The Quran and the Son of God

[j1i]

Thank you, I would say that the "dream of eternal life" you mentioned revolves around these facts:

1) Humans sin
2) Humans sin when they disobey conscience (they act against that voice that says "no")
3) Jesus died and rose so that all who trust Him, when He returns, will transform them to obey that voice, so they may enter Heaven IMHO

Also, the New Testament can be proven to not have been written 300 years after Jesus:

1) Most every verse in the New Testament was shared in correspondence between church leaders during the 1st and 2nd centuries
2) Archaeology, a modern science the NT writers did not have access to, has shown numerous points in the NT, demonstrating the NT was written in the 1st century

Thank you for writing my brother
Thank you for your kind and sincere feelings in writing what you think is useful to me

I appreciate your human feelings
I am therefore understanding and willing to have a strong friendship despite differences
We know that brothers in one house quarrel and enter into a fight
But they keep his brother bear the pure heart with each party retain his convictions


hawkins wrote this

1) 10 out of the 12 Jesus' direct disciples (they are eye-witnesses) martyred themselves to testify the truth of Jesus.
In the ancient world, nothing can be made more credible than the "middle man" being willing to die for what has been witnessed.

my answer
There is no scriptural text in their time that proves that Jesus is God

Because honestly, there will be many claims in the world's continents of divinity, including Hinduism

Everyone tries to put an element of verbal proof

This is ineffective because the author may be a liar because of the frequent presence of allegations

Here, because of our inability to reveal the truth, we must be in a safe situation

There is no document

In the Old Testament there are prophecies that speak of events that will occur in the future but never touched on the idea that there will be a God living in the earth

Does this involve poor planning from GOD and this raises suspicion

I will try be more positive
We love Jesus very much
My mother is Mary
One of my relatives named Jesus Haha
Jesus is a name that we can use in Islam

GOD bless you

 

[Niblo]

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

You write: ‘Why do you ask me what I believe about Yeshua, then follow by telling me what Irenaeus and Tertullian believed, as if I am compelled to agree or disagree with them?

Whether you agree, or disagree, with Irenaeus and Tertullian is not my concern. Rest assured, when it comes to the nature of Yeshua the man they most certainly disagree with you!

Both believed that Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) had two natures: that he was ‘fully God’ and ‘fully man’. This part of our conversation is concerned with what is meant by ‘fully man’.

According to Irenaeus, Yeshua’s human nature was no different from ours. He suffered; he ‘struggled’; he ‘went through every stage of human life.’ (see ‘Adversus Haereses’; Book 3).

Tertullian asks us to ‘look closely at the Lord’s corporeal substance (for) it is to his flesh that people pose questions.’

He reminds us that Yeshua (according to the New Testament) was crucified and buried; but that he ‘rose from the dead after burial’. He asks: ‘In what way will these things hold true of (Christ) if he himself was not true, if he did not truly have what it takes to be crucified, to die, to be buried, and to be raised – that is, this flesh of ours, suffused with blood, built up on bones, woven through with sinews, intertwined with veins?’ (see ‘De Carne Christi’).

In other words, how could Yeshua have died if he were other than a normal human being; if he were not ‘indubitably human because born of a human being and therefore mortal?’

An omnipotent being is not – and never can be – a mortal being.

According to the vast majority of Christians – past and present – to deny Yeshua’s truly human nature is to deny the true incarnation of the Second Person of the Trinity (the ‘Word’) as a man. (I need to point out that being accepted by a majority does not, of itself, make any doctrine true).

Christian redemption theology is a mish-mash of notions. Most relevant to our conversation is a) that the ‘Word’ of God assumed a human nature, and became the mediator between God and man; and b) that redemption itself was attained through Yeshua’s obedience to One who was greater than he.

‘You heard me say: I am going away, and shall return. If you loved me you would have been glad to know that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. I have told you this now before it happens, so that when it does happen you may believe. I shall not talk with you any longer, because the prince of this world is on his way. He has no power over me, but the world must be brought to know that I love the Father and that I am doing exactly what the Father told me. Come now, let us go.’ (John 14: 28-31).

An omnipotent being is not – and never can be – inferior to another. When Yeshua said that the Father is greater than he, was he telling the truth; or was he lying?

Paul tells us: ‘Well then, sin entered the world through one man, and through sin death, and thus death has spread through the whole human race because everyone has sinned. Sin existed in the world long before the Law was given. There was no law and so no one could be accused of the sin of "law breaking," yet death reigned over all from Adam to Moses, even though their sin, unlike that of Adam, was not a matter of breaking a law.

‘Adam prefigured the One to come, but the gift itself considerably outweighed the fall. If it is certain that through one man's fall so many died, it is even more certain that divine grace, coming through the one man, Jesus Christ, came to so many as an abundant free gift. The results of the gift also outweigh the results of one man's sin: for after one single fall came judgment with a verdict of condemnation, now after many falls comes grace with its verdict of acquittal.

‘If it is certain that death reigned over everyone as the consequence of one man's fall, it is even more certain that one man, Jesus Christ, will cause everyone to reign in life who receives the free gift that he does not deserve, of being made righteous. Again, as one man's fall brought condemnation on everyone, so the good act of one man brings everyone life and makes them justified. 19 As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous.’ (Romans 5: 12-19).

The message is clear: Without a true incarnation there can be no atonement for sin, since it was not then a true man who died for our sins. To claim – as you do – that Yeshua was not a normal man, but a superman – a kind of demi-god – is to deny this most fundamental of Christian doctrine.

You write: ‘Why do you quote Hebrews to emphasize Jesus's humanity as our priest, without quoting Hebrews statements that Jesus is a pre-existent, eternal priest, above all men and angels….?’

Then what of this?:

‘He (God) did not appoint angels to be rulers of the world to come, and that world is what we are talking about. Somewhere there is a passage that shows us this. It runs: What is man that you should spare a thought for him, the son of man that you should care for him? For a short while you made him lower than the angels; you crowned him with glory and splendor. You have put him in command of everything. Well then, if he has put him in command of everything, he has left nothing which is not under his command. At present, it is true, we are not able to see that everything has been put under his command, but we do see in Jesus one who was for a short while made lower than the angels and is now crowned with glory and splendor because he submitted to death; by God's grace he had to experience death for all mankind.’ (Hebrews 2: 5-9).

Verses 5 to 8 refer to (mere) human beings, of course. Verse 9 refers to Yeshua, who is also said to have been ‘made lower than the angels’; just like the rest of us. Tell me, how can Yeshua (the man) have been made ‘lower than the angels’ if he was – according to you – both omnipotent and omniscient?

You write: ‘Why do you quote John 11 to disprove Jesus's divinity when the statement you quoted, "I knew indeed that you always hear me," is a demonstration of Jesus's omniscience?

John 11:42 is not a demonstration of Yeshua’s omniscience; it is a statement of his confidence in God; and this is quite a different matter.

Consider this:

‘We are quite confident that if we ask Him for anything, and it is in accordance with His will, He will hear us; and, knowing that whatever we may ask, He hears us, we know that we have already been granted what we asked of Him.’ (1 John 5: 14-15). It has been my privilege to know a great many Christians who, having accepted the truth of these verses, responded accordingly. While each and every one of them had total confidence in God - and in the power of prayer - I can assure you that not a single one was omniscient!

You have chosen to avoid Matthew 24:36; in which Yeshua refers to the coming of the Son of Man at the End of Days:

'However, no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. Only the Father knows.'? (Matthew 24:36).

When Yeshua said that ‘Only the Father knows’; was he speaking the truth, or was he lying?

Finally, you write:

‘I've rarely questioned the doctrine that the Son is subservient to the Father, but that does not make the Son less than God.’

‘…………….but we do see in Jesus one who was for a short while made lower than the angels………… ’ (Hebrews 2:9).

If one accepts that Yeshua had two natures – one ‘fully divine’, and one ‘fully human’ – then Yeshua, the ‘fully human’, was not only less than God, he was less that the angels. In short, he was just a man.

You take good care now.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Thank you for writing my brother
Thank you for your kind and sincere feelings in writing what you think is useful to me

I appreciate your human feelings
I am therefore understanding and willing to have a strong friendship despite differences
We know that brothers in one house quarrel and enter into a fight
But they keep his brother bear the pure heart with each party retain his convictions


hawkins wrote this

1) 10 out of the 12 Jesus' direct disciples (they are eye-witnesses) martyred themselves to testify the truth of Jesus.
In the ancient world, nothing can be made more credible than the "middle man" being willing to die for what has been witnessed.

my answer
There is no scriptural text in their time that proves that Jesus is God

Because honestly, there will be many claims in the world's continents of divinity, including Hinduism

Everyone tries to put an element of verbal proof

This is ineffective because the author may be a liar because of the frequent presence of allegations

Here, because of our inability to reveal the truth, we must be in a safe situation

There is no document

In the Old Testament there are prophecies that speak of events that will occur in the future but never touched on the idea that there will be a God living in the earth

Does this involve poor planning from GOD and this raises suspicion

I will try be more positive
We love Jesus very much
My mother is Mary
One of my relatives named Jesus Haha
Jesus is a name that we can use in Islam

GOD bless you

Thank you, brother. There is a "scriptural text in their time that proves that Jesus is God", indeed, multiple ones:

1) Jesus was found guilty only of blasphemy by the Pharisees (claiming to be God by saying I AM and "I will sit at the right hand of God and return on Judgment Day with my witnesses, as in Daniel 12")

2) The Jewish Talmud, contemporary to the events, says it is horrible for Jews to trust Jesus for salvation, but also that Jesus did miracles, was crucified on Passover, Joseph wasn't His Father, etc.

3) There are 12 NT authors who promote Jesus as God

I've read much of the Qu'ran, the testimony of one person, I have 12 NT authors, proven to have written in the first century. For example:

Flavius Josephus (ca. 37-–ca. 100), who ultimately became the greatest Jewish historian of his time. Josephus began his historical writings in Rome while serving as a historian for the Roman emperor Domitian. It was there that he authored his autobiography and two major historical works. One of those works is his now-famous Antiquities of the Jews, which he finished in about A.D. 93. In book 18, chapter 3, section 3 of that work, Josephus, who was not a Christian, wrote these words:

At this time [the time of Pilate] there was a wise man who was called Jesus. His conduct was good and (he) was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive; accordingly he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders.1

 

[BilliardsBall]

You write: ‘Why do you ask me what I believe about Yeshua, then follow by telling me what Irenaeus and Tertullian believed, as if I am compelled to agree or disagree with them?

Whether you agree, or disagree, with Irenaeus and Tertullian is not my concern. Rest assured, when it comes to the nature of Yeshua the man they most certainly disagree with you!

Both believed that Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) had two natures: that he was ‘fully God’ and ‘fully man’. This part of our conversation is concerned with what is meant by ‘fully man’.

According to Irenaeus, Yeshua’s human nature was no different from ours. He suffered; he ‘struggled’; he ‘went through every stage of human life.’ (see ‘Adversus Haereses’; Book 3).

Tertullian asks us to ‘look closely at the Lord’s corporeal substance (for) it is to his flesh that people pose questions.’

He reminds us that Yeshua (according to the New Testament) was crucified and buried; but that he ‘rose from the dead after burial’. He asks: ‘In what way will these things hold true of (Christ) if he himself was not true, if he did not truly have what it takes to be crucified, to die, to be buried, and to be raised – that is, this flesh of ours, suffused with blood, built up on bones, woven through with sinews, intertwined with veins?’ (see ‘De Carne Christi’).

In other words, how could Yeshua have died if he were other than a normal human being; if he were not ‘indubitably human because born of a human being and therefore mortal?’

An omnipotent being is not – and never can be – a mortal being.

According to the vast majority of Christians – past and present – to deny Yeshua’s truly human nature is to deny the true incarnation of the Second Person of the Trinity (the ‘Word’) as a man. (I need to point out that being accepted by a majority does not, of itself, make any doctrine true).

Christian redemption theology is a mish-mash of notions. Most relevant to our conversation is a) that the ‘Word’ of God assumed a human nature, and became the mediator between God and man; and b) that redemption itself was attained through Yeshua’s obedience to One who was greater than he.

‘You heard me say: I am going away, and shall return. If you loved me you would have been glad to know that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. I have told you this now before it happens, so that when it does happen you may believe. I shall not talk with you any longer, because the prince of this world is on his way. He has no power over me, but the world must be brought to know that I love the Father and that I am doing exactly what the Father told me. Come now, let us go.’ (John 14: 28-31).

An omnipotent being is not – and never can be – inferior to another. When Yeshua said that the Father is greater than he, was he telling the truth; or was he lying?

Paul tells us: ‘Well then, sin entered the world through one man, and through sin death, and thus death has spread through the whole human race because everyone has sinned. Sin existed in the world long before the Law was given. There was no law and so no one could be accused of the sin of "law breaking," yet death reigned over all from Adam to Moses, even though their sin, unlike that of Adam, was not a matter of breaking a law.

‘Adam prefigured the One to come, but the gift itself considerably outweighed the fall. If it is certain that through one man's fall so many died, it is even more certain that divine grace, coming through the one man, Jesus Christ, came to so many as an abundant free gift. The results of the gift also outweigh the results of one man's sin: for after one single fall came judgment with a verdict of condemnation, now after many falls comes grace with its verdict of acquittal.

‘If it is certain that death reigned over everyone as the consequence of one man's fall, it is even more certain that one man, Jesus Christ, will cause everyone to reign in life who receives the free gift that he does not deserve, of being made righteous. Again, as one man's fall brought condemnation on everyone, so the good act of one man brings everyone life and makes them justified. 19 As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous.’ (Romans 5: 12-19).

The message is clear: Without a true incarnation there can be no atonement for sin, since it was not then a true man who died for our sins. To claim – as you do – that Yeshua was not a normal man, but a superman – a kind of demi-god – is to deny this most fundamental of Christian doctrine.

You write: ‘Why do you quote Hebrews to emphasize Jesus's humanity as our priest, without quoting Hebrews statements that Jesus is a pre-existent, eternal priest, above all men and angels….?’

Then what of this?:

‘He (God) did not appoint angels to be rulers of the world to come, and that world is what we are talking about. Somewhere there is a passage that shows us this. It runs: What is man that you should spare a thought for him, the son of man that you should care for him? For a short while you made him lower than the angels; you crowned him with glory and splendor. You have put him in command of everything. Well then, if he has put him in command of everything, he has left nothing which is not under his command. At present, it is true, we are not able to see that everything has been put under his command, but we do see in Jesus one who was for a short while made lower than the angels and is now crowned with glory and splendor because he submitted to death; by God's grace he had to experience death for all mankind.’ (Hebrews 2: 5-9).

Verses 5 to 8 refer to (mere) human beings, of course. Verse 9 refers to Yeshua, who is also said to have been ‘made lower than the angels’; just like the rest of us. Tell me, how can Yeshua (the man) have been made ‘lower than the angels’ if he was – according to you – both omnipotent and omniscient?

You write: ‘Why do you quote John 11 to disprove Jesus's divinity when the statement you quoted, "I knew indeed that you always hear me," is a demonstration of Jesus's omniscience?

John 11:42 is not a demonstration of Yeshua’s omniscience; it is a statement of his confidence in God; and this is quite a different matter.

Consider this:

‘We are quite confident that if we ask Him for anything, and it is in accordance with His will, He will hear us; and, knowing that whatever we may ask, He hears us, we know that we have already been granted what we asked of Him.’ (1 John 5: 14-15). It has been my privilege to know a great many Christians who, having accepted the truth of these verses, responded accordingly. While each and every one of them had total confidence in God - and in the power of prayer - I can assure you that not a single one was omniscient!

You have chosen to avoid Matthew 24:36; in which Yeshua refers to the coming of the Son of Man at the End of Days:

'However, no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. Only the Father knows.'? (Matthew 24:36).

When Yeshua said that ‘Only the Father knows’; was he speaking the truth, or was he lying?

Finally, you write:

‘I've rarely questioned the doctrine that the Son is subservient to the Father, but that does not make the Son less than God.’

‘…………….but we do see in Jesus one who was for a short while made lower than the angels………… ’ (Hebrews 2:9).

If one accepts that Yeshua had two natures – one ‘fully divine’, and one ‘fully human’ – then Yeshua, the ‘fully human’, was not only less than God, he was less that the angels. In short, he was just a man.

You take good care now.

“Whether you agree, or disagree, with Irenaeus and Tertullian is not my concern. Rest assured, when it comes to the nature of Yeshua the man they most certainly disagree with you!

Both believed that Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) had two natures: that he was ‘fully God’ and ‘fully man’. This part of our conversation is concerned with what is meant by ‘fully man’.”

I agree, He had two full natures.


“An omnipotent being is not – and never can be – a mortal being.”

How so? Omnipotent means “can do anything”.


“An omnipotent being is not – and never can be – inferior to another.”

Two omnipotent beings can do anything, one is deferent to the other, this flows from the humility of Christ. Such is in the NT.


“The message is clear: Without a true incarnation there can be no atonement for sin, since it was not then a true man who died for our sins. To claim – as you do – that Yeshua was not a normal man, but a superman – a kind of demi-god – is to deny this most fundamental of Christian doctrine.”

I never claimed Yeshua was a superman. I claim He is God, omnipotent inside a person. Two natures.


“Verses 5 to 8 refer to (mere) human beings, of course. Verse 9 refers to Yeshua, who is also said to have been ‘made lower than the angels’; just like the rest of us. Tell me, how can Yeshua (the man) have been made ‘lower than the angels’ if he was – according to you – both omnipotent and omniscient?”

You are highly intelligent, which is why I’m shocked you asked this—surely you know that all angels are higher in power and order than all men. Yeshua’s nature as man was lower than an angel.


“You have chosen to avoid Matthew 24:36; in which Yeshua refers to the coming of the Son of Man at the End of Days:

'However, no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. Only the Father knows.'? (Matthew 24:36).

When Yeshua said that ‘Only the Father knows’; was he speaking the truth, or was he lying?”

I didn’t ignore it. The Last Supper is a betrothal, Christ and the church. In ancient Israel, a man would build a home for his bride, then his father, not the son, would approve the new home, then send his son to get his bride. This is the allusion Jesus is making.


“If one accepts that Yeshua had two natures – one ‘fully divine’, and one ‘fully human’ – then Yeshua, the ‘fully human’, was not only less than God, he was less that the angels. In short, he was just a man.

You take good care now.”

Yes, you are correct, “just a man” is lower than the angels, as recorded in Hebrews, and this man in the same book of Hebrews is equal with God in power and received tribute from Abraham.

 

[j1i]

Thank you, brother. There is a "scriptural text in their time that proves that Jesus is God", indeed, multiple ones:

1) Jesus was found guilty only of blasphemy by the Pharisees (claiming to be God by saying I AM and "I will sit at the right hand of God and return on Judgment Day with my witnesses, as in Daniel 12")

2) The Jewish Talmud, contemporary to the events, says it is horrible for Jews to trust Jesus for salvation, but also that Jesus did miracles, was crucified on Passover, Joseph wasn't His Father, etc.

3) There are 12 NT authors who promote Jesus as God

I've read much of the Qu'ran, the testimony of one person, I have 12 NT authors, proven to have written in the first century. For example:

Flavius Josephus (ca. 37-–ca. 100), who ultimately became the greatest Jewish historian of his time. Josephus began his historical writings in Rome while serving as a historian for the Roman emperor Domitian. It was there that he authored his autobiography and two major historical works. One of those works is his now-famous Antiquities of the Jews, which he finished in about A.D. 93. In book 18, chapter 3, section 3 of that work, Josephus, who was not a Christian, wrote these words:

At this time [the time of Pilate] there was a wise man who was called Jesus. His conduct was good and (he) was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive; accordingly he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders.1

I have read the reply carefully
Thank you very much for putting these signals
I am very happy because I know that your response is keen to spread good and love
I would like to assist you if you allow me to do so

Are these scriptural text written is Compatible with the Old Testament

We know that the difference between the Jews and cristians is if the Jesus was correct or not
But did it mention in bible that say Messiah (Jesus) from the House of David would be a God in the Old Testament?
This is the important question

 

[Niblo]

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

Thank you for you reply.

I need clarification:

You state that Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) had: ‘Two full natures’.

I assume you referring to a divine nature, and a human nature. Am I correct in assuming this?

You write: I never claimed Yeshua was a superman.

Is that so?

On the 15th October you wrote: ‘Jesus the man had omniscience, omnipotence....’

When you write ‘Jesus the man’ are you referring a) to his human nature only**; b) to his (alleged) divine nature only; or c) to both natures in equal measure?

I ask these questions simply because you appear (and I stress appear) to have a free-floating Christology. In šāʾ Allāh, I will address the remainder of your post once you have responded to this one.

** To date I have assumed (understandably enough) that you are indeed referring to his human nature only, why else would you say 'Jesus the man'?

Have a great day.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I have read the reply carefully
Thank you very much for putting these signals
I am very happy because I know that your response is keen to spread good and love
I would like to assist you if you allow me to do so

Are these scriptural text written is Compatible with the Old Testament

We know that the difference between the Jews and cristians is if the Jesus was correct or not
But did it mention in bible that say Messiah (Jesus) from the House of David would be a God in the Old Testament?
This is the important question

That IS a good question! Two examples from the OT that the House of David would birth a God come to mind:

Micah 5:2 "Bethlehem (birthplace of King David), though you are the smallest village in the province of Judah, from you will come an eternal ruler!"

Isaiah 9: "For to us a CHILD is born, a SON is given, whose names will include Wonderful Counselor, Prince of Peace, EVERLASTING FATHER, THE MIGHTY GOD! ...He will reign on David's throne... FOREVER!"

 

[BilliardsBall]

Thank you for you reply.

I need clarification:

You state that Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) had: ‘Two full natures’.

I assume you referring to a divine nature, and a human nature. Am I correct in assuming this?

You write: I never claimed Yeshua was a superman.

Is that so?

On the 15th October you wrote: ‘Jesus the man had omniscience, omnipotence....’

When you write ‘Jesus the man’ are you referring a) to his human nature only**; b) to his (alleged) divine nature only; or c) to both natures in equal measure?

I ask these questions simply because you appear (and I stress appear) to have a free-floating Christology. In šāʾ Allāh, I will address the remainder of your post once you have responded to this one.

** To date I have assumed (understandably enough) that you are indeed referring to his human nature only, why else would you say 'Jesus the man'?

Have a great day.

Thank you for clarifying:

Jesus had two natures, fully divine and fully human. I don't know how much they operated separately or how much they "fused" as per the Coptic Christian faith. But 100% a person and 100% God.

I apologize if it was confusing to write Jesus THE MAN had X attributes of God. We shouldn't make such assumptions, we only know what Jesus the man spoke. In my own life, I believe God has spoken to me, and I have said the words of God with my human mouth.

 

[Niblo]

Thank you for clarifying:

Jesus had two natures, fully divine and fully human. I don't know how much they operated separately or how much they "fused" as per the Coptic Christian faith. But 100% a person and 100% God.

I apologize if it was confusing to write Jesus THE MAN had X attributes of God. We shouldn't make such assumptions, we only know what Jesus the man spoke. In my own life, I believe God has spoken to me, and I have said the words of God with my human mouth.

Excellent. I was getting rather worried. Thought I had a heretic on my hands!

In šāʾ Allāh, I'll readjust my thoughts, and come back to you.

Have a great day, and thanks you.

 

[j1i]

That IS a good question! Two examples from the OT that the House of David would birth a God come to mind:

Micah 5:2 "Bethlehem (birthplace of King David), though you are the smallest village in the province of Judah, from you will come an eternal ruler!"

Isaiah 9: "For to us a CHILD is born, a SON is given, whose names will include Wonderful Counselor, Prince of Peace, EVERLASTING FATHER, THE MIGHTY GOD! ...He will reign on David's throne... FOREVER!"

These translations are distorted and revised by evidence
The ruler of Israel or the king of Israel, the king of kings, people magnified to greatness
They have no knowledge of it, nor had their fathers. Grave is the word that comes out of their mouths; they speak not except a lie.

The meanings has changed
In the Qur'an the word of the Lord was spoken in the story of Joseph to the ruler of Egypt, and the king here means as a kind of appreciation and does not mean that he is a God
It is these words that brought the ancient fathers into the trap of trinity

I have entered a website called Ask Moses
Askmoses.com - Torah, Judaism and Jewish Info - Ask the Rabbi
and the Jews deny these claims and say they have been modified
The Jews were forced in the past to baptize and many texts were changed and forced to do so


I give you an example that these books are not real
Everyone agrees that there is a prophet named Moses
But why do not everyone agree that there is a trinity?
This is what is suspicious, suspect, suspected, dubious, fishy, doubtful, questionable, equivocal

Everyone believes in the prophet Abraham and everyone believes in the prophet Moses and David. Why does not everyone believe in Jesus as a God?
Nontrinitarianism, jews, muslims, Arius

We are the family of Abraham, as Abraham, Isaac, and Ishmael promised us to promise that we worship one God without a trinity

And according to the general interest of the sons of Abraham
We decided the following
The decision must be collective and God is the witness until Jesus descends and tells us the truth

Muslims and Jews use veto power

and every one have freedom to believe​

with totally respect (^_^)

 

[Muffled]

Yep, your beliefs match your faith. lol

I believe what God tells me.

 

[Muffled]

Let me pose another question: if a "Holy" book contained conflicting verses would you still consider it to be Holy? Most likely you will say of course not. Let me share with you some conflicting verses both in the Old and New Testaments:

II Samuel 8:4 (vs) II Samuel 8:9-10 II Kings 8:26
II Samuel 6:23 Genesis 6:3 John 5:37
John 5:31 I Chronicles 18:4 I Chronicles 18:9-10
II Chronicles 22:2 II Samuel 21:8 Genesis 9:29
John 14:9 John 8:14
Only two contradictions of the New Testament have been mentioned, but others will be referenced when the Trinity, Divinity of Jesus Christ, Divine Sonship of Jesus, Original Sin and Atonement are reviewed.

How could the "inspired words" of God get the genealogy of Jesus incorrect (See Matthew 1:6-16 where it states 26 forefathers up to Prophet David, and Luke 3:23-31 says 41 in number). Or for that matter, give a genealogy to Jesus who had NO father? See II Kings 19:1-37, now read Isaiah 37:1-38. Why is it that the words of these verse are identical? Yet they have been attributed to two different authors, one unknown and the other is Isaiah, who are centuries apart; and yet, the Christians have claimed these books to be inspired by God.

I looked up the word Easter in the Nelson Bible dictionary and learned that the word "Easter" (as mentioned in Acts 12:4) is a mistranslation of "pascha," the ordinary Greek word for "Passover." As, you know Passover is a Jewish celebration not a Christian holiday. I think human hands, all to human, had played havoc with the Bible.

From the brief points mentioned above, and the fact that Biblical scholars themselves have recognized the human nature and human composition of the Bible (Curt Kuhl, The Old Testament: Its Origin and Composition, PP 47, 51, 52), there should exist in the Christian’s mind some acceptance to the fact that maybe every word of the Bible is not God’s word.

As a side note to this subject, let me mention that some Christians believe that the Bible was dictated to Prophet Muhammad (SAW) by a Christian monk, and that is why some of the biblical accounts are in the Quran. After some research, I found that this could not have happened because there were no Arabic Bible in existence in the 6th century of the Christian era when Muhammad (SAW) lived and preached. Therefore, no Arab, not even Prophet Muhammad (SAW) who was absolutely unlettered and unlearned, would have had the opportunity to examine the written text of the Bible in his own language.

in this
The Bible Led me to Islam - IslamiCity

The subject of writing notes and comparisons is annoying and negative
But dialogue is needed to find out the full truth
I am not with religion or against religion
But I want to know the truth and touch it


am not interested in entering Islam More than what we are interested in being educated and know the facts on the assets


We must correct errors in all religions, even Islam ​

I believe there are no conflicting verses.

 

[Muffled]

'By their fruit you will know them (Matthew 7:16).

Insult and calumny are rotten fruit. If this is all you can offer after years of Christian devotion, then I pity you...I truly do.

I believe the feeling that you are insulted comes from yourself. I am simply speaking of reality. If it isn't a reality you wish and prefer fantasy you wouldn't feel insulted but the fact that it is recognized as real makes it difficult to fantasize that everything is ok.

 

[Niblo]

I believe the feeling that you are insulted comes from yourself. I am simply speaking of reality. If it isn't a reality you wish and prefer fantasy you wouldn't feel insulted but the fact that it is recognized as real makes it difficult to fantasize that everything is ok.

You wrote:

‘I am open to discussion on this. First have you ever received Jesus as your Lord and Savior?’

I replied: ‘As a Christian, yes.’

You replied: ‘I believe if that were really true, you would never be anything but a Christian.’

The words ‘if that were really true’ imply that I was lying when I said ‘yes’ to your question. I was not lying.

It would have been better to acknowledge acceptance of my word by asking why, having received Jesus as my Lord and Saviour, I ceased to be a Christian.

You say that you are 'speaking of reality'; what reality would that be, exactly? And what exactly do you mean by 'fantasy'?

 

[Muffled]

You wrote:

‘I am open to discussion on this. First have you ever received Jesus as your Lord and Savior?’

I replied: ‘As a Christian, yes.’

You replied: ‘I believe if that were really true, you would never be anything but a Christian.’

The words ‘if that were really true’ imply that I was lying when I said ‘yes’ to your question. I was not lying.

It would have been better to acknowledge acceptance of my word by asking why, having received Jesus as my Lord and Saviour, I ceased to be a Christian.

You say that you are 'speaking of reality'; what reality would that be, exactly? And what exactly do you mean by 'fantasy'?

I believe I was not talking about whether your statement was true or not but whether what happened is what you think happened. For me it was the best thing that ever happened in my life and continues to be so. Obviously the experience is not the same for everyone. My wife received Jesus as Lord and Savior but she has not been led by the Holy Spirit and had no great experience. So the question is did you really receive anything or just say the words. I received peace, love and joy.

I believe that might indicate why you weren't one to start with. So let's start with the basics. You are saying you don't want the eternal life Jesus offers? You are saying you don't want the freedom from sin that Jesus offers? Or is it just that you weren't getting your freedom from sin and eternal life is a ways off yet. I am speculating of course and perhaps your reasons are more worldly than that but I would love to hear them.

Having Jesus as Lord means you do as He says and for that usually you have to hear what He is saying. As the meaning of Islam states: hear and obey. However for the Christian hearing is not necessary, because Jesus is already in charge of the mind and the mind obeys the Spirit that is master of it.

I believe that is seeing things as you wish them to be and not as they are.

 

[Niblo]

I believe I was not talking about whether your statement was true or not but whether what happened is what you think happened. For me it was the best thing that ever happened in my life and continues to be so. Obviously the experience is not the same for everyone. My wife received Jesus as Lord and Savior but she has not been led by the Holy Spirit and had no great experience. So the question is did you really receive anything or just say the words. I received peace, love and joy.

I believe that might indicate why you weren't one to start with. So let's start with the basics. You are saying you don't want the eternal life Jesus offers? You are saying you don't want the freedom from sin that Jesus offers? Or is it just that you weren't getting your freedom from sin and eternal life is a ways off yet. I am speculating of course and perhaps your reasons are more worldly than that but I would love to hear them.

Having Jesus as Lord means you do as He says and for that usually you have to hear what He is saying. As the meaning of Islam states: hear and obey. However for the Christian hearing is not necessary, because Jesus is already in charge of the mind and the mind obeys the Spirit that is master of it.

I believe that is seeing things as you wish them to be and not as they are.

Allow me to say a bit about myself.

I was raised as a Baptist in South Wales. At the age of fifteen I became a Catholic, and I remained one for over fifty years. For ten years I was a professed member of the Carmelite Third Order; and studied biblical and dogmatic theology, as well as other relevant stuff. I spent a year with the Carmelite Friars at Hazlewood Castle in Yorkshire (now a hotel); and over a year with the Cistercians at Mount Saint Bernard Abbey in Leicester, testing a vocation. It became clear that life in a religious order was not my calling, and so I became a husband and father – and now a grandfather – (as the Abbey Secretary said to me: ‘Our novitiate is a seedbed of good Catholic marriages!’). I look back at my time with the Carmelites and Cistercians with great affection. Even though I no longer share their doctrinal beliefs I admire their spirituality, and their honest convictions; and their way of life - especially the Cistercians. It has been my privilege to know many excellent Christians: paternal grandfather; priests, religious and laity. Each was an example of the best of their Faith.

Because certain folk do not believe what you believe does not, of itself, make them ignorant fools. Neither does it deprive them of ‘peace, love and joy’. These most excellent gifts are by no means restricted to Christians! I enjoyed each and every one as a Christian, and I continue to do so as a Muslim. I realise that this reality is not one you can easily comprehend – if at all – but it is what it is.

I do not believe that Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) offers eternal life. This gift belongs to God alone, and Yeshua is not God.

I do not believe that Yeshua offers freedom from sin. To sin or not to sin is a personal choice. Yeshua never sinned, whereas I have (and do). This makes him a far better man than I…but a man nonetheless. I seek forgiveness for my sins; and I am sure that forgiveness is given, not because I merit it, but because God is both loving and merciful; and His mercy takes priority over His wrath.

As for eternal life being ‘a ways off yet’; well, not for me it isn’t. If my family history is anything to go by (at least for the males) the years I have left can be measured in a single digit, in šāʾ Allāh.

A great deal of discussion (sometimes with bitterness and mockery) takes place over the nature of the Bible and Qur’an. If these two Books were shown to be utter folly; or else vanish overnight – along with all other religious works – and all memory of them wiped clean, I would still carry, in both heart and mind, the assurance that God is here; with me – in spite of my unworthiness. He is here because He is true to Himself; He loves because He is true to Himself; He forgives, and embraces, because He is true to Himself. How do I know this? A lifetime of experience – both my own, and that of those wonderful people it has been my privilege to know and to love.

‘Lead, kindly Light, amid th’ encircling gloom,
Lead Thou me on;
The night is dark, and I am far from home,
Lead Thou me on;
Keep Thou my feet; I do not ask to see
The distant scene; one step enough for me.

‘I was not ever thus, nor prayed that Thou
Shouldst lead me on;
I loved to choose and see my path, but now
Lead Thou me on;
I loved the garish day, and spite of fears,
Pride ruled my will; remember not past years.

So long Thy pow’r has blest me, sure it still
Wilt lead me on,
O’er moor and fen, o’er crag and torrent, till
The night is gone,
And with the morn those angel faces smile,
Which I have loved long since, and lost awhile.’ (Cardinal John Henry Newman).

For me, the Light that Cardinal Newman addresses is not Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām), it is Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla). God Himself. This is my reality.

 

[j1i]

I believe there are no conflicting verses.

I believe the feeling that you are insulted comes from yourself. I am simply speaking of reality. If it isn't a reality you wish and prefer fantasy you wouldn't feel insulted but the fact that it is recognized as real makes it difficult to fantasize that everything is ok.

Allow me to say a bit about myself.

I was raised as a Baptist in South Wales. At the age of fifteen I became a Catholic, and I remained one for over fifty years. For ten years I was a professed member of the Carmelite Third Order; and studied biblical and dogmatic theology, as well as other relevant stuff. I spent a year with the Carmelite Friars at Hazlewood Castle in Yorkshire (now a hotel); and over a year with the Cistercians at Mount Saint Bernard Abbey in Leicester, testing a vocation. It became clear that life in a religious order was not my calling, and so I became a husband and father – and now a grandfather – (as the Abbey Secretary said to me: ‘Our novitiate is a seedbed of good Catholic marriages!’). I look back at my time with the Carmelites and Cistercians with great affection. Even though I no longer share their doctrinal beliefs I admire their spirituality, and their honest convictions; and their way of life - especially the Cistercians. It has been my privilege to know many excellent Christians: paternal grandfather; priests, religious and laity. Each was an example of the best of their Faith.

Because certain folk do not believe what you believe does not, of itself, make them ignorant fools. Neither does it deprive them of ‘peace, love and joy’. These most excellent gifts are by no means restricted to Christians! I enjoyed each and every one as a Christian, and I continue to do so as a Muslim. I realise that this reality is not one you can easily comprehend – if at all – but it is what it is.

I do not believe that Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) offers eternal life. This gift belongs to God alone, and Yeshua is not God.

I do not believe that Yeshua offers freedom from sin. To sin or not to sin is a personal choice. Yeshua never sinned, whereas I have (and do). This makes him a far better man than I…but a man nonetheless. I seek forgiveness for my sins; and I am sure that forgiveness is given, not because I merit it, but because God is both loving and merciful; and His mercy takes priority over His wrath.

As for eternal life being ‘a ways off yet’; well, not for me it isn’t. If my family history is anything to go by (at least for the males) the years I have left can be measured in a single digit, in šāʾ Allāh.

A great deal of discussion (sometimes with bitterness and mockery) takes place over the nature of the Bible and Qur’an. If these two Books were shown to be utter folly; or else vanish overnight – along with all other religious works – and all memory of them wiped clean, I would still carry, in both heart and mind, the assurance that God is here; with me – in spite of my unworthiness. He is here because He is true to Himself; He loves because He is true to Himself; He forgives, and embraces, because He is true to Himself. How do I know this? A lifetime of experience – both my own, and that of those wonderful people it has been my privilege to know and to love.

‘Lead, kindly Light, amid th’ encircling gloom,
Lead Thou me on;
The night is dark, and I am far from home,
Lead Thou me on;
Keep Thou my feet; I do not ask to see
The distant scene; one step enough for me.

‘I was not ever thus, nor prayed that Thou
Shouldst lead me on;
I loved to choose and see my path, but now
Lead Thou me on;
I loved the garish day, and spite of fears,
Pride ruled my will; remember not past years.

So long Thy pow’r has blest me, sure it still
Wilt lead me on,
O’er moor and fen, o’er crag and torrent, till
The night is gone,
And with the morn those angel faces smile,
Which I have loved long since, and lost awhile.’ (Cardinal John Henry Newman).

For me, the Light that Cardinal Newman addresses is not Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām), it is Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla). God Himself. This is my reality.

Peace, mercy and blessings be upon you
I enjoyed reading the story
Wishing you success in your life
God bless you

 

[james blunt]

Peace, mercy and blessings be upon you
I enjoyed reading the story
Wishing you success in your life
God bless you

God the greatness of deeds
asks you
explain your belief
without memory

 

[Niblo]

Peace, mercy and blessings be upon you
I enjoyed reading the story
Wishing you success in your life
God bless you

As-Salāmu ‘alaykum wa Rahmatullāhi wa Barakātuhu.

Thank you very much, brother. That’s very kind of you.

May Allāh (Subḥānahu ūta'āla) reward you; and may He keep you and your family close to Himself.

 

[Niblo]

God the greatness of deeds
asks you
explain your belief
without memory

I said all memory of the Books; not of life!