Author Topic: My 3rd study,The futile muslim-christian debate of "Is the Trinity biblical". (Read 44735 times)

Egyptian · « **on:** August 18, 2012, 05:06:20 PM »

Hundreds of heated online debates ... between Muslims and Christians ,Unitarians and Trinitarians on "Is the Trinity biblical?".... such debates attract numerous Muslim audience ,to the limit that some of them dedicate most of their times searching for whatever new debates related would appear online !!!..
many Muslims mistakenly believe that the only difference between Islam and Christianity is the issue of the nature of Jesus,that is why there are numerous Muslim-christian debates on the trinity.
I was once addicted to view such debates ,and debating others on the same topic..... till I found out after reflection ,that me and other Muslims are wasting their time in such futile debates.....

Why Muslims err when they debate Christians whether the trinity is in the bible or not?

The following is my positive criticism regarding the matter :

I have noted several mistakes committed by those good Muslims (whom I respect and wish them the best) who are,were involved in trinity debates ...

The first mistake:

They exaggerate the significance of the issue with regard to the difference between Islam and Christianity ....
their mistake here is that they are not fully aware of Islam opposing ,not only how the Christians suggest the nature of Jesus is ,but also how would they suggested his role in both past and future ,in addition to all that Islam opposes strongly the concept of blood atonement .

.................................

The second mistake:

most of them, don't realize the big difference between , the Question, Is Jesus God? and Does the bible say Jesus is God?

I contacted many Muslims whom though know the Quranic attitude towards the bible ( as partially inspired with some added fabrications therein),yet they would never put into their consideration ,the possibility that among the uninspired passages in the Bible there could be ones suggests the divinity of Jesus .
They accept that the new testament falsely teaches the crucifixion,resurrection of Jesus ,yet they will never accept that the some biblical passages ,at least possibly be understood as teaching a divinity of Jesus !!!
Their common argument is just those who belong to mainstream Christianity misunderstood them !

Now hold on ... dear Muslim pause and think !

1- Don't you realize that arguing that way,would give the impression that we accept such verses as inspired,it is just we disagree with Christians regarding how it should be understood !!

That is clearly against Islam , I will give just one example:

Do you know what is the Muslim-christian argument of the famous trinity proof text in John 1:1 ?

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

If you notice, the dispute is whether the word (logos) is God, or "... a god" or "... divine" ...
Hasn't the Muslim debater already assumed that the problem is not the passage but the way Christians understand it?!
if so ,what would he suggest the proper understanding would be? ...... it would be logically the second option..... if so , would he accept Jesus as a god (not God) or in some sense divine? is that Quranic?

Egyptian · « **Reply #1 on:** August 18, 2012, 05:19:50 PM »

more important have you read what the THE WORD (LOGOS),did according to the writer of John?

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

Through the word ,that is Jesus ,everything was created !.....
Are you ready to accept that?! Is that Quranic?!
it is obvious that the meaning that is suggested as an alternative from the text continues to contradict the Qur'an and teachings of Islam!
why would you waste your time arguing with Christians the meaning ?......
Have you any difficulty including such passage fully ,as one of the parts of the new testament to be against what the Quran defines as the true gospel revealed to Jesus,and thus has to be be rejected totally ?

.....................................................

The third mistake:

Though we got the message of the Quran that anyone, anywhere,anytime believes in the divinity of Jesus ,then has committed blasphemy ,yet I dunno why should a Muslim exclude one or more from the writers of the new testament to be a founder,believer of the belief of the deity of Jesus !!
Just where is such Islamic textual support either from the Quran or sunnah ,claiming that none of the writers of the new testament believed in the deity of Jesus ?

Egyptian · « **Reply #2 on:** August 18, 2012, 05:32:49 PM »

To add to the second mistake of confusing ,Is Jesus God? with ,Is Jesus God be biblical?

What if the divinity of Jesus proved to be biblical?
If we suppose that the trinity is biblical ,still that doesn't prove that the trinity is a fact..... Jesus ,according to the bible, atoned with his blood the sinful Christians ,but that doesn't mean it is a fact. Jesus ,according to the bible, was killed and resurrected from the dead,but that doesn't mean it is a fact.
Our position in Islam is clear . the Quran denies the deity of Jesus ,not whether it is taught in the bible, or not !..
I have contacted some in-experienced Muslims who felt disappointed after reading or listening to the christian materials that argue for the divinity of Jesus as biblical .....
those good ,pious Muslims, been confused and wrongly thought, that if the bible teaches trinity then not only Christianity is true but Islam is false !!!!

Egyptian · « **Reply #3 on:** August 18, 2012, 05:45:02 PM »

The fourth mistake:

Is when the issue of Arius be brought in the discussion .... usually the Muslim while attacking the trinity, would suggest that the Arians were true monotheists ,and a representative of the true Christians ,who been destroyed by the trinitarians (false Christians) ....

but the fact ,with careful thinking ,one would easily understand that merely the belief that Jesus is not God ,doesn't necessarily require that those adherent to such belief to be Muslims or their belief to be in accordance with Islam.......

Though Arians never believed in Jesus as God the almighty ,yet the rest of their beliefs (including their view on the pre-existence of Jesus) are against Islam !.

I believe, that not only Muslims would be wrong once they believe that Arianism is the representative of the true Christianity ,but also Christians would be wrong if they believe that Mohamed (peace be upon him) integrated and advanced the Arian theology !.....

Who are the Arians?

1-They ,unlike Muslims, believe the new testament as fully the word of God .
2-They, unlike Muslims , believe Jesus to be the son of God ,while divine , was created by God as the agent through whom he created the universe !.
3-They, unlike Muslims ,believe that Jesus was not only crucified but also atoned with his blood those who believe in his message (as it is in the new testament).

Are those supposed to be the true Christians?!!I don't find Islam agree with them in ANYTHING .....They opposed Jesus as God ,yet they preached the pre-existed ,creator Jesus !! both of the two versions against the Islamic created Jesus the prophet . Christians whether Trinitarians or Unitarians are two faces of the same coin ... no big difference is there ,indeed.

Egyptian · « **Reply #4 on:** August 18, 2012, 06:05:54 PM »

so what If a Muslim find out someday that the way that those who believe that the bible teaches Jesus divinity ,is convincing?

the mental reaction should be very simple ,and Islamic..

all what you should do, to include those writers (whether John ,Paul etc) who wrote those passages "that you are convinced to be teaching the divinity of Jesus" into the following noble verse :

The Holy Qur'an 5:72.they do blaspheme who say: "Allah is Christ the son of Mary."

don't feel sorry for them , they weren't true disciples of Jesus .....

all what they did,is that they collected some of the hearsay accounts regarding Jesus (truth and falsehoods as well) ,and added their personal exegesis,concepts ( which possibly include a concept of the divinity of Jesus) .....

To be factual , I think that a Muslim reaction to finding out that the bible teaches the divinity of Jesus,shouldn't be more than a yawn.

Egyptian · « **Reply #5 on:** August 18, 2012, 06:37:11 PM »

I would like to conclude my positive criticism , with answering the question,What made Muslims commit such mistakes...

Do you know who are the christian Unitarians? Those are the people who (even before Islam) though believed in the new testament as fully the word of God , and Jesus was crucified and atoned the sinful Christians. yet they objected to the trinity. examples of them ,The Arians ,testimony of Jehovah etc.....

their belief of the new testament as fully inspired, and at the same time rejecting the trinity ,forced them to argue that the trinity proof texts are misunderstood by the so called orthodox Christianity.

the Muslim writers made the mistake of following their arguments, assuming they have our exact position,but the fact our problem with the trinity is much deeper that their ..

out problem can't be resolved by believing that the bible has a textual support for the trinity ... because If there was such textual support ,it would be included automatically in the human made passages that are included within the Injeel..

one last word ...

I hope the dear Muslims who read that ,no longer waste their times ,getting themselves into such futile headache called "Is the trinity biblical ,the debate"....

...........................

To be continued inshallah

peace be upon you.

Final Overture · « **Reply #6 on:** August 19, 2012, 05:31:15 AM »

Quote from: Egyptian on August 18, 2012, 05:19:50 PM

3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.[/color][/b]

Through the word ,that is Jesus ,everything was created !.....

Jesus never said that through him everything was created. Jesus was rather word From God than Word of God (see the difference?). The idea that through Jesus everything is created comes from, as i think, this: "

Quote

By the word of the Lord the heavens were made

Psalms 33:6
The word "BE", as I guess

Egyptian · « **Reply #7 on:** August 19, 2012, 06:59:23 AM »

welcome Bro Final Overture,to the thread ...

First : I agree with you that The idea that through Jesus everything is created comes from "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made" ,the writer of John believed that Jesus is that word.

Second: Again I agree that "Jesus never said that through him everything was created" , it is the writer of John ,also the writer (s) of 1 Corinthians 8:6 , Colossians 1:15 , Hebrews 1:1 ,who said so .

1 Corinthians 8:6
Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

Hebrews 1 1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

Though Trinitarians understand the verses as Jesus God the pr-existent creator, Unitarians understand the verses as the function of God the Father as the SOURCE of creation is distinguished from Christ's role as MEDIATOR of creation
the Father alone is the source and his first creation (the only direct creation by Him), His only-begotten son, is the channel through whom he caused all the rest of creation to be.

Such controversy shouldn't bother us even for a minute, as both of their understandings are against Islam ... Jesus neither God the creator nor the channel through whom he caused all the rest of creation to be.
The Islamic Jesus is a by product of the word ,not the word ,and wasn't the entity through whom the universe was created....

Third : The goal of the study is not to prove a Trinitarian reading against a Unitarian one ,neither the opposite ... but rather to say that BOTH readings are against Islam , and there are no valuable consequences ,to held any of the readings for the truth of Islam .....
I explained before why the question of whether the Bible contains a textual support for the trinity,is of no merit . and should make no difference for Islam or Muslims.

Fourth : I believe that the writer of John(and others as well,eg;Paul) believed ,at least ,of the pre-existence of Jesus as a conscious entity (whatever grade such entity is considered, whether God or divine but not God)... If you read their texts without any preconceived ideas, expectations ,you most probably agree with me.

Fifth: The matter is different when it comes to the synoptic gospels .
I think nothing compelling to suggest from any passage from the synoptic gospels, that the writers,in spite of their highly,mostly non Islamic elevated views of Jesus, believed in him as God ...

I hope the next posts I elaborate more those points.

laloumen · « **Reply #8 on:** September 23, 2012, 10:39:46 PM »

Quote from: Egyptian on August 18, 2012, 05:32:49 PM

To add to the second mistake of confusing ,Is Jesus God? with ,Is Jesus God be biblical?

What if the divinity of Jesus proved to be biblical?
If we suppose that the trinity is biblical ,still that doesn't proof that the trinity is a fact..... Jesus ,according to the bible, atoned with his blood the sinful Christians ,but that doesn't mean it is a fact. Jesus ,according to the bible, was killed and resurrected from the dead,but that doesn't mean it is a fact.
Our position in Islam is clear . the Quran denies the deity of Jesus ,not whether it is taught in the bible, or not !..
I have contacted some in-experienced Muslims who felt disappointed after reading or listening to the christian materials that argue for the divinity of Jesus as biblical .....
those good ,pious Muslims, been confused and wrongly thought, that if the bible teaches trinity then not only Christianity is true but Islam is false !!!!

Here is a word from the Qu'ran:

And argue not with the People of the Scripture unless it be in (a way)
that is better, save with such of them as do wrong; and say: We believe
in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our God
and your God is One, and unto Him we surrender.
(29:46)

Given that that divinity of Jesus can be easily proven, and given that the Qu'ran states that "we believe in that what hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you" - that means you are obligated to believe in the divinity of Jesus. It says, "our God and your God is One" and our God is a Trinity - so where does that leave you, except with a disaster on your hands?

In Christ,
Jim

laloumen · « **Reply #9 on:** September 23, 2012, 11:02:38 PM »

Quote from: Egyptian on August 19, 2012, 06:59:23 AM

welcome Bro Final Overture,to the thread ...

Such controversy shouldn't bother us even for a minute, as both of their understandings are against Islam ... Jesus neither God the creator nor the channel through whom he caused all the rest of creation to be.
The Islamic Jesus is a by product of the word ,not the word ,and wasn't the entity through whom the universe was created....

Third : The goal of the study is not to prove a Trinitarian reading against a Unitarian one ,neither the opposite ... but rather to say that BOTH readings are against Islam , and there are no valuable consequences ,to held any of the readings for the truth of Islam .....
I explained before why the question of whether the Bible contains a textual support for the trinity,is of no merit . and should make no difference for Islam or Muslims.

Given that the Qu'ran says "we have believed in what was given to Jesus and the prophets" --

Say, "We have believed in Allah and in what was revealed to us and
what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Descendants,
and in what was given to Moses and Jesus and to the prophets from their Lord.
We make no distinction between any of them, and we are Muslims [submitting]
to Him."
(3:84)

and that a "prophet from their Lord" said the following concerning Jesus,

But of the Son he says,
"Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,
   the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has anointed you
   with the oil of gladness beyond your companions."

And,

"You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning,
   and the heavens are the work of your hands;
they will perish, but you remain;
   they will all wear out like a garment,
like a robe you will roll them up,
   like a garment they will be changed.
But you are the same,
   and your years will have no end."
(Hebrews 1:8-12)

It doesn't seem that there is any reason for the Muslim to reject Christ as the Creator God.

In Christ,
Jim

Egyptian · « **Reply #10 on:** September 24, 2012, 08:06:04 AM »

Quote from: laloumen on September 23, 2012, 10:39:46 PM

Given that that divinity of Jesus can be easily proven

proven biblicaly or scientifically?

If the first ,Trinity proof text been and still controversial for centuries,hence exaggeration if one say easily proven . equally exaggeration if one say it can be easily disproved.

if the second, it is impossible dream to prove it ,as it is mere an item of faith .

Quote from: laloumen on September 23, 2012, 10:39:46 PM

Here is a word from the Qu'ran:

And argue not with the People of the Scripture unless it be in (a way)
that is better, save with such of them as do wrong; and say: We believe
in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our God
and your God is One, and unto Him we surrender.
(29:46)
given that the Qu'ran states that "we believe in that what hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you" - that means you are obligated to believe in the divinity of Jesus. It says, "our God and your God is One" and our God is a Trinity - so where does that leave you, except with a disaster on your hands?

1- The real disaster on your hands ,according to the Quran ,is the horrible punishment waiting those who believe in the trinity !

Holy Quran 5:73 They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

2- There is nothing in the verse(29:46) to specify the term "people of the book" to only Christians ,but Jews must be included too ...

3- The verse means when it says: "our God and your God is One" , one with no partners .... hence ,indirectly ,attacking the trinity etc.....

Holy Quran 2:163 And your God is One God. There is no god but He, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

Holy Quran : Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for God is one God.

Allah addresses all humanity in another verse : Verily, verily, your God is one! Holy Quran 37:4

3- Applying your logic gets you into trouble , Jews don't believe in triune god ,and the new testament claims that the God of the Jews and Christians is one and the same.that means you are obligated to believe in the Non-Triune God of the Jews.
you may claim the Jews are ignorant of the true triune God ,I can argue the same that you are ignorant of the true Non-Triune God . and that should bury your argument forever.

Quote from: laloumen on September 23, 2012, 10:39:46 PM

It doesn't seem that there is any reason for the Muslim to reject Christ as the Creator God.

Muslims have lots of reasons to reject Jesus as the Creator God. including the verses that shows his nature as mere a creature ,blaspheming those who think of him as more than a creature ,servant and prophet ..... and the dozens of the verses affirming it was Allah (his father) is the one and only who is God and who is the creator.

Quote from: laloumen on September 23, 2012, 10:39:46 PM

Given that the Qur'an says "we have believed in what was given to Jesus and the prophets"

you confuse the term "new testament" with "Injeel" .... they are not one and the same ,according to the Qur'an:

Quote from: Egyptian

Injeel ?

1- A revelation was sent to Jesus, as a guidance and light, confirmation yet modifying few items of the Law that had come before him, to make clear to Jews some of the (points) on which they dispute, a guidance and an admonition to those who fear God, verses 5:046,3:50 ,43:63 ...

2 - It HAS TO BE mostly the saying parts of the the synoptic gospels

Holy Quran[007:157] "Those who follow the apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the Torah and the Injil;- for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him,- it is they who will prosper."

the Quran though tells that both the books were tampered with(we have exposed that in previous posts),yet most the truth has remained therein .....
the verse is not telling Christians,Jews to go look up a passage (s) in a lost gospel .....

the Injeel is mostly within the new testament .... why mostly? The Quran quotes the Injeel (besides the torah),directly ?

Holy Quran[009:111] God hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Torah, the Injil, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than God?

Holy Quran [048:029] Muhammad is the apostle of God; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from God and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Taurat; and their similitude in the Injil is: like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. God has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward.

Are such promise & proverb to be found in the Old and New Testament?

if they are not there, then the Saying gospel (which is within the New testament) is missing some parts.....

If the following modifications of the Law were parts of the Injeel, and no mention about them in the saying gospel, then we can be assured of missing parts in the saying gospel that are parts of the Injeel .....

Holy Quran 3:50 "'(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me.

Holy Quran 43:63 When Jesus came with Clear Signs, he said: "Now have I come to you with Wisdom, and in order to make clear to you some of the (points) on which ye dispute: therefore fear Allah and obey me.. that is why I said the Injeel is MOSTLY within the saying gospel ..

laloumen · « **Reply #11 on:** September 24, 2012, 07:54:37 PM »

Quote from: Egyptian on September 24, 2012, 08:06:04 AM

Quote from: laloumen on September 23, 2012, 10:39:46 PM
Given that that divinity of Jesus can be easily proven

proven biblicaly or scientifically?

If the first ,Trinity proof text been and still controversial for centuries,hence exaggeration if one say easily proven . equally exaggeration if one say it can be easily disproved.

if the second, it is impossible dream to prove it ,as it is mere an item of faith .

No, it is easy to prove but that is distinguished from persuasion. People can be stubborn even if the face of overwhelming proof.

Quote from: Egyptian on September 24, 2012, 08:06:04 AM

Quote from: laloumen on September 23, 2012, 10:39:46 PM
Here is a word from the Qu'ran:

And argue not with the People of the Scripture unless it be in (a way)
that is better, save with such of them as do wrong; and say: We believe
in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our God
and your God is One, and unto Him we surrender.
(29:46)
given that the Qu'ran states that "we believe in that what hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you" - that means you are obligated to believe in the divinity of Jesus. It says, "our God and your God is One" and our God is a Trinity - so where does that leave you, except with a disaster on your hands?

1- The real disaster on your hands ,according to the Quran ,is the horrible punishment waiting those who believe in the trinity !

Holy Quran 5:73 They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

2- There is nothing in the verse(29:46) to specify the term "people of the book" to only Christians ,but Jews must be included too ...

3- The verse means when it says: "our God and your God is One" , one with no partners .... hence ,indirectly ,attacking the trinity etc.....

Holy Quran 2:163 And your God is One God. There is no god but He, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

Holy Quran : Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for God is one God.

But the Qu'ran is, in my opinion, not the Word of God. It has none of the qualities of God's word. There is nothing to distinguish it from the common writing of a common man.

Quote from: Egyptian on September 24, 2012, 08:06:04 AM

Allah addresses all humanity in another verse : Verily, verily, your God is one! Holy Quran 37:4

3- Applying your logic gets you into trouble , Jews don't believe in triune god ,and the new testament claims that the God of the Jews and Christians is one and the same.that means you are obligated to believe in the Non-Triune God of the Jews.
you may claim the Jews are ignorant of the true triune God ,I can argue the same that you are ignorant of the true Non-Triune God . and that should bury your argument forever.

You think that exegesis is like a democratic process or something? As if the text has no objective meaning? For instance, when the Scripture says,

The LORD says to my Lord:
   â€œSit at my right hand,
until I make your enemies your footstool.â€
(Psalm 110:1)

who is this "Lord" referred to by David? Who could be the Lord of the king of Israel? Jesus used this passage against the Jews and they were not able to answer Him:

Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question,
saying, â€œWhat do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?â€ They said to him,
â€œThe son of David.â€ He said to them, â€œHow is it then that David, in the Spirit, calls
him Lord, saying,
   â€œâ€˜The Lord said to my Lord,
   â€œSit at my right hand,
      until I put your enemies under your feetâ€â€™?
If then David calls him Lord, how is he his son?â€ And no one was able to answer him a word,
nor from that day did anyone dare to ask him any more questions.
(Matthew 22:41-46)

How can David call Him Lord knowing that there is one true God? Simple answer: David had a glimpse of the Trinity which was more fully revealed later.

Quote from: Egyptian on September 24, 2012, 08:06:04 AM

Quote from: laloumen on September 23, 2012, 10:39:46 PM
It doesn't seem that there is any reason for the Muslim to reject Christ as the Creator God.

Muslims have lots of reasons to reject Jesus as the Creator God. including the verses that shows his nature as mere a creature ,blaspheming those who think of him as more than a creature ,servant and prophet ..... and the dozens of the verses affirming it was Allah (his father) is the one and only who is God and who is the creator.

So you just pick and choose which verses suit you instead of understanding them in the sense in which they were meant to be understood.

Quote from: Egyptian on September 24, 2012, 08:06:04 AM

Quote from: laloumen on September 23, 2012, 10:39:46 PM
Given that the Qur'an says "we have believed in what was given to Jesus and the prophets"

you confuse the term "new testament" with "Injeel" .... they are not one and the same ,according to the Qur'an:

Quote from: Egyptian

Injeel ?

1- A revelation was sent to Jesus, as a guidance and light, confirmation yet modifying few items of the Law that had come before him, to make clear to Jews some of the (points) on which they dispute, a guidance and an admonition to those who fear God, verses 5:046,3:50 ,43:63 ...

2 - It HAS TO BE mostly the saying parts of the the synoptic gospels

Holy Quran[007:157] "Those who follow the apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the Torah and the Injil;- for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him,- it is they who will prosper."

the Quran though tells that both the books were tampered with(we have exposed that in previous posts),yet most the truth has remained therein .....
the verse is not telling Christians,Jews to go look up a passage (s) in a lost gospel .....

the Injeel is mostly within the new testament .... why mostly? The Quran quotes the Injeel (besides the torah),directly ?

Holy Quran[009:111] God hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Torah, the Injil, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than God?

Holy Quran [048:029] Muhammad is the apostle of God; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from God and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Taurat; and their similitude in the Injil is: like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. God has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward.

Are such promise & proverb to be found in the Old and New Testament?

if they are not there, then the Saying gospel (which is within the New testament) is missing some parts.....

If the following modifications of the Law were parts of the Injeel, and no mention about them in the saying gospel, then we can be assured of missing parts in the saying gospel that are parts of the Injeel .....

Holy Quran 3:50 "'(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me.

Holy Quran 43:63 When Jesus came with Clear Signs, he said: "Now have I come to you with Wisdom, and in order to make clear to you some of the (points) on which ye dispute: therefore fear Allah and obey me.. that is why I said the Injeel is MOSTLY within the saying gospel ..

The Qur'an (Sura An-Nisa 4:163) states "and to David We gave the Psalms" so Psalm 110 is a problem for you.

In Christ,
Jim

Final Overture · « **Reply #12 on:** September 25, 2012, 08:24:39 AM »

Quote

How can David call Him Lord knowing that there is one true God? Simple answer: David had a glimpse of the Trinity which was more fully revealed later.

How can son of David be lord of David? Having a lord above you doesn't prove Trinity. How many lords did mankind have through whole history?

Egyptian · « **Reply #13 on:** September 25, 2012, 03:51:23 PM »

Quote from: laloumen on September 24, 2012, 07:54:37 PM

People can be stubborn even if the face of overwhelming proof.

That is not a realistic way to describe the case with the never ending controversy of the trinity,which was due to the high tension between the texts of the synoptics that view Jesus as the highly elevated Messiah yet not reaching the limit of making him God, and the texts of Paul and John that possibly refers to divinity.

caring to believe in the whole packet of the new testament as the word of God without sacrificing any ,then in one hand the Trinitarians solved the problem by a try to harmonize the synoptic view with the other view ,producing "the man-God" concept , Unitarians on the other hand rejected that view and gave alternative possible readings to John and Paul...

why would the Unitarians accept Jesus as the messiah and reject him as God?
the answer is simple , there is overwhelming proofs from the new testament that the writers of the new testament claimed him as the messiah ,with the clearest of terms , yet when it comes to divinity ,the proofs is not solid ,and open for speculations ,alternative readings.....

If you are fond of producing the overwhelming proofs of the trinity ,then plz do it with a christian Unitarian ,who will be more than interested to counter your arguments .....Good luck.
If you read the thread well ,you will find out why Muslims should be out of such debate headache ,not only that , but also you will be glad to find ,for the first time in your life, a Muslim (me) who says that it is possible "may be one day I will say most probable" that the writers of John and the writer(s) of ,Corinthians, Colossians,and Hebrews believed in Jesus as God the creator.

Quote from: laloumen on September 24, 2012, 07:54:37 PM

But the Qu'ran is, in my opinion, not the Word of God. It has none of the qualities of God's word. There is nothing to distinguish it from the common writing of a common man.

1- I didn't ask you about your opinion of the Quran , and there are other non-Muslims ,though don't believe in it as the word of God ,still disagree with your view eg:

G. Margoliouth, Introduction to J.M. Rodwell's, THE KORAN, New York: Everyman's Library,1977, p. vii.
"A work, then, which calls forth so powerful and seemingly incompatible emotions even in the distant reader - distant as to time, and still more so as a mental development - a work which not only conquers the repugnance which he may begin its perusal, but changes this adverse feeling into astonishment and admiration, such a work must be a wonderful production of the human mind indeed and a problem of the highest interest to every thoughtful observer of the destinies of mankind."

2- If you don't like it ,OK as you wish ... just you should be stood corrected anytime "as I did to you",you bring misunderstandings. your disbelief in the quran didn't protect you from misunderstanding it.

Quote from: laloumen on September 24, 2012, 07:54:37 PM

For instance, when the Scripture says,The LORD says to my Lord:â€œSit at my right hand,until I make your enemies your footstool.â€(Psalm 110:1) who is this "Lord" referred to by David? Who could be the Lord of the king of Israel? Jesus used this passage against the Jews and they were not able to answer Him:

That is the first case of you giving irrelevant comment to one of my points (plz, don't repeat that ,lest our discussion will be over for good) my point doesn't require ,quoting old testament text ( I think you might misunderstood me).... actually, such texts will be exposed totally in the right place , my thread of "origin of Christianity NT quotation of OT, is the key"

till we discuss it there "if you would like" , I can't let it without at least giving a clear,academic refutation of the verse you just quoted....

for me (and lot others) ,the story you just quotes ,is ,one of the example that writers of the new testament made up an artificial incident to make a theological point for their readers(details in the proper thread ....

good refutation for the quotation:

Quote from: Tovia Singer ,founder and director of Outreach Judaism.

Rabbi Tovia Singer ,founder and director of Outreach Judaism:

Psalm 110 represents one of the New Testamentâ€™s most stunning, yet clever, mistranslations of the Jewish Scriptures. Moreover, the confusion created by the Christianization of this verse was further perpetuated and promulgated by numerous Christian translators of the Bible. As you will soon see, some Christian translators, to their credit, refrain from manipulating this text in Psalm 110.The Church began tampering with Psalm 110 in its infancy, when the New Testament was written during the first century. In the Gospels we find the first use of Psalm 110, and it is introduced with within the framework of an anecdotal question. In the Book of Matthew Jesus
turns to the Pharisees and asks them, What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he? (Matthew 22:41-44) The question in laymenâ€™s terms is, â€œOf whom is the messiah supposed to be a descendant?â€ They said to him, â€œThe son of David.â€ He said to them, â€œHow then does David in the spirit call him â€˜Lord,â€™ saying, â€˜The Lord said to my Lord, â€œSit at My right hand, till I make your enemies your footstool?â€â€™ If David then called him Lord, how is he his son?â€ No one was able to answer him a word, neither did any man from that day forth ask him any more questions. (Matthew 22:41-44)
Although, as you will soon understand, the above conversation could not have occurred, this
narrative has been replayed over and over again in the imagination of countless Christians for nearly two millennia.
In the Christian mind, this was a terrific triumphant story. Jesus really showed those arrogant Pharisees how little they knew about their own Bible! Yet, this is precisely why this story never transpired. No Jew armed with a superficial knowledge of this chapter would have ever found Jesusâ€™ argument compelling, let alone a conversation-stopper. The depth of knowledge that the Pharisees possessed of Tanach was astounding.

Let us closely examine the original verse from which Matthewâ€™s Jesus quoted in order to grasp the manner in which the original Hebrew text was manipulated to create the above storyline. The King James Version (KJV), the most esteemed English language Christian Bibles in use today, translates this passage in the following manner, The LORD said unto my Lord, â€œSit thou on my right hand, till I put thine enemies underneath thy feet.â€ (Psalm 110:1 KJV)
It appears from the KJV translation that the â€œLord,â€ which is God, said unto to â€œmy Lordâ€ â€“who missionaries would have you believe is Jesus (Davidâ€™s â€œLordâ€) â€“ â€œSit thou on my right hand, till I put thine enemies underneath thy feet.â€

Is the above verse speaking about the messiah? Not at all. Yet look at the first and second word â€œLordâ€ in the verse (they are side by side). Were you able to detect any difference between these two words in this fundamentalist Bible? In the â€œtranslationâ€ they appear virtually identical because the Christian translator cleverly masked the text of the original Hebrew.

Psalm 110:1 King James Version (KJV) 110 The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool

Psalm 110:1 New Living Translation (NLT) Psalm 110:1 The Lord said to my Lord, â€œSit in the place of honor at my right hand until I humble your enemies, making them a footstool under your feet.â€

Although the two English words in the KJV translation were deliberately made to appear virtually identical, in the original Hebrew text they are entirely different. Whereas the first word â€œLordâ€ in the Hebrew is a correct translation of יהוה, which is the Tetragrammaton (YHWH), the ineffable name of God, the second word â€œLordâ€ is a complete and deliberate mistranslation of the text. The second word â€œLordâ€ in the verse is an appalling translation of the Hebrew word לַאדֹנִי; (pronounced ladonee). The correct and only translation of ladonee is â€œto my masterâ€ or â€œto my lord.â€ The Hebrew word adonee never refers to God anywhere in the Bible. It is used only to address a person, never God. That is to say, God, the Creator of the universe, is never called adonee in the Bible. There are many words reserved for God in the Bible; adonee, however, is not one of them.
To illustrate this vital point, letâ€™s examine other places in the Bible where the exact same Hebrew word appears and find out how the same New American Standard Bible translates it there. Bear in mind, in none of the following examples do the Christian Bibles have any incentive for mistranslating the word adonee. For example, we find the same Hebrew word, לַאדֹנִי; (ladonee), used in the following two verses which have been translated by the same King James Version where the identical word is used as in Psalm 110: And they did eat and drink, he and the men that were with him, and tarried all night; and they rose up in the morning, and he said, Send me away unto my master. (ladonee: לַאדֹנִי [Abraham].â€ (Genesis 24:54, King James Version)
Jacob instructed the angels to bring the following message to his wicked brother Esau:
â€œAnd he commanded them, saying, Thus shall ye speak unto my lord Esau; לַאדֹנִי; (ladonee)
â€˜Thy servant Jacob saith thus, I have sojourned with Laban, and stayed there until now.â€™â€ (Genesis 32:4, King James Version) The Hebrew word לַאדֹנִי; (ladonee) used in the above two verses is referring to Abraham and Esau, respectively. Notice that the Hebrew word used in both verses is identical to the Hebrew word in Psalm 110:1. Why did the King James Version translate לַאדֹנִי; correctly in Genesis 24:54 as â€œto my master,â€ or in Genesis 32:4 as â€œto my lord,â€ yet deliberately mistranslate Psalm 110:1 as â€œLordâ€? Why do most Christian Bibles make not distinction between those two words, as they do in each and every other place they appear in the Tanach?
The answer is obvious. Both Genesis 24:54 and Genesis 32:4 are not texts used by the Church to â€œproveâ€ Jesus from the Jewish Scriptures and therefore they had no incentive to tamper with them. Psalm 110:1, on the other hand, is a passage flaunted by the New Testament and its missionaries as a verse that they argue â€œunquestionably points only to Jesus,â€ and was deliberate mistranslated.
Some Christian translations are more transparent in their rendering of Psalm 110 than the New American Standard Bible. For example, the King James Version and a few other Bibles still render the second â€œLordâ€ as if it were sacred; however, they translate the first â€œLORDâ€ in upper case. This is a helpful hint to the keen observer that there is a distinction between them. Of course, itâ€™s up to the curious Bible student to then look up the second â€œLordâ€ in a Hebrew Bible. Only a careful investigation of the original Hebrew text would reveal how this verse was doctored.
It should be noted that while many Christian translators indulge in this manipulation of Psalm 110:1, some refrain from engaging in this practice. Numerous modern Christian Bibles have corrected Matthewâ€™s mistranslation. For example, the Revised Standard Version and the New English Bible correctly render the Hebrew word ladonee as â€œ to my lord,â€ in Psalm 110:1, clearly indicating that this word is not speaking of God.As mentioned above, this tampering with Psalm 110:1 began at the time the Christian Bible was written. The Christian translators, who would later also mistranslate this verse, simply followed in the footsteps of the author of the first Gospel. If we look at the original Greek of Matthew 22:44 we find the same doctoring of the text in later Christian translations of the Book of Psalms. When Matthew has Jesus quote Psalm 110:1 to the
Pharisees, the identical Greek word κύριος2 (kurios pronounced koo-re-os) is used both times
the word â€œLordâ€ appears in Matthew 22:44.Finally, it is essential that we explore the meaning of Psalm 110:1. Of whom is this Psalm speaking? To whom are the words â€œmy masterâ€ or â€œmy lordâ€ referring?The Psalm begins with the opening Hebrew words מִזְמוֹר לְדָוִד (Mizmor lâ€™David).â€ The word â€œMizmorâ€ means â€œa song,â€ and thus the opening phrase of this Psalm is, â€œA Song of David.â€ In fact,
the word Psalms comes from the Greek word ψαλμός (psalmos), which means â€œa song.â€ Bible
students are often unaware of this.Why would King David be writing these songs? For whom was he writing them? Who did King David intend to sing these songs? With these questions in mind, we can begin to understand the meaning of Psalm 110.One of King David's greatest disappointments was Godâ€™s refusal to allow him to build the first Temple in Jerusalem. Although Davidâ€™s son Solomon undertook that task, and eventually constructed the first Temple, Davidâ€™s umbilical connection to Solomonâ€™s Temple was significant.
For example, David founded the city of Jerusalem, the city where the Temple was built. In fact, both the city and the Temple were named after him, the City and Temple of David. Moreover, he made preparations for the building of the Temple, and even arranged for the Temple service (II Samuel 7; I Chronicles 14-17, 22-26). This is where the Book of Psalms played its central role. King David was a faithful servant of God who possessed extraordinary skills as a teacher, musician, and poet. In fact, King David authored most of the Book of Psalms. The central purpose of the composition of this sacred work for the Levites to sing them in the Temple. The Levites would stand on a platform and joyfully chant these spiritually exhilarating Psalms to an inspired audience. Accordingly, the Levites would sing allowed, The Lord [God] said to my master [King David] â€œSit thou at my right hand...â€ (Psalm 110:1)
For the Church, however, the Psalmistâ€™s original intent was set aside because it was zealously committed to Christianizing this verse. Thus, the opening verse in Psalm 110 was altered in order to paint Jesus into the Jewish Scriptures.Here is some advice. The only way to recognize rampant Christian tampering of the Bible is to read the passage in the original Hebrew language, without the biased filter of the Christian translator.

Sincerely yours,

Rabbi Tovia Singer
:

Quote from: laloumen on September 24, 2012, 07:54:37 PM

So you just pick and choose which verses suit you instead of understanding them in the sense in which they were meant to be understood.
:

then please do the same, pick and choose those verse that counter my arguments ,fair? do you have quranic verses that describe Jesus in a way against the way how I described him? I think that is the best place where we can go on the discussion with topics related somehow to the thread topic. I hope you focus on that point in your next post.

Quote from: laloumen on September 24, 2012, 07:54:37 PM

The Qur'an (Sura An-Nisa 4:163) states "and to David We gave the Psalms" so Psalm 110 is a problem for you.:

What problem!?

rickisam · « **Reply #14 on:** November 04, 2012, 07:18:35 AM »

This is brilliant.

I hope musllims which are actively engaging with Christian polemicists will take note of this in-depth study.

rickisam · « **Reply #15 on:** November 04, 2012, 07:40:47 AM »

Not many muslims realized that although it doesnt have clear passages which mention Jesus claim to be divine but the NT teach contradictory nature about Jesus, and not many muslims are aware of different christology in the gospels the evolution of deitification of Jesus by the works of gospel writers. They just tend to accept the premis that NT has nothing to support Jesus divinity exactly like in the OT or the Quran

bro Egyptian is right that Muslims must be equipped with knowledge of other aspects of christianity innovation that is the concept of blood atonement, a concept alien to true monotheism

Egyptian · « **Reply #16 on:** November 05, 2012, 01:01:38 PM »

Welcome Bro rickisam , thanx for your comment ...

I hope you and other Brothers ,do their best as much as possible to encourage the muslims who are actively engaging with Christian polemicists in such debates ,to rethink their position ........

those debates not only futile and waste of time ,but dangerous as well .... I know some muslims who thought of such debates as if "THE FINAL BATTLE BETWEEN ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY" !!! ....
in any war there are the gains and the loses ,isn't it?

I never forgot the day ,when I met a naive muslim ,who said once, that he decided to convert to christianity , and I asked him about his reasons for such convertion ? he answered "because he is convinced that the bible says that Jesus is God" !!!!
I immediately enlightened him of the problem of his argument, and how he was victimized by such irrelevant argument for a muslim ....
I took upon myself from that day ,to warn muslims as much as possible against that faulty approach that leads to that faulty conclusion ...

May Allah bless you and increase your wisdom and open-mindedness ,Ameen.

arsalanmoiz · « **Reply #17 on:** April 06, 2013, 07:15:02 PM »

Hello everyone

I just want to say that whenever there is a discussion/debate regarding trinity, Jesus pbuh and God Almighty is mentioned. Even Christians won't be bringing in the third part of the Trinity - Spirit .... and that is obviously because there is no such proof from the bible that can make Spirit to form Trinity.

Although christians bring up biblical verses in attempt to prove that Jesus pbuh was god, but what about Spirit, which is mentioned in the bible, there is absolutely no such verse I ever heard from bible that would indicate that Spirit that bible talks about is divine, it's god !!!

If no such proof for showing the Spirit God , then obviously no trinity.

Egyptian · « **Reply #18 on:** April 10, 2013, 12:33:36 PM »

welcome arsalanmoiz to the thread

Quote from: arsalanmoiz on April 06, 2013, 07:15:02 PM

Hello everyone

I just want to say that whenever there is a discussion/debate regarding trinity, Jesus pbuh and God Almighty is mentioned. Even Christians won't be bringing in the third part of the Trinity - Spirit ....
and that is obviously because there is no such proof from the bible that can make Spirit to form Trinity.

Christians do bring a so called textual support from the bible to prove the divinity of the holy spirit ,though with less focus than the focus on the divinity of Jesus. as they view Jesus as superior in role than the holy spirit ,in spite of their being from the same essence !

Quote from: arsalanmoiz on April 06, 2013, 07:15:02 PM

Although christians bring up biblical verses in attempt to prove that Jesus pbuh was god, but what about Spirit, which is mentioned in the bible, there is absolutely no such verse I ever heard from bible that would indicate that Spirit that bible talks about is divine, it's god !!!

If no such proof for showing the Spirit God , then obviously no trinity.

what if there is such proof that the spirit (also Jesus) is God in the bible ? does it make a difference for the muslim?
my arguments in the thread say; no difference, unless someone would convince me otherwise.

Regards

Sama · « **Reply #19 on:** April 14, 2013, 12:31:48 PM »

Quote from: Egyptian on August 18, 2012, 06:37:11 PM

I would like to conclude my positive criticism , with answering the question,What made Muslims commit such mistakes...

Do you know who are the christian Unitarians? Those are the people who (even before Islam) though believed in the new testament as fully the word of God , and Jesus was crucified and atoned the sinful Christians. yet they objected to the trinity. examples of them ,The Arians ,testimony of Jehovah etc.....

their belief of the new testament as fully inspired, and at the same time rejecting the trinity ,forced them to argue that the trinity proof texts are misunderstood by the so called orthodox Christianity.

the Muslim writers made the mistake of following their arguments, assuming they have our exact position,but the fact our problem with the trinity is much deeper that their ..

out problem can't be resolved by believing that the bible has a textual support for the trinity ... because If there was such textual support ,it would be included automatically in the human made passages that are included within the Injeel..

one last word ...

I hope the dear Muslims who read that ,no longer waste their times ,getting themselves into such futile headache called "Is the trinity biblical ,the debate"....

...........................

To be continued inshallah

peace be upon you.

Assalam alaikum
What do you suggest for a muslim to explain that trinity is wrong ?

Egyptian · « **Reply #20 on:** April 15, 2013, 12:08:58 PM »

Assalam alaikum
What do you suggest for a muslim to explain that trinity is wrong ?
[/quote]

Alaikom assalaam wr wb

Thank you for that question ...

First: It is not your duty to prove trinity as wrong , it is the burden on the shoulder of those (trinitarians) who claim it does exist ....... it is exactly as the matter of the existence of God, it is the believer who should provide proofs for his existence.
"the burden of proof lies on him who asserts"

Second:
The only proof suggested for the trinity ,is quouting the bible ,that is certainly a book of beliefs not a book of science ,in order to check and verify its truth .... you will never find the triune god to be examined into a laboratory .... it is only a matter of faith ...

Third : as I wrote before ,it is absolutely wrong to use the bible either to support the trinity or to negate its existence ..... as the best you can do is to prove that the trinity does or doesn't exist in the bible ... Unicorns is mentioned in the bible ,but does it mean that they do exist(ed) ?

Fourth : It is again wrong to argue that trinity doesn't exist because it seems illogical , as some of the matters of the unseen (even in Islam) seems illogical ,inaccessible to the human minds (including the creator who has no beginning) etc...

Fifth: So what is the proper way to question the trinity ?

Trinity is a matter of the unseen isn't it? if so we have a great instrument to disprove it ...... let's read the following precious words written by christians themselves:

â€œthe very nature of inspiration renders the bible infallible, inspiration involved infallibility from start to finish, if inspiration allows for possibility of errors ;then inspiration ceases to be inspiration.
Harold Lindsell, The Battle for the Bible

â€œEven if the errors are supposedly in â€˜minorâ€™ matters, any error opens the Bible to suspicion on other points which may not be so â€˜minor.â€™ If inerrancy falls, other doctrines will fall too.â€ If we canâ€™t trust Scripture in things like geography, chronology, and history, then how can we be sure we can trust it in its message of salvation and sanctification?
Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology, Victor Books, Wheaton, IL, 1987, electronic media.

Again. a belief in limited inerrancy demands the impossible__that a fallible exegete become an infallible discerner and interpreter of (the word of God)within the scripture .This opens the door for confusion and uncertainty ,undergirded by either subjectivism or personal bias.
Indeed can the holy spirit inspire error; can the spirit of truth inspire untruth.?
Handbook of Biblical Evidences By John Ankerberg, John Weldon

If the biblical record can be proved fallible in areas of fact that can be verified, then it is hardly to be trusted in areas where it cannot be tested. As a witness for God, the Bible would be discredited as untrustworthy. What solid truth it may contain would be left as a matter of mere conjecture, subject to the intuition or canons of likelihood of each individual. An attitude of sentimental attachment to traditional religion may incline one person to accept nearly all the substantive teachings of Scripture as probably true. But someone else with equal justification may pick and chose whatever teachings in the Bible happen to appeal to him and lay equal claim to legitimacy. One opinion is as good as another. All things are possible, but nothing is certain if indeed the Bible contains mistakes or errors of any kind (Gleason Archer ,Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties pp. 23-24).

"... But how do you know Jesus except as he is presented to you in the Bible? If the Bible is not God's Word and does not present a picture of Jesus Christ that can be trusted, how do you know it is the true Christ you are following? You may be worshipping a Christ of your own imagination." (Does Errancy Matter by James Boice, page 24)

To apply such reasonable rule on the the matter under discussion (trinity) ... we can prove that the new testament is fallible in areas of fact that can be verified in order then it is hardly to be trusted in areas where it cannot be tested.

let's be specific,ok?

what is the specific area that can't be tested ? It is the trinity ..

what is the specific suggested area ,that is strongly related to the matter,wheret the bible can be verified?

it is the claim of Jesus being the Davidic Messiah ..... what does that mean?

If Jesus is believed by the writers of the new testament as the long awaited Davidic messiah king (will be proved to be false) ,and "assuming" it is believed by them to be God as well..... Isn't proving the first to be false strongly requires the second to be false too? If Jesus is not the so called Davidic messiah,that logically leads to him not being the so called incarnated God ,as well.....isn't it?
test the so called divine Jesus ,if he failed as the davidic messiah he would fail as God as well....

Jesus as being the Davidic messiah is not a matter of the unseen , it is easily to be verfied ,just one need to read what the old testament prophecized regarding the Davidic awaited messiah and what the writer of the new testament claimed that Jesus did.....

If you compare what Jesus is written to be done and what the so called is supposed to do ...you will find out that he can't be that predicted messiah ....

AGAIN the best to way to refute the trinity :

Is to test the so called divine Jesus (a matter of the unseen) ,if he failed as the davidic messiah( a matter can be verified) he would fail as God as well..

here is my detailed thread refuting the concept that Jesus was the predicted old testament Davidic king messiah..

http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,27.0.html

Assalam alaikum

Trinity_is_Idolatry · « **Reply #21 on:** June 13, 2013, 09:56:04 AM »

The Trinity debate is blown out of proportion. Its simple to debunk. Ask a Christian this. When we stand before God in heaven, will we see three persons with three faces on three thrones or one God on one throne? The END!!!

TheEyeofGod · « **Reply #22 on:** May 15, 2014, 10:31:59 AM »

Quote from: Trinity_is_Idolatry on June 13, 2013, 09:56:04 AM

The Trinity debate is blown out of proportion. Its simple to debunk. Ask a Christian this. When we stand before God in heaven, will we see three persons with three faces on three thrones or one God on one throne? The END!!!

. :D :D :D :D at the End time, we are going to have one God

MuslimBoy · « **Reply #23 on:** May 19, 2014, 12:09:30 PM »

As-Salamu Alaikum Everyone,

:D

Brother Egyptian, According to you, Is there any was to convince a Christian that Trinity is False?

TheEyeofGod · « **Reply #24 on:** May 20, 2014, 03:01:35 PM »

Quote from: MuslimBoy on May 19, 2014, 12:09:30 PM

As-Salamu Alaikum Everyone,

:D

Brother Egyptian, According to you, Is there any was to convince a Christian that Trinity is False?

. A real christian can never be confused on that

Egyptian · « **Reply #25 on:** May 23, 2014, 01:28:25 AM »

Quote from: MuslimBoy on May 19, 2014, 12:09:30 PM

As-Salamu Alaikum Everyone,

:D

Brother Egyptian, According to you, Is there any was to convince a Christian that Trinity is False?

Salam Bro Muslimboy

...Your question is similar to when the theist asking the atheist ,what is his proofs that God doesn't exist ?!

the fact that ,the burden on the shoulder of those who alleges. it is the theist duty to prove that God does exist ,as the Trinitarians duty to prove trinity does exist ,it is their claim to begin with.

I have discussed before the problems if we resort to the bible to prove the trinity.

take care...

TheEyeofGod · « **Reply #26 on:** May 23, 2014, 04:23:40 AM »

Quote

the fact that ,the burden on the shoulder of those who alleges. it is the theist duty to prove that God does exist ,as the Trinitarians duty to prove trinity does exist ,it is their claim to begin with.

MuslimBoy · « **Reply #27 on:** May 25, 2014, 02:59:53 AM »

Quote from: Egyptian on May 23, 2014, 01:28:25 AM

Quote from: MuslimBoy on May 19, 2014, 12:09:30 PM
As-Salamu Alaikum Everyone,

:D

Brother Egyptian, According to you, Is there any was to convince a Christian that Trinity is False?

Salam Bro Muslimboy

...Your question is similar to when the theist asking the atheist ,what is his proofs that God doesn't exist ?!

the fact that ,the burden on the shoulder of those who alleges. it is the theist duty to prove that God does exist ,as the Trinitarians duty to prove trinity does exist ,it is their claim to begin with.

I have discussed before the problems if we resort to the bible to prove the trinity.

take care...

Right Bro, but what to do with Christians? Sometimes I laugh on them...... They gave ridiculous answer, links and Videos etc... One time a Christian says that we have only 3 Primary Colours, 3 Atoms in molecule of Ozone, 3 atoms in molecule of water etc................., therefore Trinity Exists. Then I think We have only two ways to deal with them. 1. Leave them 2. Prove it From Bible. And Allah Knows Best.