Muslims are not the only ones who believe that Jesus (pbuh) is mortal and not a god. The Jews also believe this, in addition to the very first groups of Christianity such as the Ebonites, the Cerinthians, the Basilidians, the Capocratians, and the Hypisistarians. The Arians, Paulicians and Goths also accepted Jesus (pbuh) as a prophet of God. Even in the modern age there are churches in Asia, in Africa, the Unitarian church, the Jehovah's witnesses, and even the majority of today's Anglican Bishops do not worship Jesus (pbuh) as God.


In the British newspaper the "Daily News" 25/6/84 under the heading "Shock survey of Anglican Bishops" We read


"More than half of England's Anglican Bishops say that Christians are not obliged to believe that Jesus Christ was God, according to a survey published today. The pole of 31 of England's 39 bishops shows that many of them think that Christ's miracles, the virgin birth and the resurrection might not have happened exactly as described in the Bible. Only 11 of the bishops insisted that Christians must regard Christ as both God and man, while 19 said it was sufficient to regard Jesus as 'God's supreme agent'"


But what is a messenger of God? Is he not "God's supreme agent" ?. This is indeed what God Himself has already told us in the noble Qur'an 1400 years ago, and exactly what Jesus (pbuh) himself testified to in the Bible:


"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."

John 17:3


Astounding, isn't it? With every passing day, the most learned among the Christian community are slowly recognizing the truth and drawing closer and closer to Islam. These are not Muslims who issued this statement. These are not "liberal" Christians. These are the most learned and most highly esteemed men of the Anglican Church. These men have dedicated their whole lives to the study of the religion of Jesus, and their study has driven them to the truth which God had already revealed to them in the Qur'an 1400 years ago: That Jesus was not God. That God is not a Trinity. And that the stories of the ministry of Jesus in the Bible have been extensively tampered with by the hands of mankind.


"And when Allah said: O Jesus, son of Mary! Did you say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he said: Be You glorified. It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then You knew it. You know what is in my [innermost] self but I know not what is in Yours. Truly! You, only You are the Knower of things hidden. I spoke unto them only that which You commanded me, (saying): Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness over them while I dwelt among them, and when You took me You were the Watcher over them, and You are Witness over all things."

The noble Qur'an, Al-Maidah(5):116-118


The Church, as Heinz Zahrnt put it "put words into the mouth of Jesus which he never spoke and attributed actions to him which he never performed." One of those who has shown that most of what the church says about Jesus is baseless is Rudolph Augustein in his book "Jesus the Son of Man." Another very comprehensive study of this matter can be found in the book "The Myth of God Incarnate" which was written by seven theologian scholars in England in 1977 and edited by John Hick. Their conclusion in this matter is that Jesus was "a man approved by God, for a special role within the divine purpose, and, the later conception of him as God incarnate , is a mythological or poetic way of expressing his significance for us." See also John Mackinnon Robertson's "Christianity and Mythology" T.W Doane's "The Bible Myths and their Parallels in Other Religions" (A good summary of these studies is available in M.F. Ansarei, "Islam and Christianity in the Modern World".


A University of Richmond professor, Dr. Robert Alley, after considerable research into newly found ancient documents concludes that


", The (Biblical) passages where Jesus talks about the Son of God are later additions, what the church said about him. Such a claim of deity for himself would not have been consistent with his entire lifestyle as we can reconstruct. For the first three decades after Jesus' death Christianity continued as a sect within Judaism. The first three decades of the existence of the church were within the synagogue. That would have been beyond belief if they (the followers) had boldly proclaimed the deity of Jesus."


Is there any confirmation of this in the Bible, yes! If we were to read the Bible we would find that long after the departure of Jesus, his faithful followers continued to "keep up their daily attendance at the Temple" (Acts 2:46) It would be beyond belief to imagine that had Jesus indeed preached to his apostles that he was God, and if Jesus had indeed commanded them to forsake the commandments, that they would then disregard all of this and continue to worship in a Jewish synagogue on a daily basis, let alone the great Temple itself. It is further beyond belief that the Jews of the Temple would stand idly by and allow them to do this if they were preaching the total cancellation of the law of Moses and that Jesus was God.


Can any Trinitarian Christian, even in their wildest fantasies, imagine that the Jews in an orthodox Jewish synagogue would stand idly by while he took out his cross and prayed to Jesus in the midst of their synagogue and was publicly calling others to worship Jesus and forsake the commandments? How much more preposterous to imagine that they would have nothing to say to someone who did that in their most sacred of all synagogues, the Temple, on a daily basis yet. This is further evidence in support of the Qur'an, that Jesus only called his followers to a continuation of the religion of Moses and not by any means to the total cancellation and destruction of that law.


In the previous section, we read the following verses of the Bible:

"Know therefore this day, and consider [it] in thine heart, that the LORD he [is] God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: [there is] none else." Deuteronomy 4:39.
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." Exodus 20:3
"For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name [is] Jealous, [is] a jealous God:" Exodus 34:14
"Ye [are] my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I [am] he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, [even] I, [am] the LORD; and beside me [there is] no savior." Isaiah 43:10-11.
"Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I [am] the first, and I [am] the last; and beside me [there is] no God." Isaiah 44:6
"That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that [there is] none beside me. I [am] the LORD, and [there is] none else." Isaiah 45:6
"For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I [am] the LORD; and [there is] none else." Isaiah 45:18.
"Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I [am] God, and [there is] none else." Isaiah 45:22


Now we should begin to ask ourselves: If there was no god before or after God Almighty, then how was Jesus (pbuh) "begotten" as a god? The answer is: he was not. He was a mortal man, not a god. We even have the testimony of the majority of today's Anglican Bishops in defense of this basic truth. If we want the testimony of a trustworthy witness then how much more trustworthy a witness shall we ever find than the majority of the most learned and respected conservative Christians of the Anglican Church?


The Bible only preaches that Jesus is God and that God is a Trinity to those who do not know it's innermost details and the truth of the history of the Church as these men have come to know it. But let us move on in our study of the Biblical verses so that we can see only a small sampling of the evidence that has made the truth clear to these men.

Jazhakullah Khairan

Well, i Think Christian are afraid to coment on this,this is ridiculous to their faith LOL

luv2talk:

Well, i Think Christian are afraid to coment on this,this is ridiculous to their faith LOL

You don belleful?   How many questions have Christians asked and found you guys chasing your shoe-laces on the same spot?

I only tease you on the other thread where you claimed to have been a graduate with a degree in Islam - never mind that I was detailed. I didn't feel it would be cool to land you the same thing here - lest you take off again like . .em. .  like one other fellow called Tiptronic!

Anyhow, just a small point to remember - that some people of high rank have misplaced their faith even in what they pretend to preach does not mean that automatically weakends the Christian faith! It is just as well that we could argue that the deviant ideas of various sects within Islam might as well be advanced as "proof" that Islam has lost is nectar, not so?

That was the same thing I pointed out in your misgivings in the other thread where you assumed that your accalime dexperience in the Catholic corridors made you falsely suppose that such experiences define Biblical Christianity - which is not the case. The same here: whatever the Anglican leaders and others are saying, it still do not add up to weakening the testimony of Biblical Christianity.

I hope you'd see this point clearly and learn a few lessons. . . or, I might come back yet again and show you that Muslims have done worse to their own belief system! Try me!!

luv2talk,

It might be more honorable (I daresay, even more Islamic) to first give your esteemed muslim brother Misha'al Ibn Abdullah the credit/honor he deserves for his work (rather than robbing him through plagiarism) that you have posted, before moving on to pour scorn Christians and their doctrine on the basis of a treatise that you probably cannot defend. If I asked you, for instance, to expantiate on the Hypisistarians and their beliefs and practises, would you be able to comply?


http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/index.html
http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/ch1.2.3.1.html

I beg fashi them, all they ever do is attack, I feel as though even they "the so called muslims faithfuls" do not understand their own religion!

Maybe God save their souls,

It seems luv2talk, is new and we should cut him some slack . Perhaps he is one of those islamic students that has just completed dem muslims schools - what do they call those schools again? The ones that you just chant all day long and move your head back and forth. They have them en mass in Pakistan, abeg someone should remind me the name of those schools again.

It's either we will start ignoring you because you don't seem to be able to defend and substantiate any theory or argument you bring forward. You copy and paste your imams' word, you plagiarize articles from islamic websites and come and put them here, all the while you are unable to defend your earlier topics and threads you open when christians on this forum has provided explanations and answers to your insulting stipulations and questions.

I really don't know if you think you are doing islam a favour. Do you read your quran at all, every time you attack the bible, you disobey commandments in the quran that instruct you to reference and venerate the bible.

We have seen your likes, there is babs and alhaji obowale. I really can't see what you want to prove that these individuals haven't tried and failed to achieve on this forum.

My advice is if you don't understand anything about Christianity, you should ask before you start condemning or criticizing , this not a competition. So, big up and behave like a civilized gentleman if you are one.

My advice is if you don't understand anything about Christianity, you should ask before you start condemning or criticizing , this not a competition. So, big up and behave like a civilized gentleman if you are one

GBAM!!!

luv2talk, you simply love to talk and 95% of the time, you are talking stupidity. you could migrate to Afghanistan and join those stupid suicide bombers there cos that's where you definetely belong, m sure you will be fulfilled dying for your religion. All of your posts always have this underlying hatred for christianity, even when the post is not religion related. not much to say to you cos,

I came across this thread, and thought it was rather interesting.
I was hoping that the christians will be able to engage in discourse and hopefully save the soul of the poster.
There are several people who ask these questions because the passages do exist in the bible.

God says, you shall have no other God before me. etc.
Truly, there were no definitive pointers in the old testament that there are three persons in one God, Hence you can imagine why a Jew, or Muslim or not-yet-converter person will struggle to undrstand the divinity of Christ and the person of the Holy Spirit.
So all I'm asking is, let us shed some light, rather than exchange vitriol.

@Grouppoint:

God says, you shall have no other God before me. etc.
Truly, there were no definitive pointers in the old testament that there are three persons in one God, Hence you can imagine why a Jew, or Muslim or not-yet-converter person will struggle to undrstand the divinity of Christ and the person of the Holy Spirit.
So all I'm asking is, let us shed some light, rather than exchange vitriol.

Please shed some light how God of the Old testament, for many centuries, kept telling us about Him being One. Then all of a sudden in the New Testament with Jesus He told us he is a Combination of Himself, Christ and Holy spirit. Then He went back, changing His mind again to tell Muhammad, only less that 700 years after He told it in the New Testament, that He was 3 in 1, that He is One God again? Enough already, Grouppoint! It is either God never said what you attributed to Him, in the New Testament, thereby I summit to you that the author of such horrible statement about God, in your New Testament is a liar. Or that your God does not know how to have firm control over His own affairs. Afterall, 1/3 of that godhead was crucified, according to the New testament. It will therefore remained a 2/3 of 3 godhead! By the way, what role is this perceive HolySpirit chap playing, apart from being a supposed part of 3 that witness in heaven? Jesus role is stronger that his role, it seems. Even Jesus seemed to have absorbed all the essential role of the third part, which seems to be constant always! Please explain, Grouppoint.

Thank you for asking. So long as we maintain a civil discourse.

If you study the old testament, you would see that it is indeed a shadow of things to come, i.e. the New Testament.
So let us look and see what we can find;

In the begining, God , said Let Us make man in our own image, after our likeness.

'Us' means that God the Father was not alone in the work of creation, Do you agree so far?

Now before you say that God was speaking to angels, let me quickly point out that angels do not have the image or likeness of God, and also angels do not have creative powers. Hence we cannot say that God asked angels to create.

Olabowale, et al.
Can I also suggest this; Since both the Christian and Muslim religion have sources which clearly emanated from judaism, please let us only quote, not from the koran or bible, but from the judaic book; the Old testament or even just the Torah.
Is this ok with you?

@Grouppoint,

Grouppoint:

I came across this thread, and thought it was rather interesting.
I was hoping that the christians will be able to engage in discourse and hopefully save the soul of the poster. There are several people who ask these questions because the passages do exist in the bible.

Well, I would be silently watching events unfold as you seek to engage this discussion. The one thing, though, is that this issue has been recycled so many times - and answers have always been proffered. Besides, if you observe carefully, you will discover that Muslims are often not seeking answers - and it shows in the way they enter a discussion with a mindset already biased and froth with aspersion. Let me make reference to just one instance:

olabowale:

By the way, what role is this perceive HolySpirit chap playing, apart from being a supposed part of 3 that witness in heaven?

Would it interest you to know that even in Islam, the term 'Holy Spirit' as misappropriated for angel Gabriel (Jibril) is never disparagingly spoken of as olabowale puns it above. If Islam considers it an insult to speak disrespectfully about the name "Muhammad", does the same thing stand when speaking about the "Holy Spirit" - or has Muhammad become even holier than Him?!?

If one is seeking a genuine and engaging discourse, the first impressions will demonstrate it so. Aside the fact that it is a Muslim thing to recycle topics in order to simply ridicule and castigate Christ and Christianity, how much answers would you suppose would interest Muslims here for a healthy discussion?

Grouppoint:

God says, you shall have no other God before me. etc. Truly, there were no definitive pointers in the old testament that there are three persons in one God, Hence you can imagine why a Jew, or Muslim or not-yet-converter person will struggle to undrstand the divinity of Christ and the person of the Holy Spirit. So all I'm asking is, let us shed some light, rather than exchange vitriol.

Two things:

(a) Actually, there are 'definitive pointers' to the Trinity in the OT - it is only a matter of terminologies used in speaking about the Godhead. The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all recognized in the OT by all the prophets to whom the LORD God revealed Himself. So, if this most remarkable truth was only to be found in the NT, then it would indeed be something amazing to be considered a Christian deviation from the other revelation preceding the Incarnation.

(b) As regards the DEITY of the Lord Jesus Christ, there again there are far more definitive pointers in the Old TestamentT - and so many already have been proffered! There again, if the deity of Jesus Christ was only a NT thing, then it would have been a departure from the revelations of the OT prophets.

The most important thing that should come to mind here is this:

~ What has God revealed about Himself to ALL the prophets of the Bible - and did Muhammad teach the same thing or he contradicted them?

If Muhammad actually taught directly the OPPOSITE of what the Biblical prophets taught, why would anyone suppose that the Qur'an should be the standard of evaluating the Biblical prophets - espcially when in very FACT, Muhammad denied every single intrinsic revelation of God revealed to those prophets?

Carefully think about these matters.

Grouppoint:

Olabowale, et al.
Can I also suggest this; Since both the Christian and Muslim religion have sources which clearly emanated from judaism, please let us only quote, not from the koran or bible, but from the judaic book; the Old testament or even just the Torah.
Is this ok with you?

Precisely the point. Well done.

pilgrim.1:

Precisely the point. Well done.

Pilgrim.1 How ya doing sis? Long time. acada nko? Missed you on the forum sha! Welcome back hope it is full welcome this time around.

On the issue of using the torah alone as the basis for discussion, Olabowale wont last a quote and to show his fraudulent nature, he would tell you they are corrupted or is it lost?

these muslims sef,

pilgrim.1:

@Grouppoint,

Two things:

(a) Actually, there are 'definitive pointers' to the Trinity in the OT - it is only a matter of terminologies used in speaking about the Godhead. The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all recognized in the OT by all the prophets to whom the LORD God revealed Himself. So, if this most remarkable truth was only to be found in the NT, then it would indeed be something amazing to be considered a Christian deviation from the other revelation preceding the Incarnation.

(b) As regards the DEITY of the Lord Jesus Christ, there again there are far more definitive pointers in the Old TestamentT - and so many already have been proffered! There again, if the deity of Jesus Christ was only a NT thing, then it would have been a departure from the revelations of the OT prophets.

My people.

Let us give Olabowale a chance to speak for himself. Perhaps, he will surprise you lot.
I dont want a shouting match. I noticed the insults in his response, but I decided to apply what little I have learnt from my faith, namely, do not return evil for evil. And do not let any corrupt communication proceed from my mouth, but that which is good and edifying,

So, Olabowale, I await your response. Please dont fight. We will learn from each other, OK.

@Pilgrim, you mean that you had already expounded passages such as , 'the LORD said unto my Lord'.

Have you shown how that the Holy Spirit hovered above the waters and How God Breathe the Holy Spirit and gave life to man etc

How the Holy Spirit functioned in the lives of Samson, David, Joshua, Elijah.
How the Holy Spirit how the holy spirit 'Ruach' in its original translation shows him to be a being rather than some force or power.

No, let us be patient to hear Olabowale out.

@Grouppoint and Pilgrim.1: To Pilgrim.1, I missed you and I hope that you are doing well?  Now to the subject matter.

Thank you for asking. So long as we maintain a civil discourse.
If you study the old testament, you would see that it is indeed a shadow of things to come, i.e. the New Testament.
So let us look and see what we can find;
In the begining, God , said Let Us make man in our own image, after our likeness.
'Us' means that God the Father was not alone in the work of creation,  Do you agree so far?
Now before you say that God was speaking to angels, let me quickly point out that angels do not have the image or likeness of God, and also angels do not have creative powers. Hence we cannot say that God asked angels to create.

: You have my commitment, I will be very civil. Am sure the Children of Israel, who we blanketed call Jews, study the OT more than you, yet, the major population, over 90%, will disagree with you, about trying to tie them to your New Testament, as indicated above. As I look at your assertion of creation, whereby God used the plural sense,'Us and Our,' as stated above, I wonder if God Himself did not nullify your thought of anyone with in the pronouns used, by the First Commandment itself! Further, I wonder if human blue bloods, eg the African and other royal family members do not make use of what is known as 'majestic pronouns?' I know the Queen of England uses it. If Humans, who are bound to be terminated use 'we, us, our, etc,' to honor themselves individually, I wonder how you could not imagine God to use even a set of stronger pronouns for Himself, if there were any, to clearly separate Himself, from His Creations?

You will agree that The British system of Government has what is known as house of Lords. Are the member of that house truly Lords, in the real sense? Further, see how the masculine gender is used by God in the Old, New testaments and Qur'an. Is God a male as human male is? The answer is no, except that male gender is stronger than female gender. You will expect God to be strong, right? I will never think as a Muslim that God needs the permission of any of His creations to do anything, hence the fact that you may think that I will even bring the Angels to the picture of the majestic pronoun, is not correct. I summit to you that in the Qur'an, it is stated clearly that God alone made the decision to create, without asking anyone. He only informed the Angels that He is going to create viceroy for the earth, which was man, Adam being the first of its kind!

Olabowale, et al.
Can I also suggest this; Since both the Christian and Muslim religion have sources which clearly emanated from judaism, please let us only quote, not from the koran or bible, but from the judaic book; the Old testament or even just the Torah.
Is this ok with you?

: I never have stated to you that Qur'an has its source of information, from the Old testament. Just because I said that the Old testament and the Qur'an agree that God is One, does not give you any support to your assertion, conclude that Qur'an is a child of the Old Testament! You as a Christian do not agree with everything in the Old testament, yet you have it in your Holy book. They, the Jews do not even have your New testament in their Holy book. It is you Christians, who are cozying up to them. We in Islam have our Holy Book, different and separate from either of you. You will only find pure Qur'an in Arabiya. Not in any other languages. What you see in any other languages are what the write/translator deemed it means, based on his/her own knowledge.

Would it interest you to know that even in Islam, the term 'Holy Spirit' as misappropriated for angel Gabriel (Jibril) is never disparagingly spoken of as olabowale puns it above. If Islam considers it an insult to speak disrespectfully about the name "Muhammad", does the same thing stand when speaking about the "Holy Spirit" - or has Muhammad become even holier than Him?!?
If one is seeking a genuine and engaging discourse, the first impressions will demonstrate it so. Aside the fact that it is a Muslim thing to recycle topics in order to simply ridicule and castigate Christ and Christianity, how much answers would you suppose would interest Muslims here for a healthy discussion?
God says, you shall have no other God before me. etc. Truly, there were no definitive pointers in the old testament that there are three persons in one God, Hence you can imagine why a Jew, or Muslim or not-yet-converter person will struggle to undrstand the divinity of Christ and the person of the Holy Spirit. So all I'm asking is, let us shed some light, rather than exchange vitriol.
Two things:
(a) Actually, there are 'definitive pointers' to the Trinity in the OT - it is only a matter of terminologies used in speaking about the Godhead. The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all recognized in the OT by all the prophets to whom the LORD God revealed Himself. So, if this most remarkable truth was only to be found in the NT, then it would indeed be something amazing to be considered a Christian deviation from the other revelation preceding the Incarnation.
(b) As regards the DEITY of the Lord Jesus Christ, there again there are far more definitive pointers in the Old TestamentT - and so many already have been proffered! There again, if the deity of Jesus Christ was only a NT thing, then it would have been a departure from the revelations of the OT prophets.

: My dear sister, Iya mi owon, and I say it as a term of endearment, I do not disrespect anything that is Godly. However, to the Onisongos, Aborisas, and indeed, all the idol worshippers, will just be as annoyed if one were to say something absolutely true about their deity; it is not a Thing, an Object, Deity worthy of any worship. You have spoken, yet you have said almost nothing, toward rationalization of 3 godhead in One God, from the Old Testament, and directly coming from the mouth of Jesus in the New Testament. The best anyone has presented are what Saul/Paul has used to coral people, especially the 'gentiles,' to coming to Christianity. They came, with the destructions of the laws; circumcision is no more compulsory, you can eat what you want, etc. You are now not responsible for your own actions, the death of an innocent man, who I now elevated to be God has taken up your sins and he alone is responsible for your salvation, as long as you believe this; his suffering, death on the cross as a curse on his soul (Galatians), the spilling of his blood and his resurrections, you will go to heaven! T ask you, as a rational man, does this make any sense, morally or religiously/spiritually? Where is the sense of personal responsibility, struggling to attain piety, seeking the face and mercy of your Creator?

The most important thing that should come to mind here is this:
~ What has God revealed about Himself to ALL the prophets of the Bible - and did Muhammad teach the same thing or he contradicted them?

: God said He is the soul Creator and One. Muhammad (as) said the same thing. Indeed, the revelation came to him in Makka, for 13 years, teaching this very singularly subject; There is no god, but He Allah Almighty alone. The next 10 years was to implement the legislations that govern Islam, yet there were still revelations that came to be added on the central theme: God is One, there is none beside Him.

AS I was reading your last entry, Grouppoint, directed to Pilgrim.1 about the 'LORD said unto my Lord', and how the God breathe the Holy Spirit and gave life to man, etc, how the Holy spirit functioned the lives of Samsom, david, Joshua, Elijah, and how, as "Ruach,' in its Original translation, shows him to be a being rather than a force or power, I just can not, but wonder that you are a very cool headed guy, who deserves all the attention and respect you may need in this dialogue. Now then, you will notice that when you use LORD, denoting what every one will who believes that there is a God, you use all Capital letter. Then you use lower case letters, except the L for the lord in 'my Lord.' It clearly shows, that One is more powerful than the other. Then in the case of of the Holy Spirit, you show how it seems to be the errant functioning of 'LORD.' Then when you show us its true and original translation, as 'Ruach,' I was taken aback to how similar it is to 'Ruuh,' in the Qur'an, as a denoted to mean, the soul of man, when it is functioning in the body of a living person. You have clearly demonstrated it, in your statement of it being breathed into Adam, which instantly made him come alive from its formed shape made with mud/clay. Angel Gabrael is called Ruuh, Ruuh Qudus, and others in the Qur'an. So when you said Ruach, Ruuh came to mind, and you can see how similar they are. One Ruach is probably aramaic/ hebrew and the other Ruuh is clearly arabic.

There is no way that we can then argue rhat Gabrael is in partnership with God, but only as an errand or a doer of what God commands him to do. He was given the adequate power to do those things. the little/small Lord could never be compared or equated to be a partner of God, the Bigger LORD. From your statement, the LORD said to my Lord, we see that LORD is talking in a position of BOSS over the Lord in the position of subordinate. Further, how restrictive is this word Lord in usage, since almost every Dick and Harry of England can be Knighted and be called Lord. Look at Branson. All you need is deep pocket. Lastly, we must not forget the house of Lords.

Hi Olabowale,

Regarding the house of Lords:
Today, we humans are free to call ourselves lord, Lord, or even God. Several have unwittingly chosen that path. However, it has no bearing on the original naming and its significance at the time David wrote that Psalm. We can therefore not draw that analogy here.

Regarding the idea of 'majestic pronouns’:
It would have been more credible if God used this manner of speaking throughout scripture. Hence I cannot agree that sometimes He would say ‘Let us make man in Our image’ and at other times He would say ‘I will bless you’ (Why not “We will bless you”).

Regarding the Idea of religion making rational sense:
In all the major religions existing today, whereby there is the worship of God. This is a God that we have never seen. God is said to have no beginning or end. Does that make rational sense? So why should it suddenly need to make sense when we talk of trinity, or other concepts and doctrines?


Regarding the Lord, LORD, lord.
It is clear that there is one God. However, if as the Christians assert, He sent His Only begotten Son. Then it goes without saying that one was sent, and therefore the sender must be greater in some respect. Just as I am greater than my Child, but at the same time, my child and I are on (If he does my will at all times). This manner of speaking is still purely relevant in this earthly realm, since the concept is entirely different in the heavens. E.g. God created Man as male and female. etc.
Jesus made these things clear in the New Testament. (However, We agreed not to use evidence from the Bible or Qu’ran).
We will deal with this at length, because I would prefer to keep things short in order to make for easy reading.

Regarding the Similarity between Ruach and Ruuh
This leads me to believe that someone had a view of the Old Testament, and misinterpreted Ruach to mean an Angel (Gabriel).
There may be a similarity between Ruuh and Ruach, because angels are spirit beings. But the Spirit of God is certainly not the Gabriel spirit.

If as you say, the pure Qur'an in Arabiya has information similar to that found in the old testament, then there must be some relationship between the two. Surely one was given before the other. Are you asserting that the Torah and Old testament which were first given are untrue? If so, where did the information come from and why is it then very similar to the Qu’ran?

This matter is a very simple one, The Bible gives a clear account of Jesus's origins, John1:1 says "In the Beginning was the Word,and the Word was with GOD,ANd the word was GOD, (vs14) and the Word became fllesh and dwelt amongst men(vs 10) The Word was in the world.and the world knew Him not(vs12)Yet some people accepted him and put their faith in him,So he gave them the right to be children of GOD(vs18), No one has ever seen GOD.The only Son,who is truly God anad is closest to the Father,has shown us what GOD is Like.
The christian religion is one based on faith and faith alone, not on science or archeology or any discipline.Every scholar or clergyman has his right to view things in his own Light, However as a true christian,my belief in Jesus Status as GOD is based on the bible and the bible alone(whether confirmed or not), whyy do i even need science to confirm the truth, the same science which disputes the creation story of the Bible via it's postulation of the Big bang theory(Einstein i believe).
Jesus was never declared anywhere in the Bible as the prophet of God, but rather as the son of God, (vs 21) Just as the Father raises the dead and gives life.so also does the son give life to anyone he wants.The Giving of Life is an attribute excercised by GOD and GOD alone, By giving it to his son: JESUS, GOD shares with him his status of Godship, Nevertheless anyone is free to his own interpretation of the BIBLE

@Omololu,
Thanks for your response.

Omolulu:

This matter is a very simple one, The Bible gives a clear account of Jesus's origins, John1:1 says "In the Beginning was the Word,and the Word was with GOD,ANd the word was GOD, (vs14) and the Word became fllesh and dwelt amongst men(vs 10) The Word was in the world.and the world knew Him not(vs12)Yet some people accepted him and put their faith in him,So he gave them the right to be children of GOD(vs18), No one has ever seen GOD.The only Son,who is truly God anad is closest to the Father,has shown us what GOD is Like.

However, if you observe what we are aiming to achieve, you'll see that there is no point in trying to prove the bible from within the bible, especially from the New Testament.
If we did that, then each religion will also prove the authenticity of their prophets from words written in the pages of their holy books, or books of reference.

Omolulu:

The christian religion is one based on faith and faith alone, not on science or archeology or any discipline.

Are you certain of this? Why then did the Lord Jesus perform so many miracles, if He simply expected us to have faith without any evidence or works?

Omolulu:

Jesus was never declared anywhere in the Bible as the prophet of God, but rather as the son of God

Jesus was king and Priest and Prophet, and Physician, Shepperd. etc.
see below:

Luke 24:19 “And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:”
Matthew 21:11 “And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee.”
Luke 7:16 “And there came a fear on all: and they glorified God, saying, That a great prophet is risen up among us”

Omolulu:


Nevertheless anyone is free to his own interpretation of the BIBLE

Please dont say that.
The bible is not for private interpretation.
read 2 Peter 1: 20
"knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation"

Anyway. What we want to discuss is proofs and evidence that Jesus is God, either from the utterances of Christ Himself, or from the Prophets before him (i.e. Old Testament).

@Grouppoint and Omololu: First at grouppoint, I completed a response to you, yesterday only to mistakenly pressed the wrong button, and deleted, everything! Well, God the Almighty had given me strength to respond today. But I thought you will stop using a subtle references and other tactics to restrict people to your Scripture? Let me share something with you. Instead of you proving logic and critical thinking to dialogue with Omololu, even though he is a Christian, you in one way try to stop him from using the Bible and then in another call Jesus Lord Jesus? Is that deceit or what is that?

Hi Olabowale,
Regarding the house of Lords:
Today, we humans are free to call ourselves lord, Lord, or even God. Several have unwittingly chosen that path. However, it has no bearing on the original naming and its significance at the time David wrote that Psalm. We can therefore not draw that analogy here.

The house of lord in England has politican power beyond its chambers. Indeed their power include determining who dies and who lives as England is concerns, by its colonisation and the wars she wages! By this its power over humans, does it mean they are truly "LORD?" More so we have many in the Judiciaries who are called lords. Truly there is only One Lord which is God. the rest are just in name only, but not in ultimate power. There were people referenced as lord(s0, before David wrote that Psalm. You need to check it out yourself.

Regarding the idea of 'majestic pronouns’:
It would have been more credible if God used this manner of speaking throughout scripture. Hence I cannot agree that sometimes He would say ‘Let us make man in Our image’ and at other times He would say ‘I will bless you’ (Why not “We will bless you”).

It depend on what you mean by scripture. But lets leave that alone. We see that from the, 'I will bless you,' that He did not need the others, if there is any at all in, 'let us make man in Our image,' to enact/demostrate His control. Therefore, we see that the others, if at all there is any are completely useless and irrelevant for any action of God to take hold.

Regarding the Idea of religion making rational sense:
In all the major religions existing today, whereby there is the worship of God. This is a God that we have never seen. God is said to have no beginning or end. Does that make rational sense? So why should it suddenly need to make sense when we talk of trinity, or other concepts and doctrines?

Even the Hindus belief indicate that there is One God, but they have the others under Him. Ask the Hindus, they are very plentiful in UK. Does this belief make any sense with you? If you say yes, then one will have to say that you are in the wrong religion. If you say no, I can see why you are in Christianity, because it reduces the multiple gods to just 3! I do not have to tell you that there is a Mover/Creator, before you believe it. Even the Atheist belief that there is a singular entity that originated creation. they just do not call him God.

Regarding the Lord, LORD, lord.
It is clear that there is one God. However, if as the Christians assert, He sent His Only begotten Son. Then it goes without saying that one was sent, and therefore the sender must be greater in some respect. Just as I am greater than my Child, but at the same time, my child and I are on (If he does my will at all times). This manner of speaking is still purely relevant in this earthly realm, since the concept is entirely different in the heavens. E.g. God created Man as male and female. etc.
Jesus made these things clear in the New Testament. (However, We agreed not to use evidence from the Bible or Qu’ran).
We will deal with this at length, because I would prefer to keep things short in order to make for easy reading.

Let me be bold here: the idea that you and your son are one, is a very lame idea. For many reasons, you are the one that sleeps with his mother, not he. You are the one that lays down the law that govern the household, not he. You can punish your son, but your son can not punish you. You can deprive your son of favor with you, he practically has no ability to threaten you with, or withholding any favor from you, since he does not have any when it concerns you, and as long as he is under your household. It is the same that we can say of those who are Creations of God, be they on earth or in heavens!

I do not want you to plant any seed in the heart/mind of any gullible soul, without my rebuttal: What is true about Jesus is been confirmed by the Qur'an. All the fallacies of Saul/Paul have been denied as well.

Regarding the Similarity between Ruach and Ruuh
This leads me to believe that someone had a view of the Old Testament, and misinterpreted Ruach to mean an Angel (Gabriel).
There may be a similarity between Ruuh and Ruach, because angels are spirit beings. But the Spirit of God is certainly not the Gabriel spirit.

Your believe about Ruach from the OT is wrong, when it comes to the belief of the Muslims. However, as I have said before, Qur'an confirms all that is true, from the Bible; OT, Psalm and NT. To assume that Gabreil is not Ruach/Ruuh in this case is lack of proper understanding. If one considers that you have indicated that this Ruach actually manifested itself into Physical being, when it is necessary, and since we know that Angels have been seen by prophets of olds. Gabreil was also seen by many prophets, including Muhammad amng them. No one can deny this fact. Ruuh is also the soul part of a living human being.

If as you say, the pure Qur'an in Arabiya has information similar to that found in the old testament, then there must be some relationship between the two. Surely one was given before the other. Are you asserting that the Torah and Old testament which were first given are untrue? If so, where did the information come from and why is it then very similar to the Qu’ran?

Qur'an agrees, as confirmer of the truth of the Bible; In the OT, it agrees with God being One and not 3godhead of the NT. In the NT, it agrees with Jesus being a Prophet and Messiah (Messenger), to the Children of Israel and the fact that Jesus heralded the coming of the Comforter. However there are many things Qur'an confirms that are not in either the Toral or the Injiil. There are things that the Qur'an rebuked that are in the Bible, the OT and NT. The Qur'an is clear by this as the Independent material source and also the best to support the truth where the two may differ, if one of them is correct.

This matter is a very simple one, The Bible gives a clear account of Jesus's origins, John1:1 says "In the Beginning was the Word,and the Word was with GOD,ANd the word was GOD, (vs14) and the Word became fllesh and dwelt amongst men(vs 10) The Word was in the world.and the world knew Him not(vs12)Yet some people accepted him and put their faith in him,So he gave them the right to be children of GOD(vs18), No one has ever seen GOD.The only Son,who is truly God anad is closest to the Father,has shown us what GOD is Like.

If we look at the sequential event of the 'word' up to where this word, gave the right for people to be Children of God, we will just have to say that there are a lot of Children of God running around the world, doing all kinds of deeds, from very good to very bad. I ask myself, if they are truly Children of God as a child is the child of his father, you will expect the quality of God to be in them. But how do you explain the children of God who are doing bad deeds? The devil in them runs out the God blood in them? You will realise that your just saying it does not make it so, because you are just saying pure conjecture, a lie against God. There is no son of God and there is no begotten son of God. none whatsoever.

The christian religion is one based on faith and faith alone, not on science or archeology or any discipline.Every scholar or clergyman has his right to view things in his own Light, However as a true christian,my belief in Jesus Status as GOD is based on the bible and the bible alone(whether confirmed or not), whyy do i even need science to confirm the truth, the same science which disputes the creation story of the Bible via it's postulation of the Big bang theory(Einstein i believe).
Jesus was never declared anywhere in the Bible as the prophet of God, but rather as the son of God, (vs 21) Just as the Father raises the dead and gives life.so also does the son give life to anyone he wants.The Giving of Life is an attribute excercised by GOD and GOD alone, By giving it to his son: JESUS, GOD shares with him his status of Godship, Nevertheless anyone is free to his own interpretation of the BIBLE

You spoke volume. Read your Bible again. Jesus was called Prophet in it. Even the dead bones of Elijah or was it Elisha was good enough to wake up a dead man. If the raising up of dead is your litmus, then there are many Gods with God Almighty in the Bible.

Quote from: Omolulu on Today at 11:23:53 AM
This matter is a very simple one, The Bible gives a clear account of Jesus's origins, John1:1 says "In the Beginning was the Word,and the Word was with GOD,ANd the word was GOD, (vs14) and the Word became fllesh and dwelt amongst men(vs 10) The Word was in the world.and the world knew Him not(vs12)Yet some people accepted him and put their faith in him,So he gave them the right to be children of GOD(vs18), No one has ever seen GOD.The only Son,who is truly God anad is closest to the Father,has shown us what GOD is Like.

However, if you observe what we are aiming to achieve, you'll see that there is no point in trying to prove the bible from within the bible, especially from the New Testament.
If we did that, then each religion will also prove the authenticity of their prophets from words written in the pages of their holy books, or books of reference.[/quoe]

Grouppoint at least for a moment, you agree that Jesus was a Prophet, along with the Muslims. Even though the Jews do not believe him to be more than a scholar, at best, which is denial of his Prophetic position, but the Christians exagerate it by elevating him to a position of godhead!

Quote from: Omolulu on Today at 11:23:53 AM
The christian religion is one based on faith and faith alone, not on science or archeology or any discipline.

Are you certain of this? Why then did the Lord Jesus perform so many miracles, if He simply expected us to have faith without any evidence or works?

One of you will make sense, or both will be wrong, but both can never be 100% correct, while having opposing views on a matter, at the same time.

Quote from: Omolulu on Today at 11:23:53 AM
Jesus was never declared anywhere in the Bible as the prophet of God, but rather as the son of God

Jesus was king and Priest and Prophet, and Physician, Shepperd. etc.
see below:
Luke 24:19 “And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:”
Matthew 21:11 “And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee.”
Luke 7:16 “And there came a fear on all: and they glorified God, saying, That a great prophet is risen up among us”

None of all of these attributes qualified him as God. None of it is unique, to him, alone. Indeed, Moses was exactly that and more.

Quote from: Omolulu on Today at 11:23:53 AM
Nevertheless anyone is free to his own interpretation of the BIBLE

Please don't say that.
The bible is not for private interpretation.
read 2 Peter 1: 20
"knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation"

grouppoint, I thought you promised not to use the 'Scripture, both Jews and Christians,' to dialogue? Maybe, only when you are dialoguing with me I assume? But with others, you are free to plant the seed of future harvest, uh? Well, you did not use a better material from your Book to make your case. You are using subjective opinion of (Peter, if that is truly his name), to argue. Next time use the word of the master himself, Jesus. Anyother, will be equal at best to what we call hadith or even less, which will be the writing of the second generation muslims, the tabi'in.

Anyway. What we want to discuss is proofs and evidence that Jesus is God, either from the utterances of Christ Himself, or from the Prophets before him (i.e. Old Testament).

When you do that I will proof you wrong from the same material source, and from their Granddaddy, The Qur'an, the ALTIMATE CHECKER!

Grouppoint and Olabowale.thanks for your response
Permit me to refer to the Bible again to bring out Jesus's status as God, First of all The passage from which i brought out that quotation of Jesus being the word directs the noun "Word" to Jesus alone and not to other "christians". Secondly while it is true that other prophets could raise the dead eg Elijah and the son of the woman from shunnem,This power is conferred on the prophets as a confirmatory power on the existence of God,whereas Jesus is a bearer of this power as a result of his status as the "Son of God", In israel(in those days it was common for a miracle worker or a mystic who is in special communication with God to be called a prophet).Nevertheless Jesus shows that his status was above that of the prophets, consider this statement
", There with the lampstands seemed someone who seemed to be the Son of man.
He was wearing a robe that reached his feet and a gold cloth was wrapped around
His chest, He held seven stars in his right hand, and a sharp double edged sword was
coming from his mouth, He put his hand and said Dont be afraid! I am the first and the last
AND the Living one.I died but am alive forevermore,and i have the keys to death and the world of the Dead(Rev13-20)
I believe this shows that the power to raise the dead does not equate Christ with his prophets.In debating such a subject it is of utmost importance that we rely on the Bible rather than Logic as it is the only accurate source of Biblical times, characters and phrases or words.
In Paul's letter to the colossians,he says "God Lives fully in Christ,And you are grown fully because you belong to Christwho is over every power and authourity( Col 2:9)
As for my Brother who believes the Quran is the ultimate checker, I do hope you can bear full responsibility for your unguarded staements, especially in matters in which you employ your human rationality rather than divine knowledge(or did an angel tell you the fact of the matter?)

@Omolulu: Your quoting Revelation and Corinthian verses and the likes, will not profit you in making a case for Jesus. Jesus status is already established with his Creator. You have no real argument to substanciate anything other than the fact that some guy is claiming him to be what he is not! You are not capable of using the words of Jesus son of Mary to support himself about what you are claiming for him. It is you that should be concern about the terrible utterrance that comes out tha the Merciful has a son and partner!

I have God the Almighty to support me. Then in addition to that, as a multiple layers of support, under the support of their Creator, are his Angels, His prophets, including the master Jesus himself, all true believers, the Jinns of them and the humans of them. I am ready and prepared. I fear none, but the Creator! God, alone is sufficient as my Witness!

Hi again @Grouppoint,

I did not mean to have logged out the other day so abruptly. I was getting late for my second job and thought to find time to come and address some concerns that you may have misunderstood. All the same, like I said earlier, it would be interesting to watch events unfold and then take time to comment in depth.

Grouppoint:

@Pilgrim, you mean that you had already expounded passages such as , 'the LORD said unto my Lord'.

Have you shown how that the Holy Spirit hovered above the waters and How God Breathe the Holy Spirit and gave life to man etc

Lol. . . please go back again and read my rejoinder. I did not claim that pilgrim.1 was the one who expounded such matters as you suggested. What I offered was this:

pilgrim.1:

@Grouppoint,

Well, I would be silently watching events unfold as you seek to engage this discussion. The one thing, though, is that this issue has been recycled so many times - and answers have always been proffered. . . .

If one is seeking a genuine and engaging discourse, the first impressions will demonstrate it so. Aside the fact that it is a Muslim thing to recycle topics in order to simply ridicule and castigate Christ and Christianity, how much answers would you suppose would interest Muslims here for a healthy discussion?

You can see that I did not say that I personally had answered those topics. There are a lot of intelligent Christians who meet here and and deal directly with issues rather than skit around as Muslims often do - and I have been reading those entries from other Christians than myself who have delat with the recycled topics.

If, however, the issue was about expounding the verses you highlighted, then certainly Olabowale hasn't a clue and is only interested in posting his own passions rather than reason. His subsequent posts have said it all - and until he learns to respect the fact that the Bible cannot be disregarded on the mere assumption of his Muslim hate against Paul and the other apostles, nobody in his right mind should take Muhammad's fancy tales any seriously.

Shallom.

@olabowale,

olabowale:

@Omolulu: Your quoting Revelation and Corinthian verses and the likes, will not profit you in making a case for Jesus.

And just precisely what is wrong with quoting from those books of the Bible? I suppose if you and your folks had seen another verse in those same books where you could have tried to smuggle Muhammad into them, a long and tiresome debate would have ensued as in the case where you tried hard in smuggling Muhammad into John's Gospel and was subsequently bleached.

olabowale:

Jesus status is already established with his Creator. You have no real argument to substanciate anything other than the fact that some guy is claiming him to be what he is not!

That "some guy" happens to be Muhammad - because he was the very one who came to claim things about Jesus Christ that He was not! Have you thought about that? Just because Muhammad sat down and started fabricating tales here and there with nothing to substantiate them other than his personal phobias, you assume that the Biblical narratives could then be subjugated to the Quraish thoughts of the Arab prophet? Sorry, but your own assumptions are alrealdy throwing out your arguments before you even started.

On a fair deal, Grouppoint already offered you the one basis for this argument: the Torah! But what was your answer? It shows from the very beginning that you're not seeking an honest discussion but a rather illiterate attempt to litter this thread yet again with your bloviates. This is why I am rather unsympathetic to your tried and discarded duplicity.

Well it is obvious that you're are biased as the many other souls who fail to employ rationality in such debates, if you have a problem with Jesus's sonship, you can go and kiss the National grid, or better still,a nearby transformer, you might get better answers after your experience

Pilgim abeg make we save energy find better thing talk about, Olabowale and the like would realize the truth sooner or later,

Omolulu:

Pilgim abeg make we save energy find better thing talk about, Olabowale and the like would realize the truth sooner or later,

Lol. . . that is why I said that I would be watching events from the sidelines for the meanwhile.

But this one na super advice:

Omolulu:

if you have a problem with Jesus's sonship, you can go and kiss the National grid, or better still,a nearby transformer, you might get better answers after your experience

Hehehehe. . . I no fit laugh! A thousand jolts to reality will sure cure him of his bloviate fevers.

@Pilgrim.1: "some guy," here is Saul/Paul! Aburo, how are you? I wo no fe ki ne te ku? Thats a forgone conclusion. But let me do great things first.

@Omolulu: I hope NEPA has favored you. There is no need to be wishing me death. It is a Hatman decree. Ask Pilgrim, what that is!