₦airaland Forum

Leemzyy:
You know yaaya i feel like is it that they dont read the bible?or they dont get the words there?cux everything is there and also straight forward na

They have been given a false doctrine of a triune God, they have to read that into the text of the Bible.

Qasim6:
You will see from this verse that Jesus identify God as the ONLY TRUE GOD, and himself as the person that was sent by that God.

He will come back to tell you how the person that was sent is the same as the person that sent him.

What they believe in is illogical and incoherent.

They just want to be polytheist and monotheist at the same time.

Oh yea thank you i forgot to add that line,its been quite long i get to go through the bible that much

Qasim6:
They have been given a false doctrine of a triune God, they have to read that into the text of the Bible.

May Allah guide us through

Qasim6:
No bro, the joke is on Christainity.

WE KNOW WHO WE WORSHIP!

Gather 100 Christians in a room and ask them about the nature of Jesus and see confusion flying left and right. So the Joke is all on you and entire Christendom.

Christainity understanding of the term son of God is incoherent and illogical just like your doctrine of trinity, so don't come here and be telling us lack of understanding bla bla bla.

🥱🥱🥱🥱🥱🥱
That some Christians can't explain their belief is not my problem so don't project that on me.
Take me on trinity and watch your argument crumble n your eyes open.
But I know U will run away like always do.
It's not like the trinity is even that important to your Christian faith. U don't need trinity for salvation, just understand the triune nature of God and U are fine.
Trinity is purely academic theology not spiritual. Reason why most Christians don't fully take time to study it.
It only gain prominence nowadays because Muslims and some atheist started hammering on it like their own salvation or disbelief depend on it.

Qasim6:
The fact that Tertullian is the first to used the term trinity does not mean he had the same understanding as Christians post nicene-contatinople councils.

Do U even understand the Nicene creed? Maybe we should start from there.
It's obvious U have never read the Nicene creed because if U do, the first thing U will notice is that it clearly stated WE BELIEVE IN ONE GOD- THE FATHER ALMIGHTY.
You are the one that do not understand the concept of trinity not the early church fathers.
Qasim heed my advice, do your own independent research on Christian beliefs. It will make U less ignorant because that's who is proceeding from U at the moment.

Qasim6:
Tertullian believed the son is not eternal which is contradictory to how they define the trinity in the later creed

Here is a quote from Tertullian
"Because God is in like manner a father, and He is also a judge, but he has not always been a father and judge, merely on the ground of his having always been a God. For HE COULDN'T HAVE BEEN THE FATHER PREVIOUS TO THE SON, nor a judge previous to sin........"

So I repeat NO CHURCH FATHER FOR THE FIRST 3 CENTURY OF CHRISTAINITY BELIEVED IN THE DOCTRINE OF TRINITY AS YOU HAVE BELIEVE IT SINCE NICEA/CONSTANTINOPLE COUNCILS

[/quote]As I said U don't understand trinity at all. U don't even understand Tertulian's quite U brought here. That's passage was about when the word became Son.
It's not about trinity.

Below is Tertullian quote on trinity.

“The Father makes him equal to the Son, and the Son, by proceeding from him, was made the first-begotten, since he was begotten before all things, and the only-begotten, because he alone was begotten of God, in a manner peculiar to himself, from the womb of his own heart, to which even the Father himself gives witness: ‘My heart has poured forth my finest Word’ [Ps. 45:1–2]” (Against Praxeas 7:1 [A.D. 216]).

Qasim6:
U just like deceiving yourself, which evidence did u bring?

Ancient Rabbinical Jews believed there is going to be 2 Messiahs, do you believe that too?

Infact they believed the Prophet of Deuteronomy 18:18 is different from the Messiah, do you believe that too?

No Rabbinical Judaism believe the Messiah will die for anybody sins.

Jesus did not have any offspring like Isaiah 53 prophesied, Isaiah 53 is most likely about Prophet Jeremiah.

I noticed modern Muslims are now leaning on modern Jewish interpretation of their scriptures to reject new testament.

Hahahaha

Modern Jews are playing u guys for a fool. They are deliberately misinterpreting their scripture so that Jesus won't be the Messiah.
Their ancient fathers believed otherwise. The viewed their scriptures in line with Christian beliefs.

Let's go back to Isaiah 53 then we will return to Daniel 7.
I will destroy that modern Jewish line U want to lean on today.

SIRTee15:
I noticed modern Muslims are now leaning on modern Jewish interpretation of their scriptures to reject new testament.

Hahahaha

Modern Jews are playing u guys for a fool. They are deliberately misinterpreting their scripture so that Jesus won't be the Messiah.
Their ancient fathers believed otherwise. The viewed their scriptures in line with Christian beliefs.

Let's go back to Isaiah 53 then we will return to Daniel 7.
I will destroy that modern Jewish line U want to lean on today.

Lol
This your false doctrine really sure for you.
In as much as there is no evidence of the early church fathers believing in it as you believe it post Nicene-contatinople, you are just wasting ur time with that developing doctrine of yours.

You are the one that need to do more diligent study about your man-made doctrine. It is man-made till you can provide a single saying from any of the prophets that clearly support your man-made doctrine.

Alaye it's quite clear Tertullian believed there was a time the son doesn't exist. You are just wasting your time still quoting Tertullian. You can move on to another church Father.

No, no one is taking me for a fool. Because I already believe Jesus is the Messiah. You are the one that keep bringing what they believed prior to coming of Jesus to substantiate your point.

I'm telling you we can not rely on what they believed in prior to coming of Christ. They are prophecies for a reason. Christ already came we have seen the prophecy he fulfilled 100% to know which are messianic prophecies and which are not.

Isaiah 53 is not about Jesus. He had no offspring. It is most likely about Prophet Jeremiah.

Just like the kingdom of the Son of man in the book of Daniel is supposed to defeat the 4th kingdom from Babylon which is the Roman empire.

Jesus seem to be talking about the son of man in 3rd person.

And should we just take the Isra wa miraj (the prophet night journey to heaven) in our tradition and Islamic empire defeating the Roman empire as a coincidence?

Leemzyy:
Hmm am sorry i was late,now can we do this?i want to talk more about islam to you and oneness of God(Allah) in both of the holy book,so can i?

Is Allah Omnipotent, Omnipresent and Omniscient?

Taoheed prevent this, thus Allah cannot be God

TenQ:
Is Allah Omnipotent, Omnipresent and Omniscient?

Taoheed prevent this, thus Allah cannot be God

Are you now saying that jesus himself is lying about him saying that Allah is the only true God?yes or no?is he lying or not?i dont want an epistle answer

Leemzyy:
Are you now saying that jesus himself is lying about him saying that Allah is the only true God?yes or no?is he lying or not?i dont want an epistle answer

Why don't you first answer my questions!

Tell me , according to Islam, who has the power to grant paradise to anyone?

Mr sirtee15 i can see that you are ashame to answer my question,but may i ask u why plss?

TenQ:
Why don't you first answer my questions!

Well then Allah is an immortal single omnipotent and omniscient God,so now answer mine

Leemzyy:
Well then Allah is an immortal single omnipotent and omniscient God,so now answer mine

But not Omnipresent.!? LOL!?

He isn't even Omnipotent:
Can Allah enter his creation without ceasing to be Allah?

Neither is Allah Omniscient: this can easily be shown from the Qur'an


Your Question: YAHWEH is the Only True God!

TenQ:
But not Omnipresent.!? LOL!?

He isn't even Omnipotent:
Can Allah enter his creation without ceasing to be Allah?

Neither is Allah Omniscient: this can easily be shown from the Qur'an


Your Question: YAHWEH is the Only True God!

Lol so clearly u mean jesus nw dey lie right?

Qasim6:
Lol
This your false doctrine really sure for you.
In as much as there is no evidence of the early church fathers believing in it as you believe it post Nicene-contatinople, you are just wasting ur time with that developing doctrine of yours.

You are the one that need to do more diligent study about your man-made doctrine. It is man-made till you can provide a single saying from any of the prophets that clearly support your man-made doctrine.

Alaye it's quite clear Tertullian believed there was a time the son doesn't exist. You are just wasting your time still quoting Tertullian. You can move on to another church Father.



Jesus seem to be talking about the son of man in 3rd person.

Ok let's deal with trinity and the beliefs of the early church fathers.

First here is the trinity as stated in the Nicene creed.

Here is the Nicene creed as formulated at the council of Constantinople in 325 AD

We believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
begotten from the Father before all ages,
God from God,
Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made;
of the same essence as the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven;
he became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the virgin Mary,
and was made human.
He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered and was buried.
The third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again with glory
to judge the living and the dead.
His kingdom will never end.

And we believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Lord, the giver of life.
He proceeds from the Father and the Son,
and with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified.
He spoke through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.
We affirm one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look forward to the resurrection of the dead,
and to life in the world to come. Amen.

This is the trinity as established by the Nicene creed.
Now let's read what the early church fathers pre Nicene believed about the trinity

SIRTee15:
Ok let's deal with trinity and the beliefs of the early church fathers.

First here is the trinity as stated in the Nicene creed.

Here is the Nicene creed as formulated at the council of Constantinople in 325 AD

We believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
begotten from the Father before all ages,
God from God,
Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made;
of the same essence as the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven;
he became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the virgin Mary,
and was made human.
He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered and was buried.
The third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again with glory
to judge the living and the dead.
His kingdom will never end.

And we believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Lord, the giver of life.
He proceeds from the Father and the Son,
and with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified.
He spoke through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.
We affirm one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look forward to the resurrection of the dead,
and to life in the world to come. Amen.

This is the trinity as established by the Nicene creed.
Now let's read what the early church fathers pre Nicene believed about the trinity

Nope

I'm not sure this is their take at the first council.

They only affirmed "we believe in holy spirit"

I think they have to wait another 60 years or so to confirm the holy spirit as also God.

And people who have belief similar to Tertullian were declare heretic.

"But as for those who say, There was when He was not,........."

Qasim6:
Lol
This your false doctrine really sure for you.
In as much as there is no evidence of the early church fathers believing in it as you believe it post Nicene-contatinople, you are just wasting ur time with that developing doctrine of yours.

You are the one that need to do more diligent study about your man-made doctrine. It is man-made till you can provide a single saying from any of the prophets that clearly support your man-made doctrine.

Alaye it's quite clear Tertullian believed there was a time the son doesn't exist. You are just wasting your time still quoting Tertullian. You can move on to another church Father.

Now does pre Nicene church fathers said about Trinity.


Ignatius of Antioch (AD 30-110)

He (Jesus Christ), being begotten by the Father before the beginning of time, was God the Word, the only-begotten Son, and remains the same for ever; for “of His kingdom there shall be no end,” says Daniel the prophet. (The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians Chapter VI.—Preserve harmony.)

But our Physician is the only true God, the unbegotten and unapproachable, the Lord of all, the Father and Begetter of the only-begotten Son. We have also as a Physician the Lord our God, Jesus the Christ, the only begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For “the Word was made flesh.” (Epistles to the Ephesians Chapter VII.—Beware of false teachers.)

Justin Martyr (AD 110-170)

“Jesus Christ is the only proper Son who has been begotten by God, being his Word and first-begotten, and power; and, becoming man according to his will, he taught us these things for the conversion and restoration of the human race” (First Apology 23 [A.D. 151]).

The Word of Wisdom, who is Himself this God begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter,
(Dialogue of Justin, Philosopher and Martyr, with Trypho, a Jew Chapter LXI—Wisdom is begotten of the Father, as fire from fire.)

Theophilus of Antioch (AD 110-178)

You will say, then, to me: “You said that God ought not to be contained in a place, and how do you now say that He walked in Paradise?” Hear what I say. The God and Father, indeed, of all cannot be contained, and is not found in a place, for there is no place of His rest; but His Word, through whom He made all things, being His power and His wisdom, assuming the person of the Father and Lord of all, went to the garden in the person of God, and conversed with Adam. For the divine writing itself teaches us that Adam said that he had heard the voice. But what else is this voice but the Word of God, who is also His Son?
Not as the poets and writers of myths talk of the sons of gods begotten from intercourse [with women], but as truth expounds, the Word, that always exists, residing within the heart of God. For before anything came into being He had Him as a counsellor, being His own mind and thought.
(Theophilus to Autolycus. Book II. Chapter XXII.—Why God is Said to Have Walked.)

Origen (AD 180-254)

For we do not say, as the heretics suppose, that some part of the substance of God was converted into the Son, or that the Son was procreated by the Father out of things non-existent, i.e., beyond His own substance, so that there once was a time when He did not exist; but, putting away all corporeal conceptions, we say that the Word and Wisdom was begotten out of the invisible and incorporeal without any corporeal feeling, as if it were an act of the will proceeding from the understanding. Nor, seeing He is called the Son of (His) love, will it appear absurd if in this way He be called the Son of (His) will. Nay, John also indicates that “God is Light,” and Paul also declares that the Son is the splendour of everlasting light. As light, accordingly, could never exist without splendour, so neither can the Son be understood to exist without the Father; for He is called the “express image of His person,” and the Word and Wisdom.

How, then, can it be asserted that there once was a time when He was not the Son? For that is nothing else than to say that there was once a time when He was not the Truth, nor the Wisdom, nor the Life, although in all these He is judged to be the perfect essence of God the Father; for these things cannot be severed from Him, or even be separated from His essence.
(Origen De Principiis. Book IV Chapter I.—On the Inspiration of Holy Scripture, and How the Same is to be Read and Understood, and What is the Reason of the Uncertainty in it; and of the Impossibility or Irrationality of Certain Things in it, Taken According to the Letter Summary (of Doctrine) Regarding the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and the Other Topics Discussed in the Preceding Pages.)

Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria (AD 195-265)

(From the First Book.)

1. There certainly was not a time when God was not the Father.

2. Neither, indeed, as though He had not brought forth these things, did God afterwards beget the Son, but because the Son has existence not from Himself, but from the Father.

3. Being the brightness of the eternal Light, He Himself also is absolutely eternal. For since light is always in existence, it is manifest that its brightness also exists,


4. Since, therefore, the Father is eternal, the Son also is eternal, Light of Light. For where there is the begetter, there is also the offspring. And if there is no offspring, how and of what can He be the begetter?

5. Moreover, the Son alone, always co-existing with the Father, and filled with Him who is, Himself also is, since He is of the Father.
(The Works of Dionysius. Extant Fragments. Part I.—Containing Various Sections of the Works. IV.—Epistle to Dionysius Bishop of Rome.)

Gregory the wonderworker.
“There is one God, the Father of the living Word, who is his subsistent wisdom and power and eternal image: perfect begetter of the perfect begotten, Father of the only-begotten Son. There is one Lord, only of the only, God of God, image and likeness of deity, efficient Word, wisdom comprehensive of the constitution of all things, and power formative of the whole creation, true Son of true Father” (Declaration of Faith [A.D. 265]).

Council of Constantinople I
“We believe . . . in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, born of the Father before all ages, light of light, true God of true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father” (The Nicene Creed [A.D. 381






So friend go through each of the above pre Nicene confession and tell me which one contradicts the Nicene creed.

And Yes they declared the Son is eternal and has always exist outside of time. There was never a time he was begotten but has always been begotten.

Leemzyy:
Lol so clearly u mean jesus nw dey lie right?

He intentionally Use Yahweh, but there is no record of Jesus using Yahweh.

Jesus would have used Alaha, Because that is how he would have called God in his language.

His intention is to portray to you that God of Jesus is different from God of Islam.

Qasim6:
No, no one is taking me for a fool. Because I already believe Jesus is the Messiah. You are the one that keep bringing what they believed prior to coming of Jesus to substantiate your point.

I'm telling you we can not rely on what they believed in prior to coming of Christ. They are prophecies for a reason. Christ already came we have seen the prophecy he fulfilled 100% to know which are messianic prophecies and which are not.

Isaiah 53 is not about Jesus. He had no offspring. It is most likely about Prophet Jeremiah.

Do U believe Isaiah 53 is about the Messiah coming to suffer and die for sins of mankind?

That's my question. Not whether it's about Jesus or not.

If U believe in the Messiah, do U believe he's the one talked about in Isaiah 53 because the ancient rabbinical Judaism believed the Messiah talked about in Isaiah 53 is coming to suffer and die for their sins.

Qasim6:
He intentionally Use Yahweh, but there is no record of Jesus using Yahweh.

Jesus would have used Alaha, Because that is how he would have called God in his language.

His intention is to portray to you that God of Jesus is different from God of Islam.

No record of Jesus using Yahweh....are U for real.

Did Jesus quote the shema...
'Hear O Israel, the LORD our God is one.
The LORD here is what in Hebrew?

Did Jesus quote
'Thou shall only Worship your LORD your God' a verse from the book of Deuteronomy.
The LORD here is what in Hebrew?

Qasim6:
Just like the kingdom of the Son of man in the book of Daniel is supposed to defeat the 4th kingdom from Babylon which is the Roman empire.

Jesus seem to be talking about the son of man in 3rd person.

And should we just take the Isra wa miraj (the prophet night journey to heaven) in our tradition and Islamic empire defeating the Roman empire as a coincidence?

Ok let's put Daniel 7 to rest.
Did the ancient rabbinical Jews believed the passage was about the Messiah.
Yes they did.
Daniel 7.13 is one of the ancient messianic prophecy.

Qasim6:
Just like the kingdom of the Son of man in the book of Daniel is supposed to defeat the 4th kingdom from Babylon which is the Roman empire.

Jesus seem to be talking about the son of man in 3rd person.

And should we just take the Isra wa miraj (the prophet night journey to heaven) in our tradition and Islamic empire defeating the Roman empire as a coincidence?

More on ancient rabinnaical interpretation of Daniel 7.13

Qasim6:
And should we just take the Isra wa miraj (the prophet night journey to heaven) in our tradition and Islamic empire defeating the Roman empire as a coincidence?

Daniel 7 isn't about Muhammed.
The Isra miraj never happened except in Muhammad's head.
His wife, Aisha said Muhammed was with him in bed the night he claimed he went to heaven.

U are free to believe your delusion, that's your business.

The only thing left for U now is to argue against evidence.
I leave that for U. Going to work.

SIRTee15:
Do U believe Isaiah 53 is about the Messiah coming to suffer and die for sins of mankind?

That's my question. Not whether it's about Jesus or not.

If U believe in the Messiah, do U believe he's the one talked about in Isaiah 53 because the ancient rabbinical Judaism believed the Messiah talked about in Isaiah 53 is coming to suffer and die for their sins.

Stop wasting your time on what ancient Rabbinical Jews believed about a prophecy.

Just like I asked you earlier, do you believe there is supposed to be 2 Messiahs like they believed?

Or do you believe the Prophet of Deuteronomy 18:18 is different from the Messiah?

If you don't 100% agree with them, then why use them as reference?

Qasim6:
Nope

I'm not sure this is their take at the first council.

They only affirmed "we believe in holy spirit"

I think they have to wait another 60 years or so to confirm the holy spirit as also God.

And people who have belief similar to Tertullian were declare heretic.

"But as for those who say, There was when He was not,........."

Mr man don't waste my time. If U reject my evidence bring your counter evidence. I do t want your opinion

Go and bring the Nicene creed U think they formulated if U think this is not the one. Google is free.

This is the one that was formulated in 325 AD and this is the one we read our churches.

I already said U know nothing about the trinity doctrine except what U read from Muslim website.
Go and do your own independent research and stop being a nuisance.

SIRTee15:
No record of Jesus using Yahweh....are U for real.

Did Jesus quote the shema...
'Hear O Israel, the LORD our God is one.
The LORD here is what in Hebrew?

Did Jesus quote
'Thou shall only Worship your LORD your God' a verse from the book of Deuteronomy.
The LORD here is what in Hebrew?

Are you saying the Jews knew the correct pronunciation of the word YHVH during the time of Jesus?

SIRTee15:
Mr man don't waste my time. If U reject my evidence bring your counter evidence. I do t want your opinion

Go and bring the Nicene creed U think they formulated if U think this is not the one. Google is free.

This is the one that was formulated in 325 AD and this is the one we read our churches.

I already said U know nothing about the trinity doctrine except what U read from Muslim website.
Go and do your own independent research and stop being a nuisance.

U should re-use that Google to check the creed again

What you are quoting should be from 381AD and not 325AD

Leemzyy:
Mr sirtee15 i can see that you are ashame to answer my question,but may i ask u why plss?

Not trying to demean U or anything, but your questions are too basic for me to spend time on.
It's obvious U don't discuss regularly with Christians and U know very little about our belief.

Your questions are too elementary for the apologetic debates we having here.

The issue of hypostasis union and Christology doctrine have been debated multiple times here. I myself have explained it to your Muslims friends here multiple times.

All your questions bothers around unifying Jesus as Son of God and servant of God.
What U need is bible lessons and I will teach u, but U have to be patient. I'm going to work now.
Stay blessed.

Qasim6:
He intentionally Use Yahweh, but there is no record of Jesus using Yahweh.

Jesus would have used Alaha, Because that is how he would have called God in his language.

His intention is to portray to you that God of Jesus is different from God of Islam.

Lol so there are two God(Allah)?

SIRTee15:
Not trying to demean U or anything, but your questions are too basic for me to spend time on.
It's obvious U don't discuss regularly with Christians and U know very little about our belief.

Your questions are too elementary for the apologetic debates we having here.

The issue of hypostasis union and Christology doctrine have been debated multiple times here. I myself have explained it to your Muslims friends here multiple times.

All your questions bothers around unifying Jesus as Son of God and servant of God.
What U need is bible lessons and I will teach u, but U have to be patient. I'm going to work now.
Stay blessed.

Lolsss plss answer me did jesus said so or not?afterall all i quoted was from the bible,or is bible the one lying?

Qasim6:
U should re-use that Google to check the creed again

What you are quoting should be from 381AD and not 325AD

what he quoted for you was 325ad and not 381ad this is the evidence

SIRTee15:
Daniel 7 isn't about Muhammed.
The Isra miraj never happened except in Muhammad's head.
His wife, Aisha said Muhammed was with him in bed the night he claimed he went to heaven.

U are free to believe your delusion, that's your business.

The only thing left for U now is to argue against evidence.
I leave that for U. Going to work.

Just like it is only in your head that it was not the Islamic empire that defeat the 4th empire from Babylon.

Just a coincidence huh?

Kingsempires:
what he quoted for you was 325ad and not 381ad this is the evidence

If you read the evidence you presented very well, you will know what I claimed is correct