly say that you believe it is a myth, but you stated it as a fact. Who is to say that the apocryphal books that were rejected by the various councils (Nicea, Hippo) were not authentic. Regardless, the Quranic revelation was not based on the Bible or other writings, rather it is a direct revelation from Allah.

Yes, all Muslim scholars accept this story about Jesus speaking as an infant because it is clearly written in the Quran. We believe that Jesus has not died yet, but that he will die when he returns to earth near the end of time. After his death he will be resurrected like the rest of us.

Those more knowledgeable, please, correct any errors I may have made.
 
Regardless, do all Muslim scholars believe it is true? If so, do they have any commentary on it, and in particular on Jesus' death and resurrection, which the child refers to?

Muslim scholars have different opinions only on things which are not directly stated in the Qur'an. As for things which are clearly stated in the Qur'an, there is no space for opinions.

3:45. Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah.
3:46. "He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. And he shall be (of the company) of the righteous."


Commenting of verse 46 from Tafsir of Ibn Abbas:


{ وَيُكَلِّمُ ٱلنَّاسَ فِي ٱلْمَهْدِ وَكَهْلاً وَمِنَ ٱلصَّالِحِينَ }

(He will speak unto mankind in his cradle) in the lap of his mother, saying: I am the servant of Allah and His Messiah (and in his manhood) after he reaches 30 years old, saying that he is a prophet, (and he is of the righteous) of the messengers.
 
here are some commentary on some verses that talk about Jesus , and the plot to kill him.

3:54. And (the unbelievers) plotted and planned, and Allah too planned, and the best of planners is Allah.


{ وَمَكَرُواْ وَمَكَرَ ٱللَّهُ وَٱللَّهُ خَيْرُ ٱلْمَاكِرِينَ }

(And they schemed) they, i.e. the Jews, planned to kill Jesus, (and Allah schemed (against them)) Allah wished to kill their man Tatianos: (and Allah is the best of schemers) the strongest of those who have a will; it is also said this means: the best of Makers.


3:55. Behold! Allah said: "O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection: Then shall ye all return unto me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute.



{ إِذْ قَالَ ٱللَّهُ يٰعِيسَىٰ إِنِّي مُتَوَفِّيكَ وَرَافِعُكَ إِلَيَّ وَمُطَهِّرُكَ مِنَ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ وَجَاعِلُ ٱلَّذِينَ ٱتَّبَعُوكَ فَوْقَ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ ٱلْقِيَامَةِ ثُمَّ إِلَيَّ مَرْجِعُكُمْ فَأَحْكُمُ بَيْنَكُمْ فِيمَا كُنتُمْ فِيهِ تَخْتَلِفُونَ }

((And remember) when Allah said: O Jesus! Lo! I am gathering thee and causing thee to ascend unto Me, and am cleansing) saving (thee of those who disbelieve) in you (and am setting those who follow you) follow your Religion (above those who disbelieve) with strong argument and triumph (until the Day of Resurrection) then I shall make you to die after descent; it is also said this means: I shall make your heart die to the love of the life of this world. (Then unto Me ye will (all) return) after death, (and I shall judge between you as to that wherein) in religion (ye used to differ) to argue.
 
If you want more , then just shout, and I'll post some other inshaAllah.
 
here are some commentary on some verses that talk about Jesus , and the plot to kill him.

3:54. And (the unbelievers) plotted and planned, and Allah too planned, and the best of planners is Allah.


{ وَمَكَرُواْ وَمَكَرَ ٱللَّهُ وَٱللَّهُ خَيْرُ ٱلْمَاكِرِينَ }

(And they schemed) they, i.e. the Jews, planned to kill Jesus, (and Allah schemed (against them)) Allah wished to kill their man Tatianos: (and Allah is the best of schemers) the strongest of those who have a will; it is also said this means: the best of Makers.


So, even in Islam we have the Jews wishing to kill Jesus. According to Islamic thought what was the reason for this?
 
So, even in Islam we have the Jews wishing to kill Jesus. According to Islamic thought what was the reason for this?
reason for what?

but Qur'an tells us that Jews always used to kill the prophets of Allah.
 
reason for what?

but Qur'an tells us that Jews always used to kill the prophets of Allah.


Fine. But for what reason? Because it was tradition? Because they didn't like the message? If that, what was it in the message that they didn't like? Because God's prophets presented themselves with a holier than thou attitude that angered people? Because they claimed to talk with God? Because they wore their hair long or liked rutabagas?

Does the Qur'an disclose the reaons that the Jews always used to kill the prophets of Allah? Was it the same for each of them? Or was it one reason for this prophet and another for that? Can you be a little bit more specific please, and especially with regard to the reason that the Qur'an says that the Jews sought to kill Jesus.

Also, I don't think that all of the prophets were killed? For instance, don't you list Abraham, Moses and David as prophets? According to the Bible these folks all died natural deaths. And only David was ever pursued by people who wanted to kill him. Do you have different ends for these people in the Qur'an?
 
[FONT=&quot]With the name of ALLAH (God Almighty) -The Bestower Of Unlimited Mercy, The Continously Merciful[/FONT]

Salaam/peace;


....Does the Qur'an disclose the reaons that the Jews always used to kill the prophets of Allah? Was it the same for each of them?

ur question reminded me of this thread .



similarities between Muslims & Jewish Holy Books


http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...rities-between-muslims-jewish-holy-books.html


And the seed of Israel separated themselves from all foreigners, and stood and confessed their sins, and the iniquities of their fathers




...But they and our fathers dealt proudly, and hardened their neck, and hearkened not to Thy commandments,




....they were disobedient, and rebelled against Thee, and cast Thy law behind their back, and slew Thy prophets that did forewarn them to turn them back unto Thee,



....Yea, when they had made them a molten calf, and said: 'This is thy God


http://www.convertstoislam.org

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt35b09.htm

few related lines :


Is the Qur’an Hard on Jews?


Surah 2, verse 83:
And remember We took a covenant from the Children of Israel [to this effect]:


Worship none but Allah;


treat with kindness your parents and kindred, and orphans and those in need;


speak fair to the people;

be steadfast in prayer; and give Zakat.


Then did ye turn back, except a few among you, and ye backslide [even now].
Surah 5, verse 70:
We took the covenant of the Children of Israel and sent them messengers, every time, there came to them a messenger with what they themselves desired not - some [of these] they called impostors, and some they [go so far as to] slay.


You can even read much more if you go to Surah 5 - verse 78, Surah 7 – verse 137, Surah 10, verse 93 and Surah 17, verse 2.

...
Please read the Qur’an 2:109 and 4:54.

The Qur'an specifically notes that such criticism is not directed against all Jews. You can always see that the expression "among them there are some..." is placed before such criticisms, so that the good are not condemned along with the bad.


http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...kAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE&cid=1123996015780
 
Last edited:
here are some commentary on some verses that talk about Jesus, and the plot to kill him.

The whole flavor of those verses is that Allah out-schemed the schemers who plotted to kill Jesus, by rescuing Jesus and taking Him to Heaven. And yet that is so contrary to His primary purpose of coming to earth, to die for the sins of the world. "The Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world." So He would never abort that mission and take Him home before it was accomplished, not to mention all the OT prophecies that had to be fulfilled at Calvary.

1 John 4:
9. In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him.
10. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
11. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.
12. No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love has been perfected in us.
13. By this we know that we abide in Him, and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit.
14. And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world.
15. Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.
 
Last edited:
Fine. But for what reason? Because it was tradition? Because they didn't like the message? If that, what was it in the message that they didn't like? Because God's prophets presented themselves with a holier than thou attitude that angered people? Because they claimed to talk with God? Because they wore their hair long or liked rutabagas?

Does the Qur'an disclose the reaons that the Jews always used to kill the prophets of Allah? Was it the same for each of them? Or was it one reason for this prophet and another for that? Can you be a little bit more specific please, and especially with regard to the reason that the Qur'an says that the Jews sought to kill Jesus.

Also, I don't think that all of the prophets were killed? For instance, don't you list Abraham, Moses and David as prophets? According to the Bible these folks all died natural deaths. And only David was ever pursued by people who wanted to kill him. Do you have different ends for these people in the Qur'an?
ok , I will get to you with more detailed explanation tomorrow inshaallah cuz it's too late now and I'm going to sleep inshaallah.

and I know that some prophets died, and didn't get killed. but remember that one of the hadith states that Allah has sent 124,000 messengers. So those mentioned in the Qur'an or Bible are just few.

The whole flavor of those verses is that Allah out-schemed the schemers who plotted to kill Jesus, by rescuing Jesus and taking Him to Heaven. And yet that is so contrary to His primary purpose of coming to earth, to die for the sins of the world. "The Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world." So He would never abort that mission and take Him home before it was accomplished, not to mention all the OT prophecies that had to be fulfilled at Calvary.
I see, you are speaking from a christian point of view, but if you look from Islamic prespective, it does not contradict, bc Jesus a.s was not sent to wash the sins, but he was sent as a slave and messenger of Allah, to call people to the Oneness of Allah, as other prophets did (including Muhammed saws). :)
 
Salaam/peace ;

killing Prophets (p) by Jews.......it will be off topic here.

Anyway , to my knowledgy Prophet Yahya (p) was killed by Jews. I don't think , all names are mentioned in Quran or hadith.
 
1 John 4:
9. In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him.
10. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
11. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.
12. No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love has been perfected in us.
13. By this we know that we abide in Him, and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit.
14. And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world.
15. Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.

It's interesting that you mentioned these verses because they popped some questions in my poor excuse of a brain.

What exactly is your definition of propitiation? Does your definition differ from the one present at the time of Christ? (Meanings of the words change and so I feel it crucial that understanding the Bible as it was present then be more suitable.)

Likewise, In verse 9, it says, (and I quote) "God has sent His only begotten Son into the world"

What was the definition of Begotten at the time of Christ?


There were quite a number of texts present prior to the birth of Christ, do these definitions match the definitions present in the Bible? Or does it differ and the definition had to be modified?

Since you just put these up, I'll do some research myself and try to post the results.

:w:
 
It's interesting that you mentioned these verses because they popped some questions in my poor excuse of a brain.

What exactly is your definition of propitiation? Does your definition differ from the one present at the time of Christ? (Meanings of the words change and so I feel it crucial that understanding the Bible as it was present then be more suitable.)

Likewise, In verse 9, it says, (and I quote) "God has sent His only begotten Son into the world"

What was the definition of Begotten at the time of Christ?


There were quite a number of texts present prior to the birth of Christ, do these definitions match the definitions present in the Bible? Or does it differ and the definition had to be modified?

Since you just put these up, I'll do some research myself and try to post the results.

:w:

The word "begotten" is one of those words hard to translate from the Greek. The Greek word used, which I believe was "monoghean"(or some variation of that), meant "one of a kind", "incomparable", etc.
 
It's interesting that you mentioned these verses because they popped some questions in my poor excuse of a brain.

What exactly is your definition of propitiation? Does your definition differ from the one present at the time of Christ? (Meanings of the words change and so I feel it crucial that understanding the Bible as it was present then be more suitable.)

I've always thought of "propitiation" as an atoning sacrifice. Here is what Easton's Bible Dictionary says:

Topics: Propitia'tion

Text: that by which God is rendered propitious, i.e., by which it becomes consistent with his character and government to pardon and bless the sinner. The propitiation does not procure his love or make him loving; it only renders it consistent for him to execise his love towards sinners. In Rom. 3:25 and Heb. 9:5 (A.V., "mercy-seat") the Greek word hilasterion is used. It is the word employed by the LXX. translators in Ex. 25:17 and elsewhere as the equivalent for the Hebrew kapporeth, which means "covering," and is used of the lid of the ark of the covenant (Ex. 25:21; 30:6).

This Greek word (hilasterion) came to denote not only the mercy-seat or lid of the ark, but also propitation or reconciliation by blood. On the great day of atonement the high priest carried the blood of the sacrifice he offered for all the people within the veil and sprinkled with it the "mercy-seat," and so made propitiation.

In 1 John 2:2; 4:10, Christ is called the "propitiation for our sins." Here a different Greek word is used (hilasmos). Christ is "the propitiation," because by his becoming our substitute and assuming our obligations he expiated our guilt, covered it, by the vicarious punishment which he endured. (Comp. Heb. 2:17, where the expression "make reconciliation" of the A.V. is more correctly in the R.V. "make propitiation.")


Likewise, In verse 9, it says, (and I quote) "God has sent His only begotten Son into the world"

What was the definition of Begotten at the time of Christ?

Easton did not have "begotten" or "only begotten," but here's Elwell's Evangelical Dictionary's discussion of "only begotten":

Topics: Only Begotten

Text: The word monogenes occurs nine times in the NT, referring to Isaac (Heb. 11:17), the widow's son (Luke 7:12), Jairus's daughter (Luke 8:42), the demoniac boy (Luke 9:38), and Jesus Christ (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). In the LXX it is used to render yahid, meaning "only one" (Judg. 11:34, e.g.). Wisdom is monogenes (Wisd. Sol. 7:22), having no peer, unique.

The second half of the word is not derived from gennao, "to beget," but is an adjectival form derived from genos, "origin, race, stock," etc. Monogenes, therefore, could be rendered "one of a kind." The translation "only" will suffice for the references in Luke and Hebrews. But what about the passages in the Johannine writings? "The adjective 'only begotten' conveys the idea, not of derivation and subordination, but of uniqueness and consubstantiality: Jesus is all that God is, and He alone is this" (B. B. Warfield, Biblical Doctrines, p. 194). Cremer finds a parallel in the Pauline idios huios (Rom. 8:32). Since the Synoptists use "beloved" (agapetos) of the Son, some have concluded that the two words agapetos and monogenes are equivalent in force. But "beloved" does not point to the uniqueness of the Son's relation to the Father as monogenes does.

Though the translation "only" is lexically sound for the Johannine passages, since in all strictness "only begotten" would require monogennetos, the old rendering "only begotten" is not entirely without justification when the context in John 1:14 is considered. The verb genesthai occurs at the end of 1:13 ("born of God") and ginesthai in 1:14. These words ultimately go back to the same root as the second half of monogenes. Especially important is 1 John 5:18, where the second "born of God" must refer to Christ according to the superior Greek text. As a sample of patristic interpretation, see Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 105. At the very least it is clear that the relationship expressed by monogenes is not confined to the earthly life so as to be adaptable to an adoptionist Christology. The sonship in John is linked to preexistence (17:5, 24, and the many references to the Son as sent of the Father).

In its significance monogenes relates to several areas: (1) being or nature (uniquely God's Son), (2) the revelation of God to man (John 1:18), and (3) salvation through the Son (John 3:16; 1 John 4:9).

The Apostles' Creed is content with "only Son," which is the usual form of the Old Roman Symbol. In the Old Latin Version of the NT monogenes was rendered by unicus, but in the Vulgate it became unigenitus due to the influence of the Nicene Christological formulation upon Jerome. E. F. HARRISON


There were quite a number of texts present prior to the birth of Christ, do these definitions match the definitions present in the Bible? Or does it differ and the definition had to be modified?

I really don't know the answer to that question. Which texts are you referring to?
 
With respect to "begotten" and "only begotten", the English words "begotten" or "begat" or "born" are translations of the Greek word gennao and basically means "born of" or "generated of", with few exceptions. One of those exceptions is Matthew 1:20 where it means "conceived" and in John 3:7 Jesus uses it when he tells Nicodemus that "you must be born again". (I'll leave it to the reader to determine if he meant that literally, metaphorically, spiritually, or exactly how.)

One of the more interesting uses of gennao is 2 Timothy 2:23 -- "Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels." Here obvioulsy the type of generating being spoken of is not reproductive birth. And much the same thing occurs in Philemon 1:10 -- "I appeal to you for my son Onesimus, who became my son while I was in chains." If you know the story, you know that Onesimus was a runaway slave that came to Paul seeking protection (though Paul was himself in prison at the time) and while with him became a Christian, hence the reference to "became my son".

The phrase "only begotten" in English appears simply to be attaching the adverb "only" (meaning one, sole, single or alone) in front of "begotten". The Greek words usually translated as "only" are monos and monon, and indeed this is the way we do find "only" throughout the majority of scripture. But the phrase "only begotten" in English isn't translated from a two-word phrase (monos gennao or monon gennao), but from a compound word monogenes. And, as a compoun word, monogenes means something slightly different than either monos gennao or monon gennao would have meant as a two-word phrase.

Just as in interpreting the Arabic of the Qur'an into English there are many translations, so in interpreting the Greek of the New Testament into English there are many translations. Some of them translate monogenes as "only begotten" but others use the phrase "one and only", some just "only", and personally I prefer the translation "unique". You see, just as any compound word takes on a connotation that includes but is slightly different than it's original words taken independently (try "background", "runway", or "guidelines" for example), so too for "monogenes". It is only distantly related to gennao (to begat) and literally means "of a single kind". Of course it could be used for any unique item. It, monogenes, is even used in Hebrews 11:17-18 in reference to Isaac, though everyone new that Abraham had more than just a single son:
By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had received the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, even though God had said to him, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned." (NIV)

By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, of whom it was said, "That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:" (KJV)

So, clearly, if "only begotten" can be used in reference to Isaac, when Abraham had another son Ishmael, then the term monogenes does not mean that one is the only offspring, but more the concept of being uniquely generated, which carries with it the literal meaning "of a single kind". Isaac was the unique child of the covenant that God had promised to Abraham and Sarah. Though both Isaac and Ishmael were sons of Abraham, what was unique about Isaac was that God had promised him to Abraham through Sarah, not Hagar. So, Isaac was monogenes not because he was the only begotten son of Abraham but because he was the unique son of the covenant that God had made with Abraham.
***(Please, I am working with the Greek here to help us interpret "monogenes", not trying to make commentary on the Qur'an if it happens to differ with that aspect of the storyline.)

In this sense monogenes can refer to a person who is the single child of a parent (as in Luke 7:12, 8:42, and 9:38) or the Phoenix (see 1 Clement 25:2 at the end of this post*) because each is unique. It also very appropriately refers to Jesus, who in the understanding of the New Testament writers, was a literally one of a kind individual. So, though there are many who may refer to themselves as "begotten" or "born" (gennao) of God (see 1 John 5:1), Jesus is one of a kind. Thus he is not only gennao he is monogenes. Jesus as the monogenes is the ONE AND ONLY who can say, "I and the Father are one [hen esmen]" (John 10:30), even as he invites us to be one with each other and one joined with/in him (John 17:21-22).




*as referenced above
(This is a letter by an early Christian leader, not scripture. It is customarily dated to 95 or 96 A.D. which would make it nearly contemporaneous with the last writings of the New Testament.)
1 Clement 25:2
There is a bird, which is named the phoenix. This, being the only
one of its kind
, liveth for five hundred years; and when it hath now
reached the time of its dissolution that it should die, it maketh for
itself a coffin of frankincense and myrrh and the other spices, into
the which in the fullness of time it entereth, and so it dieth.
 
Last edited:
It's interesting that you mentioned these verses because they popped some questions in my poor excuse of a brain.

What exactly is your definition of propitiation? Does your definition differ from the one present at the time of Christ? (Meanings of the words change and so I feel it crucial that understanding the Bible as it was present then be more suitable.)

Do you have any access to theological dictionaries? I don't mean Bible dictionaries, I mean something such as either Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament or Colin Brown's Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Both are multi-volume works that I haven't seen available online, but you might find in a large library, certainly in a theological school library.

There is an excellent article on "propitiation" in my copy of Colin Brown which would probably answer your question, but I don't think you want me to copy all 20+ pages of it here.
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top