• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Prophet Jesus (PBUH) Never Claimed Divinity

A-ManESL

Well-Known Member
Islam persistently says there is only one God. So what is meant by "oneness of God"?

I feel there are certain misconceptions you have regarding Islam, two of which are that it claims superiority over religions and that the concept of panentheism is not there in Islam.

Aside from that also I feel that the Reality, cant be described in totality in any human thought, so arguing about various ideas of God, as to which is correct is immaterial. Saint Ramakrishna said that it is both with form, and formless. Hence if the novice is uncomfortable with the fact as to how both these conflicting positions are the same, then better (s)he stick with one and start the spiritual journey with that one idea.

Please take a look at this article discussing the transcendental nature of unity existing Islam and Hinduism, once we move beyond the threshold of exoterism. Also your confusion regarding what is meant by deen and oneness of God might be resolved by reading it.

:)

Regards
 
Last edited:

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in Hindu scriptures

I use to watch Videos by Zakir. I have seen his meetings degrade into bullying sessions with him behaving in a seeming nice way. All the while agitating his crowed to the point, if I was there I would leave do to safety concerns. So I have no interest in looking at your clips. I do not see him as a good Muslim or a good man. I have seen many Muslim scholars that have given lectures at Hindu meetings. I have never seen any of them sink to his level. They have been polite as well as being educated. I am a great fan of Dr Seyyed Hossein Nasr

Dr Seyyed Hossein Nasr
[youtube]jcWnfCXJW4E[/youtube]
YouTube - Is Theism Coherent?

I see Dr Zakir in such a negative light he gives me a bias against Islam. I don't want to have a bias against anybody.
 
Last edited:

Green Kepi

Active Member
Yes i am Muslim alhumdillah and i dont even have 0.000000000000000000000000000000001% doubt about my religion

If you read all the major world scriptures

you'll always find "oneness of God" is always mentioned even though the people who practice the religion against it

like Quran says in al-Ikhlâs

[SIZE=-1] Sa[/SIZE]y: He is Allah, the One and Only!
Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
He begetteth not nor is He begotten.
And there is none like unto Him

Also in major world scriptures you'll find that at some place or another "The coming of the prophet will be mentioned who'll guide the world"

Dang dude...that's a lot. I've never really met anyone who claims to have "arrived" and has no doubts about anything...how does that feel?
 

Islam432

Practicing Muslim
Dang dude...that's a lot. I've never really met anyone who claims to have "arrived" and has no doubts about anything...how does that feel?

i guess you have never met a 'practicing muslims' then , who follows the teaching of Quran and sunnah , not the so-called ' moderate muslims '
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
I
We believe that he was one of the mightiest Messengers of Allah (swt).

One may ask, if both Muslims and Christians love and respect Jesus (pbuh), where exactly is the parting of ways? The major difference between Islam and Christianity is the Christians’ insistence on the supposed divinity of Christ (pbuh). A study of the Christian scriptures reveals that Jesus (pbuh) never claimed divinity. In fact there is not a single unequivocal statement in the entire Bible where Jesus (pbuh) himself says, "I am God" or where he says, "worship me". In fact the Bible contains statements attributed to Jesus (pbuh) in which he preached quite the contrary.

The truth is that Muslims do not believe the message of Jesus. Claiming that they believe Jesus is a messenger and then not believing the messge is antithetical.

I have proven otherwise on a thread in Religious Debates titled "Did Jesus say He is God."

This is not a fact; it is an assumption.

This statement is completely false.
 

Sufi

Member
Please...your Quran is not without translation errors either. Just one example out of many...Mohammad knew that the Christians believed in a son of god, so he assumed the Jews did too:


YUSUFALI: The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
PICKTHAL: And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!
SHAKIR: And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!

This is a mistake. Find me a Jew that talks about Ezra. You can't. Especially one that talks about Ezra being the son of god. You see, the Jews find the whole son of god thing to be blasphemous. They would not say it.

Jewish Convert to Islam and Islamic Scholar Muhammed Asad wrote the following commentary:

''
As regards the belief attributed to the Jews that Ezra (or, in the Arabicized form of this name,
'Uzayr) was "God's son", it is to be noted that almost all classical commentators of the Qur'an agree
in that only the Jews of Arabia, and not all Jews, have been thus accused. (According to a Tradition
on the authority of Ibn 'Abbas - quoted by Tabari in his commentary on this verse - some of the Jews
of Medina once said to Muhammad, "How could we follow thee when thou hast forsaken our qiblah and
dost not consider Ezra a son of God?") On the other hand, Ezra occupies a unique position in the
esteem of all Jews, and has always been praised by them in the most extravagant terms. It was he
who restored and codified the Torah after it had been lost during the Babylonian Exile, and "edited"
it in more or less the form which it has today; and thus "he promoted the establishment of an
exclusive, legalistic type of religion that became dominant in later Judaism" (Encyclopaedia Britannica,
1963, vol. IX, p. 15). Ever since then he has been venerated to such a degree that his verdicts
on the Law of Moses have come to be regarded by the Talmudists as being practically equivalent to
the Law itself: which, in Qur'anic ideology, amounts to the unforgivable sin of shirk, inasmuch as
it implies the elevation of a human being to the status of a quasi-divine law-giver and the blasphemous
attribution to him - albeit metaphorically - of the quality of "sonship" in relation to God. Cf.
in this connection Exodus iv, 22-23 ("Israel is My son") or Jeremiah xxxi, 9 ("I am a father to
Israel"): expressions to which, because of their idolatrous implications, the Qur'an takes strong
exception.''

(Muhammad Asad/Leopold Weiss, Message of the Quran)
 

Sufi

Member
Surely, you are not serious. If you were to convert...that would then make you an unbeliever. So...tell me...what does this then mean? Hadith 9:50... "whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him.

“Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them.” Koran 2:19/Hadith 9:4.

[youtube]4e7zeuXIcio[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4e7zeuXIcio

Mr Kepi the verses are in Quran 2:190/191 and not 2:19 for the sake of clarification i will post the whole verse rather than taking things out of context wich can be easily done with the ''Bible'' as well

2:190
AND FIGHT in God's cause against those who wage war against you, but do not commit aggression - for, verily, God
does not love aggressors.167 (2:191) And slay them wherever you may come upon them, and drive them away from
wherever they drove you away - for oppression is even worse than killing.168 And fight not against them near the
Inviolable House of Worship unless they fight against you there first;169 but if they fight against you, slay them: such shall
be the recompense of those who deny the truth.
2:192
But if they desist - behold, God is much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace.

167 This and the following verses lay down unequivocally that only self-defence (in the widest
sense of the word) makes war permissible for Muslims. Most of the commentators agree in that
the expression la ta'tadu signifies, in this context, "do not commit aggression"; while by
al-mu'tadin "those who commit aggression" are meant. The defensive character of a fight
"in God's cause" - that is, in the cause of the ethical principles ordained by God - is,
moreover, self-evident in the reference to "those who wage war against you", and has been
still further clarified in 22:39 - "permission [to fight] is given to those against whom war
is being wrongfully waged" - which, according to all available Traditions, constitutes the
earliest (and therefore fundamental) Qur'anic reference to the question of jihad, or
holy war (see Tabari and Ibn Kathir in their commentaries on 22:39). That this early,
fundamental principle of self-defence as the only possible justification of war has been

168 In view of the preceding ordinance, the injunction "slay them wherever you may come upon
them" is valid only within the context of hostilities already in progress (Razi), on the
understanding that "those who wage war against you" are the aggressors or oppressors (a
war of liberation being a war "in God's cause"). The translation, in this context, of
fitnah as "oppression" is justified by the application of this term to any affliction which
may cause man to go astray and to lose his faith in spiritual values (cf. Lisan al-'Arab).
169 This reference to warfare in the vicinity of Mecca is due to the fact that at the time
of the revelation of this verse the Holy City was still in the possession of the pagan Quraysh,
who were hostile to the Muslims. However - as is always the case with historical references
in the Qur'an - the above injunction has a general import, and is valid for all times
and circumstances.

(Taken from Muhammad Asad's/Leopold Weiss's, Message of the Quran)
 

Sufi

Member
Okay...correction. If you will notice...I am not claiming to be a Jew. I am Christian. The Laws of Moses has no authority over me. I am under one Law and that is the Law of Christ (which is only one law) and that is 'To Love others as myself'. Now...that's the hard one! To love my enemies. I have no problem treating my enemies as humanly as they will let me, but the love part is hard. And...I have read the 3 English translations and studied his life...but, I also understand...that's not supposed to be good enough....

By the way, you're doing a great job of defending Islam...but weren't you the one that has left your faith...why?

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. Matthew 5:17

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law. Matthew 5:18

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven Matthew 5:19

And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. Luke 16:17
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Actually when you read the verse it says "sprit of truth" not "holy sprit" and many christian scholars agree its referring to the a prophet to come

And yes your own interpretation because

you said

"nothing will disappear from the Law UNTIL everything is accomplished"...meaning His death on the Cross.

if it was true why was supposedly Jesus(pbuh) saying this when he was put on cross

'Eli Eli lama sabachthani - Oh God Oh God (my God my God) why did you forsake me' Mathew 27:46? its an only Hebrew quotation

If everything was accomplished why was he asking God , that have you forsaken me...does it sounds logical , you be the judge

The Spirit of Truth is Jesus. John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me.

"spirit of truth" does not equate to prophet.

This appears to be an assumption on your part. I expect everything to mean just that and there is plenty yet to come.

Jesus was quoting a psalm that predicted the crucifixion so that all men would know that He was fulfilling prophecy.

I would question whether He is questioning God or not. As God He certainly knows His own motives for doing things and doesn't need to question them. I suspect it is more like the Passover service where a question is asked by the leader but the leader already knows the answer. That means the question is for the hearers not the speaker.
 

Sufi

Member
This Yemeni Jews refutes all your claims!
[youtube]65zyICBKBPI[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65zyICBKBPI

The Crescent: A Legitimate Symbol of Islam?
[youtube]lV8QbTRjOi8[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lV8QbTRjOi8&feature=related

Even in idolatrous pre-Islamic Arabia, Allah was
revered as the creator of the heavens and the earth
and lord of the worlds. In distinction to the cults of
hundreds of lesser pagan gods, pre-Islamic Arabian
worship of Allah was never associated with an idol,
including Hubal—Pat Robertson’s “moon god of
Mecca,” whom he erroneously associates with Allah.

Hubal
was the chief idol of pagan Mecca but had

no historical or theological connection with Allah
or, for that matter, even with the moon. Hubal was
venerated as a god of divination, and its cult was
relatively new, having been introduced to Mecca
only a few generations before Muhammad’s time,
probably originating among the ancient Moabites or


Mesopotamians.
http://www.nawawi.org/downloads/article2.pdf

(ONE GOD Many Names
A Nawawi Foundation Paper

by Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah)
 
Last edited:

Muffled

Jesus in me
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. Matthew 5:17

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law. Matthew 5:18

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven Matthew 5:19

And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. Luke 16:17

This is the meaning of being under the Law of Christ. It does not mean that the Christian is ignoring Mosaic law but only that the Law of Moses is being fulfiled in Christ for us.

"Thou shalt not murder" is not simply a law for us but an understanding of God's love for all people through Jesus who is living (continuously) His love in us.
 

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
He is always a pleasure to read indeed. I have recently started reading up on the traditionalism and Hossein Nasr belongs to that school. You might be interested in this other forum also, if you feel attracted to that school of thought.

Regards

He was the key note speaker at a Hindu meeting. I was very impressed. I have also read Frithjof Schuon and Martin Lings because of him. His book The Need for a Sacred Science is a good counter balance to modern thought.
 

Islam432

Practicing Muslim
The truth is that Muslims do not believe the message of Jesus. Claiming that they believe Jesus is a messenger and then not believing the messge is antithetical.

I have proven otherwise on a thread in Religious Debates titled "Did Jesus say He is God."

This is not a fact; it is an assumption.

This statement is completely false.

First of all , we believe in revelation given to Jesus(Pbuh) not Bible but 'Injeel' which was the original form of Bible , the current Bible you see has been corrupted with time , it contains words of peter, paul , john,historians etc so its no longer in its pure form (some Christian scholars even agree to that) as it has mathematical errors ,historical contradiction's etc just to prove it

And the message of old prophet's isnt needed anymore

Just as bible says:

"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear.But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come."John 16:11-13

1. John chapter 14 verse 16:
"And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever."

2. Gospel of John chapter 15 verse 26:
"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which
proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me."


3. Gospel of John chapter 16 verse 7:
"Nevertheless I tell you the truth; it is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not
come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you".


"Ahmed" or "Muhammad" meaning "the one who praises" or "the praised one" is almost the translation of the
Greek word Periclytos. In the Gospel of John 14:16, 15:26, and 16:7. The word 'Comforter' is used in the English translation for the Greek word Paracletos which means advocate or a kind friend rather than a comforter.
Paracletos is the warped reading for Periclytos. Jesus (pbuh) actually prophesised Ahmed by name. Even the
Greek word Paraclete refers to the Prophet (pbuh) who is a mercy for all creatures.

Some Christians say that the Comforter mentioned in these prophecies refers to the Holy Sprit. They fail to realise
that the prophecy clearly says that only if Jesus (pbuh) departs will the Comforter come. The Bible states that the
Holy Spirit was already present on earth before and during the time of Jesus (pbuh), in the womb of Elizabeth, and again when Jesus (pbuh) was being baptised, etc. Hence this prophecy refers to none other than Prophet Muhammad (Pbuh)

And the message of all the previous Messengers(Pbuh all) isn't needed anymore , because those messenger(Pbuh all) were sent to a particular tribe and for a particular time , But as Quran mentions Hazrat Muhammad (pbuh) is the last and final messenger sent by Allah and for all of the humankind for eternity , so other revelations aren't needed anymore

"We have not sent thee but as a universal (Messenger) to men, giving them glad tidings and warning them (against sin), but most men understand not."
[Al-Qur'an 34:28]


"And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said, 'O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me and giving glad tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmed.' But when he came to them with clear signs, they said, 'This is evident sorcery!' "

[Al-Qur'an Chapter 61:6]


And the point to be noted is no Muslim is a Muslim until he believes in all the messenger's of Allah which he sent from time to time including Prophet Jesus(pbuh) & Moses(pbuh)

Muslim is a person who submits his will to Allah and so is Jesus (pbuh) as he said, "not my will but thy will be done." John 5:30
Prophet jesus(Pbuh) was a muslim
 
Last edited:

Islam432

Practicing Muslim
Islam persistently says there is only one God. So what is meant by "oneness of God"?

Oneness of God (Tawheed) means devoting worship to Allah/God alone , no one else ,

A common Hindu believes everything is god(although it is against there scripture) , and A Muslim believes everything is God's
 

Bowman

Active Member
First of all , we believe in revelation given to Jesus(Pbuh) not Bible but 'Injeel' which was the original form of Bible , the current Bible you see has been corrupted with time , it contains words of peter, paul , john,historians etc so its no longer in its pure form (some Christian scholars even agree to that) as it has mathematical errors ,historical contradiction's etc just to prove it


There is one slight problem here.

The fact that the word “Gospel” resides within the pages of the Koran, should be cause of great concern for followers of Islam.

الإنجيل= “al” + “injeeli” = “al-injeeli” = ‘The Gospel’

“Al-injeeli” is an Arabicized word from the Greek ευαγγελιον “euaggelion”.

The Greek word “euaggelion” means ‘Salvation through Jesus Christ’.

Hence, the very fact that the authors of the Koran had to borrow a word from outside Arabic, in order to relate to the Jesus Christ that they were writing about, totally decimates Islamic theology.

The borrowed word “al-injeeli” must impart the original meaning, otherwise there would be no need to borrow it in the first place….and this meaning is ‘Salvation through Jesus Christ’.

Time to wake up…Muslims…!
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
There is one slight problem here.

The fact that the word “Gospel” resides within the pages of the Koran, should be cause of great concern for followers of Islam.

الإنجيل= “al” + “injeeli” = “al-injeeli” = ‘The Gospel’

“Al-injeeli” is an Arabicized word from the Greek ευαγγελιον “euaggelion”.

The Greek word “euaggelion” means ‘Salvation through Jesus Christ’.

Hence, the very fact that the authors of the Koran had to borrow a word from outside Arabic, in order to relate to the Jesus Christ that they were writing about, totally decimates Islamic theology.

The borrowed word “al-injeeli” must impart the original meaning, otherwise there would be no need to borrow it in the first place….and this meaning is ‘Salvation through Jesus Christ’.

Time to wake up…Muslims…!

This is how Wikipedia puts it: The term evangelical has its etymological roots in the Greek word for "gospel" or "good news": ευαγγελιον (evangelion), from eu- "good" and angelion "message." In that sense, to be evangelical would mean to be a believer in the gospel, that is the message of Jesus Christ
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
First of all , we believe in revelation given to Jesus(Pbuh) not Bible but 'Injeel' which was the original form of Bible , the current Bible you see has been corrupted with time , it contains words of peter, paul , john,historians etc so its no longer in its pure form (some Christian scholars even agree to that) as it has mathematical errors ,historical contradiction's etc just to prove it

Ths is a flase claim. There is no revelation given to Jesus outside of the Bible. By rejecting the Bible, Jesus is rejected and your claim to believe in Him is worthless.

Although there are minor instances of this, there is not enough evidence to consider the whole as corrupt. The concept that minor corruptions indicate major ones is pure speculation and without foundation.

The words of the Gospel that were recorded by the authors were the words of Jesus. When John reports Jesus as saying "I and My Father are one," the words are the words of Jesus not of John.

There is no evidence that a pure form existed. The Bible that we have today contains the only recorded words of Jesus without any reference to any previous form.
 

A Thousand Suns

Rationalist
Ths is a flase claim. There is no revelation given to Jesus outside of the Bible. By rejecting the Bible, Jesus is rejected and your claim to believe in Him is worthless.

Although there are minor instances of this, there is not enough evidence to consider the whole as corrupt. The concept that minor corruptions indicate major ones is pure speculation and without foundation.

The words of the Gospel that were recorded by the authors were the words of Jesus. When John reports Jesus as saying "I and My Father are one," the words are the words of Jesus not of John.

There is no evidence that a pure form existed. The Bible that we have today contains the only recorded words of Jesus without any reference to any previous form.
Its already been answered ,your quoting bible out of context

"I and my father are one."

This verse, however is quoted out of context. The complete passage, starting with John 10:23, reads as follows:

"And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one."

John 10:23-30

In divinity? In a holy "Trinity"? No! They are one in PURPOSE. Just as no one shall pluck them out of Jesus' hand, so too shall no one pluck them out of God's hand.

Need more proof? Then read:

"Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one."

John 17:20-22

Is all of mankind also part of the "Trinity"?

Such terminology can be found in many other places, read for example:

"Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit,"

1 Corinthians 6:15-17

And also

"One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all."

Ephesians 4:6

And

"For as the (human) body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many."

1 Corinthians 12:12-14

Once we read the above verses and understand what the message was that Paul was trying to get across, then we can begin to understand his words in such places as

"There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all."

Ephesians 4:4

"St. Paul" was speaking about Christian unity, not about a plurality of gods merged into one body. As we shall soon see, he was completely ignorant of where his teachings would later lead, and how decades later, they would be the foundations which would spawn the "Trinity" doctrine.

p.s i like your colorful posts
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Its already been answered ,your quoting bible out of context

"I and my father are one."

This verse, however is quoted out of context. The complete passage, starting with John 10:23, reads as follows:

"And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one."

John 10:23-30

In divinity? In a holy "Trinity"? No! They are one in PURPOSE. Just as no one shall pluck them out of Jesus' hand, so too shall no one pluck them out of God's hand.

Need more proof? Then read:

"Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one."

John 17:20-22

Is all of mankind also part of the "Trinity"?

Such terminology can be found in many other places, read for example:

"Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit,"

1 Corinthians 6:15-17

And also

"One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all."

Ephesians 4:6

And

"For as the (human) body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many."

1 Corinthians 12:12-14

Once we read the above verses and understand what the message was that Paul was trying to get across, then we can begin to understand his words in such places as

"There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all."

Ephesians 4:4

"St. Paul" was speaking about Christian unity, not about a plurality of gods merged into one body. As we shall soon see, he was completely ignorant of where his teachings would later lead, and how decades later, they would be the foundations which would spawn the "Trinity" doctrine.

p.s i like your colorful posts

You are correct in requiring context. I was simply providing an instance of Jesus making a direct statement. I assume that you are corroborating that this word is from Jesus.

Yes, the context supports the divinty of Jesus according to His claim. Your "No" and "one purpose" are incorrect and not found in the context.

This is not proof that Jesus is only one in purpose with God.

No, only those who have the Holy Spirit residing within.

There is no "plurality of gods." There is only one God in the Father, the Son and the Paraclete.

Not everyone does but I like to have some way of referring back to what you have said. It is my desire to be responsive. Is that not what debate is all about?
I try to prove my points and disprove yours in a rebuttal. I will answer your rebuttal with further proofs.
 
Top