If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, - Christianity Etc (4) - Nairaland
Nairaland Forum › Nairaland General › Christianity Etc › If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, (3729 Views)
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by NairaLTQ: 10:37pm On Jun 06, 2025 |
JimRohn:I was correcting you calling Jesus a Soul rather than a Spirit in order to reduce Jesus to your own Standard Islamic narration. JimRohn:Unfortunately, Adam wasn't created by BE! Was he? Allah claimed that he created Adam with his two hands: is this UNTRUE? JimRohn:RUH Al-Qudus according to your Arabic would be the Holy Soul. Is Jibril the Holy Spirit or the Holy Soul? Muslims with twisting plain words to rebuild Islam! Like I said: Muslims behave like Allah and Mohammed are the worst communicators in the Universe. Is it impossible to just hold them by their words without needing re-interpretations? JimRohn:It is a simple question, Show me who else in the universe have the titles according to your prophet. Spirit of Allah and Word of Allah JimRohn:Is the hadith Maudu? Is it fabricated!? If it is NOT, what do you want us to believe? So that you know that the Hadith is strong, here is another Sahih Muslim 2767 d Abu Burda reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: There would come people amongst the Muslims on the Day of Resurrection with as heavy sins as a mountain, and Allah would forgive them and He would place in their stead the Jews and the Christians. (As far as I think), Abu Raub said: I do not know as to who is in doubt. Abu Burda said: I narrated it to 'Umar b. 'Abd al-'Aziz, whereupon he said: Was it your father who narrated it to you from Allah's Apostle (ﷺ)? I said: Yes. I hail you. Here Mohammed is contradicting Allah! I guess the verse of Qur’an 6:164 has been abrogated: isn't it? LOL! JimRohn:One need several lies to prop up Islam. The word of Allah and his prophet are usually NOT clear so that Muslims need scholars to re-interprete them even against plain words. If Jesus is TRUE, Muslims in deamination of Hell fire JimRohn:No Christian who is born again will pray this kind of prayers. Do you know why? 1. We are not slaves but sons of YHWH, so we are never afraid of going home! 2. Jesus is our own ransom from the debt of our sin and not anyone. 3. All Muslims are going to hell at least temporarily anyway Quran 19:71 There is not one of you who will not go down to it (the Fire), that is a fixed Decree of your Lord Meaning that ALL Muslims will at least first be in Hell Fire. Here is the Arabic if you do not like the translation above وَإِن مِّنكُمۡ إِلَّا وَارِدُهَاۚ كَانَ عَلَىٰ رَبِّكَ حَتۡمࣰا مَّقۡضِیࣰّا Quran 19:72 Then, We will save those who were cautious of Us, but the harmdoers shall be left there hobbling on their knees After ALL you Muslims enter the Fire, THEN Allah will THEREAFTER remove the good Muslims and leave others in the Fire 4. Herein was the words of Jesus John 14:6-7: "Jesus said to him, I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no man comes to the Father, but by me. If you had known me, you should have known my Father also: and from now on you know him, and have seen him." Mar 16:15-16: "And he said to them, Go you into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believes and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believes not shall be damned." Unfortunately, Allah is NOT the Father! |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by QuinQ: 1:14am On Jun 07, 2025 |
MaxIntheHouse2:Being a fake JW |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by JimRohn(op): 1:52am On Jun 07, 2025 |
advanceDNA:Thank you for your reply. I appreciate the engagement, though I must respectfully clarify that my questions are not aimed at mocking, dismissing, or presenting an "Islamic version" of God as inherently superior. Rather, I am critically examining internal consistency within Christian theology on its own terms—especially regarding the nature of God, incarnation, and divine immutability. Let me address your points systematically: 1. On God's Ability vs. Logical Contradiction You accuse me of contradiction—saying I affirm God’s ability, yet question the possibility of the incarnation. But this is a misunderstanding of the argument. Affirming that God can do all things does not imply He can do the logically impossible. God cannot cease to be God. He cannot be imperfect and perfect at the same time. He cannot be all-knowing and limited in knowledge simultaneously. These are not limitations on God’s power, but affirmations of His perfection and coherence. To claim otherwise is to reduce omnipotence to absurdity. So my question stands within your theological framework: How can an unchanging, eternal, all-powerful God literally assume human limitations—such as ignorance, suffering, and death—without undergoing change or diminishing His perfection? That is not a challenge based on Islamic belief; it is a request for consistency within Christian metaphysics. 2. On Divine Emotions vs. Human Limitations I did not deny God’s attributes such as anger or jealousy. What I clarified is that in Islam, these attributes are not like human emotions, which are born out of need, ignorance, or imperfection. You seem to agree when you say Jesus' death is “not like” the death of ordinary men. But if you affirm that point, you actually reinforce my concern: If Christ’s death, hunger, fatigue, and sorrow are not truly like human experiences, then in what meaningful sense can He be said to have taken on “full humanity”? And if they are real human experiences, how can you still claim that God remained fully divine while experiencing them? This leads back to the same theological tension: If these were genuine limitations, then God assumed imperfection. If they were not, then the incarnation is symbolic, not literal. 3. On "Cherry-Picking" Scripture and Interfaith Respect I have not cherry-picked verses nor attempted to mock the Bible. Instead, I am holding the theological claims you assert (such as the incarnation and divine justice through substitutionary sacrifice) to rational scrutiny. It’s also important to correct a misrepresentation: I never said that the Bible states, “God cannot exist as flesh.” Rather, I asked whether the claim that the infinite God literally became finite flesh can be logically and theologically reconciled with your belief that God is eternal, omniscient, and unchanging. That is a rational inquiry—not an Islamic imposition. 4. On Limiting God vs. Upholding His Nature You claim I’m “putting God in a box.” But again, there is a key distinction between denying God's power and upholding His nature. God cannot lie, cease to exist, or act unjustly—not because He lacks power, but because these contradict His essence. Likewise, in Islam and in rational theology generally, the idea that God can become a man, with all the limitations that entails, is not rejected due to a lack of divine ability, but because it negates divine perfection and transcendence. You cannot assert that God is eternal and unchanging, and then say He took on mortality and change. That is not divine mystery—it is theological contradiction. 5. On the Nature of Productive Dialogue I’m not entering this conversation to assert that “Allah is better.” I am engaging as someone who respects serious theological reflection. If we want genuine interfaith dialogue, we must allow difficult questions—questions that probe the internal logic of our respective worldviews. If a belief cannot be questioned without accusations of mockery or superiority, then it is not being presented in a way that invites honest investigation. In Conclusion I invite you to reflect once more on the core issue: > Is it logically and theologically coherent to believe that the infinite, perfect, all-powerful God literally became a finite, limited human being—without change, contradiction, or compromise to His divine essence? That is the heart of the matter—not whether Islam or Christianity is superior, but whether the belief in the incarnation is self-consistent. If you would like to continue this dialogue, I’m open to respectful, rational exchange. But let’s stay focused on the concepts—not accusations or assumptions about each other’s intentions or faith traditions. 2 Likes 3 Shares |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by JimRohn(op): 2:17am On Jun 07, 2025 |
NairaLTQ:Thank you again for continuing this discussion. I value serious dialogue, especially when we are engaging profound matters of theology and divine nature. I will respond to your key claims in an orderly manner, aiming for clarity and mutual understanding, even in disagreement. 1. Paradox vs. Contradiction: Distinguishing Concepts You claim, “God is paradox without resolution” and equate this with the mystery of His existence without beginning. But this is a category mistake. There is a critical difference between a mystery (something beyond full human comprehension) and a contradiction (something that defies logic itself). Saying “God is eternal while creation has a beginning” is a mystery, but it does not violate logic. Saying “God is finite and infinite, limited and unlimited, dying and undying at the same time in the same nature” is a contradiction—not just mysterious, but logically incoherent. Appealing to God’s transcendence does not give license to affirm contradictions. A contradiction is not resolved by attributing it to divine mystery—because the nature of contradiction is that it cannot be true in any realm, including the divine. In Islamic theology, God's greatness is not defined by His ability to embody opposites, but by His absolute perfection and consistency. > “There is nothing like unto Him” (Qur'an 42:11), and this includes that God does not assume the nature of the created. 2. God’s Presence Does Not Require Incarnation You argue that because God is “everywhere,” He can also be finite. But that does not follow. Being omnipresent does not entail embodiment. It means God's knowledge, will, and authority extend to all of creation—without Him becoming part of creation. In Islam, God is Al-Qayyum (The Self-Sustaining), transcendent and not subject to space, time, or matter. He does not need to “become flesh” to act within the world. He commands by will, not by incarnation. The concept of “Word of God” (e.g., kun fayakūn) in the Qur’an signifies His creative command, not an independent divine person that becomes incarnate. Thus, the comparison to the Islamic understanding of the “Word” is not equivalent. 3. Who Set the Legal Condition for Blood Sacrifice? You stated that “the Law of Sin is that sin must be punished by death.” But who set this law? If God is the lawgiver, then He is not obligated to punish sin with death. He can forgive freely, especially if repentance is sincere. If God must punish regardless of repentance, then this portrays God as bound by an abstract law higher than Himself—which undermines His sovereignty. From the Islamic perspective, God’s justice and mercy are not in conflict. He forgives whom He wills (Qur’an 39:53) and holds to account whom He wills—with no injustice done. Furthermore, forgiveness is not made void by mercy. The very essence of divine mercy is that the wrongdoer is shown compassion when justice is due. That is not injustice; it is higher justice—because the one wronged (God) is also the forgiver. 4. Is Substitutionary Atonement Just? You describe Jesus taking upon himself the sin of the world. But this raises a moral concern: How is it just for the innocent to suffer in place of the guilty? In human courts, we reject such substitution as unjust, even if done voluntarily. Islamic theology strongly affirms: > “No soul shall bear the burden of another” (Qur’an 6:164). True justice is that each person is held accountable for their own actions—and true mercy is that God can forgive without needing an innocent life to be sacrificed. 5. On the “Gravity of Sin” and God's Sovereignty You claim we Muslims do not understand the gravity of sin. On the contrary, Islam treats sin with great seriousness. Disobedience to the Creator is rebellion—but not one that renders God helpless or forces Him into self-sacrifice. You say sin “violates the integrity of God” because it resists His command (kun fayakūn). But if God’s will is truly sovereign, then no act of the creature can undermine His divine essence. Sin harms the sinner—not God. God remains perfect and unthreatened. To claim that God's command is “defeated” unless He punishes is to imply that His authority depends on response rather than essence—which is not true sovereignty. 6. Is Forgiveness Ever Free? You conclude by saying forgiveness is “never free”—someone must pay. But this is not a universal moral truth; it is a specific theological premise of substitutionary atonement. Forgiveness, by definition, is pardoning without demanding equivalent retribution. If God chooses to forgive out of mercy, it is not injustice, because He is the one wronged—and He is the judge. In Islam, this is the glory of God: > “And your Lord is the Forgiving, Full of Mercy. If He were to seize them for what they earned, He would hasten for them the punishment...” (Qur’an 18:58) This balance of mercy and justice is not theoretical—it is divine perfection. Conclusion: To summarize: Affirming that God can forgive without blood is not weakness—it is sovereignty. Ascribing logical contradictions to God (finite/infinite, mortal/immortal simultaneously) undermines His perfection, not enhances it. Justice does not require punishing the innocent for the guilty; it requires moral accountability. Mercy does not negate justice when the one forgiving is the very one sinned against. I welcome continued dialogue—but only on the basis of respectful reasoning, not accusations of ignorance. If you believe the Christian model is coherent, then the task is not to say, “It’s a mystery,” but to demonstrate that it is not internally contradictory. That is a standard every theology must meet. Would you like to continue this line of discussion with a focus on divine nature, or shift toward scriptural authority and interpretation? 1 Like 2 Shares |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by JimRohn(op): 2:37am On Jun 07, 2025 |
NairaLTQ:Thank you for your continued engagement. I appreciate the effort you are making to explain your position. I will respond to your main claims in the order you presented them, aiming to maintain a rational, respectful, and theological tone grounded in Islamic monotheism and logical analysis. 1. Jesus is “Human but Not Human”? You state that Jesus is “human like us yet not human” because he did not inherit sin from Adam. But this is a contradiction in terms. Something cannot be both X and not-X at the same time and in the same sense. If Jesus is fully human, he shares in human nature — which, according to Christian doctrine, includes the fallen state due to Adam’s sin. If he does not inherit this state, then he is not fully human as defined by your own theology. You cannot affirm and deny his full humanity simultaneously. You quote Hebrews 4:15, which says Jesus was tempted in every way yet without sin. But this raises a deeper issue: if Jesus was incapable of sin due to his divine nature, was the temptation genuine? And if he could have sinned, then how can God be at risk of moral failure? This dilemma again exposes the logical conflict in claiming Jesus is simultaneously fully God (infallible) and fully man (fallible) without division, confusion, or contradiction. 2. Paradox ≠ Truth You say: “Whether you like it or not, it is a reality that God can be unlimited and limited without contradicting His Almightiness.” This is not a “reality” — it is an assertion that violates the law of non-contradiction. You are simply claiming that paradox is proof of divinity. But by this standard, any incoherent doctrine could be justified as “divine mystery.” Islam does not reduce God to logic — but Islam upholds that God is not illogical. Allah is not subject to our limitations, but He is not self-contradictory either. Being all-powerful does not mean doing what is absurd, such as creating a square circle or being infinite and finite simultaneously. Your position exempts itself from rational inquiry by appealing to paradox. But a claim that cannot be falsified or logically examined is not proof — it is dogma. 3. Divine Descent and Throne Theology You mock the Islamic concept of God descending from His Throne, suggesting an angel might "overthrow Him." This is a theological caricature. In Islam, Allah is not spatially confined like a creature on a throne. When we say He is “above the heavens,” this affirms His transcendence — not physical location. Allah is not a body in a place, nor is He vulnerable to space or time. His Knowledge, Power, and Will encompass all creation, yet He is not part of creation. By contrast, the Christian claim that God became creation (i.e., human) makes Him subject to space, time, hunger, ignorance, and death — all of which directly contradict divine perfection. 4. Misunderstanding of Islamic Sacrifice You accuse Muslims of not understanding “sacrifice,” especially the sacrifice of Abraham (Ibrahim). But in Islam, the event of Ibrahim's willingness to sacrifice his son is preserved — not to atone for sin, but to demonstrate obedience. The Qur’an explicitly states: > “It is neither their meat nor their blood that reaches Allah, but your piety.” (Qur’an 22:37) This verse dismantles the idea that blood itself is salvific. Sacrifice in Islam is symbolic of submission — not a ransom for sin. Eid al-Adha commemorates obedience, not divine death. As for the variety of sacrifices in the Mosaic law, Islam does not reject the fact that God ordained sacrifices for various purposes — purification, thanksgiving, vows, etc. What Islam rejects is the deification of sacrifice as a necessary vehicle for salvation. 5. Can Allah Do What YHWH Does? You ask: Can Allah be somewhere and everywhere at the same time? Can Allah be infinite and limited at the same time? Let’s be clear: To ask “Can Allah be infinite and limited at the same time?” is like asking, “Can Allah be perfectly wise and foolish simultaneously?” The answer is no — not because of inability, but because self-contradiction is not a valid attribute of divinity. Islam teaches that Allah does whatever He wills — but His Will is always in harmony with His Perfection. He does not will imperfection, limitation, or error for Himself. That is not a limitation on Allah — that is the perfection of His nature. To say that God must be “limited” in order to prove His power is a category error. Perfection does not require becoming imperfect to demonstrate greatness. 6. Uniqueness Does Not Prove Truth You conclude by saying: “Unless someone else can do what the Trinity claims, I stand on my ground.” But uniqueness alone does not prove truth. A claim must be coherent, not merely unique. Islam also affirms that “There is nothing like unto Him” (Qur’an 42:11) — but it does not require logical contradiction to express God’s uniqueness. The One God is eternal, self-sufficient, and absolutely unique — without needing to become man or suffer death. Final Thought Your theology assumes the truth of the Trinity and then treats every objection as a “comprehension problem.” But I invite you to consider: if your view of God contradicts reason, and then requires suspending reason to believe, are you truly worshipping the God of Abraham — or a doctrine invented by later councils? Islam maintains the pure monotheism of every Prophet — from Adam to Noah to Abraham to Moses to Jesus to Muhammad (peace be upon them all). Not one of them ever claimed that God became man. And not one of them taught that salvation required God's death. The God of Islam is not limited by logic — He is exalted above contradiction. 1 Like 2 Shares |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by JimRohn(op): 3:09am On Jun 07, 2025 |
NairaLTQ:Thank you for your follow-up. I will respond to your claims in sequence, using logic, context, and respect. You are free to critique Islam, but mocking is not an argument — it is a substitute for one. 1. On Qur’an 75:37 and the Origin of Man You wrote: > “Is the human sperm? This is ancient error. The Qur’an should’ve corrected it.” This objection misunderstands both the language and purpose of the verse. The Qur’an 75:37 does not say the human is sperm, but that he began from a sperm drop (“nutfah min maniyyin yumnā”). This is a statement of biological origin — not essence. Even modern embryology describes the human being’s creation as beginning from the union of sperm and egg. The Qur’an’s phrasing is consistent with this and never claims sperm alone constitutes the full human — rather, it humbles the arrogant man by reminding him of his base beginnings. This is not a biological error; it is moral reflection using accurate biological reference. To call this an “ancient error” is itself an outdated polemic — not a meaningful objection. 2. On the 40 Days Hadith (Sahih Muslim 2644) You quoted the hadith: > “When the drop of semen remains in the womb for 40 or 45 nights…” Your objection assumes this means sperm physically remains unchanged for 40 days. But again, this is a misunderstanding of language and genre. The hadith does not claim that sperm survives for 40 days. It describes the first stage of embryonic development as “nutfah” — a stage, not a substance. Classical and modern scholars alike have interpreted this as referring to the embryo's initial developmental phase. Your interpretation lacks familiarity with how both embryological and theological texts speak in stages, not microscopic permanence. If one insists on hyper-literal reading, the same issues arise in biblical embryology (e.g. Genesis 2:7 – man made from dust, breathed into directly). Your sarcasm (“I guess my comprehension is not like Muslims”) does not mask the lack of contextual reading. 3. On Dhul Qarnayn and the Sun Setting You ask: > “How could there be people where the sun sets into a murky spring?” Your confusion arises from treating a perceived event as a cosmic phenomenon. The Qur’an says: > “Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of dark mud...” (Qur’an 18:86) The Arabic verb “wajada” (he found) refers to Dhul Qarnayn’s experience — not an objective astronomical event. This is classical Arabic usage. Even today, in English, we say “the sun set into the sea” — without meaning it literally entered the water. You then argue: > “There couldn’t be people at the horizon where the sun sets.” That’s precisely the point — it’s a visual perspective. Standing at a shoreline, one may “see” the sun dipping into the water — but the people are simply located near that westernmost point. There’s no contradiction unless you deny metaphor and perspective in all language. If you reject such expressions, then Biblical phrases like “sun stood still” (Joshua 10:13) or “four corners of the Earth” (Revelation 7:1) must also be literal errors. But you likely interpret those metaphorically — and rightly so. 4. On the Wall of Gog and Magog You claim: > “If the wall was made of iron and copper, we would’ve found it via aeromagnetic tools.” This assumes far too much: That we know the precise location (we don’t), That the wall remains intact (the Qur’an says it will eventually collapse — 18:98), That it wasn’t buried, dismantled, or eroded over millennia, That all iron or copper deposits must be detectable today (not always true — mineral surveys are not omniscient). Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Many historical sites (e.g., Sodom and Gomorrah, Ebla) were long thought mythical until archaeological discovery proved otherwise. Your argument rests not on proof, but on assumptions. 5. On Surah Al-Kahf and the Sleepers of the Cave You mockingly said: > “Allah turned them left and right... I could say the same about Batman!” The story of the sleepers (Qur’an 18:9–26) is not myth — it is a retelling of a well-known historical tradition, also recorded in Christian texts (e.g., the “Seven Sleepers of Ephesus”). The Qur’an gives its version and explicitly distinguishes speculation from truth (18:22), then reminds readers that Allah alone knows their true number. This is consistent with the Qur’an’s method: recounting spiritually significant stories without indulging in trivia, while grounding them in divine authority. Mockery about “Batman” does not disprove the narrative. It only proves a dismissive attitude toward any religious text not your own. That is not reasoned critique — it’s intellectual prejudice. Final Thought You’re welcome to reject Islam. But when you critique it, do so fairly. Interpreting every verse hyper-literally while granting your own tradition metaphorical flexibility is not logical — it’s biased. The Qur’an repeatedly invites people to reflect: > “Do they not reflect upon the Qur’an, or are there locks upon their hearts?” (Qur’an 47:24) If you wish to discuss further, I’m happy to continue — but let us elevate the discussion beyond ridicule and into reason. 1 Like 2 Shares |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by JimRohn(op): 3:35am On Jun 07, 2025 |
NairaLTQ:Thank you for your reply. Your zeal is noted, but clarity requires more than passion — it requires consistency, fairness, and precision. Below, I will address your key claims one by one. 1. On “Ruh” vs “Soul” and “Spirit” You objected to my clarification of Jesus being a Spirit from God — accusing me of reducing his status. But let us clarify: The Qur’an says “Ruhun minhu” — a spirit from Him — not “Ruhullah” (God's spirit), and certainly not a part of God. All human beings possess a spirit from God — see Qur’an 32:9: “Then He proportioned him and breathed into him of His spirit (min rūḥihi).” So if “Ruhun minhu” implies divinity, then by your logic, Adam, too, is divine. Yet neither Islam nor Christianity teaches this. As for Jibril (Gabriel) being called Ruh al-Qudus (Holy Spirit) — this is firmly established in the Qur’an (e.g., 2:87, 16:102). Islamic exegesis from the earliest generations affirms that this is Gabriel, the angelic messenger — not a divine being, and certainly not the third person of a Trinity. In Arabic: Rūḥ = Spirit. Nafs = Soul. Rūḥ al-Qudus = Gabriel — by consensus of early tafsīr (e.g., Ibn Kathir, al-Tabari). Thus, Islam remains consistent and free from confusion: Gabriel is the Holy Spirit — a created angel, not God. 2. On Adam Created by “Be” or “Hands” You said: > “Adam wasn’t created by ‘Be’ but with Allah’s two hands.” This is a false dichotomy. Both are true in Islamic belief: Qur’an 3:59 says: “Indeed, the example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam. He created him from dust, then said to him, ‘Be,’ and he was.” Qur’an 38:75 affirms: “Whom I created with My two hands” (referring to Adam). This presents no contradiction: the command “Be” denotes divine will and decree, while “hands” denotes special attention — not physical body parts (Islam denies anthropomorphism). Do you believe God literally has hands of flesh and blood? If not, why mock Muslims for using metaphor while your own theology depends on symbolic language? 3. On “Spirit of God” and “Word of God” — Are These Titles Exclusive? You ask: > “Who else is called ‘Spirit of God’ and ‘Word of God’?” This is a flawed appeal to exclusivity. Jesus being called “Word” (Kalimatullah) refers to God’s creative command “Be” — not to pre-existent divinity. Even in the Bible, many are described in elevated terms without being divine. For example: Jeremiah is called the mouth of the Lord (Jeremiah 1:9). The heavens are said to be made by the word of the Lord (Psalm 33:6). Prophets were filled with God’s Spirit — e.g., Ezekiel 11:5. So your logic would make many beings divine. Jesus is honored in Islam — miraculously born, given revelation, called “Word from God” and “Spirit from Him” — but not divine. Islam draws a clear line between honor and divinity. Christianity collapses that distinction. 4. On the Hadith about Jews and Christians You quoted Sahih Muslim 2767d, alleging it proves substitutionary atonement like Christian theology. But context matters. The Qur’an is explicit: > “No bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another.” (Qur’an 6:164) Thus, scholars interpret the hadith as metaphorical: those who denied truth while Muslims strove in faith will bear their own burden — not that Muslims’ sins are shifted onto them, but that others failed where Muslims were forgiven. Ibn Hajar and An-Nawawi, leading Hadith commentators, explain this refers to relative accountability, not vicarious punishment. Contrast this with Christianity, which openly declares one innocent man (Jesus) died as ransom for the sins of the guilty — a direct violation of moral justice. Islam never teaches that the sins of one are carried by another — and never makes forgiveness depend on bloodshed. 5. On Qur’an 19:71 — Do All Muslims Enter Hell? You misquoted Qur’an 19:71: > “There is not one of you except that he will pass over it [the Hellfire]...” You claim this means all Muslims enter Hell. But the verse says “wāriduhā”, which linguistically means to pass by or approach, not necessarily to enter and suffer in it. This is clarified by the next verse (19:72): > “Then We will save those who were righteous, and leave the wrongdoers within it, on their knees.” In tafsīr (exegesis), scholars such as al-Qurtubi, Ibn Abbas, and Ibn Kathir confirm: the righteous will cross Hell on the bridge (Sirat), not dwell in it. Again, selective literalism without the next verse or scholarly context results in distortion. Ironically, the Bible says something more terrifying: > “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord,’... and I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of iniquity.’” (Matthew 7:22–23) Even those claiming Christ may be rejected. 6. On Being “Sons” Not “Slaves” of God You said: > “We are not slaves but sons of God.” This is a theological error from the Islamic perspective. The Qur’an teaches: > “The Messiah never disdained to be a servant of Allah...” (Qur’an 4:172) To be a ‘slave of God’ (Abdullah) is an honor, not a deficiency. Jesus himself is called ‘Abdullah’ in the Qur’an (19:30). Calling oneself a son of God in the literal or exclusive sense risks elevating man to divinity — which Islam firmly rejects. God has no sons or partners. The Bible, too, uses “sons of God” metaphorically (e.g., Adam in Luke 3:38, Israel in Exodus 4:22) — yet you interpret Jesus' title as uniquely divine. This is a theological leap without justification. 7. Your Conclusion & Claim that Allah Is Not the Father You said: > “Allah is not the Father!” Correct — and that is precisely the Qur’an’s point: > “He neither begets nor is begotten.” (Qur’an 112:3) God is not like creation. He does not have biological processes, familial relationships, or bloodlines. This is the ultimate monotheism — a God who is absolutely unique and indivisible. Fatherhood implies dependence, similarity, or lineage — all of which Islam negates of God. Final Reflection Your objections rely on: Ignoring historical and linguistic context, Projecting Christian theology onto Islamic terms, Misreading metaphor as metaphysics, and Mockery in place of meaningful analysis. You ask why Muslims refer to scholars — yet you rely on theologians and councils (e.g., Nicaea) to justify doctrines like the Trinity or original sin. The difference? Islam admits it: the Qur’an invites reflection, not blind literalism. Islam rejects contradictions and clings to clarity: > “Say: He is Allah, One — Allah, the Eternal. He neither begets nor is begotten.” (Qur’an 112) If sincere dialogue is what you seek, I am ready to engage. But if mockery is your method, I remind you of what Jesus himself said: > “By your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.” (Matthew 12:37) May God guide us both to truth — with humility and reason. 1 Like 2 Shares |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by NairaLTQ: 9:18am On Jun 07, 2025 |
JimRohn:LOL, Anything that violates logic but is nevertheless True is a mystery sir. And do you deny that God is unlike Anyone or Anything in creation? Do you agree that if God exists and Heis not visible nor measurable in any sense, this would be a logical contradiction BUT you are not an Atheist: you believe in the unseen! Your argument falls apart! JimRohn:You got me wrong. I never said that God's Omnipresence requires incarnation because YHWH as a spirit is already Omnipresent. What I said was that YHWH can be Omnipresent and Somewhere at the same time without violation in nature. Can Allah do that? If he is not, how can he be Almighty! JimRohn:LOL! In every forgiveness, the forgiver pays the price. If I slapped you BUT you decided to forgive me even though you could deal ruthlessly with me, don't you see that You bear the cost of forgiving me in terms of sucking in the Ridicule, Pain or Shame I have cost you!? Again, you have shown that Islam does not understand the gravity of Sin as attacking the integrity of God by making his will and command to fail on our account! JimRohn:First your Hadiths contradict the Qur'an on this! Secondly, If Jesus was human like us, he cannot justly substitute us for our sin because he himself requires atonement. This is the purpose for sacrifices for sin in the religion of Moses. The Lamb or Goat who did not commit sin pays the penalty for sin of the sinner. If your teenage son has an accident and with your car damaged a persons vehicle BUT you as the father payed the damage, to you this substitution is unjust!? It is a failed logic sir! JimRohn:I don't know if you agree that one of the original attributes of God is that He is JUST and MERCIFUL. Being just required that He must punish sin and transgression. Being Merciful requires that He overlook the sin and transgression of men. God's wisdom is to institute the ordinance of sacrifice. God provided His own Sacrificial Being perfect as a replacement for the cost of your offence. Thus, God executes justice that you as a sinner can by his mercy go free! John 1:29: "The next day John sees Jesus coming to him, and said, Behold the Lamb of God, which takes away the sin of the world." I invite you to the Messiah: for your salvation! The Messiah becomes your ransom from the punishment you deserve. What do you think: Is it possible to execute both total justice and total mercy on a violator of the law? How? |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by JimRohn(op): 10:15am On Jun 07, 2025 |
NairaLTQ:Thank you again for your reply. While I appreciate continued engagement, I must note that your tone (“LOL”, repeated interruptions with mockery, and avoidance of key points) undermines the seriousness of the discussion. If we are to have a meaningful dialogue about divine nature, coherence of theology, and moral logic, it must be conducted with mutual respect and intellectual integrity. Let me now respond, point by point, and also address why many of your comments simply restate already-refuted claims. 1. Mystery vs. Logical Contradiction: Still Unresolved You insist, “Anything that violates logic but is nevertheless true is a mystery.” But that is a philosophical error. There is a world of difference between something being beyond comprehension and something being logically incoherent. You have not engaged this distinction—just repeated the claim with laughter. Let me be clear: Mystery: When a truth exceeds the full grasp of human knowledge but remains non-contradictory. (e.g., the eternity of God, or how He creates instantly by will). Contradiction: When something affirms mutually exclusive properties at the same time in the same respect, such as “God is mortal and immortal simultaneously.” That is not “mystery”—that is a violation of the law of non-contradiction, which even you must apply when arguing for anything at all. You ask: “Do you deny that God is unlike anything in creation?” Of course not. I explicitly affirmed Qur’an 42:11 — “There is nothing like unto Him.” But being unlike creation does not mean being logically incoherent. Uniqueness is not the same as absurdity. 2. God's Unseen Nature is Not a Contradiction You say belief in the unseen is illogical. That too is a category mistake. We believe in the unseen not because it is contradictory, but because it is beyond sensory perception, yet affirmed through reason, revelation, and signs. For example, gravity is unseen—but not illogical. Similarly, God being unseen is a limitation of human perception, not a logical contradiction. If you’re equating invisibility with contradiction, then that standard would reject not only monotheism—but many foundational scientific concepts too. 3. Redundancy on Omnipresence and Embodiment You say again: “YHWH can be Omnipresent and somewhere at the same time.” But this is exactly the claim I already addressed. To be omnipresent is to transcend space—yet you affirm God is spatially located in the body of Christ. You are affirming both: that God is beyond space and within a space-bound body. That is not a mystery—it is a contradiction in metaphysical terms: being both bound and unbound by space simultaneously. You ask, “Can Allah do that?” No—not because of weakness, but because God does not violate His own perfection. He does not become limited while remaining unlimited. That’s not transcendence—that’s confusion. 4. Forgiveness Does Not Require a Payment You repeat the claim that “forgiveness always has a cost.” This is a semantic fallacy. Yes, forgiveness may entail emotional cost to the forgiver—but that does not mean a judicial or blood payment must be made. You gave the example of someone slapping me and I forgive them. That does not require a third party being executed for their act. In human experience, we understand that forgiveness means choosing not to exact punishment, even if one could. In divine context, God's choice to forgive reflects His mercy and justice—not an unresolved debt passed onto an innocent. If your model insists that no forgiveness is real unless someone dies, you are no longer speaking of forgiveness, but transaction—a paid debt, not pardoned wrongdoing. 5. Misunderstanding the Nature of Sin and God’s Sovereignty You insist again that sin attacks the integrity of God and “defeats His will.” But as I said before—and you did not answer—if sin can “defeat” God’s will, then God's will is not sovereign. In Islam, God's will is supreme. Nothing happens except by His permission—even sin. God allowing humans free will to disobey is not the same as being defeated. If He forgives, it is from power, not from being forced by some cosmic law to sacrifice Himself. 6. On Substitution: Still a Moral Problem You said Jesus can substitute for sinners because He is sinless. But again, you avoid the core question: How is it just for the innocent to suffer in the place of the guilty? Your car accident analogy proves the opposite of what you intend. If my son crashes your car and I pay for the damage, that is material restitution—not moral guilt transfer. I did not take on his guilt. No judge would punish me instead of him for reckless driving. In your theology, Jesus is not just helping with the consequence—he is being punished in place of the guilty. That is not justice—that is moral substitution, which you would never accept in any human courtroom. Again: > “No soul bears the burden of another” (Qur’an 6:164) Islamic justice holds each person accountable and allows forgiveness directly from the One wronged—God Himself. 7. Redundancy in Arguments Respectfully, I must point out: your replies repeat several arguments I already answered: You repeated “mystery = contradiction,” without addressing the difference I showed. You brought up omnipresence and location again, despite my clarification. You repeated “forgiveness has a cost,” ignoring the difference between emotional cost and legal blood payment. You restated substitution with a flawed analogy, without answering the moral objection I raised. I would invite you—if sincere—to engage the actual substance of the rebuttals, rather than repeating slogans and rhetorical questions. In Conclusion: No, contradiction is not a higher truth. It's a breakdown of meaning. No, God being unseen is not a contradiction. No, omnipresence and incarnation are not complementary—they are ontologically incompatible. No, justice does not require punishing the innocent. Yes, forgiveness can be free—especially when the Forgiver is the Judge and the One wronged. Yes, Islam understands sin deeply—but also understands God’s mercy is not bound by human logic of transaction and debt. If you would like to move forward constructively, let’s raise the level of the discourse. I propose we choose one of the following for our next focus: 1. The concept of Divine Justice and Mercy: Is substitution coherent or necessary? 2. The nature of God: Is the Trinity logically consistent? 3. Scriptural reliability: Is the Bible internally consistent or divinely preserved? Would you prefer to proceed on one of these? Or would you rather clarify your existing arguments in light of the detailed responses provided? 1 Like 2 Shares |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by NairaLTQ: 10:26am On Jun 07, 2025 |
JimRohn:Logical truth exists differently within the physical and spiritual state. Do you concede that It is an illogical fallacy that an animal called Al-Burak will take your prophet from the earth to the seven heavens! Doe it makes it untrue? Your argument is abysmally feeble. From the point of view of the Trinity, these are logically possible, logically feasible and Truth at the same time. JimRohn:Beings stubbornly ignorant and dogmatic doesn't suddenly make your claim and misunderstanding the truth. Process this Logically: -YHWH is everywhere as the Holy Spirit -YHWH is on His throne in the Heavens -YHWH is anywhere in Creation where His power and manifest presence is required as the Word. Do you oppose the notion that God Himself is a PARADOX as nothing in existence is Like Him? If you do, your argument then holds no water! JimRohn:Sorry, Allah is confined to his throne as Taoheed according to your prophet. 1. Is it untrue that Allah descend every third part of the night to the our lowest heaven to listen to the prayers of Muslims? 2. Is it untrue that Allah's throne is carried by eight mountain goats that are angels? Do you thus concede that if these eight angels are not infinite, then Allah's throne is not infinite, thus Allah cannot be infinite but localized? You still must do Straw man argument: -I asked you the question: when Jibril became a perfect man, did he cease being an angel? -If God is a Trinity as explained to you, when He incarnated (the Word becoming Human with human limitations), doesn't his make YHWH limited? Sorry: poor argument sir! JimRohn:If you claimed you understand sacrifice with respect to Abraham 1. Let's assume that God wanted to test if Abraham would withhold his son from Him, why did God provide a Ram for sacrifice: what does sacrifice mean to Allah? 2. Why was Allah's animal called a great Ransom? Note: From the point Abraham was deemed to have obeyed God, all that was necessary was for God to tell him that he passed the test and case closed 3. Who with evidence was the Sacrificial son of Abraham? 4. Why is there a big disconnect between the religion of Abraham, Moses and David that requires different kinds of sacrifices? [quote author=JimRohn post=135654002]5. Can Allah Do What YHWH Does? You ask: Can Allah be somewhere and everywhere at the same time? Can Allah be infinite and limited at the same time? Let’s be clear: To ask “Can Allah be infinite and limited at the same time?” is like asking, “Can Allah be perfectly wise and foolish simultaneously?” The answer is no — not because of inability, but because self-contradiction is not a valid attribute of divinity. Islam teaches that Allah does whatever He wills — but His Will is always in harmony with His Perfection. He does not will imperfection, limitation, or error for Himself. That is not a limitation on Allah — that is the perfection of His nature. To say that God must be “limited” in order to prove His power is a category error. Perfection does not require becoming imperfect to demonstrate greatness. God can choose to be infinitely wise and foolish at the same time, but even God's foolishness is incredibly higher than ours.I never said that uniqueness mean the truth, I am just asserting what you already know that God is Unique except your objective is to deny that. I don't know you understand some little physics as Islam is like a Physicist who is locked in the realm of Classical physics and sees Quantum physics as Illogical. The uniqueness of YHWH makes Him an Enigma: the more you study Him, the more you see that you are unqualified. Islam's Taoheed is an attempt to redefining the Oneness of God described as Trinity. Unfortunately, you arrived at a oneness of Allah like the oneness of created things. Unfortunately, the Taoheed fails miserably in showing that Allah is Omnipotent, Omnipresent and Omniscient! How can this limitation be the Almighty God! |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by NairaLTQ: 11:00am On Jun 07, 2025 |
JimRohn:We know it is a scientific error that sperms become babies: my contention is that Allah should know better . I am quoting Allah, but you don't want me to quote him but yourself and the scholars you believe. Judge! JimRohn:Unfortunately, quoting your prophet, this is a scientific error. BUT You would prefer that I quote you and the scholars you subscribe to rather than your prophet! Please Judge this yourself. JimRohn:Allah says that Dhul Qarnyn reached the setting place of the sun! You say, I should disbelieve that but believe the re-interpretations you are giving it. Doesn't this make sense to you that I choose you over Allah? Secondly, I showed you the physical impossibility of the act of Dhul Qarnyn's perceptions. The sun ALWAYS set in the Horizon The Horizon is the farthest place a human can see of the earth. At that distance, it is IMPOSSIBLE to find a people at this Horizon because, the nearer you move towards any horizon, the farther it moves away from you. Don't you get this simple thing!? JimRohn:Yes, just like under Nigeria is another country of giants deep within the earth. Trust me, it's only because we have not dug deep enough, we would have found this people! SMH! This is how you sound. The whole earth except the Antarctica has been mapped for aeromagnetic data. The whole earth including Nigeria had been mapped for aeromagnetic data. Any significant iron deposits would have been noted sir. The structure is too huge to be missed as it is not a pin we are looking for but huge IRON walls (not even the weakly magnetic iron ores) JimRohn:I challenge you then to show that the sleepers of the cave is a historical reality! All I did was to show you that Allah claimed to be involved with this myth as Allah thinks that it was a real story. I used Batman to show that talk is cheap: you did not believe me did you? Batman stories are myths, thus should you believe me when I insert myself into the myth. Judge please! I am waiting! JimRohn:No problem! I have chosen to value the words of Allah and the words of Mohammed higher than you or your scholars re-interpretations of what is clearly stated. That seem to be my crime! 1 Like |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by JimRohn(op): 12:19pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
NairaLTQ:Thank you once again for your response. I will address your points systematically while emphasizing logical coherence and theological consistency. However, I would also request that you refrain from repeating previously addressed objections and rhetorical exaggerations, as repetition without engagement does not advance the dialogue. 1. Logic and Spiritual Realities You claim that "logical truth exists differently within the physical and spiritual state." However, you have not demonstrated how the law of non-contradiction—a fundamental axiom of reason—ceases to be valid in the spiritual realm. A paradox is not a proof; it is an admission that the claim cannot be explained without contradiction. Spiritual truth transcends our experience but does not negate reason. As the Qur’an repeatedly invites, “Will you not reason?” (Qur’an 2:44; 3:190–191). Truth, whether spiritual or physical, does not violate logic—it may go beyond our full comprehension, but it does not contradict itself. If a belief requires a contradiction to be true, then by definition it cannot be true. That is not an “Islamic” claim. That is the universal foundation of all coherent discourse. 2. Al-Burāq and the Nature of Miracles You bring up the Mi‘raj (Prophet Muhammad’s ascension) and suggest it is “illogical.” But this is a category error. A miracle is by definition extraordinary—but it is not a contradiction. The Mi‘raj is not presented as a logical impossibility (like being infinite and finite simultaneously), but as a supernatural act of God, which remains internally coherent: a creature transported by divine power. Even Christians believe in supernatural events—Jesus walking on water, raising the dead, or being born of a virgin. You accept those without seeing them as “illogical.” So invoking the Mi‘raj here is not a rebuttal—it is a double standard. 3. On the Trinity and Logical Contradictions You assert: > “From the point of view of the Trinity, these are logically possible, logically feasible and Truth at the same time.” This is simply an assertion, not a demonstration. Claiming a contradiction is “logically feasible” without showing how God can be infinite and finite, omniscient and ignorant, immutable and changing—all at once—is not reasoning. It is bypassing reasoning. You then argue: > “Do you oppose the notion that God Himself is a PARADOX…?” No. We reject that God is a logical contradiction. We affirm that Allah is utterly unique, but not absurd or irrational. As the Qur’an says: > “There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11) Uniqueness does not mean contradiction. God is unlike creation, yes—but He is not logically self-negating. 4. Misrepresenting Islamic Theology You claim: > “Allah is confined to his throne according to your Prophet.” This is a distortion. Islamic scholars for centuries have explained that Allah’s “Throne” is a statement of majesty, not confinement. When we speak of Allah descending in the last third of the night, we do not say He moves like a body through space. Rather, this is an action attributed to Him in a way that befits His majesty, and we do not liken it to human movement. Furthermore, Allah is not dependent on His throne or angels. You state: > “If the throne is carried by eight angels, Allah is not infinite.” This is a false conclusion. The throne is a creation of Allah; it does not contain or limit Him. Saying Allah created a throne and assigned angels to carry it does not imply He is sitting like a man or limited by it. That is anthropomorphism, which Islam rejects completely. 5. Repeated and Avoided Questions You repeat a question I already answered: > “Can Allah be infinite and limited at the same time?” To reiterate: No, because that is a contradiction, not because of any limitation in Allah’s power. Allah’s perfection is in never being subject to imperfection. To ask if Allah can be limited is like asking, “Can Allah be weak?” The answer is no—not due to inability, but due to His flawless nature. You also ask: > “When Jibril became a man, did he stop being an angel?” This is not parallel to the incarnation claim. Angels do not become human in nature, but manifest in human form. Gabriel did not become a human being with a human soul, weakness, and ignorance—he simply appeared as a man. That is not the same as claiming God became an actual human being, subject to human limitations, ignorance, hunger, and death. 6. On Abraham’s Sacrifice and “Great Ransom” Let’s clarify: The Qur’an does not state the purpose of the ram was to atone for sin. The event was a test of obedience, and the ransom was a substitution, not a salvific atonement. The term “fidaan ‘azheem” (great ransom) refers to the significance of the test, not to a doctrine of original sin or blood atonement. To read Christian theology into Islamic texts is to ignore context and commit eisegesis, not exegesis. Regarding the identity of the son: Islamic tradition strongly supports Ishmael, though the Qur’an does not explicitly name him. This is not a contradiction—it is simply a matter where Islamic and Judeo-Christian narratives diverge. Your final question: > “Why is there a disconnect between Abraham, Moses, and David regarding sacrifices?” There is no disconnect in Islam. All prophets taught submission to one God, and all their sacrifices were acts of obedience—not redemptive blood rituals to pay off inherited guilt. The disconnect lies in later Christian theology, which departed from the monotheism and moral responsibility emphasized by the earlier prophets. Final Appeal Your responses are increasingly repetitive and rely heavily on restating paradoxes as if they were answers. I respectfully request that you avoid circular reasoning and engage with the logical and theological issues actually raised. We must ask: > If your theology requires suspending logic, redefining paradox as proof, and accepting contradictions as divine nature — how can it be distinguished from error, myth, or confusion? Islam’s message remains simple, coherent, and preserved: > “Say: He is Allah, One. Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born. And there is none comparable to Him.” (Qur’an 112:1–4) No councils, no paradoxes, no blood debt. Just pure tawḥīd. Let us engage in truth-seeking, not mere repetition.. 1 Like 1 Share |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by JimRohn(op): 12:41pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
NairaLTQ:Thank you once again for continuing this discussion. However, it is important that we raise the standard of dialogue and avoid circular repetition, mockery, or emotional outbursts. If this conversation is to continue, it must remain respectful, rational, and theologically coherent. Let me now respond to your main points, and then offer a final word. 1. “Mystery” Is Not a License for Contradiction You said: “Anything that violates logic but is nevertheless true is a mystery.” That statement is self-defeating. A mystery is something beyond comprehension, not something logically impossible. Saying God is “unseen” is a mystery because His essence transcends empirical observation. That is not illogical. But to say “God is finite and infinite, mortal and immortal, limited and unlimited, visible and invisible—all simultaneously in one being” is a logical contradiction, not a mystery. Contradictions are not made acceptable just because they’re labeled “divine.” Logic is not a man-made invention—it is the framework by which meaning and coherence are even possible. If we remove logical consistency, any incoherent belief (including polytheism, paganism, or atheism) could claim to be a “mystery.” > God being unlike creation (Qur’an 42:11) does not mean God becomes illogical or self-negating. 2. Omnipresence ≠ Multiplicity or Incarnation You said that YHWH can be “everywhere and somewhere in particular” and then asked if Allah can do this. This is another category confusion. In Islam, Allah is not limited by space, nor does He require embodiment to be active in creation. His Knowledge, Will, and Power encompass all things. He is not a spatial being, so the question of “being somewhere and everywhere” is based on a flawed assumption of divine spatiality. > Allah is not a body, a spirit, or a physical entity. He is not composed of parts. He does not “localize” Himself. Asking whether Allah can do what YHWH does assumes the Trinitarian framework as a default. But that is precisely what is under dispute. 3. On Forgiveness: Paying a Price? You argued that forgiveness must always involve a cost. But that is not a universal truth—it is an emotional analogy. If God is all-powerful and self-sufficient, He is not emotionally wounded or harmed by sin in the way humans are. He is not subject to trauma, pain, or ego. > Forgiveness in Islam is based on God’s Mercy, not emotional cost or psychological pain. There is no cosmic wound needing healing. Yes, a human may “bear the cost” emotionally when forgiving—but God is not a human. He is al-Ghaniyy (Self-Sufficient) and al-Haleem (Most Forbearing). To anthropomorphize Him in order to justify atonement theology is theologically misguided. 4. “Gravity of Sin” Does Not Require Blood You insist Islam does not grasp the gravity of sin because we do not believe it “violates” God’s integrity. But this claim stems from a misunderstanding of divine sovereignty. Sin in Islam is serious—not because it harms God—but because it is rebellion against His command. But God remains perfect and unharmed, regardless of who disobeys Him. You said, “Sin causes God’s command to fail.” That is false by definition. God’s command is not defeated when creatures disobey—it is fulfilled when they are held accountable. His authority is not contingent on universal obedience. 5. Substitutionary Atonement Is Morally and Logically Flawed You continue to defend the idea of substitutionary atonement by giving human analogies. But here’s the issue: morality must remain coherent at the divine level. You asked: “If your son crashes a car and you pay, is that unjust?” But let’s clarify: In that case, the father owns both the car and the money and chooses to cover a material loss. That’s not moral substitution. In atonement theology, the innocent is punished instead of the guilty, for moral debt—not property damage. In any just legal system, punishing the innocent for the crimes of the guilty is unjust—even if done “voluntarily.” Islam teaches: > “No soul shall bear the burden of another.” (Qur’an 6:164) That is pure moral clarity—not human analogy. 6. Repeating the Same Challenges You keep repeating questions that were already addressed: On God descending or being on the Throne: Islam affirms Allah’s transcendence without anthropomorphism. “Descent” is understood in a manner befitting His majesty—not as spatial relocation. On the nature of sacrifice: We’ve addressed that sacrifice in Islam is not for atonement but submission. On who the sacrificial son was: That is not the central point of Islamic theology regarding obedience and faith. If you wish to continue this discussion, please stop returning to these same rhetorical questions without engaging the actual answers provided. Conclusion: To summarize once more: Contradictions are not “mysteries”—they are logical impossibilities. God’s perfection is not shown by embodying opposites, but by remaining unchanging, unique, and free from flaw. Divine mercy is not weakness—it is sovereignty. Moral justice is not punishing the innocent, but holding each accountable. You cannot win a debate by laughing off the points you cannot refute, or by repeating the same questions already answered. If you are genuinely interested in continuing a dialogue, I welcome it—but only if it moves forward. If you intend to keep mocking, repeating, and ignoring the core arguments while shifting topics, then this conversation may have reached its conclusion. Let me know how you would like to proceed—with reason, or with rhetoric. 1 Like 2 Shares |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by FreeIgboho: 12:46pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
MaxIntheHouse2:. |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by FreeIgboho: 12:49pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
NairaLTQ:👍 |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by FreeIgboho: 1:07pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
JimRohn:So why then worship this God you describe. Why does it (it can't be "he"} require worship? |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by advanceDNA: 1:17pm On Jun 07, 2025*. Modified: 2:11pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
JimRohn:you are already off by this statement. Why do atheist call religious pple f00ls or stvp!d?? because nothing is logical about religion in the first place...it is a matter of faith.. ....so saying that the God in the biblical account can't do something because to you that thing is illogical shows your are only playing the atheist game JimRohn:how does he cease to be God becos he chose to manifest simultaneously in this cosmos' time and space.... you are the one tagging these actions of God as imperfect because your mind rejects the motive behind it based on your Islamic Allah version of God... JimRohn:no....this is you putting God in a box of what you feel he can or cannot do to suit your aim of invalidating the christian faith..... JimRohn:what has his unchanging nature got to do with his motive for acting... his unchanging, eternal, all-powerful status is why he chose to execute his actions of justice & reconciliation in the first place.... .....the action of reconciliation and justice has been executed...so what is his current state...?? How has he now changed ?? 2. On Divine Emotions vs. Human Limitations I did not deny God’s attributes such as anger or jealousy. What I clarified is that in Islam, these attributes are not like human emotions, which are born out of need, ignorance, or imperfection.[/quote]here u go again..... in Islam??......you claim you are trying to argue Christian theology based on logic..why are you trying to use Islamic framework to invalidate Christian beliefs here? JimRohn:you can't even see sarcasm when it's staring at you.... I ddnt agree with you....I was only throwing your sloppy logic back at you JimRohn:They are human experiences for the purpose of reconciling humans who live such experiences and fell into sin becos of them.. but Jesus did not...showing his nature was sinless a nature only God God has.... JimRohn:Lol...this is a similar question atheists ask just to invalidate God....why will an all knowing God, all powerful, make such imperfect world and flawed creations that goes against him..?? Like the atheists....These questions you ask is driven by deliberate error of cognitive bias... JimRohn:until u can show me where God state what he can or cannot with respect to how he chose to execute his reconciliation & justice ..then we can continue this point...... For now...all u have is a desperate attempt at invalidating another person's faith & beliefs.... JimRohn:yeah....God cannot lie, God cannot be unjust etc.....you have still not showed me where God said he cannot extend his holiness attribute into flesh and blood for the purpose of justice and reconciliation....  JimRohn:here u are bringing you Islamic framework work into it in order to validate you comment......how come God, that is perfect, all powerful and all knowing still made an imperfect world with creation prone to flaws yet still remain a perfect God with all his perfect knowledge .....yet still remain the perfect, all knowing God.. JimRohn:You are just playing around with words and throwing context away....so where is Jesus now...?? Is he dead?? buried inside a grave.?? How has he changed from the eternal nature that he was, is and forevermore...?? God's nature is also just and ensures justice which is the reason for his reconciliation and atonement of sin (an idea which u reject and greatly drives all your questions) ..so how does this mean he change when in actual fact he is being himself ...the God that upholds justice.... JimRohn:u are throwing claims masked as question to invalidate another person's faith, while comparing to to your Islamic framework...u keep denying this yet in every of your comment you mention how Islam doesn't do this or that....and Allah is this or that..... |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by TenQ: 1:42pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
Mr JimRohn, You refused to answer direct questions and any answer I give you is considered a ridicule which wasn't my intention. What I noticed however is that when I show you how impossible your position is, it seems to inflamed you. I must commend you however that you were not abusive as some other Muslims when their position seems threatened by superior arguments. Have you noticed that you seem to reject obvious meaning of the Qur'an and Hadiths whenever they seem problematic to you. So, I will ask you just one small batch of question at a time and I expect you to answer them directly if possibly with evidence AND maintain consistency by standing by your answers. 1. Is it TRUE or UNTRUE that Prophet Mohammad is in his grave praying? 2. Is this also TRUE for ALL prophets of Islam: that they are in their graves praying? 3. On the day of resurrection, who would be the first to resurrect from the dead? |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by NairaLTQ: 1:49pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
When you mis-anwer any question, you expect one to accept it as TRUTH without showing you where you were making conjectures. Example: 1. You insisted that Jesus was created by BE when there are evidences to show that this is UNTRUE 2. In our discussion on wariduha in the Quran 19:71-72, you say the Qur'an say that you will pass over it (Hell) But you know that this is completely UNTRUE. Let me attach my response before the Nairaland bots flagged my post
|
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by FreeIgboho: 2:19pm On Jun 07, 2025*. Modified: 3:57pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
JimRohn:Why do you think the net result of this Islam is hyper individual terrorism. Suicide bombers and Fatwas all over the place. Almost every religion-based acts of terrorism is Islam. Take Nigeria, see all these Islamic terrorist groups and burning people for "insulting the Koran or Prophet", etc Do you really think this is the right religion to belong to? |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by FreeIgboho: 2:27pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
JimRohn:Likewise, you cannot assert that God is eternal and unchanging, and then say he STARTED creating at some point. That implies change both internally and externally. Massive change at that |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by JimRohn(op): 4:39pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
advanceDNA:Thank you for your response. While your passion is evident, I would like to clarify that I am not attacking Christianity out of hostility or blind comparison. Rather, I am critically engaging with the internal coherence of certain Christian theological claims. I trust you can appreciate that genuine interfaith dialogue includes raising difficult questions—questions that probe the logical consistency of our respective views. Let me now respond to your key objections point by point: 1. Faith vs. Reason You state that religion is not about logic but “faith,” and equate my questions with atheism. But this is a false dichotomy. Faith is not irrational; otherwise, any belief—however contradictory—could be justified under the banner of faith. Historically, Christian thinkers like Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, and others have appealed to reason in articulating doctrine. If theological claims are exempt from rational inquiry, then all religious claims become equally unverifiable and irreconcilable. Furthermore, I did not say “God cannot manifest as flesh” based on Islamic assumptions. I asked whether the specific Christian claim that an eternal, all-powerful, unchanging God literally became a limited, mortal human being is internally consistent within Christian theology itself. That is a rational question, not an atheist one. If God can do anything, including things that are logically self-contradictory (such as being infinite and finite simultaneously), then the entire framework of metaphysical reasoning collapses. You cannot reject the logical impossibility of “square circles” yet affirm contradictions in theology as “mystery.” 2. On “Putting God in a Box” This accusation misunderstands the difference between logical contradiction and divine mystery. Denying that God lies, dies, or changes is not “limiting” God—it is upholding His perfection. When you say “God can manifest in flesh,” you must then account for how He does so without ceasing to be omniscient, eternal, or unchanging. For instance: Did Jesus know everything while also saying he did not know the hour (Mark 13:32)? Did Jesus die, and if so, what does it mean for God to die? If Jesus suffered and cried out, “My God, why have you forsaken me?”, then who was he speaking to—if he himself is fully God? These are not attacks—they are attempts to understand the internal coherence of the doctrine. You also asked: “How has God changed?” The point is not after the resurrection, but during the incarnation—was God undergoing change by entering into time, taking on flesh, and experiencing limitation? If so, that conflicts with the claim that He is unchanging. If not, then what meaningfully occurred in the incarnation? 3. Islamic Framework vs. Logical Inquiry You object to my mention of Islamic theology. But I only referenced it to contrast differing understandings of divine attributes—not to impose Islamic views on Christianity. In fact, the majority of my critique is based on logical consistency within Christian claims—not Qur’anic doctrine. For example, when I ask how God can be omnipotent and omniscient, yet ignorant, weak, and mortal in human form, I am not using Islamic theology—I’m pointing to a tension in your own system. Moreover, if any appeal to a different framework is automatically dismissed as “irrelevant,” then all interfaith dialogue becomes impossible. The whole point of such discussions is to examine how different worldviews respond to the same philosophical challenges. 4. Divine Justice and Reconciliation You argue that God chose to reconcile humanity through incarnation and atonement. But again, the issue is not why He did so, but how He could do so without contradiction. If God is just, why is forgiveness impossible without blood sacrifice? Why is the punishment transferred to an innocent being (Jesus) instead of given to the guilty? In human courts, that would be called injustice. Are we to believe that God’s mercy and justice are limited such that He cannot forgive without violent substitution? In Islam, God is both Just and Merciful—He holds people accountable, but also forgives sincerely repentant believers without needing to become part of creation or suffer. This is not mentioned to “compare religions” for superiority, but to show that divine forgiveness and justice need not contradict one another, nor require incarnation. 5. Human Experiences of Christ You claimed that Jesus’ hunger, sorrow, and fatigue were “real” for the purpose of reconciliation. But that only reinforces the issue: If these were real, then God experienced limitation, weakness, and need. If they were not real, then the humanity of Jesus becomes symbolic or illusory. You also mentioned Jesus' sinlessness proving His divine nature. But prophets like Moses and John the Baptist are described as righteous and blameless—yet not considered divine. Sinlessness does not prove divinity. Rather, the Christian claim is that God became man, not simply that a man was sinless. 6. Respectful Inquiry Is Not Hostility Lastly, you suggest that my questions are “masked attacks.” I respectfully disagree. Serious inquiry requires confronting tensions. If asking whether God dying or being ignorant is logically coherent is taken as “hostile,” then we have abandoned reasoned dialogue. It is not disrespectful to ask: > Can the eternal become temporal without ceasing to be eternal? Can the omniscient be ignorant and still be omniscient? Can the immortal die and still be immortal? If the answers rely on contradiction being classified as “mystery,” then the belief loses rational intelligibility. In Conclusion I invite you again to address the core philosophical tension without deflection: > Is it logically and theologically coherent to affirm that the infinite, eternal, omniscient, and unchanging God literally became a finite, temporal, limited, and mortal man—without any compromise to His divine essence? That is not a Muslim question. It is a universal one. If Christianity has an answer that maintains both logic and faith, I sincerely welcome it. But merely labeling it a “mystery” or “sarcasm” avoids rather than resolves the difficulty. I remain open to respectful, reasoned engagement—without accusations or assumptions about motives. May our discussion lead to deeper understanding and clarity, for both of us. Peace. 1 Like 2 Shares |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by JimRohn(op): 4:53pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
FreeIgboho:Thank you for your response, though I must express disappointment at the direction it took. I posed a sincere theological question regarding the nature of Jesus and the coherence of the doctrine of the incarnation. Rather than addressing that question, your reply shifted entirely to a sociopolitical accusation against Islam. With respect, this kind of diversion neither answers the question nor contributes to constructive interfaith dialogue. If the truth of a religion were determined by the actions of some of its adherents, then no religion — including Christianity — would stand without criticism. After all, history has seen atrocities carried out in the name of nearly every major faith, from the Crusades and Inquisitions to modern sectarian violence. However, theological truth is not established by misbehavior, extremism, or geopolitical conflicts. It is determined by examining the core teachings, scriptures, and principles of a faith. To respond briefly: Islam explicitly condemns the killing of innocents (Qur'an 5:32), suicide (Qur'an 4:29), and compulsion in religion (Qur'an 2:256). The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) forbade harming non-combatants, religious clergy, and even trees during conflict. Terrorism and criminal violence committed by some individuals claiming Islam are not proof of the faith itself — just as crimes by those identifying as Christian are not proof against Christianity. If an ideology must be judged, let it be judged by its foundational texts and the example of its prophets, not the selective misdeeds of misguided followers. Returning to the original point, I would encourage us to stay focused on the theological question I raised, which remains unanswered: > How can Jesus be fully God and fully man, while simultaneously experiencing limitations — such as ignorance, hunger, temptation, and death — that contradict divine attributes? This is not an attempt to “score points” or promote hostility. It is a genuine question seeking clarity about the internal consistency of Trinitarian belief. If Christianity offers a rational, theologically coherent explanation, I am open to hearing it. But to respond to a theological inquiry with accusations about violence or geopolitics is to sidestep the question entirely and, frankly, to shift into an ad hominem fallacy. If you are interested in continuing a serious and respectful dialogue about the nature of God, Jesus, and the truth of revelation, I remain willing to engage. Peace and sincerity in seeking truth. 1 Like 2 Shares |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by JimRohn(op): 5:09pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
TenQ:Dear, TenQ Thank you for your response. I appreciate your tone and your willingness to engage respectfully. That said, I must point out a critical issue: your reply completely diverges from the theological question I posed. I asked a sincere and specific question about Trinitarian doctrine: > How can Jesus — if fully God — experience human limitations such as ignorance, temptation, hunger, and growth in wisdom, which contradict the very definition of divine perfection? This question was not meant to ridicule, provoke, or evade — but to invite serious reflection on the internal coherence of the belief that Jesus is both fully divine and fully human. It is a theological inquiry based on the claims of Christian doctrine and Scripture (e.g., James 1:13, Mark 13:32), and it deserves a direct response. Instead of engaging with that subject, you've now posed unrelated questions about Islamic belief, particularly concerning the status of prophets after death. While I'm happy to respond to those questions separately, they do not address the central issue under discussion: the divine-human nature of Jesus in Christian theology. To answer your concern directly: No, I am not "inflamed" by theological debate. I simply expect the same intellectual seriousness I strive to offer. If there is a disagreement, let it be settled by reasoned argument, not redirection. Now, to briefly address your new questions — though again, they are not germane to the topic at hand: 1. Is Prophet Muhammad ﷺ in his grave praying? Islam teaches that the Prophets are alive in the barzakh (intermediate realm) in a way different from ordinary people. The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ informed us that the earth does not consume the bodies of the prophets, and that he is presented with the greetings of his ummah regularly. This does not mean he is physically alive in our worldly sense, nor does it imply divinity or contradiction with Tawhid. 2. Are all prophets in their graves praying? Some narrations support that prophets continue a state of worship in the barzakh, but again, this is not comparable to life in this world and does not entail any theological contradiction in Islam. 3. Who is resurrected first on the Day of Judgment? According to authentic hadith, the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said: “I will be the first to be resurrected on the Day of Judgment.” (Sahih Muslim) — and this is understood in the context of his unique rank among prophets, not divinity. But again, I must stress: these answers, while sincere, are not a substitute for addressing the original question I asked: > If Jesus is truly God, how do you reconcile his human limitations — ignorance of the Hour, hunger, fatigue, temptation — with the essential attributes of divine perfection? If we are to have meaningful interfaith dialogue, it is important that we stay on topic and respond directly to the theological issues raised. I am not trying to trap or mock anyone — I’m asking for theological consistency. If your belief is true, it should stand up to honest questions. I remain open to continuing this dialogue with mutual respect and intellectual clarity. Warm regards, Jimrohn 1 Like 2 Shares |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by advanceDNA: 6:25pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
JimRohn:fallacy/cognitive bias.. 2. On “Putting God in a Box” This accusation misunderstands the difference between logical contradiction and divine mystery. Denying that God lies, dies, or changes is not “limiting” God—it is upholding His perfection. When you say “God can manifest in flesh,” you must then account for how He does so without ceasing to be omniscient, eternal, or unchanging.[/quote]I don't have to account for anything on behalf of God... I told you if a perfect God who is all knowing, and all powerful, can make create imperfect, full of flaw creations, yet still remain a perfect God...then my brother....u are just clinging to straws Did Jesus know everything while also saying he did not know the hour (Mark 13:32)?[/quote]Sigh...u have never read the bible...all u have is what desperate Islamic scholars use to mock the christian faith....if you have u would have noticed Jesus speaks about himself like hes talking about someone else...... He refers to himself in 3rd party, as son of man, the son..example in matt 22 & John 17, and many others verses...... you may not understand this but this is one of the many proofs that the son is a state (like an office) that God extended part of his nature into per time for the purpose of reconciliation and justice... . How can he who knows people's thought, who was aware of money in the mouth of a fish at the bottom of the lake, spoke the future clearly not know the same future....u ignore facts ...u cling to statement with context u don't even understand or deliberately ignore ... Did Jesus die, and if so, what does it mean for God to die?[/quote]lol.....In the first place, even mortal lives forever only his container or flesh dies......so the idea that God died you are trying to cling to is laughable....I asked you earlier, is this Jesus dead now...? If Jesus suffered and cried out, “My God, why have you forsaken me?”, then who was he speaking to—if he himself is fully God?[/quote]this statement isn't Jesus crying to the father but quoting a scripture that prophesied that very hour that was being fulfilled...again... U have never read the bible ...all u have is desperate point Islamic scholars use to mock Christian faith. You also asked: “How has God changed?” The point is not after the resurrection, but during the incarnation—was God undergoing change by entering into time, taking on flesh, and experiencing limitation? If so, that conflicts with the claim that He is unchanging[/quote]fallacy/ cognitive bias as usual.. . If not, then what meaningfully occurred in the incarnation?[/quote]what meaning fully occured?? you must be a comedian....are u asking me to explain to you the mechanism of action by which the Almighty God executed an action...?? why don't you tell me what will meaningfully happen when your Allah give you Muslims p0wer to fvck 72 w0men in heaven ?? Baba..you are clinging to straws, your desperation is becoming too obvious....you believe your Allah can do all things, even make it possible for an illetrate to write the Quran.. but when Christians say God did this or that, you'll start looking for how to to prove logic... I'm happy I'm not dealing with an atheist..so the joke is on you when you try to pretend all that your Allah does is withing a logical framework. 3. Islamic Framework vs. Logical Inquiry[/quote]I am not against your choice of words, I am only telling you it exposes your aim whenever you bring in your Islamic framework which is very different from the Christian faith The issue with u Muslims is that because u have Abraham and some other people in your Quran which your prophet clearly copied, u sort of think we all believe in the same God....no we do not, If you think deeply and compare scriptures.... 4. Divine Justice and Reconciliation You argue that God chose to reconcile humanity through incarnation and atonement. But again, the issue is not why He did so, but how He could do so without contradiction.[/quote]I am tired of you trying to play authority on what God can or cannot do...it's nauseating... This your point carries no weight because your are trying to claim authority on what you have no knowledge on... If God is just, why is forgiveness impossible without blood sacrifice? Why is the punishment transferred to an innocent being (Jesus) instead of given to the guilty?[/quote]Do u believe through Adam, sin came to the world?? (This is what the Bible says) . If yes... why are u having a brain aneurysm trying to get why God chose to reconcile the fall of man through a perfect sinless entity...?? In human courts, that would be called injustice. Are we to believe that God’s mercy and justice are limited such that He cannot forgive without violent substitution?[/quote]I will answer this with an account of scripture.. In the bible...David sinned and the entire Israel started to feel the heat....David prayed and cried to God through the help of the prophets When God answered, he said a sacrifice is needed to fix the issue......why ddnt the all powerful God just forgive with a snap of the finger....?? I mean what's the big deal?? He could just do it like your Allah would have... The same God who u quoted out of context earlier that he prefers mercy than sacrifice did actually ask for sacrifice to atone for many wrong doings..... In Islam, God is both Just and Merciful—He holds people accountable, but also forgives sincerely repentant believers without needing to become part of creation or suffer.This is not mentioned to “compare religions” for superiority, but to show that divine forgiveness and justice need not contradict one another, nor require incarnation.[/quote]you are indeed making a comparison and concluding on some form of superiority.....so saying you are not doing ai doesn't nullify what you said. ....see I care less when u introduce your Islamic framework....I'm just letting you know u expose yourself every time you do so... because it shows you are not really arguing Christian theology against logic but only pointing out the superiority of your Allah and how more logical he is.... again..the joke is on you...there is nothing really logical about religion..we are all just believing through faith and at best God gives us some conviction for our faith.... 5. Human Experiences of Christ You also mentioned Jesus' sinlessness proving His divine nature. But prophets like Moses and John the Baptist are described as righteous and blameless—[/quote]lol....moses and John were not classified as sinless .....Moses murdered a man...u knowledge of the bible is weak....like I said ...all your argument is based yet not considered divine. Sinlessness does not prove divinity. Rather, the Christian claim is that God became man, not simply that a man was sinless. 6. Respectful Inquiry Is Not Hostility Lastly, you suggest that my questions are “masked attacks.” I respectfully disagree. Serious inquiry requires confronting tensions. If asking whether God dying or being ignorant is logically coherent is taken as “hostile,” then we have abandoned reasoned dialogue. It is not disrespectful to ask: > Can the eternal become temporal without ceasing to be eternal? Can the omniscient be ignorant and still be omniscient? Can the immortal die and still be immortal? If the answers rely on contradiction being classified as “mystery,” then the belief loses rational intelligibility. In Conclusion I invite you again to address the core philosophical tension without deflection: > Is it logically and theologically coherent to affirm that the infinite, eternal, omniscient, and unchanging God literally became a finite, temporal, limited, and mortal man—without any compromise to His divine essence? That is not a Muslim question. It is a universal one. If Christianity has an answer that maintains both logic and faith, I sincerely welcome it. But merely labeling it a “mystery” or “sarcasm” avoids rather than resolves the difficulty. I remain open to respectful, reasoned engagement—without accusations or assumptions about motives. May our discussion lead to deeper understanding and clarity, for both of us. Peace.[/quote] |
| Re: If Jesus Is Fully God And Fully Man, Does That Mean God Can Be Ignorant, Hungry, by advanceDNA: 7:19pm On Jun 07, 2025 |
JimRohn:its funny how you first make a statement of Gods all powerfulness and ability to do all things unquestionable... then to invalidate Jesus you reach a conclusion of what you think God cannot do by referencing logic...you are deliberately riding in the error of fallacy/cognitive bias....nothing more JimRohn:I don't have to account for anything on behalf of God....God I all powerful and unquestionable....why he decides to do something and how he chooses to execute it is being my human comprehension...which makes your attempt to pull logic out of it pointless I told you earlier ....if a perfect God who is all knowing, and all powerful, can create imperfect, full of flaw creations, yet still remain a perfect God...then my brother....u are just clinging to straws JimRohn:Sigh...u have never read the bible...all u have is what desperate Islamic scholars use to mock the christian faith....if you have u would have noticed Jesus speaks about himself like he's talking about someone else...... He refers to himself in 3rd person, as son of man, the son, etc... example in matt 22 & John 17, Luke 8v18 and many others verses.... you may not understand this but this is one of the many proofs that the son who walked the earth is a state for a period (like an office of operation) that God extended part of his nature into per time for the purpose of reconciliation and justice... How can he who knows people's thought, who was aware of what is at the bottom of the lake, spoke the future clearly not know the same future........u ignore facts but clinging to statement with context u don't even understand or deliberately ignore ... JimRohn:lol.....In the first place, even mortal lives forever only his container or flesh dies......so the idea that God died you are trying to cling to is laughable....I asked you earlier, is this Jesus dead now...? JimRohn:you knowledge of the bible is too weak and laughable.....this statement isn't Jesus crying to the father but quoting a scripture that prophesied that very hour that was being fulfilled...again... U have never read the bible ...all u have is desperate point Islamic scholars use to mock Christian faith. JimRohn:fallacy/ cognitive bias as usual.. JimRohn:what meaning fully occured?? Are u a comedian or just trying to be funny......are u asking me to explain to you the mechanism of action by which the Almighty God executed an action...?? why don't you tell me what will meaningfully happen when your Allah give you Muslims p0wer to fvck 72 w0men in heaven ?? Baba..you are clinging to straws, your desperation is becoming too obvious....you believe your Allah can do all things, even make it possible for an illiterate to write the Quran.. but when Christians say God did this or that, you'll start looking for how to to prove logic... I'm happy I'm not dealing with an atheist..so the joke is on you when you try to pretend all that your Allah does is within a logical framework. JimRohn:I am not against your choice of words, I am only telling you it exposes your real aim whenever you bring in your Islamic framework which is very different from the Christian faith JimRohn:I am tired of you trying to play authority on what God can or cannot do...it's nauseating... This your point carries no weight .. JimRohn:Do u believe through Adam, sin came to the world?? (This is what the Bible says) . If yes... why are u having a brain aneurysm trying to get why God chose to reconcile the fall of man through a perfect sinless entity...?? JimRohn:I will answer this with an account of scripture.. In the bible...David sinned and the entire Israel started to feel the wrath of God.......David prayed and cried to God through the help of the prophets When God answered, he said a sacrifice is needed to fix the issue......why ddnt the all powerful God just forgive with a snap of the finger....?? I mean what's the big deal?? He could just do it like your Allah would have... The same God who u quoted out of context earlier that he prefers mercy than sacrifice did actually ask for sacrifice to atone for many wrong doings.. see..you don't understand God ..none of us fully does...you are just claiming to becos u want to invalidate the Christian faith... JimRohn:you are indeed making a comparison and concluding on some form of superiority.....so saying you are not doing so doesn't nullify what you already said. ....see I care less when u introduce your Islamic framework....I'm just letting you know u expose yourself every time you do so... because it shows you are not really arguing Christian theology against logic but only pointing out the superiority of your Allah and how more logical he is.... again..the joke is on you...there is nothing really logical about religion..we are all just believing through faith and at best God gives us some conviction for our faith.... JimRohn:lol......u are getting more desperate.....Moses murdered a man and disobeyed God a couple of times....both John and Moses were never called sinless in scripture.. JimRohn:lol...u are getting more desperate by the minute.....only God is without sin....so you saying being sinless is not part of an attribute of divinity, shows you are only saying so our of desperation to invalidate Jesus.... JimRohn:u can say one thing and mean another.....which is what u have need doing .. Everytime you mention your so called limitations of Jesus...then you come with your Islamic framework work to show you don't have such in Islam.....you are therefore not arguing Christian theology against logic but against your Islam version of God... |
If Jesus Calls The Father " The Only True God" Does That Mean Jesus Is Not God? • What Does "Elohim" Really Mean, God or gods or both? • Obasanjo: If Jesus Were In Nigeria Today, He Would Not Keep Quiet • 2 • 3 • 4
The Irony Of Religion • Nigerian Church In Tampa, Florida • Midnight Prayers For Head, Hands And Legs Deliverance