The Trinity makes no sense to me. Please Explain....

[anonymous9887]

I believe God never dies, but that does not mean He is in a body forever. What has been will always be but in the past not the future.

I don't believe in Modalism the way that Sabellius described it. I believe someone who says something is obvious can't prove it but since it isn't obvious to me you will have to try to explain it.

I believe it says that Jesus existed in the form of the Father,

I believe this is a false assumption. There is no proof that this is the case. It is more logical that the glory is God's as Jesus identifies Himself as God.

I believe in the omnipresence of God.

well here is my reply:
John 1:1 in the beginning was the word and the word was with god and the word was a god ( I believe "a god" is what the Greek language expresses)
- First of all this tells us the word existed with God in the beginning. To be with someone you have to be separate persons. We can get into the definite article if you wish, and putting "a god" in the passage makes more sense then god. but again I believe that John was expressing "a God'. If Jesus was the father or god it would read like this En arche en ho logos kai ho logos en pros ton theon kai ton theon en ho logos ( in the beginning was the word, and the word was with the god and the god was the word.
so from this passage it is evident Jesus existed apart from the only true god.

John 17:5 So now father glorify me at your side with the glory "I had before the world was"
So the son is speaking here and he is telling the father to glorify him(the son) with the glory I(the son) had before the world was.
they are separate beings. So what glory did the son have before the world was?

Philippians 2:6 for although he(Paul is talking about the son Jesus) was existing in gods form (defining what gods form means is a discussion in itself) did not consider equality with god a thing to be grasped. But this action Jesus takes, takes place before he became a man, he made a decision to empty himself before he came into the world.

we can expand more on these, just let me know. BTW here are some scriptures that at least to me prove they are separate persons.
1 Corinthians 15:24-28
Revelation 3:12
Revelation 1:1

And I forgot this important one.
Colossians 1:15,16 he (jesus) is the image of the invisible god, the firstborn of all creation, because by means of him (Jesus the son is being talked about) all things were created etc...

 

[Sabour]

I believe you are not the first to ask that question . My wife also asked it because she was a materialist. The Body dies not God. The scripture says that Jesus expired ie. that the Spirit of God left the body and significantly before the body died.

Such important concepts in religion must not cause that much confusion if they were true.

The nature of who God is should be clear and easy for everyone to understand.

 

[anonymous9887]

Such important concepts in religion must not cause that much confusion if they were true.

The nature of who God is should be clear and easy for everyone to understand.

Should gods infinite nature be easily understood?

 

[Sabour]

Should gods infinite nature be easily understood?

The reply you quoted specifically talks about the concept of the trinity which you don't believe in, unlike the person who the reply was directed to.

Is that another discussion you are aiming for ?

 

[anonymous9887]

The reply you quoted specifically talks about the concept of the trinity which you don't believe in, unlike the person who the reply was directed to.

Is that another discussion you are aiming for ?

Yes although I don't believe in the trinity I believe in being consistent.
I believe certain aspects of gods nature simply cannot be understood.

 

[anonymous9887]

The reply you quoted specifically talks about the concept of the trinity which you don't believe in, unlike the person who the reply was directed to.

Is that another discussion you are aiming for ?

Just out of curiosity do you believe in the hadith?

 

[Sabour]

Just out of curiosity do you believe in the hadith?

The hadith? which Hadith ?

Or you mean in hadith in general ?

 

[anonymous9887]

The hadith? which Hadith ?

Or you mean in hadith in general ?

Yes.
Why do you? And how do you reconcile these things:
1. The Qur'an should be enough.
2. The people who wrote the hadith went even close knowing muhammad
3. The hadith was written 200-300 years later after muhammad.
4. And revelations from god ended with muhammad.

 

[Sabour]

Why do you?

As you know, we believe that the Quraan is the word of God meaning that we have to follow it. It is a revelation revealed to our prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. All prophets came to the world to show us the way to live and to worship God. They used to live the message they preached. They were people of example.

Let me quote some verses from Quraan. I will highlight the words for which I highlighted the verse.

3:32 Say, "Obey Allah and the Messenger." But if they turn away - then indeed, Allahdoes not like the disbelievers.

3:132 And obey Allah and the Messenger that you may obtain mercy.

4:13 These are the limits [set by] Allah , and whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger will be admitted by Him to gardens [in Paradise] under which rivers flow, abiding eternally therein; and that is the great attainment.

4:52 ... obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And... Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the ...

The set of verses I quoted, among some more, tell us to follow the messenger. Now, I am living in this century and never met the prophet, and the Quraan is the word of God for me, meaning that Allah is talking to me through the Quraan. The question is now how am I supposed to follow these verses and obey the prophet. The only possible way is through learning about his life through the Quraan.

Additionally, there are some other verse too worth noting.

53:1 By the star when it descends,
53:2 Your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred,
53:3 Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination.
53:4It is not but a revelation revealed,

The verse I highlighted shows that the prophet didn't use to make up stuff from him own.

Now, as you know there are many things we are recommended to do in Islam. Let us take prayer ( the 5 Salat or worship) and giving Zakat. If you read the Quraan, it tells us to do these three. However, details are not given in the Quraan on the following questions

1- How much Salat should we make in a day?
2- How to perform Salat?
3- The times for Salat
4- The percentage of Zakat

How are we supposed to know the answers to these if it weren't for the hadith. There are much more examples

Another reason is that even Arabic native speakers may face some problems understanding the some verses of the the Quraan due to how broad the Arabic language is. Referring to hadith to explain the verses is a must sometimes.

Chapter 100 would be a good example of that.

These are the things I can think of at the moment. I think some other muslim members can benefit you also, I may miss some points. I suggest making a thread in Islam dir if interested. Additionally there is a long, but benefitial video on the topic if you would like, here it is

Sorry I have to go now, it is 3:30 am here I will try to answer on the other points you asked about asap as they are very important points you raised.

 

[Sabour]

4. And revelations from god ended with muhammad.

That is true, Quraan was the last revelation of God and revelation stopped.

Hadith is not revelation. Hadith are the saying of the prophet Mohammad peace be upon him. The muslims were learning from him how to live the Quraan and how to be true muslims so they used to approach him with different questions. Mohammad peace be upon him also used to advise the companions and give them the directions to the straight path.

Let us suppose I am a well known teacher in a certain University and I am at my time the only source for a certain kind of information.If I die and if the students I taught want to pass information to other students, they will refer to me when asked about the source of their information. They will say 0ne-answer told us that ...........

And that is the way my teachings would be passed on for generation after generation. They are not new teachings, they are merely something that I taught while I was alive and is being passed on by the word of mouth.

Same applies to hadith. They are not revelations or new teachings. They are the words of the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him and his teachings while he was alive passed on by the word of mouth generations after generations.

1. The Qur'an should be enough.

I believe I answered that in my previous reply.

2. The people who wrote the hadith went even close knowing muhammad

There is something called the science of hadith. There is a specific methodology followed to know which hadith are authentic and true, and which are not.

Take for example Al boukhari


What makes Sahih al-Bukhari so unique was Imam al-Bukhari’s meticulous attention to detail when it came to the compilation of hadiths. He had far stricter rules than other hadith scholars for accepting a hadith as authentic. The chain of narrators for a particular hadith had to be verified as authentic and reliable before Imam al-Bukhari would include that hadith in his compilation. For example, the first hadith in the book begins:

“We have heard from al-Humaydi Abdallah ibn al-Zubayr who said that he heard from Sufyan, who said he heard from Yahya ibn Sa’eed al-Ansari who said he was informed by Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al-Taymi that he heard ‘Alqama ibn Waqqas al-Laythi say that he heard ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab say on the sermon pulpit that he heard the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ say: ‘Actions are only by intentions…'”

This chain of six narrators was meticulously inspected by Imam al-Bukhari. In order for him to consider the hadith authentic, he had to study the lives of all the people in the chain in depth. He studied where and when the narrators lived, in order to make sure that if someone narrates from someone else, they must both have been in the same place at the same time and have actually met and discussed hadith. Other hadith scholars did not all require evidence that two consecutive narrators met personally, but Imam al-Bukhari’s strict requirements is what makes his compilation unique.

Imam al-Bukhari also studied the lives of narrators, to make sure they were trustworthy and would not fabricate, or change the wording of a hadith. If he discovered that someone in a chain openly sinned or was not considered trustworthy, that hadith was immediately discarded and not included in his book unless a stronger chain for it existed.



Using his strict guidelines for hadith acceptance, Imam al-Bukhari was the first to make a systematic approach to classifying hadith. Each hadith he analyzed was labelled as either sahih (authentic), hasan (good), mutawatir (recurrent in many chains), ahad (solitary), da’eef (weak), or mawdu’ (fabricated). This system for hadith then became the standard by which all hadiths were classified by other hadith scholars.


I hope that I sufficiently answered your question.

 

[Gharib]

Yes.
Why do you? And how do you reconcile these things:
1. The Qur'an should be enough.
2. The people who wrote the hadith went even close knowing muhammad
3. The hadith was written 200-300 years later after muhammad.
4. And revelations from god ended with muhammad.

If it's no problem I will try to explain this issue.

The Qur'an itself is a guide. It is a revelation that occurred through a period of 23 years. It doesn't rule out the teachings of Muhammed, salallahu alayhi wa salam (peace be upon him), in fact it says numerous times that we must obey the Prophet and what is/was being revealed to him, but this in no way is confined to the Qur'an.

This is the Book about which there is no doubt, a guidance for those conscious of Allah -
Who believe in the unseen, establish prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them,
And who believe in what has been revealed to you, [O Muhammad], and what was revealed before you, and of the Hereafter they are certain [in faith].
Chapter 2, verses 2-4

Your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred,
Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination.
It is not but a revelation revealed,
Chapter 53, verses 2-4

For Muslims, the above verses and a couple hadith which I will mention below suffice that what Muhammed, salallahu alayhi wa salam, spoke of regarding faith was nothing other than a revelation, second only to the Qur'an. However, it is conditional that the hadith are in line with the Qur'an while the Qur'an holds absolute authority that it is not altered or that it can ever be. See this thread I made a little while ago on the matter

If you actually try to understand the first 3 verses, a distinction is made in verse 2 and verse 4. The first speaks of the Qur'an, and how it is a guidance and then says "and who believe in what has been revealed to you". We all know that 'and' is an addition and therefore referring to something else other than the Qur'an.

The two hadith that I'd like to mention which explain that the hadith are a revelation and that they must be followed;

It was narrated from 'Aisha that the Prophet (ﷺ) heard some sounds and said:
“What is this noise?” They said: “Palm trees that are being pollinated.” He said: “If they did not do that it would be better.” So they did not pollinate them that year, and the dates did not mature properly. they mentioned that to the Prophet (ﷺ) and he said: “If it is one of the matters of your religion, then refer to me.”

It was narrated from Simak that the heard Musa bin Talhah bin `Ubaidullah narrating that his father said:
“I passed by some palm trees with the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and he saw some people pollinating the trees. He said: 'What are these people doing?' They said: 'They are taking something from the male part (of the plant) and putting it in the female part.' He said: 'I do not think that this will do any good.' News of that reached them, so they stopped doing it, and their yield declined. News of that reached the Prophet (ﷺ) and he said: 'That was only my thought. If it will do any good, then do it. I am only a human being like you, and what I think may be right or wrong. But When I tell you: “Allah (SWT) says,” I will never tell lies about Allah (SWT).' ”
Sunan Ibn Majah

These two hadith indicate that the Prophet received revelation for anything to do with Islam. Anything else was an opinion of his just like that of any other human.

With this info so far, I believe I have answered your question as to why we accept the hadith. Now for the remainder that they were written down some 200 years after his death. If you didn't read the thread I have linked to above, yet, please do so, so that the following will make sense since I am writing in reference to that.

Just like the Qur'an everything else was memorized. This is a distinct Islamic practice which unfortunately is seen as a flaw by western/non-Islamic ideologies when in reality it is the opposite. You can change a book by destroying all other copies or not reprinting the same version and simply do what you wish with it some time after and make heaps of copies which no one will be able to spot the difference. But with the Islamic practice of memorizing everything nothing can be changed, if it does it gets noticed, very quick.

The hadith were written down into the form of a book some 200 years after the death of our Prophet, but they existed during that whole time, the only problem was false hadith were being circulated so Imam Bukhari, Muslim and others, may Allah be well pleased with them, realized that memorization was in decline which is why false hadith were appearing as most people would take as truth anything ascribed to the Prophet. Imam Bukhari had no need to write the hadith down for his own benefit, he had memorized over 500 thousand of them, of which he classified only 3000 as authentic without dispute. And he was also the man responsible for the formal codification/formation of the science of hadith. Now, those that study hadith do so according to his guidelines and his criteria where his books are the last reference point instead of having to memorize the lives of all people who would transmit them over the period of 1400 years. We now have only a period of 200 years worth of people whose lives must be studied in order to study the science of hadith.

I hope my post is clear and answers your questions.

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

So we've gone off on a tangent here talking about Quran and Hadiths which just isn't relevant for this topic although quite admirable.

Did anyone answer with an explanation of the trinity which isn't all wishy washy?

 

[anonymous9887]

So we've gone off on a tangent here talking about Quran and Hadiths which just isn't relevant for this topic although quite admirable.

Did anyone answer with an explanation of the trinity which isn't all wishy washy?

The trinity is this:
1. God is eternal, all powerful, and all knowing.
2. The being of god consist of 3 persons, the father the son and the holy spirit.
3. So there are 3 persons in YHWH god.
4. The father the son in the holy spirit are all god but play different roles in the divine being.
5. Trinitarians believe in one god that has 3 persons that share the being of god. The trick for trinitarians is making a distinction between being and person.
6. All persons of the trinity are fully god but play different roles.
7. Quite simply put YHWH or god is 3 persons in one being. So you can call each person of the trinity YHWH.

Well I don't believe in the trinity, but that's the definition I have heard many times from scholars.

To understand the trinity you also have to understand the dual nature of christ, of how he was both god and man at the same time.

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

The trinity is this:
1. God is eternal, all powerful, and all knowing.
2. The being of god consist of 3 persons, the father the son and the holy spirit.
3. So there are 3 persons in YHWH god.
4. The father the son in the holy spirit are all god but play different roles in the divine being.
5. Trinitarians believe in one god that has 3 persons that share the being of god. The trick for trinitarians is making a distinction between being and person.
6. All persons of the trinity are fully god but play different roles.
7. Quite simply put YHWH or god is 3 persons in one being. So you can call each person of the trinity YHWH.

Well I don't believe in the trinity, but that's the definition I have heard many times from scholars.

To understand the trinity you also have to understand the dual nature of christ, of how he was both god and man at the same time.

Like I said, wishy washy.

What does: "The father the son in the holy spirit are all god but play different roles in the divine being." even mean? If they are all God, why did Jesus admit to not knowing when the day of judgement was and said only the Father in heaven knows...unless he is separate from God in heaven which then makes him a separate god and goes against the monotheistic teachings of Christianity.

 

[anonymous9887]

Like I said, wishy washy.

What does: "The father the son in the holy spirit are all god but play different roles in the divine being." even mean? If they are all God, why did Jesus admit to not knowing when the day of judgement was and said only the Father in heaven knows...unless he is separate from God in heaven which then makes him a separate god and goes against the monotheistic teachings of Christianity.

Hey like I said I don't believe in the trinity.

But a trinitarian might say that Jesus was speaking as a human in matthew 24:36, he was both god and man at the same time.

My response is Jesus is called a god in a descriptive sense to his position in God's plan.

But you can call god one thing in the supreme sense and you can call a person the same thing in a limited sense. Different usage.
Example:
Isaiah 43:11 he says "I am YHWH and besides me there is no savior"
If trinitarians want to be consistent on their argument that there is only one god, and only god can be called god, then the same principle applies with savior. God is the only savior.
But take a look at:
Nehemiah: 9:27
Judges 3:9,15
These are called saviors in a different sense while Jehovah is called savior in the supreme sense, because who is the one who raised up those saviors in the first place.

 

[anonymous9887]

Like I said, wishy washy.

What does: "The father the son in the holy spirit are all god but play different roles in the divine being." even mean? If they are all God, why did Jesus admit to not knowing when the day of judgement was and said only the Father in heaven knows...unless he is separate from God in heaven which then makes him a separate god and goes against the monotheistic teachings of Christianity.

They would also bring up philippians 2:6 that christ voluntarily gave up the equality he had with the father, and became a man.

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

They would also bring up philippians 2:6 that christ voluntarily gave up the equality he had with the father, and became a man.

oops, I didn't read fully, just saw you don't believe in the trinity.

Again, that quote is wishy washy, if Jesus is God, how can he then be a man? Does he not then cease being God? Thus ending the trinity?

Doesn't make any sense.

But thanks for your info.

 

[jaybird]

oops, I didn't read fully, just saw you don't believe in the trinity.

Again, that quote is wishy washy, if Jesus is God, how can he then be a man? Does he not then cease being God? Thus ending the trinity?

Doesn't make any sense.

But thanks for your info.

i agree, its a bit wishy washy. another question, whats the benefit of the doctrine? look at all the things Jesus taught, every lesson had a benefit for mankind. look years later when the trinity doctrine starts, there are many explanations of how it works, this means that and all the rest, but nothing explaining how it helps us, how it makes us a better servant of the Lord.

 

[anonymous9887]

oops, I didn't read fully, just saw you don't believe in the trinity.

Again, that quote is wishy washy, if Jesus is God, how can he then be a man? Does he not then cease being God? Thus ending the trinity?

Doesn't make any sense.

But thanks for your info.

I have seen this before, they will then ask
So you are saying it is impossible for god to become man?
So it isn't possible for the almighty to have 2 natures at the same time?

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

I have seen this before, they will then ask
So you are saying it is impossible for god to become man?
So it isn't possible for the almighty to have 2 natures at the same time?

Sadly I've come across the same arguments.

What I also don't get is that Jesus went into the mountains to pray...who was he praying to, himself?