Let the debate begin-Round One

Let the debate begin-Round One - Printable Version

+- Forums (https://bb.islamsms.com)
+-- Forum: ENGLISH (https://bb.islamsms.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Discussion of Beliefs (https://bb.islamsms.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: Let the debate begin-Round One (/showthread.php?tid=7017)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Let the debate begin-Round One - wel_mel_2 - 09-22-2006

Bismillah:

Quote:The trinity is a very simple concept, and does not conflict with the wisdom embodied in any of the prophets.

Am sorry? Trinity is a VERY simple concept?

Look at what you just said in the above statement and in your last paragraph of post # 5.

Quote:The trinity is a very simple concept
The fact the trinity is hard to understand does not make it wrong

Simple and hard :confused_smile:

Quote:Jesus can best be understood as a special prophet, in that he is not the son of man but the son of God. (Virgin birth, etc.) Yet, does he say anything new? He is the news.

Do you know how many times he called himself son of man and how many times he was CALLED BY OTHERS as son of God? and do you know what is the meaning of SON OF GOD in the Hebrew language? and do you know that ALL OF US are called SONS of God according to the Bible?

Salam

Wael

Let the debate begin-Round One - Muslimah - 09-22-2006

Bismillah

Quote:In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

I ONCE WAS LOST, BUT NOW AM FOUND!! MASHALLAH! SUBHANA ALLAH SUBHANA ALLAH!

It's been a year and a half since my reversion back to my original faith-Islam,

Allah u Akbar, :mashaallah: I m just here to welcome u brother to the fold of Islam and to our family.

I dont intend to hijack this thread.Pls continue :mashaallah:

Let the debate begin-Round One - AlShamms - 09-22-2006

Peace......

Submit you stated:

"You've confused me a great deal. If the trinity is a "a man made construct to describe the principle that the Bible conveys" then there is no point argueing about it, because you've just told me it's made up and is a theory used to describe a principe. Plus it sounds like you don't believe in it, although i might be wrong.

Care to explain your position and beliefs?"

Yes I can expound and explain, and I am sorry if I confused you. When I stated that the WORD “Trinity” is not found in the Bible, I was saying that the WORD “Trinity” was invented to convey the Biblical principle of God the Father, God the Word, and God the Holy Spirit. I was in no way implying that the CONCEPT of God the Father, God the Word and God the Holy Spirit which is found in the Bible, was invented by man and not revealed by Jehovah. There are different places in the Bible where the three above are each called “God”. Meaning, the Holy Spirit is called God, the Word (whom the Bible and the Qur’an both confirm is Jesus Christ) is called God, and of course Jehovah is also called God. I will show you those verses in the Bible and then show you where the CONCEPT of “Trinity” is found in the Bible.

The Holy Spirit called “God”:

Act 5:1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession,

Act 5:2 And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet.

Act 5:3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?

Act 5:4 While it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.

Act 5:5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.

In verse 3 the companion of Jesus called Peter asks Ananias why he yielded to temptation from Satan to lie to the Holy Ghost. Then in the very next verse Peter wants Ananias to understand exactly what he had done, telling him that by lying to the Holy Ghost, he had not lied to men, but lied to God. The penalty for lying to the Holy Ghost which was God was death, as is witnessed in verse 5.

The Word called “God”:

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

Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.

Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Joh 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

Joh 1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

Joh 1:6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.

Joh 1:7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.

Joh 1:8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.

Joh 1:9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

Joh 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

Joh 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

Joh 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Joh 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Joh 1:15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

Joh 1:16 And of his fullness have all we received, and grace for grace.

Joh 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

I know the above is long but I felt it important to include it all for contextual understanding. In verse one we read a few things about the “Word”. That the Word existed since the beginning; that the Word was with God in the beginning; and that the Word was God. We read in verse 3 that all things were created by the Word and that nothing exists that was not created by the Word. We then read in verse 4 that in the Word was life and that this life was the light of men. We then read about a warner named John who comes as a witness to the light that was the life that was in the Word.

(I hope you are still with me)

In verse 10 we read that the Word was in the world, the world was made by the Word, and that the world did not know the Word (in Greek knew is the word “ginōskō” and means to properly understand). So the world didn’t properly understand who the Word was. But for those who did receive the Word, the Word gave them power to become the sons of God.

Now, let me stop here and bring a few points to light. Not everyone on the inhabited earth is a son of God. That distinction must be given to them by the Word and the only way that can happen is if that person receives the Word (in Greek receive is the word “lambanō” and means to associate with one’s self as companion, attendant; to admit, receive; not to refuse or reject).

Continuing on in verse 14 we read that this Word, that was in the beginning with God, who itself was God, and by which everything came into existence became flesh and dwelled among men. This Word that became flesh is the same man that John the warner gave witness about and also states in verse 15 that this man, this Word that became flesh was preferred over John and existed before John.

"Trinity” in the Bible:

In the book of Genesis in the first three verses of the first chapter we read this:

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Remember what we read and please try to follow me here. In verse one we have Jehovah; in verse two we have the Spirit of God; and in verse three we have Jehovah speaking, causing his Word to act. So there are:

1. Jehovah

2. The Holy Spirit

3. The Word of God

Each eternal, each God. I know this was a lengthy post I hope I didn’t lose anyone along the way. I hope this explains my position and beliefs and I pray that those who have an ear to hear, hear.

Shamms

Let the debate begin-Round One - John 15:18 - 09-22-2006

Quote:Peace be upon you.

You've confused me a great deal. If the trinity is a "a man made construct to describe the principle that the Bible conveys" then there is no point argueing about it, because you've just told me it's made up and is a theory used to describe a principe.

Just because something is a synthesis of facts, does not mean it is made up. The doctrine of the trinity is a full and correct exposition of the various clues given in Scripture.

It is a way of describing the three persons of the one God. I don't expect you to get that, but that's what it is.

Synthesis, yes. Fabricated, no.

Let the debate begin-Round One - Steve Consilvio - 09-22-2006

Quote:Peace.....

Now Steve, do you really think others here will get that?

Shamms

Only if they try.

Time makes more converts than reason. - From Commonsense by Thomas Paine

But you who are strong and swift, see that you do not limp before the lame, deeming it kindness. - from The Prophet by Kahlil Gibran

Thank you for letting me know that you got it.

Let the debate begin-Round One - Steve Consilvio - 09-22-2006

Quote:Let me make ,my previous statement clear "Far is it removed from His transcendent majesty that he should have a son." Not my statement, but the statement of Allah/God---Muhammed is not the athourity in the Qu'ran, Allah is, sorry to confuse you.

Please note everything in the Qu'ran is the word of God/Allah, now you know---this is what Muslim's believe anyway. Peace and 1 love

The word of God is REPRESENTED in a book, but it cannot be written. The Spirit lives in your heart. If it is written anywhere, then it is there.

You are thinking too literally.

A few years ago, I was at a board like this, and there was a guy there who kept asking "Is the Bible an icon?" For the longest time I could not understand what he meant, then one day I finally grasped it. The answer is "yes, some people treat it like an icon." The same is true of the qu'ran.

It isn't the book that is important, it is the words. It isn't the words that are important, it is what they mean.

Just like political laws, it is the Spirit of the law that must be understood, not the letter. The reason we are at war today between the Muslims and the West (in general terms) is because BOTH sides have abandoned the spirit of the original laws handed down by Moses in exchange for laws made by men that are written and re-written in a cycle of endless folly.

The Spirit is above the Law.

If you trust the Spirit, then everything is fine. Conflict arises when men trust reason. All reason can accomplish is to show the errors of reason.

Let the debate begin-Round One - wel_mel_2 - 09-24-2006

Bismillah:

Steve: have you seen post# 11? I would really appreciate if you could provide some answers.

thanks.

Wael.

Let the debate begin-Round One - Steve Consilvio - 09-24-2006

Quote:Bismillah:

Am sorry? Trinity is a VERY simple concept?

Look at what you just said in the above statement and in your last paragraph of post # 5.

Simple and hard :confused_smile:

Do you know how many times he called himself son of man and how many times he was CALLED BY OTHERS as son of God? and do you know what is the meaning of SON OF GOD in the Hebrew language? and do you know that ALL OF US are called SONS of God according to the Bible?

Salam

Wael

Simple and hard? lol Thank you for pointing that out. I guess it could be confusing. eh?

All great truths are simple and hard. For example: Love your enemy.

Obviously if we can love our enemy, then eventually we will have no enemy. So it is simple. Yet, it is very hard as well. The concept of "enemy" means to be opposed to that person. Thus you must love who you hate, which is very hard to do and not obvious, thus it is intellectually and emotionally "hard" to grasp as well. Everything in our society encourages people to conquer. Politics, business, academics, etc., everything is about "getting ahead." Thus "love your enemy" goes against all of the status quo in one swoop. It is both an easy concept, meaning it is a clear and simple principle; yet it is also hard to understand. Why would one want to make himself vulnerable and at a disadvantage? It turns our concept of power on its head.

In the case of Christ, God is all powerful, so why would he make himself weak? That is what makes the trinity hard to understand. It requires wisdom and faith for the strong to make themselves weak. Look at the contrast that Jesus sets up in healing others and lifting others out of death, yet he does nothing to defend himself. He uses his strength for the weak, and not against the strong. With one exception, he casts out the devil when he encounters him.

In some ways there are two trinities, not one. There is the Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit. And there is also us (man,) God and the Devil. For us, it is a struggle (jihad) to be moral and have faith, but when rooted in the Trinity it is "easy and hard." Easy because with faith all things are possible, hard because faith is continually unfolding itself and asking more from us...and yes, we are all sons of God, which is why loving our enemy is so important. We are a family, and brother should not slay brother like Cain did to Abel. Thus, we need to "reconcile with our brother" before we can be admitted into Heaven. We are not only obliged to purge the hate and fear in our own heart, but we are also obliged to help our brother do the same. We are our brother's keeper, and what we "keep" is faith.

The Trinity should not present a stumbling block for you, for as Jesus said, those that accept him also accept the father who sent him. Similarly, I can love Muhammed as easily as Hitler or Osama or my next door neighbor or Cain. For they all have God within them, but none of them were "sent" the way Jesus was. To love the sinner and not the sin is what I must do when I look in my mirror every morning as well. When Allah is described as merciful, then there must be the sinful and merciless who need forgiveness, right? Only the merciless need mercy.

To put it another way, it is more important to follow who the prophets follow (God or Allah) and not the prophets themselves. The President of Iran, for example, struggles to understand how to reconcile montheism with secular political authority. He sees Christ as a prophet, as did Arafat and many other Muslim leaders. The fact that he tries to make sense of these prophets makes him unintelligible to many in the West, who have separated church and morality from state. Yet the problem is that he does not quite grasp that the idea of nationhood (and religious sect) is the essential bigotry that plagues mankind. The idea of separate states for Israel and Palestine is not a solution. There needs to be one community of men, not a community for Christians, Muslims or Jews.

Just as all the Christian sects need to reconcile, so too do all the Jewish and Muslim sects, and then they all need to reconcile as one on top of that. This will not be accomplished without using Christ as the doorway with the Holy Spirit, imo.

Let the debate begin-Round One - wel_mel_2 - 09-26-2006

Bismillah:

Quote:Simple and hard? lol Thank you for pointing that out. I guess it could be confusing. eh?

aren't you confuse?

Quote:All great truths are simple and hard.

Oh please, you know well that Scholars of Christianity, Fathers and Bishops, Christian missionaries and preachers have tried all available means to justify this doctrine but after exhausting all known logics and human reasons they have failed miserably and declared it to be a “MYSTERY”

You really need to read the following, which are some statements given by the head of Churches, eminent Christian Theologians and known writers who came boldly to defend Trinity: guess what they say??

Quote:"The most Holy Trinity is a mystery in the strictest sense of the word. For reason alone cannot prove the existence of a Triune God, Revelation teaches it, And even after the existence of the mystery has been revealed to us, it remains IMPOSSIBLE for the human intellect to grasp how the Three Persons have put one Divine Nature."
Rev. J.F De Groot Catholic teaching P 101

Scholars Karl Rahner and Herbert Vorgimler stated in their Theological Dictionary that:

Quote:“The Trinity is a mystery in the strict sense, which could not be known without revelation, and even after revelation CANNOT become wholly INTELLIGIBLE”

Quote:“God is one, and God is three. Since there is nothing like this in creation, we ANNOT UNDERSTAND IT, but ONLY ACCEPT IT”
Monsignor Eugene Clark

Quote:"We know that it is very profound mystery, which we DON’T BEGIN TO UNDERSTAND”
Cardinal John O’Connor

Quote:"The INSCRUTABLE mystery of God is the Trinity”
Pope John Paul II

Are you still saying that it is VERY simple?

You can check the above quotations by yourself from the book titled “Should you believe in Trinity?”

You may or may not know that the apostolic fathers and those of the succeeding generations up to the last quarter of the 4th century CE, never have thought of a Triune God. Read by yourself what the new Catholic Encyclopedia said about Trinity:

Quote:"The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective." New catholic Encyclopedia, “The Holy Triniry” Volume 14, p 299

The doctrine of the Trinity was coined by the Christians about ]three hundred years after Jesus. The four Canonical Gospels, written between 70 and 115 C.E., contain no reference to the Trinity. Even St. Paul, who imported many foreign ideas into Christianity, knew nothing of the Triune God. The New Catholic Encyclopaedia 4(bearing the Nhil Obstat and Imprimature, indicating official approval) admits that the doctrine of the Trinity was unknown to the early Christians and that it was formulated in the last quarter of the 4th century:

Quote:" If is difficult, in the second half of the 20th century to offer a clear, objective, and straightforward account of the revelation, doctrinal evaluation, and theological elaboration of the mystery of the Trinity. Trinitarian discussion, Roman Catholic as well as other, presents a somewhat unsteady silhouette.
Two things have happened. There is the recognition on the part exegetes and Biblical theologians, including a constantly growing number of Roman Catholics, that one should not speak of Trinitarianism in the New Testament without serious qualification. There is also the closely parallel recognition on the part of historians of dogma and systematic theologians that when one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism, one has moved from the period of Christian origins to, say, the last quadrant of the 4th century. It was only then that what might be called the definitive Trinitarian dogma 'one God in three persons' became thoroughly assimilated into Christian life and thought."

Quote:At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian . . It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the (New Testament) and other early Christian writings." (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics)

read what they say with an open mind and do your homework to find out about Trinity which was adopted from Pagan religions.

Quote:"The early Christians, however, did not at first think of applying the (Trinity) idea to their own faith. They paid their devotions to God the Father and to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and they recognized the Holy Spirit; but there was no thought of these three being an actual Trinity, co-equal and united in One."
(The Paganism in Our Christianity)

The above statements plus many clear verses in the Bible shows that Trinity was not divinely inspired, then Why should anyone bother over a doctrine full of confusion when Christian scholars of the highest eminence are unable to interpret or explain it intelligibly?

Do you wanna hear more ?

Talking about the Hebrew Scriptures, The Encyclopedia of Religion admits:

Quote:"Theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity".

And the New Catholic Encyclopedia also says:

Quote:"The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament."

Talking about the Greek Scriptures The Encyclopedia of Religion says:

Quote:"Theologians agree that the New Testament also does not contain" an explicit doctrine of the Trinity.

esuit Forman states:

Quote:"The New Testament writers . . .give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons . . . .Nowhere do we find any trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology similarly states:

Quote:"The (New Testament) does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity, 'The Bible lacks the expressed declaration that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are of equal essence.' Protestant theologian Karl Barth'

"Historian Arthur Weigall Notes:

Quote:"Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon, and nowhere in the New Testament does the word 'Trinity' appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord." "Paganismin Our Christianity"

I still have much to say about this issue. But it is enough for now.

Trinity is not simple as you said, and it is not even hard, it is impossible for human mind to understand and therefore it is man-made doctrine because the Bible said that God is not the author of confusion.

Salam

Wael

Let the debate begin-Round One - Steve Consilvio - 09-26-2006

I offered an explanation of what the trinity is. It is not fair to say that the words of others are my words, and because they cannot explain it that does not mean I cannot. In other words, you should respond to what I say, not to how you think I think of the issue based on the established orthodoxy of others.

However, the premise of the trinity is the existence of God, (or Allah) which cannot be "proved" using reason or science, the existence of God must be believed. Thus your seeking a rational explanation of the trinity, when it is based on faith, is "irrational" isn't it? :-)

I think the trouble you have is with the concept of the Spirit more than Jesus as the Son of God, but the concept of the Spirit is not made up or added to the Bible by theologians. It is discussed quited clearly.

1 John 5:7-9 (New International Version)

For there are three that testify: 8the[a] Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement. 9We accept man's testimony, but God's testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about his Son.