Responding to Christianity's Critics

The Holy Trinity in the Qur’an

Without a doubt most Muslims believe that the Qur’an actually speaks against the Blessed Trinity and it is my experience that when broaching this topic, one will invariably be presented with a series of quotations from the Muslim holy book which express, in one form or another, a condemnation of what is supposed to be the Christian Trinity. Let us waste no time in saying that although the Qur’an believes itself to be condemning the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, in every instance it undertakes this task it fails to do so and in fact condemns various heresies that adherers of the Trinity themselves have condemned hundreds of years prior to the advent of Islam.

This might seem quite pretentious to the Muslim, that a non-Muslim should be able to speak so decisively concerning their holy text yet given that the Qur’an takes it upon itself to argue against a Christian doctrine, then it isn’t wrong to maintain that Christians are the appropriate judges of whether or not there exists a condemnation of this doctrine within the Muslim holy book. This might perhaps initially sound a tad self-serving yet the same principle would hold if I were to engage in a condemnation of the Islamic concept of Tawhid. No matter what my condemnation of it would consist of, I would first have to define it properly or else I would be attacking nothing but a mere caricature of their doctrine and any reasonably educated Muslim would be able to tell that I spoke concerning things I clearly possessed no understanding of. Just as the learned Muslim is in the best position to know whether one has defined their fundamental doctrine correctly, so too is the learned Christian in the best position to know whether one has defined God’s highest revelation of himself (seeing as the doctrine deals with how he is in his own being) accurately.

Yet therein lies the problem. On being exposed to the passages which the Muslim takes to be a repudiation of the Trinity, the acute Christian can but shake their head and try to explain to his interlocutor that whoever the source of the Qur’an was, this individual clearly possessed no knowledge of the Trinity for they quite clearly fell into the same pitfalls that previous individuals stumbled into and whose interpretations were rightly condemned by the early church. The following will consist of all the references to the Trinity that I have found within the Qur’an and if I have missed any, I would very much like it if I could be let known of this fact seeing as these will surely not change the force of my argument in the least.

O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, “Three”; desist — it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs. — Surah 4:171 Sahih International (emphasis mine)

Dipping right into the matter we see that the People of the Scripture (in this case Christians) are told to desist from saying “three” seeing as this is nothing but lies. It would seem that three stands in place for the trinitarian doctrine of three divine persons. Now we should note the persons involved in the above passage: Allah (who quite clearly is identified with the Father both in the Qur’an and Islamic tradition), Jesus, and Mary. Right from the start we are met with a serious problem. Mary is included in the category of the three divine persons. She is named as a member of the Godhead—of the Trinity while this has never been the case at all. Instead of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, we are treated to the Father, the Mother, and the Son. Hence why the Islamic prophet can later on claim that it is far from God’s glory to have a son seeing as he saw the sonship of Christ as being accomplished through a sexual union between God (the Father) and Mary (the Mother).

They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, “Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?” And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah is over all things competent. — Surah 5:17 Sahih International (emphasis mine)

Once again we have an incorrect formulation of the Christian doctrine. The astute Christian will know that it is fundamentally wrong to say that “God is Jesus”, rather, the declaration is “Jesus is God”. The first statement implies that the Christ is the only divine person within the being of God (to the exclusion of the other members of the Trinity) while the second maintains the divinity of Christ without positing that he is the sole person within the Godhead. This is in much the same way as it is wrong to say “math is division” but entirely correct to say “division is math” seeing as the first statement would teach that math only exists as division and nothing else while the latter does not. More than this simply being a matter of semantics, or obtuse talk entertained only by bored theologians, the phrase “God is Jesus” actually implies the heresy of Sabellianism (Modalism). This was condemned by the early church as a nontrinitarian heresy which removed all distinctions within the being of God and claimed that there was only a single divine person who operated in the modes of the Father, the Son, and the Holy spirit (as opposed to a single divine being who exists eternally as the persons of the three members of the Trinity).

They have certainly disbelieved who say, “Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary” while the Messiah has said, “O Children of Israel, worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord.” Indeed, he who associates others with Allah — Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers. They have certainly disbelieved who say, “Allah is the third of three.” And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment. So will they not repent to Allah and seek His forgiveness? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger; [other] messengers have passed on before him. And his mother was a supporter of truth. They both used to eat food. Look how We make clear to them the signs; then look how they are deluded. — Surah 5:72-75 Sahih International (emphasis mine)

Once again the Qur’an incorrectly articulates the doctrine of the divinity of Christ and in fact condemns sabellianism instead of the Trinity. It then goes on to commit a subsequent error in defining the Father’s position as the third member of the Trinity. The Father is not the third but rather the first. And God is not the third of three but rather three in one. These aren’t simple mistakes that we can gloss over when it is claimed that the Qur’an is a book from God. Yet it must be said that both the Christian and Muslim know that the above formulations are wrong seeing as no individual from these two groups who is knowledgeable on the subject will define the Trinity with the Father being the third person or as God being the third of three instead of three in one.

Notice how Mary once more makes an appearance in a passage that is aimed specifically at condemning the Trinity? The source of the Qur’an mentions that Christ and Mary ate food in order to show that they aren’t divine (seeing as God has no need to eat) but they make the great mistake of including Mary in the equation when the context is aimed at condemning the three divine persons whom Christians worship. Once again, the Qur’an is under the impression that the Trinity consists of a Father, a Son (Christ), and Mary (a mother) instead of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit! The text is very clear (“Look how We make clear to them the signs”) that it believes Mary to be part of the Holy Trinity.

And [beware the Day] when Allah will say, “O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, ‘Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah ?'” He will say, “Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within myself, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen. I said not to them except what You commanded me — to worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when You took me up, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness. — Surah 5:116-117 Sahih International (emphasis mine)

Let us remember that Muslims accuse Christians of worshiping three separate deities (and as such we are accused of polytheism). Can we count the number of persons involved in the above passage? Once again we have the Father, Christ, and Mary. These three and only these three. There is no subsequent exchange between the Muslim deity and Christ where he asks Jesus if he told his followers to take him and the Holy Spirit as gods beside Allah. That is indeed telling because it is either that the Qur’an is perfectly alright with this, or, more likely, that the source of the Qur’an simply was unaware of what the Trinity truly consisted of. This is a great problem because the above is a purported discussion that Christ will have with Allah when the latter is about to condemn Christians for the apparent errors of their faith. This then clearly shows that the Islamic prophet thought that the Christian religion (in this respect) consisted merely of the worship of Mary and Jesus as gods beside the Father! Where is a condemnation of the worship of the Holy Spirit?

Muslims will often claim that the Trinity was created during the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. instead of this having been a doctrine held by the first Christians. Even if this were true, it would still not change the fact that the Islamic prophet would have had hundreds of years to know what Christians in fact believed and there is entirely no excuse for the Qur’an to be making such glaring mistakes.

They have said, “Allah has taken a son.” Exalted is He; He is the [one] Free of need. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth. You have no authority for this [claim]. Do you say about Allah that which you do not know? — Surah 10:68 Sahih International (emphasis mine)

Once again the bolded claim is an error. The Christian claim is not that the Father took a son but rather that the Father has a son. There is a great theological distinction between the two seeing as the former teaches Adoptionism (Dynamic Monarchianism), another heresy. Taking a son refers to an action occuring in time such that there was a point when God did not have a Son and thus had need to subsequently take for himself a son. Christians believe that the Father has always—from all eternity—had a Son and as such there was never any point at which he could act in order to make Christ his son seeing as the Christ has always been the Son of the Father.

But they have attributed to Allah partners — the jinn, while He has created them — and have fabricated for Him sons and daughters. Exalted is He and high above what they describe. [He is] Originator of the heavens and the earth. How could He have a son when He does not have a companion and He created all things? And He is, of all things, Knowing. — Surah 6:100-101 Sahih International (emphasis mine)

And Exalted is the Majesty of our Lord: He has taken neither a wife nor a son. — Surah 72:3 Yusuf Ali (emphasis mine)

The above logic runs throughout the entire Qur’an. Muhammad lumped Christians and polytheists together in this regard and believed that Christians merely repeated the same myths as the polytheists; that is, God being able to enter into a sexual union with a consort and thus producing offspring thereby. From the Qur’an it is very clear that Allah can have no son because he has no wife to engage in intercourse with. This is rather crude but this is precisely why the Muslim holy book is so focused on not only disproving the divinity of Christ, but that of Mary as well (as if Christians ever claimed that Mary was divine)!

As if this weren’t enough, the Qur’an consistently speaks of the sonship of Christ in terms that imply a biological sonship:

They say: “Allah hath begotten a son”: Glory be to Him.—Nay, to Him belongs all that is in the heavens and on earth: everything renders worship to Him. — Surah 2:116 Yusuf Ali

Transliteration: Waqaloo itakhatha Allahuwaladan subhanahu bal lahu ma fee assamawatiwal-ardi kullun lahu qanitoon (emphasis mine)

—————

It befits not (the Majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son [this refers to the slander of Christians against Allah, by saying that ‘Iesa (Jesus) is the son of Allah]. Glorified (and Exalted be He above all that they associate with Him). When He decrees a thing, He only says to it, “Be!” and it is. — Surah 19:35 Muhsin Khan

Transliteration: Ma kana lillahi anyattakhitha min waladin subhanahu itha qadaamran fa-innama yaqoolu lahu kun fayakoon (emphasis mine)

In Arabic, ibn and walad can both stand for ‘son of’ yet ibn carries a more figurative meaning while the latter implies one’s progeny from a sexual union. This is why the Arabic Bible and Arabic Christians never call Christ, ‘waladu’llah‘ (Son of God) for this would imply a literal sonship accomplished through biology, but rather ‘ibnu’llah‘ (Son of God). The Qur’an uses language which always implies literal sonship except in one passage, Surah 9:30. The problem however is that seeing as ibn could also refer to a biological son (depending on the context), this one instance ought to be interpreted in light of the entire Qur’an and the Muslim scriptures are quite clear that they understand the sonship of Christ as being achieved through a sexual union between God and Mary.

Yet we can certainly understand how the Islamic prophet would arrive at such a mistake. In his travels as a merchant he no doubt would have, in some form or other, come into contact with the doctrine of the Theotokos—the God-bearer, which stated that Mary was the mother of God in the respect of her being the mother of Christ (as it concerns his humanity) and Christ himself being the one true God. To this day some Muslims still believe that this has to do with bringing the Second Person of the Trinity into existence (as opposed to giving birth to his humanity) and since they know that Christians believe Christ to be God it then isn’t hard to suppose—when one possesses an inadequate conception of this teaching—that the Father and Mary (the mother) entered into a physical union (see here) in order to produce Christ (the Son). If this misconception is still subscribed to in this day and age where the information to the contrary is freely available, how much more likely is it for a 7th century Bedouin (who himself could neither read nor write) to have fallen into the same misunderstanding? This point is even further emphasized when we appreciate the fact that Theotokos would translate to Arabic as Wālidat Alelah and we know that walad carries in its meaning a literal sonship—which is perfectly appropriate for it regards Christ’s humanity but Muhammad must have heard walidat and immediately thought of a divine son produced through the sexual union of a Father-god and a Mother-goddess. As an aside, we should note that what would make this interpretation even more likely is the fact that save for in one instance, the Qur’an always uses ibn when calling Jesus, “the son of Mary” and this no doubt highlights the great dislike that the source of the Qur’an held for the term, walad.

Now, it has been my experience that the Muslim might still object to this on the basis of Surah 9:30 alone and as such it would prove adequate to show how even this objection is untenable. Here is Surah 9:30:

The Jews say, “Ezra is the son of Allah”; and the Christians say, “The Messiah is the son of Allah.” That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded? — Sahih International (emphasis mine)

Note that the force of the argument is the fact that the Christians and Jews are said to imitate the myths of those who came before them. This clearly refers to the polytheists who believed their Gods to have been capable of engaging in sexual intercourse with divine consorts or mortal women. The fact that every time that the “three gods” whom Christians supposedly worship are enumerated, Mary makes an appearance (and as such the list always consists of a father, a mother and a son), only augments this point. We cannot ignore the fact that the worship of the Holy Spirit as a member of the Trinity is never condemned in the Qur’an. The Muslim holy book claims that Christians worship three deities and yet every passage which details the three individuals whom Christians worship mentions Mary as one of these.

The Muslim Response:

There are a few different ways in which the Muslim will try to respond and yet all these do nothing to mitigate the clear errors within their Qur’an. First off, the Muslim may point to the Catholic practise of venerating Mary (Note that this does nothing to answer why the Qur’an—in believing itself to be speaking against the Trinity—mistakenly condemns various heresies, and confounds the order of the Persons in the Holy Trinity etc.). While I do not wish to defend this practise, it must be said that Catholics do not consider Mary to be divine and have never included her as one of the three members of the Trinity. The matter that the Muslim needs to explain to the astute Christian is how at all the Qur’an can accuse Christians of worshiping “three gods” and yet always enumerate a list that does not include the Holy Spirit and substitutes Mary for him. Make no mistake about it, there are exactly zero condemnations of the worship of the Holy spirit within the Qur’an. If Muhammad had wished to condemn the veneration of Mary as well as the Trinity then he would have had to at least posit a quadrinity in which he condemned the worship of the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit and the mother of Christ.

The second response is to try to claim that the Qur’an was only condemning a certain group. Note that this reply does nothing to explain away the errors concerning the Trinity within the Muslim holy book (such as Sabellianism, Adoptionism, or confounding the persons of the Blessed Trinity). Furthermore, the Qur’an consistently says “the Christians” instead of “some Christians, a few Christians”, or even “a majority of the Christians”. Nowhere does one get the sense that the source of the Qur’an is speaking of a particular Christian sect and not Christians as a whole. For example, I could not claim  (and do so repeatedly without any clarification at all) that Muslims are in error for believing that W. Fard Muhammad is the incarnation of God. The majority of Muslims do not believe this and it is only a fringe group (the Nation of Islam) who propagate such a belief. Yet if I never even once clarified that I was speaking about an aberrant Muslim sect, the objective individual would have to conclude that I simply supposed all Muslims to believe the same thing as those comprising the Nation of Islam. This then is the problem we find with the Islamic holy book. Considering that Muslims claim the Qur’an to be a miraculous book exhibiting a perfect mastery of language it does seem rather strange that it would word its supposed intentions so clumsily. If there really did exist such a group whom the Qur’an was speaking against, then even this would be an argument against the divine inspiration of Muhammad seeing as he supposed that all Christians followed such a group (given that in every single instance when such a practice is repudiated, there is absolutely nothing to make one believe that the Islamic prophet was not speaking of Christians as a whole). It’s like only having come into contact with members of the Nation of Islam and thus supposing that all Muslims believed that W. Fard Muhammad was the incarnation of Allah (as I did when I was quite young and knew no better).

An ingenuous response is to claim that current Christians have changed their Trinity and that at some point Mary had been the third person of the Godhead instead of the Holy Spirit. (Once again this fails to make up for the errors within the Qur’an where it condemns well-known heresies instead of the Trinity and confounds the order of the Persons of the Godhead). This claim is baseless yet let us at this time concede this point for the sake of the argument, this would still not change the fact that by the time Muhammad would be preaching his condemnations of what he mistakenly thought to be the Christian Trinity, this doctrine had been firmly established and defined. Even if at some distant point in the past Mary had been displaced from the Trinity and replaced with the Holy Spirit, in the time of Muhammad however, the Trinity would be the same one which Christians adhere to today and as such the condemnations uttered by the Islamic prophet would still be in error.

In recent years, some Muslims have even begun to claim that none of the above actually speak about the Trinity and that they merely speak against the supposed deification of Christ and his mother. We must reiterate that such a claim is false and that were it true, even this would not explain away the errors in articulating the divinity of Christ, the order of the persons within the Trinity etc. Not to mention that if Muhammad had merely wished to speak against the setting up of partners beside God, why then is the Qur’an silent on the worship of the Holy Spirit? Why is it that the Muslim cannot produce even a single verse from their holy book which condemns the worship of the Holy Spirit seeing as Muslims believe him to have been merely the angel Gabriel? Clearly this attempt to answer the objections laid out by the Christian also fails.

Another response is to claim that all of the above is merely semantics. This is usually followed by a period and no further argumentation. In a way it is not really a response but more of a plea. Given that there is literally no way to vindicate the Qur’an on the matter, the devout Muslim has to find any reason to try to disregard the above. Once more this response is inadequate because history tells us that Christians took the proper formulation of the Trinity seriously enough to condemn these other heresies. Members on both sides were adamant that their articulations were in fact teaching different things and as such this issue cannot simply be swept under the rug as merely a matter of semantics. History is against this.

Now, we must not at all be surprised that Muhammad was mistaken concerning the Blessed Trinity for it truly is a hard doctrine to understand, much less articulate properly. We find that the Islamic prophet commits the very same mistakes as did individuals before him (and after him) yet this cannot excuse him as he claimed that his were the words of God. Individuals who did not adhere to the Trinity have in the past (as in the present) been able to articulate the doctrine of the Trinity properly and then proceeded to attack it from there and so should we believe that the omniscient God himself would be unable to do the same? The Muslim might be able to argue their way out of one or two examples, but when all the passages concerning the Trinity are examined in unison, the evidence is so overwhelmingly against them that it simply becomes impossible to do so. It is my sincere belief that the learned Muslim knows the Qur’an to be wrong on this account given that they will never articulate the Trinity in the manner that it is found in the Qur’an. That in itself is extremely telling.

In closing, we must once again assert that there is no condemnation of the Christian Trinity within the Qur’an and the Islamic prophet merely mistakenly condemned heresies which trinitarians themselves had condemned hundreds of years before he begun spreading his message of Islam. Furthermore, not a single Muslim response to this article can account for the various types of errors which the Islamic prophet makes in his career concerning Christian doctrine and as such they all fail. It is easy for the Muslim to think that the Qur’an repudiates the Holy Trinity for, by and large, they are unschooled in Christian history and as such are unable to pick up on the mistakes and heresies which are repeated in the Qur’an.

Advertisements

73 responses

  1. Pingback: The Trinity is Idle Speculation | Unsettled Christianity

  2. In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

    Assuredly they have disbelieved who say: verily God: He is the Masih, son of Maryam, whereas the Masih had said: Children of Israil! worship Allah, mine Lord and your Lord; verily whosoever associateth aught with Allah, Allah shall surely forbid the Garden unto him, and his resort is the Fire; and for the wrong-doers there shall be no helpers. (72) Assuredly they disbelieve who say: God is the third of the three; whereas there is no god except the One God. And if they desist not from that which they say, there shall surely befall those of them who have disbelieved a torment afflictive. (73) Wherefore turn they not toward Allah and ask His forgiveness? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (74) The Masih, son of Maryam, was naught but an apostle; surely there passed away apostles before him and his mother was a saintly woman; both of them were wont to eat food. Behold! how We expound unto them the evidences! Then behold! whither they are deviating! (75) Say thou: worship ye, beside Allah, that which availeth you not for hurt nor for profit! whereas Allah! He is the Hearer, the Knower. (76) Say thou: O people of the Book! exceed not the just bounds in your religion except with truth, and follow not the vain desires of a people who have strayed aforetime and have led many astray and have strayed from the level way. (77) Cursed were those who disbelieved from among the Children of Israil by the tongue of Daud and Isa, son of Maryam. That is because they disobeyed and were ever transgressing. (78) They were wont not to desist from the evil they committed; vile is that which they have been doing! (79)
    QURAN /5/ 72-79 Al-Maeda
    http://www.quranexplorer.com/quran/

    THX 2 U

    May 1, 2011 at 8:41 AM

    • Tiiigerr, you have just proved my point. Being unable to vindicate your holy book, you could do nothing but repeat the very passages that I have just shown to be completely faulty. One should note that you do nothing to challenge the argument for the fact that you are entirely unable to. This is an implicit acceptance of the inherent problems with the qur’an’s conception of the Holy Trinity. Thank you for being honest.

      May 1, 2011 at 6:20 PM

      • hanin

        The bible itself reject trinity in Matthew 6:24 “You can’t worship two gods at once. Loving one god, you’ll end up hating the other. Adoration of one feeds contempt for the other. You can’t worship God and Money both”.

        February 8, 2012 at 9:40 PM

      • Hello hanin,

        First off thanks for taking the time to read the article and more importantly, thanks for posting your thoughts. I appreciate comments (yours included) greatly. Now, you have made the claim that the Bible expressly teaches against the Holy Trinity in Matt. 6:24. Let us for a moment take a step back and examine your response:

        I. You will note that you have done nothing to actually prove the above article wrong. If we were, for the sake of the argument, to assume that you were right and that the passage you cite does indeed deny the Trinity, would that somehow clear away the errors in the Qur’an? No it wouldn’t. Given what i have outlined above, the Qur’an would still be wrong in its representation of Christian doctrine and so while you would have proven to Trinitarians Christians (i.e. the overwhelming majority of Christians) that they have an error in their doctrine, Islam would still end up being false for its blatant errors in expounding the doctrine of the Trinity. If the source of the Qur’an really is all-knowing, then he could not have made mistakes in representing the teachings of Christianity and yet we do find clear errors (e.g. the order of persons within the Trinity, the actual members within the trinity, the matter of divine sonship, Mary’s title of Theotokos, the matter of adoptionism, the matter of Sabellianism etc.). So whatever the case, Islam is shown to be a false religion.

        II. Matt. 6:24 does not deal with the Trinity at all. The Trinity does not posit multiple gods but only one God who exists in three persons. A Christian, in worshipping the Holy Trinity, is not worshipping God and some other god but simply the One God Himself; for the true God is triune.

        III. Furthermore, the Bible has many things to say concerning God: it calls the Father, God (John 5:18). It calls Jesus, God (Titus 2:13), and it calls the Holy spirit, God (Acts 5:3-4). The Bible shows that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are each their own person (Mark 1:9-11) and yet the Bible also says that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4). What does this sound like to you? Isn’t this clearly what the Trinity states (i.e. that there is only one God, eternal and omnipotent and that this one God exists as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit)? Clearly Christians are only following what the Bible teaches.

        Once again thanks for you comment hanin and I would encourage you to not hesitate to post again should you have more questions. God bless.

        February 9, 2012 at 2:02 PM

      • hanin

        I couldn’t find any error in the Qur’an, instead I found bible very confusing! having 150 contradictions!…Matthew 6:24 Goes against trinity which states three as one and one is three! while the verse stating the impossibilities of having more than one God…Jesus never called himself God, otherwise prove it from the bible. i have a question for you if you don’t mind answering.

        Where, specifically, in the Gospel does Jesus (PBUH!) mention the Trinity?
        and who is the Holy Ghost? what does it do? how does effect our life?

        February 9, 2012 at 8:09 PM

      • Greetings Hanin,

        As far as the claim of alleged contradictions within the Bible goes, this is a red herring. We are discussing the Trinity and as such let us keep to the topic. In no way does Matt. 6:24 deny the Trinity for it teaches against worshipping God alongside something else which clearly is not God. As such, there are two subjects in view here: God and that which is not God. Yet Christians only worship God and so this verse is not denying the Trinity.

        That said, you misformulate the Trinity. Christians do not teach that one is three and that three is one but rather that it is perfectly logical and, more importantly, biblical for God to be one in being and yet three in person (once again notice that the claim isn’t that the number one is really the number three but rather that one being can indeed be comprised of three distinct persons who can each be referred to as the one true God). Now I believe that what you’re trying to imply here is that the Trinity really teaches polytheism and not monotheism and I have already shown how such a claim is unsupported by logic in this article and in this discussion on a Muslim forum (I would encourage you to see how my points hold up when scrutinized by your own Muslim brothers and sisters).

        Now, I must find strange the claim that you ask me to prove from the Bible that Jesus called himself God or else you won’t believe me. Certainly Jesus never said the words “I am God” but he did behave in a manner fitting only to God and the Bible does indeed call him God multiple times. Now, I’m sure that you are aware that you will never find the exact words, “I am God” come from the lips of Jesus but let me show you why your argument is specious and how your position as a Muslim is one of inconsistency:

        On that note, if Mr. Evans needs for Jesus to have said the exact words, “I am God, worship me” in order to acknowledge that the bible teaches the divinity of Jesus (of course let’s not mention the verses where Jesus is equated to God, 1 Corinthians 2:8; called the creator of all things, John 1:3; worshiped, Luke 24:51-52; threatened to be stoned for making himself equal to God, John 10:33; demands to be honoured in the exact manner in which the Father is honoured, John 5:23; claims to have existed before his human birth, John 3:13; claims to have existed before Abraham, John 8:58-59; claims to have existed before the creation of the world, John 17:5; is described as indwelling God himself, John 1:18; claims that to have seen him is to have seen the Father, John 10:30; claims to share the exact same glory as the Father, John 17:5; claims to be able to do whatever the Father does, John 5:19; claims to have all authority in heaven and on earth, Matthew 28:18; etc.) then why does he believe that Jesus is the Messiah or the word of Allah given that in the Qur’an, Jesus never speaks the words, “I am the Messiah, follow me” or “I am the word of Allah, listen to me”? If Mr. Evans were an honest individual he would have to admit that, given his very argument, he cannot agree with the teachings of Islam on these matters seeing as Jesus never explicitly makes these statements in the entire Qur’an. Yet this was never about honesty in the first place—Mr. Evans does not possess a shred of honesty.

        Now Hanin, you believe that Jesus is the Messiah, Al-Masih, and a word from Allah. Can you point me in the Qur’an where Isa explicitly claims to be such? Of course you can’t seeing as the Jesus character in the Qur’an never makes any such claim and yet you believe both these things to be true of Christ because the Qur’an makes such claims on the part of Jesus. For Christians, likewise does the Bible make the claim that Jesus is God hence why we believe this to be the case. Now, can you see how the Muslim logic is hypocritical and base? For more on the divinity of Christ, please read the following two articles.

        If you are asking me where in the Bible one specifically finds the word trinity, then I must confess that it is not there. The doctrine of the Trinity does not hinge on finding the word in the Bible but rather on whether the concept is taught in the Bible and clearly it is. I have already shown you evidence for it (and I must say that you seemed to have conveniently ignored it) yet here it is again:

        Furthermore, the Bible has many things to say concerning God: it calls the Father, God (John 5:18). It calls Jesus, God (Titus 2:13), and it calls the Holy spirit, God (Acts 5:3-4). The Bible shows that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are each their own person (Mark 1:9-11) and yet the Bible also says that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4).

        Hanin, in your reply could you please tell me what the above teaches if not the Trinity? Please do not ignore me this time.

        The Holy Spirit, being God, is your Creator and the one who compels us towards grace and works within Christians to sanctify them and conform them to the image of the Lord Jesus Christ. He is the third person of the Trinity and as God himself, he can ‘do’ whatever is feasible for an omnipotent God to do. :)

        Blessings,

        methodus

        February 12, 2012 at 2:09 PM

      • hanin

        could you please state the errors you claimed in the Qur’an so we could know what you’re talking about?.

        February 9, 2012 at 8:12 PM

      • The errors are those which I have highlighted in the above article. I have even reiterated these in my previous comment to you (see section I.) and so I will not reproduce them for a third time here. This would be redundant. Please read the article again to see all the errors that the Qur’an makes concerning the Holy Trinity.

        February 12, 2012 at 1:36 PM

  3. Very few Understand that the concept of the Tri-Une ‘aspects’ of God/Allah/Brahma PRE_DATE Islam, Judaism and Christianity, and were included in the Egyptian theology and the Vedic theology as well:

    ” He who creates worlds without ceasing is threefold. He is Brahma, the Father; he is Maya, the Mother; he is Vishnu, the Son; Essence, Substance and Life, each includes the others, and all three are one in the Ineffable.”

    ~ Brahmanic Doctrine, Upanishads (from ‘The Great Initiates’ by Edouard Schure’)

    Source: http://uncletaz.com/great_initiates/krishna.html

    February 6, 2012 at 9:20 AM

    • As it concerns the matter of Brahma, the issue isn’t so straight-forward: for one thing, the conception of Brahma as part of the Trimurti (i.e. that which you seek to equivocate with the Holy Trinity) is the understanding of only a small subset within Hinduism. Even then this is undermined by the fact that some texts portray the members of the Trimurti unable to reach any consensus and even warring against one another. As such, what the Trimurti amounts to is once again not an example of a trinity but rather a triad.

      I can see that, with all due respect, you do not seem to be able to distinguish the concept of the Trinity from the concept of a triad (as your example of the Trimurti and your allusion to ancient Egyptian theology seem to imply). I would ask that you first study what the Trinity is for it is certainly not a triad of three chief gods. Also, the Muslim deity houses no plurality within his being (and as such has no ‘Tri-une’ aspects whatsoever to speak of). He is a monad and to imply otherwise shows that you have not done adequate research concerning Islam as well.

      February 6, 2012 at 9:45 AM

  4. God Bless you from Croatia. This article is great. Islam indeed teaches that christians believe in trinity: Father, Son and Virgin Mary. But in that trinity no one ever believed as a christian. Christians believe that it is: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. No one ever believed in trinity such as that written in Quran. Only trinity in which people believe has it’s root in concil of Catholic Church and doctrine of Trinity (protestants also believe this).

    This article is great to:
    http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-bible-koran-errors-catholic-mariolatry-trinity-father-son-mary.htm

    God bless you all – in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (not Mary insted of Holy Spirit)!

    March 23, 2012 at 5:18 PM

    • Thanks for the encouragement and may God bless you too. Yes, the Qu’ran is clearly wrong in its depiction of the Holy Trinity and the sad thing is that Muslims simply aren’t aware of this fact. One need not even be a Christian to know this, they simply need to be aware of history. It’s a simple historical fact that the very heresies condemned by the church hundreds of years before the Islamic prophet began spreading his message of Islam are repeated in the Qur’an.

      Once again, may the Triune God bless you!

      March 23, 2012 at 6:03 PM

  5. taz

    Methodus, it is very easy to interpret certain statements etc..that can allow you to describe something as incorrect. As seen in the koran, your faith is being questioned. Obviously you do not like that, hence your interpretation of what has been written in an attempt to argue against what has been stated. Please take note, the Bible has been corrupted and re-written by certain individuals through out history for their own purposes.

    Jesus did not die on the cross which the koran states, and only recently ancient documents were found written by one of the deciples of Jesus, obviously not mentioend in the Bible, which states that when the man that was being punished at the cross (supposidly Jesus), Jesus appeared next to this deciple, only he could see Jesus, and Jesus stated to him, do you think God would let this happen to me, thats is not me on the cross, these people are fools! Obviously this goes against the very grain of the Christain religion, but agrees with the what is written in the koran.

    March 30, 2012 at 11:15 AM

    • Thanks for commenting taz but we should note that you have done nothing to actually refute my points. You claim that I am interpreting the Qur’an improperly, if such is the case, please enlighten me as to properly read those passages in context. Perhaps we could start with why it is that whenever the Qur’an gives us a list of the three gods that Christians supposedly worship, the list is always Jesus, the Father and Mary? Furthermore, my points aren’t necessarily predicated on faith. I appeal to history and logic. The simple fact is that if you bothered to read documents written hundreds of years before Islam you would see that Trinitarian Christians have already condemned the false interpretations of Christ’s divinity and/or the Trinity we find repeated in the Qur’an. I even mention these false interpretations by name so you have no right to pretend as if I’m trying to interpret the statements in the Qur’an wrongly. For example, to claim that God is one of three (as the Qur’an incorrectly repeats) is fundamentally different than to claim that God is three in one. To claim that God is the Messiah/Jesus is fundamentally different than to claim that Jesus is God etc. In any case it is abundantly clear that you have no real argument but protest merely because the Qur’an has been shown to be incorrect.

      The simple fact is that we Christians do not even believe in what the Qur’an condemns and we even condemned the very same hundreds of years before Islam! Read up on Sabellianism, read up on adoptionism, read up on the Christian understanding of the divinity of Christ—in all these instances, Trinitarians had already condemned the false interpretations we find repeated in the Qur’an.

      As far as the rest of your post goes, it’s patent nonsense and doesn’t have anything to do with my article so I won’t respond to it.

      March 30, 2012 at 11:28 AM

      • taz

        Again you are just going too deep into interpretations. Lets agree to disagree. Attempt to read the rest of the Koran and see what you find.

        All the best.

        March 30, 2012 at 11:45 AM

      • Hello again taz,

        Now I certainly can’t agree to disagree here if what is meant by that is something along the lines of “the truth is uncertain”. Once more, the simple fact is that whatever is condemned in the Qur’an was condemned by Trintarians already hundreds of years before Islam. As such, we Trinitarians don’t believe in this. The problem however is that the Qur’an believes that we do believe in this and so it becomes quite evident that Muhammad didn’t know what he was talking about. I can see that you know this to be true as well by your comment of “you are just going too deep into interpretations”. Evidently, when we try to examine the claims of the Qur’an we realize that it falls apart. But don’t take my word for it, look up Sabellianism, adoptionism etc. and you will see that these are actually what is condemned by the Qur’an while Muhammad mistakenly thought that he was condemning the trinity etc.

        March 30, 2012 at 11:58 AM

      • Taz

        As I said. All the best.

        March 30, 2012 at 1:20 PM

  6. As I said. All the best.

    Thank you, Taz.

    March 30, 2012 at 2:17 PM

  7. Pingback: Islamic God Allah - must we believe it is the same as the God of Christianity? - Page 6 - Christian Forums

  8. Abd'

    If the Holy Qur’an states that the Nasari(original Christians) worshiped Allah, Jesus, and Mary all at once, it can’t be excluded from the wide variety of Christians all over the world during the 6th Century.
    As the Qur’an states: The Jews say, “Ezra is the son of Allah”; and the Christians say, “The Messiah is the son of Allah.” That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded?

    Why does Allah mention a small sect of Jews who worshiped Ezra(way less than 1 percent)?
    Surely the Jews as a whole didn’t. Why can’t the Qur’an say that a small sect of Christians claim that Yeshua is the son of Allah. The concept of the Trinity was not invented by Jesus, so even its existence can not be cut-and-dry, but open to interpretation by many people. Maybe it was addressing the Arab Christians view of Mary.The “Trinity” was officially incorporated by the RC Church much after the death of Christ.

    If you were not their at the time, you wouldn’t understand the Trinity as the Arabs would have.
    All three religions were built upon the holy soil of the middle east, but perverted by the foreign empires(Rome, Wahab).

    As a side note, imagine yourself in front of Moses after he brings down God’s Law. Would he bless you for claiming that Jesus is the “Begotten of God”, or curse you. No where is it mentioned anywhere in the Torah, a son of God. Islam is the most monotheistic it gets, even more than Judaism. The Qur’an does not speak of the Protestants, but of the Catholics of old.

    May 9, 2012 at 12:22 AM

    • Greetings Abd’

      If the Holy Qur’an states that the Nasari(original Christians) worshiped Allah, Jesus, and Mary all at once, it can’t be excluded from the wide variety of Christians all over the world during the 6th Century.

      There is just so much that is completely wrong with the above. First of all, if we are speaking of ‘original Christians’ then these would have to be placed in the 1st century and not 6th century. If we are speaking of ‘original Christians’ from an Islamic perspective then the Qur’an wouldn’t be accusing them of worshiping Mary at all! Furthermore, if you could prove that there was actually a Christian sect that included Mary as part of the Trinity in the 6th century then that would be great. The trouble however is that there is no such proof and the most likely explanation is the one I have already outlined in the article above—Muhammad was simply incorrect.

      Why does Allah mention a small sect of Jews who worshiped Ezra(way less than 1 percent)?
      Surely the Jews as a whole didn’t. Why can’t the Qur’an say that a small sect of Christians claim that Yeshua is the son of Allah.

      Actually, no Jews ever worshiped Ezra as the son of God. This is also a mistake of Muhammad. Once again, there is no historical evidence to make such a claim. Also, you are changing the words of your very own deity. The Qur’an never says that “a small sect of Christians claim that Yeshua is the son of Allah” but rather that “Christians claim that Yeshua is the Son of Allah”. Every single time the Qur’an touches on the subject it consistently says “Christians” or “The Christians” which no educated person will read as “only a small sect of Christians”. There simply is no warrant for doing so other than to try to cover up what we all know is a mistake on the part of Muhammad.

      As a side note, imagine yourself in front of Moses after he brings down God’s Law. Would he bless you for claiming that Jesus is the “Begotten of God”, or curse you.

      No, in fact Moses would ‘bless’ me: Matt. 17:1-9 NIV

      So to conclude, your comment has done nothing to actually address all the errors the Qur’an makes concerning the formulation of the Trinity, the Sonship and Divinity of Christ, the order of the divine persons etc., nor do we have any reason at all to trust what it says concerning what either the Christians or Jews worshiped. Think about this, why do we have evidence for all these various Jewish sects such as the Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Sicarii, and Zealots; evidence for all these various Christians sects such as Arians, Modalists, Donatists, Montanists etc. yet there is absolutely no evidence at all for either Jews who worshiped Ezra or a Christian sect that included Mary as part of the Trinity in the time of Muhammad? Why is there no evidence for this given that there is evidence for the even older sects I have just mentioned? The explanation is simply because Muhammad was making these groups up.

      May 13, 2012 at 6:07 PM

      • ali

        Thank you for replying, in rebuttal:
        I would like to admit my mistake in misquoting quran, may Allah forgive me.

        Let’s go back to the first century. Jesus never said “Worship me, I am your Creator”. In fact he calls himself the Son of Man, who is a WORM. Yet some folks choose to hold on to ancient Greek traditions of associating men with the divine. How can the Jewish religon, for thousands of years have ONE ELOH YAH God, then randomly get a Son of God…Messiah. If Jesus was son of God, then shouldn’t Abraham and Moses also be, for they have seen God. Its just too illogical and goes against the traditions of Jews, for example: 1st Commandment- ‘Thou Shalt Not Have Any Gods Before Me’ and Christians blatatnly disobeyed that basic rule. How can it be monotheistic with a begotten son of God and a side partner Holy Spirit?

        As for the Ezra part. All religious books will have 2 types of readers, literalists and figurative. When Muhammad (SAW) revealed this verse, he LITERALLY meant Ezra as son of God. There is no shame in that:
        The Jews say, “Ezra is the son of Allah”; and the Christians say, “The Messiah is the son of Allah.” That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded?
        Notice the words “FROM THEIR MOUTHS” indicating that Jews in Medina used to refer to Ezra in a divine way. Most people from 6th Century Arabia were illiterate, not excluding Jews either. They used to say these things but the idea never got popular with the Jews for obvious reasons, therefore it was not written down by scribes. All that we know from history was written down, so you can’t ask for proof of words being told from any mouths 1400 years ago. If it did exist, the Muslims probably destroyed the text as blasphemy later on, as they did many times in the Arabian peninsula. An example would be Caliph II Omar, who allegedly burned the Library of Alexandria because it could contain superfluous information to Qur’an.

        Your response to my Moses statement was quoted from the book of Matthew, written 1500 years after Moses. I meant an actual quote from the Torah, which includes his words.

        June 3, 2012 at 3:16 PM

      • Hello ali and thanks for commenting once more. I hope that you are doing well.

        Let’s go back to the first century. Jesus never said “Worship me, I am your Creator”. In fact he calls himself the Son of Man, who is a WORM. Yet some folks choose to hold on to ancient Greek traditions of associating men with the divine.

        First of all, this Jesus never having said the words “Worship me, I am your Creator” argument is simply a horrible argument for you to make. I see this time and again from Muslims and it really is just bad form. Let me quote to you what I have written on the matter once before:

        On that note, if Mr. Evans needs for Jesus to have said the exact words, “I am God, worship me” in order to acknowledge that the bible teaches the divinity of Jesus (of course let’s not mention the verses where Jesus is equated to God, 1 Corinthians 2:8; called the creator of all things, John 1:3; worshiped, Luke 24:51-52; threatened to be stoned for making himself equal to God, John 10:33; demands to be honoured in the exact manner in which the Father is honoured, John 5:23; claims to have existed before his human birth, John 3:13; claims to have existed before Abraham, John 8:58-59; claims to have existed before the creation of the world, John 17:5; is described as indwelling God himself, John 1:18; claims that to have seen him is to have seen the Father, John 10:30; claims to share the exact same glory as the Father, John 17:5; claims to be able to do whatever the Father does, John 5:19; claims to have all authority in heaven and on earth, Matthew 28:18; etc.) then why does he believe that Jesus is the Messiah or the word of Allah given that in the Qur’an, Jesus never speaks the words, “I am the Messiah, follow me” or “I am the word of Allah, listen to me”? If Mr. Evans were an honest individual he would have to admit that, given his very argument, he cannot agree with the teachings of Islam on these matters seeing as Jesus never explicitly makes these statements in the entire Qur’an. Yet this was never about honesty in the first place—Mr. Evans does not possess a shred of honesty.

        So ali, why is it alright for you, as a Muslim, to believe that Jesus is the Messiah even though the Jesus figure in the Qur’an never makes this claim but it isn’t fine for me to believe that Jesus is God even though the Bible explicitly calls him such, he did behave as if he was God, and more astoundingly, he does in fact claim to be God! Let me ask you, who according to Islam is teh first and the last? Surah 57:3 quite clearly says that Allah is the First and the Last. Now what does Jesus say on this subject?

        “Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.” — Revelation 22:12

        Furthermore, according to Islam, isn’t it Allah that will judge all people on the last day? Well read what Jesus has to say about that:

        For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. 22 Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him. — John 5:21-23

        Notice also that Jesus is saying that we should honour him in the exact same way that the Father is honoured! Just as we worship the Father, pray to him, and hold him perfectly holy, we should do the same to Christ in the exact same manner! For a more conclusive discussion on the subject, I’d ask you to read the following two articles:

        Re: Is Jesus God? and Does the Bible Teach the Divinity of Christ? Pt. II

        How can it be monotheistic with a begotten son of God and a side partner Holy Spirit?

        I’ve gone over the subject before and won’t reproduce for you here the discussion but please follow this link for a discussion I had on a Muslim forum concerning the same subject. You will see most of the common Muslim objections to the doctrine of the Trinity and how these just don’t work.

        As for the Ezra part. All religious books will have 2 types of readers, literalists and figurative. When Muhammad (SAW) revealed this verse, he LITERALLY meant Ezra as son of God. There is no shame in that:
        The Jews say, “Ezra is the son of Allah”; and the Christians say, “The Messiah is the son of Allah.” That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded?
        Notice the words “FROM THEIR MOUTHS” indicating that Jews in Medina used to refer to Ezra in a divine way. Most people from 6th Century Arabia were illiterate, not excluding Jews either.

        First of all to claim that the Jews in the 6th century Arabian peninsula were illiterate is a blatant lie! They were not. The Jews have had an extensive history of literacy precisely because they have had a need to continually make copies of the Old Testament and such. Even your own Qur’an acknowledges that the Jews could read:

        And verily, among them is a party who distort the Book with their tongues (as they read), so that you may think it is from the Book, but it is not from the Book, and they say: “This is from Allah,” but it is not from Allah; and they speak a lie against Allah while they know it. — Surah 3:78.

        Furthermore, if such a group of Jews did exist, one would expect to find literature from them, or literature against them from other Jews. One would expect for them to be at least mentioned anywhere but they simply are not. They are non-existent. These groups of Jews who worshiped Ezra as the Son of God simply don’t exist and were made up by your prophet. In any case, this doesn’t change the many errors I have outlined above concerning the Trinity and unlike with the matter of these Ezra-worshiping Jews, all you have to do is type in the words ‘Sabellianism’, or ‘Adoptionism’ etc. to find out the precise teachings of these sects. In doing so you will see the very same errors that the Qur’an commits.

        June 6, 2012 at 1:35 PM

    • MM

      Abd’ you have some valid points. Methodus is getting in a personal uproar over scriptures that I bet he doesn’t even understand. Were those scriptures specifically referring to his beliefs? I highly doubt it. They were obviously referring to Christians and Jews that believed differently than him. Methodus keeps saying that the Qur’an misinterprets the Trinity. How does he know that there were not Christians back then that believed the way the Qur’an is describing? I bet there were! There has been literally thousands of variations of Christianity through out the centuries, but yet Methodus acts as if fore-sure these scriptures are specifically referring to his personal beliefs. On the same note, I bet there are many Muslims who miss-interpret these scriptures, too.

      June 26, 2013 at 2:56 AM

  9. Amen…

    June 6, 2012 at 2:18 AM

    • Thanks.

      June 6, 2012 at 1:42 PM

      • Ali

        This is the last comment I’m going to make about the “divinity” of Jesus(pbuh) because you only quote evidence from the New Testament, most of which were written decades to centuries after Jesus, and the fact that he did not pen one word himself.
        Also, you never answered my Moses question. Please cite Old Testament verses.

        The main topic i’d like to discuss is Ezra as the “son of God”. Ezra was the great reviser of the Bible because he “received Revelation” from God in Babylon when it was virtually lost. So its fair to say that the fate and text of the entire Bible we have today was in his hands, not Moses’. Jewish rabbis included some of his words as law, alongside those given by God to Moses, so it’s fair to say where the idea of Jewish Shirk(association with Allah) came from.

        1. Mufti Taqi writes in the footnotes of Ma’ariful Quran in Volume 4 page #365 the following on the commentary of Surah Taubah (9:29-30):
        This is not the belief of all the Jews; it was the belief of some Jews of the
        Arabia. Now, the Dead Sea Scrolls have also proved the fact that some
        Jewish sects believed Ezra to be the son of God. It is learnt from some
        scholars who have studied the Scrolls. (Muhammad Taqi Usmani)
        It’s no wonder Israel chose to take 50 years to rebuild the Dead Sea Scrolls found in 1947.

        If you want hadith:
        2. Ibn ‘Asakir narrated on the authority of ‘Abdullah Ibn ‘Abbas (May Allah be pleased with him) that he asked’ Abdullah Ibn Salam about Allah’s Statement: {The Jews say: ‘Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allah}. (At-Taubah, 30) why did they say so? Ibn Salam mentioned his (‘Uzair’s) writing down of the Torah out of his memory, and the saying of the Jews that Musa (Moses) could not get them the Torah but in a book, and that ‘Uzair got it without a book. Thereupon, some of them said: ‘Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allah. For this reason, many scholars say: there was a discontinuation pertaining to the transmission of the Torah at the time of ‘Uzair.
        ABDULLAH BIN SALAM was the highest ranking Rabbi of Medina before the Prophets arrival and his conversion to Islam.

        3. On the authority of Ibn `Abbas – quoted by Tabari in his commentary on this verse – some of the Jews of Medina once said to Muhammad, “How could we follow thee when thou hast forsaken our giblah(Jerusalem) and does not consider Ezra a son of God?”

        The most important thing to remember is that no Jew came to Muhammad after this Ayat was revealed to him. They frequently came and refuted his comments about Judaism, which he always proved true. The fact that no Madani Rabbi defended Judaism against this claim is proof enough that those Arab Jews did in fact revere Ezra as son of god, or else they would have denied it.

        June 6, 2012 at 9:25 PM

      • Sorry for my absence. Where I was I couldn’t get a stable internet connection so other than approving your comments, there wasn’t much else I could do. But I’m back now and so let’s get to answering your points.

        The main topic i’d like to discuss is Ezra as the “son of God”. Ezra was the great reviser of the Bible because he “received Revelation” from God in Babylon when it was virtually lost. So its fair to say that the fate and text of the entire Bible we have today was in his hands, not Moses’. Jewish rabbis included some of his words as law, alongside those given by God to Moses, so it’s fair to say where the idea of Jewish Shirk(association with Allah) came from.

        First off, Ezra didn’t receive “revelation from God” and neither did he receive this supposed revelation in Babylon. The book of Ezra talks about the exiles return to Jerusalem. So right from the start we see that you are incorrect in your claims. Furthermore, the Torah wasn’t all but lost. Ezra came from Babylon where he himself learnt the Torah from the Jewish diaspora who were in Babylon. It was only in coming to Jerusalem that he had need to enforce the observation of the Torah. So once again, the Torah wasn’t lost because Ezra himself had learnt the Torah in Babylon and you are again in error. Furthermore, your claim that Ezra was considered the son of God because he supposedly rediscovered the Torah is only plausible the less one actually knows about Judaism. First of all, if receiving “revelation” from God could make any prophet of the Old Testament be considered a son of God it would have to be Moses because unlike any other prophet, he spoke to God face to face. He was closer to God than any other other prophet of the Old Testament and so if the Jews would revere anyone as the son of God it would have been him and not Ezra. And yet they didn’t do this. So why would they revere Ezra—a great man—but a man nonetheless who did not speak to God face to face or did the wonders that Moses did? Also, who are these Jews that supposedly worshiped Ezra? Where is the proof for such a claim? In conclusion, we can now see that when one actually looks at how the Jews viewed their own prophets, we find that what you say actually makes no sense; again.

        You then follow up the above with some “sources”—if they could even be called such—that seem to prove your point but let me ask you what century those sources come from? They all post-date the event described by hundreds of years and as if this wasn’t bad enough they are all once again, Islamic sources. Why is it that you could not show us Jewish sources for this supposed Jewish belief? Is it because this belief didn’t actually exist? The evidence sure makes us think so. If you want to prove me wrong, please show us proof for your claim from Jewish sources seeing that this is a Jewish belief we are talking about.

        The most important thing to remember is that no Jew came to Muhammad after this Ayat was revealed to him. They frequently came and refuted his comments about Judaism, which he always proved true. The fact that no Madani Rabbi defended Judaism against this claim is proof enough that those Arab Jews did in fact revere Ezra as son of god, or else they would have denied it.

        Who are you trying to kid with the above? Let’s remember that according to your very own Islamic sources, this verse was revealed less than one year after the Battle of Hunain, which ended with most of the Arabian peninsula coming under the control of Muhammad and everyone else who wasn’t part of his new religion running for their lives. So most of the Arabian Jews would have been either in hiding or have been killed. There really wasn’t anyone foolish enough to endanger their life just to tell this prophet of a new religion that he was wrong. It simply wasn’t worth their lives.

        Another problem with the account in the Qur’an is that it consistently says “the Jews” and never “some of the Jews” when talking about the worship of Ezra so from this we have to believe that Muhammad thought that, at the very least, the majority of Jews worshiped Ezra. Let’s look at the relevant sources again:

        The Jews call ‘Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is the saying from their mouth; (In this) they are intimate; what the Unbelievers of the old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the truth. — Surah 9:30

        and

        “Then it will be said to the Jews, ‘What did you use to worship?’ They will reply, ‘We used to worship Ezra, the son of Allah.’ It
        will be said to them, ‘You are liars, for Allah has neither a wife nor a son. What do you want (now)?’ They will reply, ‘We want You to provide us
        with water.’ Then it will be said to them ‘Drink,’ and they will fall down in Hell (instead). Then it will be said to the Christians, ‘What did you use to worship?’ They will reply, ‘We used to worship Messiah, the son of Allah.’ It will be
        said, ‘You are liars, for Allah has neither a wife nor a son.” — Hadith-Sahih Al-Bukhari

        Notice that the Muslim deity is talking about the Jews as a whole, and if not that then certainly a majority of the Jews (and not “less than one percent of Jews as you had initially claimed”). Notice also the comparison he makes with Christians. We know that the great majority of Christians worship Jesus as God and now look how the Muslim deity uses the exact same language to speak of the Jews! Clearly this shows that Allah thought that most of the Jews worshiped Ezra as God.

        So now the question is, where is the proof of this? History has no record of a small sect of Arabian Jews worshiping Ezra as God (which is odd because we have many records of the tenets of other small sects) and certainly no record of the majority of Jews (Arabian or otherwise) worshiping Ezra as God! Why is it that once again Muslims have no proof for what they claim? And are you still going to claim that the Muslim deity was not talking about the majority of Jews? If so, can you prove it from the words he used?

        Let’s be honest here. You can’t deny that I have been extremely careful in my analysis of the text and in no way tried to read the words of the Muslim deity in a manner other than was intended. You on the other hand have consistently added words which were not there and have refused to acknowledge teh plain meaning of the text! Think about this. Why is it that you have had to add words to what the Muslim deity had revealed in the Qur’an if what I said was truly wrong? Is it because the Muslim deity couldn’t express himself correctly and so had need of your help? If the Qur’an is supposed to be a perfect book and perfect in its language, then why is it that you felt the need to add words to what Allah had supposedly revealed? The very fact that you have done this is enough to show that the Qur’an is not from God and that Muhammad did not know what he was talking about. Let us not forget the many problems I have already outlined in my article either: why is it that the Muslim deity can’t formulate the doctrine of the Trinity correctly? Why does he believe that Mary is part of the Trinity? Why is it that the Muslim deity can’t describe the sonship of Jesus correctly?

        June 18, 2012 at 9:49 PM

  10. Ali

    I hope that this new information on Ezra was helpful to Christians. I also figured out some shocking new information about polytheism of ancient Jews. After the Babylonian exile, the Jews worshiped Asherah, who was the “wife of YHWH” until Ezra reformed them. Dozens of statues have been excavated under the Holy Temple Mount along with inscriptions. Thus it’s a fact that the Jews became polytheists one way or another.

    4…They eat the MEAT OF PIGS, cooked in sauces made of stuff unfit to eat.
    5. And then they say to others, “Don’t come near us! We’re dedicated to God…”(Isaiah 65)
    I think this final chapter of Isaiah’s book prophesizes the Christians hypocrisy. Thank God the Muslims are free from the punishment of those who eat pork with disregard!

    June 11, 2012 at 4:15 AM

    • I’m not even going to bother responding to the above except to say that your confidence has been proven to be absolutely baseless and the many errors in the Qur’an stand uncorrected.

      June 18, 2012 at 9:55 PM

  11. Neil

    christians and so many religions nowdays all abhor what was commanded of them to do. they throw up statues of the likes of animals and other earthly things, crosses with a dead man on it, they eat unhealthy foods, their claims of their god(s) and prophets all seem to have no proof ‘cept the ones that did not bare any ill towards humanity but rather instructed truth, love and forgiveness for which they ended up crucified, tortured and murdered by the masses who could not fathom good but only selfish desires and fear of ridicule. how many true prophets waged a war for their own ideas or for some sort of official gain of their own? NONE, but every false prophet has. when did the “christian” savior so disrespectfully called jesus, ever lay claim to be “god”, the One true almighty Creator, the Father of heaven? when was the so called prophet muhammed teaching love as he waged war for mecca? the answer for those is never. so many false prophets and false doctrines mislead people whove no understanding of true sacrifce, not the slaying of an innocent animal on an alter but the one of our own selfish desires, to give no power to the ruling of the flesh but to control it with supernatural spirituality and not some biased holier than thou religion. the bible is misinterpreted by those who think they have intelligence yet cannot fathom forgiveness let alone how simple it is to actually forgive others along with the ability to teach truth and healing. they lack the true conditioning to spread truth and peace. who among us strive to be like Enoch, Malchizedek, Yehoshua, Yeremiyah, Isaiah, or any true teacher of peace and healing, and so full of love and forgiveness that they could give up their selfishness and pride to teach truth regardless of what disdain other humans may contrive for us? Above someone queried of the “HOLY” Spirit, the Ruach HaKodesh, it is the empowerment and enlightenment we recieve when we start to follow the true path of love and peace, allowing us to overcome our sinfull nature, to control things beyond human reasoning, the ability to heal and perform miracles, the attainment of wisdom, hence called the “HOLY” SPIRIT. it is of spirituality that the true prophets taught, not ever any religion. Im positive that whom christians call christ never once uttered the word christianity, for christ is a greek word for the annointed one and well they should know their Savior was not greek but jewish, a hebrew who spoke hebrew and aramaic. and to believe that someone who could wage war for their own want of starting a religion could not be a prophet of the Almighty Creator. I also highly doubt that Yochanan haMatbil, john the baptist, baptised Yehoshua as modern day baptists baptise. Did this so called jesus ever speak of any trinity? I doubt it. Scripture does not speak of such a thing. nowhere it biblical scripture will you ever see the words of YHWH or Yehoshua and the true prophets ever speaking of a three in one deity form, it is but a deciet brought from years and years of tradition such as things like christmas and easter as well as the olympics. In the begining it was stated, “we shall make him in our image”, but that does not signify that YHWH is stating a threefold deity. Read further into and throughout all scripture and find the truth. As like everyone else i am not perfect, do not take my word for it, study diligently and if anything i write can be disproven by the all of scripture, ancient scripture id prefer, and im not talkin bout what some people call the new testament saints such as st. paul and certaint psalms, because; beware the wolves in sheeps clothing who come to decieve! write back the evidence as it would be appreciated. Shalom…

    June 21, 2012 at 2:59 PM

    • Neil, your comment is basically spam. I would much rather that you respond to the email I sent you seeing as in the above, I find repeated the same things that I have already shown to be incorrect. You demanded that I answer your points; now that I have I’d very much like it if you could give me a response or stop posting things I’ve already refuted. And please, for the love of God, don’t spam.

      Thanks.

      June 21, 2012 at 3:09 PM

  12. Neil

    basically what it boils down to is do not teach what the Father didnt teach, do not teach information that Yehoshua did not teach. as well im sorry you feel scriptural truth to be spam.

    June 21, 2012 at 5:38 PM

    • Neil, while you had claimed that you could prove your points through scripture, within our email conversations I have shown how all your points are incorrect. Which is why I must admit that I am a tad incensed that you would imply that your points were scriptural truth. I gave you a platform to prove your beliefs and it is not overstating the matter to say that all you did was make assertion after assertion. so for you to come here and pretend that your position holds the same weight as mine is just extremely disengenuous.

      Furthermore, your comment is considered spam because it does not deal with the subject this article is concerned with.

      June 21, 2012 at 6:58 PM

  13. kazwini

    ثالث ثلاثة “Third of three” doesnt literally mean third, it just means “one of three” or to be more clear, Allah states Christians believes is disrespecting and demeaning to Him when they unite him Him with two other entities He created, as they are equal to Him..

    June 22, 2012 at 11:19 AM

    • I have no reason to disagree with the above, so let’s assume that it was true, it still wouldn’t change the fact that all the other errors that the Muslim deity commits still stand uncorrected. Furthermore, you have not read my article carefully enough because I have already dealt with your objection:

      In recent years, some Muslims have even begun to claim that none of the above actually speak about the Trinity and that they merely speak against the supposed deification of Christ and his mother. We must reiterate that such a claim is false and that were it true, even this would not explain away the errors in articulating the divinity of Christ, the order of the persons within the Trinity etc. Not to mention that if Muhammad had merely wished to speak against the setting up of partners beside God, why then is the Qur’an silent on the worship of the Holy Spirit? Why is it that the Muslim cannot produce even a single verse from their holy book which condemns the worship of the Holy Spirit seeing as Muslims believe him to have been merely the angel Gabriel? Clearly this attempt to answer the objections laid out by the Christian also fails.

      Simply repeating a point I have already shown to be incorrect won’t suddenly make it less erroneous.

      Tell you what, from the Qur’an itself, can you show that the Muslim deity had a proper understanding of the Trinity? Can you bring us any instance where he condemns Christians for partnering him up with Jesus and the Holy Spirit? Of course we both know that no such condemnation exists and he’s always denouncing partnering him up with Mary and Jesus. So from the Qur’an itself, you cannot prove your positio while I can in fact prove that the Muslim deity thought that the three divine figures that Christians worshiped was the Father, the Son, and Mary. If we couple this point with the fact that Muslims claim that Christians worship three gods (and everytime that Allah mentions the three divien figures that Christians worship, Mary is always part of that list and never the Holy Spirit) then it doesn’t take a genius to see that the author of the Qur’an was ignorant of what the Trinity actually consisted of.

      June 22, 2012 at 12:31 PM

  14. kazwini

    Second thing, Quran never stated that trinity is Father, Jesus and Mary. The only verse where anything close to trinity is “They have certainly disbelieved who say, “Allah is the third of three.” and nothing in that verse suggests that Mary is included in the those three.
    The other verses are clearly not talking about the Trinity, but about worshipping Jesus and Mary.

    June 22, 2012 at 11:34 AM

    • Yes the context of those verses does in fact imply that the author of the Qur’an thought that the Trinity consisted of a father, mother and son. You’re just asserting your opinion without proof while I on the other hand have given extensive evidence for my position. Notice how Allah talks about the sonship of Christ. He repeatedly uses iterations of walad showing that he has a physical sonship in mind. This is just absolutely wrong because Arab Christians don’t use walad at all when talking of the sonship of Jesus! Notice that Allah consistently says that he can’t have a son because he has no wife! This once again is proof of a physical understanding of sonship! Notice that everytime Christians are condemned for worshiping three divine figures, it’s always the Father, Jesus and Mary—every single time. Please don’t come here and try to claim that the Qur’an hasn’t mistaken the Trinity, that’s just not true.

      If that weren’t bad enough, you have yet to say anything about all the other errors that I have pointed out.

      June 22, 2012 at 12:24 PM

    • Nicholas Mansfield

      Amen!

      March 8, 2015 at 3:39 AM

  15. kazwini

    Only you and your fellow Christians can see that these verses imply trinity, my proof is that I read it and I know it before and honestly I dont see anything related to Mary being included as a member of trinity ! Allah states that trinity is wrong then goes against worshipping Jesus and Mary like gods. The reason Quran mentions Father, Jesus and Mary when condemning Chrisitans for worshiping three deities is that is what christianity is about, trinity and the worship of Jesus and Mary and Jesus, it never states that Mary is part of it. You came with a wrong interpretation then went on writing a volume. When the axiom is wrong, what follows is logically wrong. And I dont have to answer it.
    The physical or not sonship of Jesus and what Quran says about it is irrelevant to trinity, so keep on the topic.

    June 22, 2012 at 1:38 PM

    • Wow, I’m astounded that you can’t back up your words from the Qur’an. Once again, can you prove from the Qur’an that the Muslim deity has an accurate understanding of the Trinity? The matter is actually very simple. I am claiming that the Qur’an possesses a deficient understanding of the Trinity and to this effect I make an extensive showing of my proof from the Qur’an itself. You on the other hand simply assert your beliefs but please let the Qur’an do the talking. In fact, let me make this absolutely simple for you, let’s take this step by step:

      1. According to the record in the Qur’an, who are the three divine persons that Christians worship? Every enumeration of the three divine persons is of the Father, the Son, and Mary. As such, from the Qur’an the only record of three divine persons is a list that includes Mary.

      2. According to the Qur’an, do Christians worship three gods? Yes, the Muslim deity even goes so far as to tell them not to say “three” because Allah is but one God.

      Is the above correct or not? Of course it is but If not, can you prove this from the Qur’an? Now understanding that you will bring forth no proof from the Qur’an that shows that my words aren’t true (trust me, I’ve been asking for proof for a very long time and if you had any you would have posted it in your earlier comments) let us combine the answers to the above two questions: According to the Qur’an, Christians are polytheists because they believe in worshiping three gods and these gods are the Father, Jesus and Mary.

      Once again, if I am wrong, simply give us one verse from the Qur’an where the list of the three gods who Christians worship does not include Mary.

      The physical or not sonship of Jesus and what Quran says about it is irrelevant to trinity, so keep on the topic.

      Oh but it is relevant because one of the reasons why the Muslim deity claims that a Trinity cannot be true (and as such Jesus can’t be God) is because he has no wife and therefore cannot have a son. I understand that you can see how big of a mistake the Qur’an has made with the issue of walad but let’s not try to hide it. At the very least, own up to it.

      June 22, 2012 at 1:55 PM

  16. kazwini

    Well, I’m talking from Quran! Notice that Quran mentions trinity and Mary as separate issues, there are no proof to give you except to ask you the very same verses you used in your post. And it is not Quran job to explain to us what is trinity. By the way, even christians dont understand it!
    So all what you are saying are your own conclusions, what you thought Quran says but in reality Quran doesnt, it simply doesnt say Mary is part of the trinity, no matter how you try to make it look so, it is simply not.
    And behold! God will say: “O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of God’?” He will say: “Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden.” Where is trinity and Mary?
    Those who say, “Allah is the third of three (the Trinity)” have most certainly committed a blasphemy. There is no god except the One true God _ Allah! A painful punishment will surely torment those disbelievers who do not quit making such (blasphemous) statements.” Where is Mary?
    “Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of God, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in God and His apostles. Say not “Trinity” : desist: it will be better for you: for God is one God: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is God as a Disposer of affairs.” Where is Mary in the trinity?
    Quran attacks both the Trinity as blasphemy, as well as Christians who have wrongly increased the status of Mary to such a high level that she has become like a god.

    June 22, 2012 at 2:24 PM

    • First of all, in the Arabic, the Qur’an never says the word Trinity so please don’t come here and pretend that it separates the Trinity and Mary. It always says “three” and never Trinity. Then it goes on to enumerate a list of what this “three” consists of and everytime it is a list that includes Mary. So we’re back to my question, can you prove to me that when the Qur’an says “three” it means anything other than a list including Mary? Here is my question again:

      1. According to the record in the Qur’an, who are the three divine persons that Christians worship? Every enumeration of the three divine persons is of the Father, the Son, and Mary. As such, from the Qur’an the only record of three divine persons is a list that includes Mary.

      2. According to the Qur’an, do Christians worship three gods? Yes, the Muslim deity even goes so far as to tell them not to say “three” because Allah is but one God.

      Is the above correct or not? Of course it is but If not, can you prove this from the Qur’an? Now understanding that you will bring forth no proof from the Qur’an that shows that my words aren’t true (trust me, I’ve been asking for proof for a very long time and if you had any you would have posted it in your earlier comments) let us combine the answers to the above two questions: According to the Qur’an, Christians are polytheists because they believe in worshiping three gods and these gods are the Father, Jesus and Mary.

      Once again, if I am wrong, simply give us one verse from the Qur’an where the list of the three gods who Christians worship does not include Mary.

      So once again, your point about a distinction between the word “Trinity” and a subsequent discussion on Mary is false because in the Arabic the Muslim deity never actually says “Trinity”. rather he says “Three” and then goes on to speak of the Father, Jesus and Mary in the context of this “Three”. So will you now answer my question or not?

      June 22, 2012 at 2:43 PM

  17. Ali

    Without a doubt it can be said that the Israelites were polytheists after the return from Babylon. Their is archaeological evidence of statues of the goddess Asherah, who they worshiped, probably because of the Babylonian influence during captivity. Interestingly enough Ezra was the scribe sent to Jerusalem by the Persian king after he freed them. Note the fact that this occurs in the same time frame, so the Jews could have tooken YHWH, Asherah, and their son Ezra as one happy family, like the Christians took YHWH, Jesus and the Holy Spirit(Gabriel).

    In seventh century Arabia: caravans from Yemen(Sa’ba) bought incense up north to Jerusalem, which happened to include Mecca as the main resting point. This allowed Muhammad to get insight on this centuries-old trading business. The Yemenites picked up some Israelite culture, which explains why there were so many Jews in Yemen at Muhammad’s time. In fact, this business goes back to Solomon’s time, as there were no other places to get incense for the temple(Rabbi Firestone). -NON ISLAMIC SOURCE

    Are there any Jewish sources that say Ezra is the son of God? Yes.

    George Sale said in his book, on the Qur’an, that the verse was speaking of ancient heterodox Jews who marveled when Ezra was raised from death 100 years after he died. This story is confirmed today by Muslims and Yemeni Jews alike.The dead sea scrolls have a book included called the sons of God(the b’nai Elohim), written by the Essenes during the Roman occupation which confirmed it. This story was also passed on via oral tradition. The Yemenites had the same concept of the “divine messiah” for Ezra as Christians have for Jesus, and claim that they “copied” them. A lot of Yemeni Jews came up north and met the prophet and converted to Islam. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlXRzRgcqsM -NON ISLAMIC SOURCE

    “That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]”. This is clearly saying MOUTHS which for some reason is keep being ignored by you. If it were written down, the Qur’an would have said so, but it wasn’t, as it was spoken by them.

    “It is interesting to note that the Jews in Arabia, during the advent of Islam, were involved in mystical speculation as well as anthromorphizing and worshipping an angel that functions as the substitute creator of the universe. That angel is usually identified as Metatron”( G. D. Newby, A History Of The Jews Of Arabia, 1988, University Of South Carolina Press, p. 59.) -NON ISLAMIC SOURCE

    In 1 Enoch, and 4 Ezra, the term Son of God can be applied to the Messiah, but most often it is applied to the righteous men, of whom Jewish tradition holds there to be no more righteous than the ones God elected to translate to heaven alive. It is easy, then, to imagine that among the Jews of the Hijaz who were apparently involved in mystical speculations associated with the merkabah, Ezra, because of the traditions of his translation, because of his piety, and particularly because he was equated with Enoch as the Scribe of God, could be termed ONE of the Bene Elohim. And, of course, he would fit the description of religious leader whom the Jews had exalted.[Ibid, p. 61.]

    “For Muhammad, Ezra, the apostle (!) of messiah, can be seen in the same light as the Christian saw Jesus, the messiah, the son of Allah.” [Encyclopaedia Judaica, Ibid., p. 1108.] -NON ISLAMIC SOURCE

    “A Christian writer also proposed that Muhammad got the information of Jews exalting Ezra to son of God from the Samaritans who said the Ezra had acted presumptuously and had changed the old divine alphabetical character of the holy Books of the Law – a character still used and revered to this day by rapidly dwindling Samaritan community.( J. Walker, “Who Is ‘Uzair?”, The Moslem World, Volume XIX, No. 3, 1939, pp. 305-306 )

    The Second Book of Esdras is an apocalypse that attempts to explain why God allowed the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem to be destroyed by Gentiles in AD 70.
    The book claims to report seven visions of Ezra the Scribe concerning ethical issues and the problem of evil and suffering.
    The first three revelations (3:1—9:25) concern the angel Uriel’s instructions to Ezra about the spiritual-moral realm.
    In the fourth revelation (9:26—10:59), Ezra witnesses a mourning woman change into the heavenly Jerusalem.
    The fifth and sixth revelations (11—13) condemn the Roman Empire and forecast its destruction along with other evil Gentile nations by a messiah.
    The seventh revelation (14) describes Ezra’s role in producing the books included in the canonical Scriptures (the 22 books in the Hebrew Bible) and the (70) apocryphal books. This revelation closes with Ezra being taken into heaven without dying. Chapters 1 and 2 and 15 and 16 are generally recognized as subsequent Christian interpolations

    June 24, 2012 at 7:23 PM

  18. methodus, above you stated that you think my comments are ‘spam’ as they do not relate to THIS blogs topic! now ive been kind enough to say that i wish you well in your endeavor and May His true Omnipotence guide you. Now if you actually care to understand what i typed, is that it does refer to this topic as im aware youre not talking about mac n cheese! I said simply to not teach points He did not teach! as well you did not show my points incorrect, what you did was leave behind what was actually said and went off on your trinity tangeant of which you definitely did not create yourself nor ever learn from true scripture that subject so put aside your malice and the fables you in turn teach and preach negating true scripture. As for you thinkin i didnt defend my points and facts im sorry you dont understand the fact that it is a subject He did not teach. if it seems im being contentious your wrong. i dont want an arguement, just to see the truth. what did the scribes and pharisees say about Yehoshua? Not much that was good im sure, maybe they said He was ‘spamming’ with His words! He boldly told them they were Wrong. So i advise you, i implore you, that it is not right to teach what was not taught by the Creator Nor His Prophets and that you being with intelligence should stop with the fables and downing of others when youre not being any better yourself. Asalaam alaikam, Shalom.

    June 27, 2012 at 3:44 PM

    • ergo, one cannot be in truth right if he believes in something untaught by The Creator and goes on to expound anything that has no teaching of what this one argues to be truth taught but yet not taught by the Creator, nor Yehoshua, nor Enoch, nor Melchizedek, Nor Yeremiah, Nor Abraham, nor Ya’qob, nor Daniel, nor Eliyah, nor the “Holy” Spirit! You yak about this Trinity when it is not taught in scripture itself and to back this up with proof, i want you to find anywhere in His Scripture where it says, We are Three, or even I Am three, or Yehoshua saying I am God, (they accused Him of saying He was The Almighty Creator, but that is not what He said, and His saying, “It is as you have said”, if He and the Father are One, one plus one does not make three, and even if you still claim that the Ruach HaKodesh is a being and not Spirit but actually a body to be a being, youre still wrong cuz one plus another one still does not make three as well as the one unforgiveable sin the blasphemy of the “Holy” Spirit as you gave the Spirit one embodiement to make up your three.. but as long as you hold firmly to your fable which you havent as ive seen you put in words, “lets say that ur point is correct” you lose substance because you did not Testify Boldy as He wants the Truth to be told! I know this trinity concept to be of catholic tradition and as for their diocy, its utterly sickening what they do and have done so, quit the fables, teach and preach the truth instead of manmade ideas and religions. And once again, I Implore you to find that True scripture is my Defense and unlike you im not runnin off with a couple of idiots ideas and defending their idiocy, Im runnin with The Truth of Scripture And His Word and shovin it down the throats of heretics. May you after reading scripture and not manmade fables see the Truth as it seems youve been blinded by the enemy. May the Creator save you. Ive brought His message to you, you can either continue to ignore it or you can finally accept it and Grow Spiritualy instead of man made Religiously!. Let me guess you celebrate christmas and easter?! Dont follow His feasts as Yehoshua did? Are you overweight? is being fat a sin if theres no health problems that didnt contribute to bein fat or obese n outa shape? i think so as its a form of greed. I could go on but then its just me bein indecent, maybe, and i should know better. though i also dont claim to be perfect. And what part of you teaching in accordance with the trinity concept is of you following the Torah? There is Ten Commands and the whole triune deal is the breaking of them Laws. If i were to mock, id say dont be such a christian! next thing ya know ya might be out tryin to burn witches insteada preachin the Truth. I think some humility would do you good.

      June 27, 2012 at 4:23 PM

  19. kazwini

    Well, I know it didnt say trinity but it said three. On the other hand, Quran never said that Christians wrship three gods then went on enumerating them, once again, that’s what you wanted to conclude from the verses. Actually, Mary was cited only once being taken as a god, on the other verses, she was really not there, it only says, Jesus son of Mary!
    Did Christians, now or throughout their history worship Mary? Yes. So stop trying to force your point when it’s baseless.
    On the sonship of Jesus and so on, the New Testament as well as the Old I guess, both used the word “begotten” or “born” so once again, Quran was right. And I do think Jehovah Witness bieleve in a physical sonship of Jesus. Quran is not addressing only Methodist doctrines as far as I heard but Christianity as a whole.
    Last remark, you used for the second time the expression “dont come here” and I do say, dont write about things you cant defend. Regards

    June 27, 2012 at 6:36 PM

    • I’m honestly getting a little bit tired of this. I mean, how far are you really going to go to try and find an excuse for the clear errors in the Qu’ran? Earlier on you claimed there to be a distinction between the words “three” and “trinity” as we find in the English Qur’an even though you, knowing Arabic, were aware that in the original language, the Qur’an makes no such distinction. And now here you are claiming that the Qur’an never says that Christians worship three gods? This is once more a lie and you know it. Case in point:

      And do not say, “Three”; desist — it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs. — Surah 4:171 Sahih International (emphasis mine)

      Now what does the above teach? It tells Christians not to say “three” because Allah is only “one” God. So it is claiming that instead of worshiping one God, Christians actually worship three Gods. The Qur’an later on goes on to expound what it means by “three” and everytime it does so, it enumerates a list that includes Mary. So let’s see who here is sticking to the statements of the Qu’ran—me or you? Here is my question again:

      1. According to the record in the Qur’an, who are the three divine persons that Christians worship? Every enumeration of the three divine persons is of the Father, the Son, and Mary. As such, from the Qur’an the only record of three divine persons is a list that includes Mary.

      2. According to the Qur’an, do Christians worship three gods? Yes, the Muslim deity even goes so far as to tell them not to say “three” because Allah is but one God.

      Is the above correct or not? Of course it is but If not, can you prove this from the Qur’an? Now understanding that you will bring forth no proof from the Qur’an that shows that my words aren’t true (trust me, I’ve been asking for proof for a very long time and if you had any you would have posted it in your earlier comments) let us combine the answers to the above two questions: According to the Qur’an, Christians are polytheists because they believe in worshiping three gods and these gods are the Father, Jesus and Mary.

      Once again, if I am wrong, simply give us one verse from the Qur’an where the list of the three gods who Christians worship does not include Mary.

      I’m not even going to bother responding to the rest of your post given that you have repeatedly shown yourself to be deceiving.

      P.S. I’m not a methodist. methodus is just a username.

      June 30, 2012 at 6:00 PM

  20. Dead Sea Scrolls – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Matthew 7:21-23 (New King James Version) – Bible Gateway
    1 Timothy 6:1-6 NKJV – Honor Masters – Let as many – Bible Gateway
    Bible list of the Ten Commandments

    If i didnt care, i wouldnt be insistent. I care about peoples souls and if you love your brother you should let him know when hes doin something that will get him into trouble. you cant make him listen but you can at least warn him and tell him. Shalom.

    June 28, 2012 at 1:47 AM

    • Once again, our discussions touch on so many subjects that at current don’t have the time to respond to your emails. I will however respond within the coming week.

      June 30, 2012 at 6:06 PM

  21. kazwini

    And do not say, “Three”; desist — it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs. — Surah 4:171
    Does it include Mary?
    “O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers.” does it include Mary?

    Dont you say three? and doesnt it say dont say God is three? does it say the three are father, Mary and Jesus? Where, where? where does it expound who the three are?
    It is really amazing how you do insist on that it enumerates them, it doesnt, it never did!
    When Quran say : dont say three, does it mean christians worship three gods?
    So,once again, your above is not correct.
    What do you want me to prove, the proof is in the verse you are using yourself, but trying to make them say what they arent!
    It is clear to everyone who read your blog, the verses you are using, the conclusions that you are trying to make out of them, to know who the deceiver is.
    Ps: methodist or whatever of the dozens of churches that are existing now, you know Christians changed so much in their religion through the centuries, why would most of the modern Bible translations conceal expressions like “the only begotten son” or the “first born” or “today I begot you”? you pretend Jesus was there from the begining, so when the “birth” occur? there must be a point in time, hence Jesus is not God, God cannot be limited in time.

    July 1, 2012 at 7:14 AM

    • kazwini

      Does “say” mean “worship”?

      July 1, 2012 at 7:19 AM

  22. Pingback: Muslim Christians - Page 8 - Christian Forums

  23. Yousef

    Unless you are fully fluent in Aramaic, Jesus’ native tongue. You can’t compare ONE OF the corrupted translations of the Bible to the unchanged Qur’an.

    There are so many miracles within the Qu’ran, ALL of which have never contradicted Science. But as I read your “God has taken a son” argument I had a feeling the rest of the post was BS. In the end, even your attempted misinterpretation of the Qu’ran failed.

    March 5, 2013 at 1:10 AM

  24. Umer

    Trinity, you people with your eyes draped with prejudice and false doctrine are now trying to find faults in us Muslims. lol.

    I read your nice and posh little post. Sorry bro, you need to understand better. This verse doesn’t ONLY deals with Christians, it points at the Jews too. Jews alleged that Jesus was an illegitimate child of Marry, [God forbid] that Marry was raped by a Roman Soldier! THIS is the one extreme that the people of the Book/The Jews stand, on the other hand, Christian say that: No, but certainly Jesus had no father, so he must have a father, so his father is God! This is another extreme view of Jesus. The Qur’an clarifies what Jesus truely is. He is a Messenger of God, as the verse clearly says. As for mentioning marry, it is a literary style you will find in old literature and heck even in the Bible add to that that God said it cause Many of you guys would then say that the Jesus in Qur’an isn’t the Jesus we know, so add Marry so you may understand.

    Anyway, ad far as Marry and Jesus and God is concerned about being the trinity, I SUGGEST you read the verse. It is clearly said, God will ask Jesus/Isaw whether he told his people to worship him and his Mother (Marry) in >derogation< to God. He Obviously Says :Glory be to you oh my lord, never did I say what I had no right to say…"

    I challenge any bloke out there to produce a single verse from the Bible where Jesus said in plain and simple statement that HE IS GOD or to worship him and his mother [come on folks, many people even worship Marry as the Mother of God! Don't you see why the Qur'an says such a thing?]

    As for the Trinity is concerned, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, Christianity boldly says these are all one God. Dude, you diseased? When you think of God the loving Father you don't think of Jesus do you? In fact if one says that Jesus is the Father it is a Heresy EVEN IN CHRISTIAN CHURCHES.

    So when you think of Jesus you don't think of The Holy Ghost or when you think of Holy Ghost, you don't think of God the father do you?

    You don't. You have three different mental pictures. They can never be one in your own mind. And you say that these three are one! THIS is the damn thing the Qur'an is trying to rectify you people. There is but one God in Heaven! Love him and worship only him and like Jesus said to that Jew who came to him and asked whats the first of all commandments, Jesus repeated the First Commandment ad-verbatim.

    Whenever a Christian will come up to you and contradict you with something, he finds his cues from the new testament. You guys are not the followers of Jesus, you follow the self appointed apostle Paul. And the doctrines of Paul and Jesus there is nothing in similar. Jesus said to keep the commandments, Paul abolished the commandments and nailed it to the cross.

    So rest at ease that Qur'an comes to rectify you, the other name of the Qur'an is the Furkan or The Criterion. It is supposed to fix all the mistakes you have in your doctrine. Well, honestly, you don't need to understand us Muslims, go understand the problem in your religion and your doctrine. Good place to start is Paul and his false doctrine, Jesus never claiming to be God, Jesus appointed to be God, people misinterpreting verses from the Bible to give divinity to christ when actually those verses meant something else. Bible with its thousand errors and contradictions, also many versions of the Bible as well. [Version = not translation differences Roman Catholic has 73 books and protestant Bible KJV or AV has 66 books, also 1952 RSV has many verse thrown out and 1970 version RSV is totally different. This is a version, and there are thousand different versions of the Bible!]

    So I sincerely ask you to leave us Muslims alone and go find out these things about your "Christianity". I don't care if you don't become a Muslim, I wish you follow Christ in all respect, not Paul or this false Doctrine you are dangling in-front of us.

    http://www.judaismvschristianity.com/index.htm#Outline%20Mark < for a good read
    http://www.truthontheweb.org/nt10com.htm < Commandments
    http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~cmadd01/jcsaygod.html < About Jesus being Divine
    http://www.voiceofjesus.org/paulvsjesus.html < Paul VS Jesus on Doctrine, see how paul is the Antichrist right off the bat?

    So you see, the most easiest way to get rid of all these is through a prophet of God and revelation which is the Qur'an and clear up the misconception. The Quran challenges you to bring your proof, which is the Bible, and when you bring it to us, we check it up and find that you claim things which aren't even in the Bible.

    About Allah being only our God, https://sites.google.com/site/allahinbible/the-king-james-study-bible-scofield <<.

    You see, the only reason you guys get away with whatever you say is cause most of the Muslims are suckers who know next to nothing.

    Oh, BE LOUD AND CLEAR as to which church you belong to when you answer to this post, if at all. Be a brave person and let everyone see this comment. Since your action will determine your faith so say Timothy, "Faith without action is dead". Don't be a coward and not post this, I am sure a comment of this type will hardly dent your belief.

    March 21, 2013 at 8:48 PM

    • Well, I’ve been absent from this blog for quite some time. Sorry to anyone whom I haven’t responded to (I may or may not. My life is just too hectic right now).

      Now Umer, I honestly don’t know where to begin. You bring up so much and most of it I have already dealt with in other articles on this blog. What you have given me in the above are a bunch of non-answers. I’m tired so forgive me if I don’t bother with answering in detail a comment I don’t know how serious you were when writing. Anyway:

      This verse doesn’t ONLY deals with Christians, it points at the Jews too.

      Which verse are you talking about? Every single verse I reference except for one deals with Christians in particular (and even then I focus on the part that deals with Christians in particular). Because I really don’t want to repeat myself, here is what I’ll do for you. I’ll simply quote myself again:

      “You claim that I am interpreting the Qur’an improperly, if such is the case, please enlighten me as to properly read those passages in context. Perhaps we could start with why it is that whenever the Qur’an gives us a list of the three gods that Christians supposedly worship, the list is always Jesus, the Father and Mary? Furthermore, my points aren’t necessarily predicated on faith. I appeal to history and logic. The simple fact is that if you bothered to read documents written hundreds of years before Islam you would see that Trinitarian Christians have already condemned the false interpretations of Christ’s divinity and/or the Trinity we find repeated in the Qur’an. I even mention these false interpretations by name so you have no right to pretend as if I’m trying to interpret the statements in the Qur’an wrongly. For example, to claim that God is one of three (as the Qur’an incorrectly repeats) is fundamentally different than to claim that God is three in one. To claim that God is the Messiah/Jesus is fundamentally different than to claim that Jesus is God etc. In any case it is abundantly clear that you have no real argument but protest merely because the Qur’an has been shown to be incorrect.

      The simple fact is that we Christians do not even believe in what the Qur’an condemns and we even condemned the very same hundreds of years before Islam! Read up on Sabellianism, read up on adoptionism, read up on the Christian understanding of the divinity of Christ—in all these instances, Trinitarians had already condemned the false interpretations we find repeated in the Qur’an.

      As far as the rest of your post goes, it’s patent nonsense and doesn’t have anything to do with my article so I won’t respond to it.”

      There, that should do it.

      March 21, 2013 at 9:08 PM

  25. bkt900

    I found this to be an interesting article and I wanted to chime my two cents in:

    For one thing, I do admit that Muslims, for many centuries, have displayed a gross ignorance of Christian history.

    That being said, I think the Qur’an’s intent is to CONDEMN what your average Christian, who does not have a sound understanding of the Trinity, generally resorts to saying about the Trinity. You have to understand that the style and structure of the Qur’an still adheres to certain rules of language – I once heard one Islamic scholar mention that when the Qur’an says “The Jews said..” or “The Christrians say…”, it is actually referring to statements made by one person or even a small group of people . There are rules of rhetoric in Arabic – you use the whole of something to indicate or refer to a part. This is how pre-Islamic poetry usually functioned, and interestingly enough, study of pre-Islamic poetry was a basic requirement of the curriculum in a traditional madrassa.

    As you yourself mentioned, the Trinity is not an easy doctrine to understand, and lay Christians to this day still have difficulty in articulating it, and when they attempt to do so, they end up making certain doctrinal mistakes, mistakes that the Qur’an itself happens to condemn.

    As for the Qur’an’s supposed inclusion of the person of Mary in the “Three”, I attribute this to 1) a response to trends that existed in Abyssinian Christianity at the time 2) once again, a tendency amongst regular believing Christians to exaggerate devotion in their piety.

    When it comes to the Quranic allegation of Jews claiming that Ezra is the son of God – there is actually disagreement over who Ezra is in Islam, and secondly, the Dead Sea Scrolls revealed that there were early Jewish groups who used “sons of God” terminology. You can even see this in the Book of Enoch.

    April 14, 2013 at 12:54 PM

  26. Pingback: Is anybody that accepts "Christ" considered a "Christian"? - Page 19 - Christian Forums

  27. NoOne

    That’s what you say when you misinterpret

    June 13, 2013 at 12:23 PM

  28. Pingback: Jesus or Muhammad? - Christian Forums

  29. v

    Off this topic, technologically challanged!
    Major unhappiness due to:
    How do we know which is right, Christianity or the Islamic faith?
    I am a christian and believe in the blessed trinity- does this mean I am going to go to hell as far as the Islamic faith is concerned?

    July 25, 2013 at 12:28 PM

  30. Pingback: The name of "Allah" - Page 9 - Christian Forums

  31. Pastor Rick Pettey

    Thank you for your most insightful, articulate and faithful discussion of the Christian faith to those who (like Muslims) have been taught a distorted view of what it is. You have also cited many pertinent passages from the Qur’an to prove that you are not making unsubstantiated claims. You take on a major task and do so in an irenic manner. Kudos to you.

    April 17, 2014 at 3:57 PM

  32. Pingback: Trinitarian Monotheism? - Page 8 - Christian Forums

  33. Well lots of points looks like rock solid argument for a critic, even for a lousy one…
    No offense…
    Just 1 question about Holy Trinity…
    Why Jesus Baptized?
    Because in Catholic belief
    Quote 1: “Catholics believe that baptism is necessary for the cleansing of the taint of original sin”

    So if There is Father and Son and Holy Spirit, and when they become on there is God, and if son is Jesus, why he baptized?
    Do you really accept the fact that 1/3 of god was sinner?
    Or atleast because Son born, God was tainted with sin?
    How is that possible? How God is 1/3 sin?

    Quote 2 :
    Anglicans believe that Baptism is also the entry into the Church and therefore allows them access to all rights and responsibilities as full members, including the privilege to receive Holy Communion. Most Methodists and Anglicans agree that it also cleanses the taint of what in the West is called original sin, in the East ancestral sin.

    Ancestral or original, in your belief before baptized Jesus was sinner, how is that possible?
    How a prophet of God, also part of God be a sinner?

    Lets continue,
    When i look to Holy Trinity i see Father Son and Holy Spirit.
    Son is Jesus right?
    And first man that commited the original sin was Adam.
    And because of Adams actions every man born after Adam get stuck with the original sin.
    And generations passed and Jesus born… From Mary the virgin…
    So tell me, God created Adam,
    Adam fell from heaven,
    After generations Mary gave birth to Jesus,
    And the God who created Adam, split Himself to 3 equal parts(or he was already 3 parts), and one part of three born from Adams grand grand grand etc daughter…

    Is that really logical to you?
    I mean seriously, God have the ultimate power, He can do anything, LITERALLY ANYTHING and He needs to something like that?

    He can observe whole universe in a simulation, He can adjust everything, He can change every part from beginning to end, and you saying that God is 3 equal pieces that infused together?
    With that 3 equal pieces logic, there must be a just ONE GOD part to achive that 3 pieces logic, because if nothing from Holy Trinity is God, then one piece cant do anything…

    Because of that, your article is wrong since the title…

    July 15, 2014 at 5:19 AM

  34. Nicholas Mansfield

    What most people are unaware of is the level of manipulation of the Christian canon. Textual scholars acknowledge the true history of 1John 5:7-8 which was a late addition found in the early Latin but not the authentic Greek manuscripts. Christians have been sold a lie and there are other devious additions too.

    March 4, 2015 at 11:14 AM

    • Hey there Nicholas, you’ll have to forgive me for being brief:

      First off, the doctrine of the trinity does not hinge on the 1John 5:7-8 passage. I don’t know of any apologist who uses that verse in support of the trinity. Furthermore most Bible translations either do not include the verse at all or, if they do, make it a point to note that the verse is not found in the oldest available manuscripts. That said, this is not a problem because the doctrine of the Trinity is clearly taught in the bible.

      If you are asking me where in the Bible one specifically finds the word trinity, then I must confess that it is not there. The doctrine of the Trinity does not hinge on finding the word in the Bible but rather on whether the concept is taught in the Bible and clearly it is. I have already shown you evidence for it (and I must say that you seemed to have conveniently ignored it) yet here it is again:

      Furthermore, the Bible has many things to say concerning God: it calls the Father, God (John 5:18). It calls Jesus, God (Titus 2:13), and it calls the Holy spirit, God (Acts 5:3-4). The Bible shows that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are each their own person (Mark 1:9-11) and yet the Bible also says that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4).

      Nicholas, in your reply could you please tell me what the above teaches if not the Trinity?

      So Nicholas, can you please now account for all those verses?

      March 4, 2015 at 1:35 PM

  35. Nicholas Mansfield

    Perhaps the greatest prophecy in the early Christian writings is found in Thomas, 30. Of course this is an early second century work and predates trinitarianism. Jesus is saying a triune is filth. Yet as the one who inherits from the King, our Adonay, or Rabb, it is forgiveable to think of two, although two are not one. Strangely enough, this never made it into the canon. Neither did the Diatessaron, and the Catholic church tried to buy up then destroy every single copy. What we have now are but shreds of what we were given. Grieve for Christianity!

    March 4, 2015 at 11:25 AM

  36. I am disappointed in Methodus’ response to Ali and Kazwini. They have both raised vital points. Methodus claims he knows what three/trinity is, and even what it meant around 1400 years ago. Still I cannot find a clear definition here. No wonder he puts words into the prophet’s mouth. Three cannot encompass Miriam (pbuh), the heresy related to her name is mentioned specifically in separate verses.
    Methodus, don’t get me wrong, you are attempting to understand and convey what Allah has spoken. That is a noble goal, but it must be done with caution. You are hasty and I charge you with the line upon line, precept upon precept approach. This is a recipe for failure. How do you plead?
    The impact of Ezra upon Judaism cannot be understated. So too for the impact of Jesus upon Christianity. Yet neither one solely defined these generic religions.
    Methodus, the material produced here is too concentrated. It is difficult for anyone to follow and respond to the entire work and replies coherently.
    A contemporary truth Methodus, and it pains me. My church erects obelisks to Baal and claims God has taken a wife. In this manner they worship Easter. The Qur’an is by Yahovah, the Blessed, and it is true about yesterday, today and tomorrow! Yet the Tanakh tells us that even King David, who paved the Way for Jesus, worshipped Baal for a time, in ignorance. Christianity must wake up!
    I accuse Christianity of denying Jesus as the Messiah, for it emphasises he was crucified! The Jews agree and knew that a crucified man could not be the Messiah, for he is cursed by God. The Qur’an stands technically correct on Torah, despite the prophet’s illiteracy. He surely had ears and a tongue! Methodus, you must read again what Luke says, carefully! Then re-examine what the Qur’an really says about Jesus. It is broken up to confound the hasty but the integrity of the message confirms Jesus is the Messiah, and how, through the Sign Of Jonah. Also compare the synoptic vs gnostic last supper.

    March 8, 2015 at 4:16 AM

    • Hey there Nicholas, I notice that once again you make claims that you do not actually back up with any evidence. It’s telling that while I’d asked you a simple question multiple times both on my blog and in our email exchanges, you’ve never actually attempted to respond to it. So I ask you again:

      Furthermore, the Bible has many things to say concerning God: it calls the Father, God (John 5:18). It calls Jesus, God (Titus 2:13), and it calls the Holy spirit, God (Acts 5:3-4). The Bible shows that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are each their own person (Mark 1:9-11) and yet the Bible also says that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4).

      Nicholas, in your reply could you please tell me what the above teaches if not the Trinity?

      So Nicholas, can you please now account for all those verses?

      March 8, 2015 at 7:59 AM

  37. Trying to set the record straight here I did address these matters in my initial e-mail to you, with the exception of John 5:18, my mistake. I did mention 1John instead, but you have not replied to my comment in that regard. I did state to you that I am not able at this present time to fully address everything. In time I hope to analyse the Torah and Qur’an together. What I find in the Qur’an amazes me and I have given you references to my own discoveries which I suggest you take the time to research. I cannot reproduce these articles on your blog! I will reproduce part of my reply here.

    “Yes the Greeks use the word theo/s indiscriminately, consistent with their native spiritual concepts. They had many theos. Theo should be translated as divine being. As it is written in Deuteronomy; Listen Israel, Yahovah our God/divine being, Yahovah is one. Jesus, in Thomas, agrees with Titus. In Titus there are two theos, not three.”

    These preceeding comments clearly address Deut.6:4 and Titus 2:13. There are numerous relevant passages in the Qur’an but because of the magnitude of this section of Deut. I will refer only to Surah al-Ihklas (112). Moses said Yahovah is one and if you say he is three then any Jew will think the worst of you. Are they ignorant? Zechariah says you must turn to them for understanding, it is written (Zech.8:23)! I could give you references for the story of Solomon found in the Qur’an and the Talmud. Judaism is the oldest religion in our context, the presbyter. Jesus was a Jew and an Israelite in terms of his religion!

    “Acts 5 is speaking of blasphemy to the Holy Spirit, in accordance with Jesus’ statement over “what would not be forgiven” in the gospel. This is a critical lesson in conduct for all of us who have received of the Spirit. It goes on to add that they were lying before God. Only an over-active imagination would suggest this is inferring God is the Holy Spirit. There is no succeeding passage saying they also lied before Jesus. If there was then you would have some sort of case for doubt.”

    I totally agree that God, the Messiah and the Spirit, whether it be a greater or lesser manifestation, are separate entities. Hence I do not understand why you are referring to Mark. I suggest you define what you believe Trinity is. Furthermore you need to define Trinity with appropriate references to the relevant period of history when Islam first developed. There is no unified bible, there never was. Historically bible could be defined as the Vulgate or codex Sinaiticus. I am quoting from the Masoretic and Received Texts unless specified otherwise.

    Here is my own version of John5:18 based on the context.
    “The Prushim were greatly incensed and sought all the more to eliminate him. Not only had he annulled the Sabbath, in their eyes, but declared God to be his father, making himself equivalent to God.”
    Whether you read equal or equivalent, it is much the same. The important thing is that Jesus did not claim he was sired by Yahovah. Paul described him as God’s designated son. This is in line with the Psalm, originally part of the gospel in Luke3:22, codex Byzae. It reads, this day I have generated thee, and John1:13 added, born, not of blood, not of inclination to pleasure, nor of the determination of man, but generated of God. This is a metaphor for conversion! This is about the First Voice From Heaven.

    Please define Trinity in the historical context.
    Have I not commented on all your references here?

    March 9, 2015 at 3:53 AM

  38. Ernest

    Grace and peace from The Lord Almighty be with you all.
    There is a vast difference between religion and Kingdom of God.
    Let’s serve God in truth and in Spirit as The book of John 4:24 said.
    It doesn’t matter whether yu are a Christian or Muslim or whatever.
    Let your service be towards God ….
    Jesus saves.✋

    April 3, 2015 at 6:30 PM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s