₦airaland Forum

JimRohn:
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:

JimRohn:
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.

JimRohn:
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.

JimRohn:
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:

JimRohn:
> 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

advanceDNA:
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

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



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 ...

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...?

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.


fallacy/ cognitive bias as usual..

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.

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

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 ..


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...??



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...


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....

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..


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....

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...

JimRohn:
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.

JimRohn:
1.
Islamic theology offers a different model: God is both Just and Merciful without contradiction. He may punish or forgive, based on wisdom—not blood. The Qur’an says:

> “Allah does not burden a soul beyond that it can bear.” (Qur’an 2:286)
“No bearer of burden shall bear the burden of another.” (Qur’an 6:164)

You’re free to disagree with this model, but to say that only the Christian version makes sense is to ignore its internal ethical dilemmas.

.

TenQ:
I will be surprised from my experience with Muslims if your intention is the understanding the Christian doctrine of Trinity because
I think your problem is looking at God from the lens of Taoheed instead of looking at God from the lens of Trinity to truely understand what Christians are saying about God. As Taoheed, it is impossible for Allah to exist simultaneously in three different dimensions of existence at the same time.

The fundamentals doctrine of Trinity begin with the fact that God YHWH is ONE.
Mar 12:29:
"And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:"
However, from the Scriptures we understand that the One YHWH exists simultaneously with THREE Identities

You cannot impose the limitation of your Taoheed on YHWH because
1. YHWH is the infinite Spirit in whom EVERYTHING consists. He is called Ruach HaKodesh, meaning the Spirit of Holiness. The Holy Spirit is the Shekhinah (the Divine Presence) of YHWH. He is the one who inspires

The Heavens and the Earth/Universe is a subset of Him. He is the Holy Spirit!
Acts 17:28:
"For in him (God) we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring."

Jeremiah 23:24
"Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the Lord. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord."

Isaiah 63:10-11:
"But they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit... Where is he who put in them his Holy Spirit?"

The Holy Spirit is Invisible and is the expression of His Omnipresence, Power and Inspiration throughout the Heaven (spiritual) and the Earth (Universe)

2. YHWH is the Father who is the Visible Image of the Invisible God in the Heavenly realms. He sits on His throne with the Angels to preside over the Universe . We call Him our Father in Heaven.

Isaiah 6:1
"In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and the train of his robe filled the temple."

1 Kings 22:19
"Micaiah continued, 'Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne with all the multitudes of heaven standing around him on his right and on his left.'"

Psalm 47:8
"God reigns over the nations; God sits on his holy throne."

Daniel 7:9
"As I looked, thrones were set in place, and the Ancient of Days took his seat. His clothing was as white as snow; the hair of his head was white like wool. His throne was flaming with fire, and its wheels were all ablaze."

3. YHWH is the Word. The visible image of the invisible God Everywhere in Space and Time. He appears on Earth as the Personage called the Angel of YHWH in the Old Testament or as a Man to Abraham.
Genesis 3:8
"And they heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day..."

Genesis 18:1-2
"The LORD appeared to Abraham near the great trees of Mamre while he was sitting at the entrance to his tent... Abraham looked up and saw three men standing nearby."
(God appears as one of three visitors.)

Genesis 32:24-30
"So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak... So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, 'It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.'"

Judges 13:3-22
"The angel of the LORD appeared to her... We are doomed to die! We have seen God!"

The bible says, YHWH the Word became Human.

John 1:14
"And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth."

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

Philippians 2:6-8
"Who, being in very nature God , did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross!"



Like I said:
You cannot look at Trinity from the point of view of the Taoheed. The nature of Trinity makes everything possible with YHWH.

So, your Question again:
> 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?

Because YHWH the Word became Human while still remaining the Infinite Holy Spirit and Father in Heaven. The Man Jesus can be weak without God being Weak. This is because YHWH remains the Father and YHWH remains the Holy Spirit. The Word took up limitation but YHWH remains Unlimited.

YHWH is Almighty because NOTHING is Impossible for HIM.

YHWH The Word became a servant

Mark 10:45:
"For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

Philippians 2:6-8
Though existing in the form of God, Jesus emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant and humbled Himself to death on a cross


I will be surprised if (after all these) you comprehend (from the Christian point of view (I don't expect you to agree) that the One God exists simultaneously in three dimensions of the Father, the Word and the infinite Holy Spirit.

FreeIgboho:
Thanks for your polite response.
Well, results matter, if not in fact the only things that actually matter.
Whatever is written in the Koran, it matters that quite a sizeable number of muslims has interpreted it to mean they become terrorists. I'd say that's the wrong religion to belong to - because even if you don't become a terrorist, your child or other relatives might! Mention a Christian or other religions' equivalent of these: Taliban, Islamic State, Boko Haram, Al Shabaab, al-Qaeda, ISIS, Hezbollah, Hamas, etc, and more being added everyday. Na only them follow come?!

Now, on to your original point, NairaLTQ tried but I'd articulate the response in a way you'd more readily understand.

>How can Jesus be fully God and fully man, while simultaneously experiencing limitations — such as ignorance, hunger, temptation, and death — that contradict divine attributes?

The HUGE flaw in your reasoning is that for something to be true it has to make sense or be logical to YOU! The problem is that this "you" is incapable of knowing what makes sense outside his extremely limited purview. "You" can only see, hear, and feel an extremely small percentage of what is there. As for ability to know what makes sense, "you" is so limited in that aspect that we can make bold to say his ability in that aspect is zero.
I mean, even quantum mechanics doesn't make sense to "you", talkless of things not in his dimension or realm, talkless of God!
So that leaves us with EVIDENCE as the only way "you" can know anything - NOT through reasoning or logic.
The evidence we have is that the scriptures said for thousands of years that God was coming to stay amongst us for a while, then someone came and said he was indeed that God and that we'd know this because thousands of years from then he'd still be worshipped and his words would never die. We are now thousands of years later and he's indeed still being worshipped as God without God punishing his worshippers but instead they're stronger and more prosperous everyday.
These are the things we know for sure.

JimRohn:
Thank you for your detailed explanation. I appreciate your willingness to engage in this dialogue and clarify your theological perspective. Allow me to respond respectfully from an Islamic standpoint, while focusing on the core philosophical and theological issue raised.

1. The Request for Internal Consistency Still Stands

My initial question was not about whether the Trinity can be stated doctrinally — I am well aware of the claims regarding the Word becoming flesh, the eternal Father, and the omnipresent Spirit. My question was more precise:

> How can the same being who is said to be all-knowing, all-powerful, and unchanging also be ignorant of the Hour, tired, tempted, and crucified?

Simply saying “the Word became flesh” does not resolve the philosophical contradiction — it relocates it. If “Jesus is God,” and Jesus is ignorant of the Hour (Mark 13:32), the divine attribute of omniscience is compromised in the person of Jesus. This is not a question of rejecting the Trinity outright, but of pointing out that, by its own terms, the doctrine raises unresolved contradictions between divinity and humanity that cannot be ignored.

2. The Appeal to “Trinitarian Logic” Is Theologically Circular

You mentioned I must not impose the lens of Tawhid when evaluating the Trinity. I understand that. But every theological system must still be coherent within itself. Saying “it makes sense because in our view YHWH can be three and one” is not sufficient. If the One Being of God becomes weak, hungry, or ignorant in any person, this challenges the absolute perfection of that Being. Appealing to a special “Trinitarian logic” that is not answerable to rational coherence does not resolve the contradiction — it shelters it.

3. Multiplicity of Manifestations vs. Multiplicity of Persons

You cite many Old Testament passages where God is said to appear in forms or act in various ways — as Spirit, as enthroned King, as appearing to Abraham, etc. Muslims have no issue affirming that God can act in creation, manifest signs, speak to Prophets, or veil Himself however He wills. But none of this logically requires God to be divided into distinct persons with distinct roles, such that one can pray to the other, or one can die while the others do not.

Islam maintains that Allah is One in Essence and One in Person, without needing to become human to relate to creation. He knows all, sees all, and acts upon His will without undergoing change, limitation, or incarnation.

4. Divine Attributes Cannot Be Compartmentalized

You stated:

> “The Word took up limitation, but YHWH remains unlimited.”

This is a serious theological problem. If Jesus is God, then God took on limitation. You cannot divide the divine nature like a pie — some limited, some unlimited — and still maintain that the full divine being was present in Jesus. Either the divine nature was fully present in Jesus, in which case divine perfection was compromised, or the divine nature was not fully present in Jesus, in which case he is not truly God.

In Islamic theology, perfection is indivisible. God's knowledge is not split; His power is not shared; His essence is not incarnated. He does not become less than what He is — not for any purpose, not for any mission.

In Conclusion

I am not denying your right to believe in the Trinity. What I am doing is inviting a deeper inspection: can a being who is uncreated, all-powerful, and all-knowing, truly become limited, tempted, and crucified — and yet remain unchanged in His divine essence?

I respectfully maintain that logical consistency is not a foreign imposition, but a tool for genuine theological reflection. As a Muslim, I believe in a God who is utterly transcendent yet near, who sends guidance, not incarnations, and who is never subject to the limitations of His creation.

I am happy to continue this dialogue in the spirit of mutual understanding.

advanceDNA:
If u are an atheist....your argument would have been less bias and valid because you would have been arguing from a place of total unbelief in any God or faith system....

But you are a also a believer of an entity who made something out of nothing (against logic and science) , whose existence is unexplainable, (against logic and science), who made an illiterate write a hundred pages of a book (against logic and sound reasoning), who will give you strength to fvck 72 virgins in heaven (against logic and science),

but hey!!! it's Allah...all his actions are automatically withing the frame of logic because he has no son and he can forgive without sacrifice....it's funny that you don't see your hypocrisy/double standard...

JimRohn:
Thank you for your detailed explanation. I appreciate your willingness to engage in this dialogue and clarify your theological perspective. Allow me to respond respectfully from an Islamic standpoint, while focusing on the core philosophical and theological issue raised.

1. The Request for Internal Consistency Still Stands

My initial question was not about whether the Trinity can be stated doctrinally — I am well aware of the claims regarding the Word becoming flesh, the eternal Father, and the omnipresent Spirit. My question was more precise:

> How can the same being who is said to be all-knowing, all-powerful, and unchanging also be ignorant of the Hour, tired, tempted, and crucified?

Simply saying “the Word became flesh” does not resolve the philosophical contradiction — it relocates it. If “Jesus is God,” and Jesus is ignorant of the Hour (Mark 13:32), the divine attribute of omniscience is compromised in the person of Jesus. This is not a question of rejecting the Trinity outright, but of pointing out that, by its own terms, the doctrine raises unresolved contradictions between divinity and humanity that cannot be ignored.

2. The Appeal to “Trinitarian Logic” Is Theologically Circular

You mentioned I must not impose the lens of Tawhid when evaluating the Trinity. I understand that. But every theological system must still be coherent within itself. Saying “it makes sense because in our view YHWH can be three and one” is not sufficient. If the One Being of God becomes weak, hungry, or ignorant in any person, this challenges the absolute perfection of that Being. Appealing to a special “Trinitarian logic” that is not answerable to rational coherence does not resolve the contradiction — it shelters it.

3. Multiplicity of Manifestations vs. Multiplicity of Persons

You cite many Old Testament passages where God is said to appear in forms or act in various ways — as Spirit, as enthroned King, as appearing to Abraham, etc. Muslims have no issue affirming that God can act in creation, manifest signs, speak to Prophets, or veil Himself however He wills. But none of this logically requires God to be divided into distinct persons with distinct roles, such that one can pray to the other, or one can die while the others do not.

Islam maintains that Allah is One in Essence and One in Person, without needing to become human to relate to creation. He knows all, sees all, and acts upon His will without undergoing change, limitation, or incarnation.

4. Divine Attributes Cannot Be Compartmentalized

You stated:

> “The Word took up limitation, but YHWH remains unlimited.”

This is a serious theological problem. If Jesus is God, then God took on limitation. You cannot divide the divine nature like a pie — some limited, some unlimited — and still maintain that the full divine being was present in Jesus. Either the divine nature was fully present in Jesus, in which case divine perfection was compromised, or the divine nature was not fully present in Jesus, in which case he is not truly God.

In Islamic theology, perfection is indivisible. God's knowledge is not split; His power is not shared; His essence is not incarnated. He does not become less than what He is — not for any purpose, not for any mission.

In Conclusion

I am not denying your right to believe in the Trinity. What I am doing is inviting a deeper inspection: can a being who is uncreated, all-powerful, and all-knowing, truly become limited, tempted, and crucified — and yet remain unchanged in His divine essence?

I respectfully maintain that logical consistency is not a foreign imposition, but a tool for genuine theological reflection. As a Muslim, I believe in a God who is utterly transcendent yet near, who sends guidance, not incarnations, and who is never subject to the limitations of His creation.

I am happy to continue this dialogue in the spirit of mutual understanding.

TenQ:
Since you asked the question at the end of this post, I will respond again to you.




If I get you correctly
1. ALL Prophets are ALIVE in their Graves Praying
2. The Earth does not consume the Bodies of the Prophets.


I wish you gave a definite Islamic answer
I understand that ALL prophets are in their graves worshipping.

I hope I am correct?


If I understand you correctly
1. Prophet Mohammad would be the first to be resurrected
2. No dead human beings prophet or not have been resurrected as they are in their graves.
3. All dead human beings remain in their graves until resurrection day.


Are my observations correct before I pose the next set of Questions?

JimRohn:
Thank you for your response.

I appreciate your willingness to return to the theological question, even if only partially. However, I must again raise concern over the way this dialogue is being handled. Rather than directly addressing the theological issue I posed, the conversation is again being steered toward sociopolitical generalizations and personal epistemological claims. For the sake of a meaningful exchange, I’d like to respond to both strands: the moral critique of Islam and your argument about logic versus evidence.

1. On the Moral Critique of Islam

You claim that the presence of extremist groups among Muslims delegitimizes the truth of Islam. This is a non sequitur. Truth is not established by the misdeeds of followers — if it were, no religion would be exempt from invalidation. Consider:

The Spanish Inquisition tortured and killed in the name of Christianity.

European colonization justified slavery and genocide while invoking Christ.

The Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda commits atrocities claiming Christian motivation.

Ku Klux Klan members burn crosses and claim to represent Christian values.

Would it be rational for me to argue that Christianity is false because of these actions? Of course not — and I choose not to, out of fairness and intellectual integrity.

Islam should be evaluated based on the Qur’an, the Prophet’s example (peace be upon him), and the core ethical framework it teaches — not the actions of misguided or politically motivated groups. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) consistently forbade the killing of innocents, destruction of property, or oppression of civilians. Qur’anic verses like “Whoever kills a soul…it is as if he has killed all mankind” (Qur’an 5:32) are not obscure — they are foundational.

So, respectfully, let's not dismiss a 1,400-year-old faith followed by over a billion people based on sensational headlines or the selective actions of fringe elements.

2. On the Claim That Logic Is Invalid in Theology

You state:

> “The HUGE flaw in your reasoning is that for something to be true, it has to make sense or be logical to YOU.”

This line of argument is deeply problematic. If you claim logic and coherence are irrelevant to truth, you essentially abandon all grounds for evaluating any belief — including your own. If contradictions are allowed, then any and all claims could be simultaneously true — even if they oppose each other.

This approach undermines all theological discourse. For example, if someone claimed:

> “God is one and not one at the same time, in the same way, and that’s okay because it doesn’t have to make sense,”
you’d rightly reject this as incoherent.

Even Scripture — whatever one’s tradition — appeals to reason:

“Come now, let us reason together” (Isaiah 1:18)

“Do they not reflect upon the Qur’an?” (Qur’an 4:82)

Islam encourages reason, reflection, and consistency in theology. God is not subject to human limitation, but He gave us reason as a tool to distinguish truth from falsehood. If you argue that logic is unreliable when it comes to theology, then why debate at all? Why offer “evidence,” make claims, or try to persuade?

3. On Your Appeal to “Evidence”

You suggest that Jesus must be God because:

He predicted he would be worshipped.

He is still worshipped.

His worshippers are strong and prosperous.

With respect, this is an argument from popularity and power, not from truth. Many false ideologies have gained massive followings and empires — that doesn’t make them divine.

The Roman Empire worshipped Caesars as gods — they were prosperous.

The Hindu pantheon has hundreds of millions of worshippers — are all their gods divine?

Communism once dominated half the globe — should we accept it as truth because of its reach?

Truth is not determined by the number of adherents or geopolitical power, but by the soundness of belief and the consistency of doctrine.

4. Returning to the Core Question

Once again, I respectfully return to the original theological challenge:

> If Jesus is fully God, how can he possess attributes that contradict divinity — such as ignorance (Mark 13:32), weakness, temptation, and death?

Saying “the Word became flesh” or “this is beyond human logic” does not resolve the contradiction. It simply bypasses it.

If divinity took on limitation, then either:

God changed — contradicting His perfection and immutability, or

Jesus is not fully God — contradicting Trinitarian doctrine.

In Islam, God is utterly One — indivisible in essence and attributes. He does not become human, does not suffer death, and is never subject to creation. He sends messengers, like Jesus (peace be upon him), as signs and guides, not as incarnations of Himself.

Conclusion

I welcome honest theological disagreement. But let’s root it in clarity, consistency, and respect. Resorting to emotional appeals, fear-based assumptions, or dismissing reason altogether only weakens the possibility of mutual understanding.

If you believe the Trinity and incarnation are rationally coherent, I invite you to explain how God can be fully divine and fully subject to human limitation without contradiction.

I remain open to continuing this dialogue sincerely and respectfully.

Peace to those who seek the truth.

JimRohn:
Thank you for your response.

I appreciate your willingness to return to the theological question, even if only partially. However, I must again raise concern over the way this dialogue is being handled. Rather than directly addressing the theological issue I posed, the conversation is again being steered toward sociopolitical generalizations and personal epistemological claims. For the sake of a meaningful exchange, I’d like to respond to both strands: the moral critique of Islam and your argument about logic versus evidence.

1. On the Moral Critique of Islam

You claim that the presence of extremist groups among Muslims delegitimizes the truth of Islam. This is a non sequitur. Truth is not established by the misdeeds of followers — if it were, no religion would be exempt from invalidation. Consider:

The Spanish Inquisition tortured and killed in the name of Christianity.

European colonization justified slavery and genocide while invoking Christ.

The Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda commits atrocities claiming Christian motivation.

Ku Klux Klan members burn crosses and claim to represent Christian values.

Would it be rational for me to argue that Christianity is false because of these actions? Of course not — and I choose not to, out of fairness and intellectual integrity.

Islam should be evaluated based on the Qur’an, the Prophet’s example (peace be upon him), and the core ethical framework it teaches — not the actions of misguided or politically motivated groups. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) consistently forbade the killing of innocents, destruction of property, or oppression of civilians. Qur’anic verses like “Whoever kills a soul…it is as if he has killed all mankind” (Qur’an 5:32) are not obscure — they are foundational.

So, respectfully, let's not dismiss a 1,400-year-old faith followed by over a billion people based on sensational headlines or the selective actions of fringe elements.

2. On the Claim That Logic Is Invalid in Theology

You state:

> “The HUGE flaw in your reasoning is that for something to be true, it has to make sense or be logical to YOU.”

This line of argument is deeply problematic. If you claim logic and coherence are irrelevant to truth, you essentially abandon all grounds for evaluating any belief — including your own. If contradictions are allowed, then any and all claims could be simultaneously true — even if they oppose each other.

This approach undermines all theological discourse. For example, if someone claimed:

> “God is one and not one at the same time, in the same way, and that’s okay because it doesn’t have to make sense,”
you’d rightly reject this as incoherent.

Even Scripture — whatever one’s tradition — appeals to reason:

“Come now, let us reason together” (Isaiah 1:18)

“Do they not reflect upon the Qur’an?” (Qur’an 4:82)

Islam encourages reason, reflection, and consistency in theology. God is not subject to human limitation, but He gave us reason as a tool to distinguish truth from falsehood. If you argue that logic is unreliable when it comes to theology, then why debate at all? Why offer “evidence,” make claims, or try to persuade?

3. On Your Appeal to “Evidence”

You suggest that Jesus must be God because:

He predicted he would be worshipped.

He is still worshipped.

His worshippers are strong and prosperous.

With respect, this is an argument from popularity and power, not from truth. Many false ideologies have gained massive followings and empires — that doesn’t make them divine.

The Roman Empire worshipped Caesars as gods — they were prosperous.

The Hindu pantheon has hundreds of millions of worshippers — are all their gods divine?

Communism once dominated half the globe — should we accept it as truth because of its reach?

Truth is not determined by the number of adherents or geopolitical power, but by the soundness of belief and the consistency of doctrine.

4. Returning to the Core Question

Once again, I respectfully return to the original theological challenge:

> If Jesus is fully God, how can he possess attributes that contradict divinity — such as ignorance (Mark 13:32), weakness, temptation, and death?

Saying “the Word became flesh” or “this is beyond human logic” does not resolve the contradiction. It simply bypasses it.

If divinity took on limitation, then either:

God changed — contradicting His perfection and immutability, or

Jesus is not fully God — contradicting Trinitarian doctrine.

In Islam, God is utterly One — indivisible in essence and attributes. He does not become human, does not suffer death, and is never subject to creation. He sends messengers, like Jesus (peace be upon him), as signs and guides, not as incarnations of Himself.

Conclusion

I welcome honest theological disagreement. But let’s root it in clarity, consistency, and respect. Resorting to emotional appeals, fear-based assumptions, or dismissing reason altogether only weakens the possibility of mutual understanding.

If you believe the Trinity and incarnation are rationally coherent, I invite you to explain how God can be fully divine and fully subject to human limitation without contradiction.

I remain open to continuing this dialogue sincerely and respectfully.

Peace to those who seek the truth.

JimRohn:
Conclusion.

I remain open to continuing this dialogue sincerely and respectfully.

Peace to those who seek the truth.

FreeIgboho:
But I asked you b4:
How can eternally unchanging anything create something?
And
How can there be an all powerful and all good anything yet bad things still happen.

Bottom line, man gave God His attributes when in fact man is incapable of comprehending God!
Example, we know Jesus Christ is God the Son, yet Jesus Christ doesn't know the last day. Does God the Father know absolutely everything? So how come we're encouraged to be a certain way to obtain a certain outcome?

TenQ:
I suspect you chose to be obstinate with respect to comprehension of plain doctrine backed up with scriptures.

Thus, I will certainly come back to this when you respond to the first post. I want to see if you would apply exactly your logic to it






Here it is below as a reminder:



I want you to assert that my understanding is correct!

FreeIgboho:
Thanks.
So we differ on that point:
I believe real-world results matter and that 99% of religious terrorism of today is from Islam.
You believe what matters is some nebulous "truth" (knowing fully well there is no such thing and if there were, you wouldn't know it if you saw it!)

As for the original point, these posts answer it:

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.

AND THIS:

But I asked you b4:
How can eternally unchanging anything create something?
And
How can there be an all powerful and all good anything yet bad things still happen.

Bottom line, man gave God His attributes when in fact man is incapable of comprehending God!
Example, we know Jesus Christ is God the Son, yet Jesus Christ doesn't know the last day. Does God the Father know absolutely everything? So how come we're encouraged to be a certain way to obtain a certain outcome?

** It’s not just his being worshipped thousands of years, Christ himself said he was God, forgave sins, accepted worship, raised himself from dead (as he said he would), and most importantly, is alive and active in people's lives TODAY!

FreeIgboho:
Since you're open to continuing the dialogue, taking into account all that happened with Christ, words of the prophets, words of Christ himself, thousands of years of him being worshipped, etc, if all that didn’t convince you he is God, (and bearing in mind you're incapable of comprehending God, and therefore discounting your own preconceived notions of God), please tell us what would reasonably convince you that a person is God

NairaLTQ:
So, let's check.
Quran 75:37
Had he not been a sperm from semen emitted?

Tell me, is any human being a sperm OR he is a fusion of sperm and ovum? How many chromosomes do we find in a full human being and how many chromosomes are in a sperm?

Quran 75:38
then he became a clot, and then Allah made it into a living body and proportioned its parts,

Tell me, what does a sperm become in a human female womb?

Is it untrue that your prophet says that the sperm will stay for 40 days in the womb?

Sahih Muslim 2644
Hudhaifa b. Usaid reported directly from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) that he said:

When the drop of (semen) remains in the womb for forty or forty five nights, the angel comes and says: My Lord, will he be good or evil? And both these things would be written. Then the angel says: My Lord, would he be male or female? And both these things are written. And his deeds and actions, his death, his livelihood; these are also recorded. Then his document of destiny is rolled and there is no addition to nor subtraction from it.


LOL
Do you concede that Allah was the one relating the story and not Dhul Qarnyn? (Qur'an 18:83)
Did Allah say that
1. Dhul Qarnyn found the sun setting in some dark murky waters?
2. Dhul Qarnyn found a people near this dark murky water?

I guess, Dhul Qarnyn appeared to find a people there: is that true?
3. Can you show us by Google map: The wall that was constructed to prevent Yājūj and Mājūj from causing further destruction and hardship to people?.

Don you see why it is the job of your scholars to rewrite the words of Allah and his prophet to correct several blunders like this?


Initially, it Al-Samari mean the Samaritan BUT because of recent scholarship, you have to find a new culprit for it.

Tafsirs Al-Jalalayn Quran20:85
But those he supposed [to be following him] had remained behind, for He, exalted be He, said, ‘Indeed We tried your people after you, that is, after your departure from them, and the Samaritan led them astray’, so they took to worshipping the )golden) calf.



How can it be a miracle when it is a myth treated as real by Allah and Mohammed.

The earliest written version of the story comes from Christian bishop and writer Jacob of Serugh, who wrote an account of the sleepers in Syriac. The story begins in the Roman Empire around 250 CE.

The story wasn't even real. It was written to encourage Christians who were being persecuted to encourage them that bad times will end.

Now, we find a fiction entering the Book of Allah as a miracle!? Tell me, how can the story of Superman or Batman somehow become a miracle?



Let's see what Allah said:

Qur'an 4:171
"O People of the Scripture, do not exceed in your religion beyond the truth and do not follow the inclination of a people who had gone astray before and misled many and strayed from the sound way.
And [mention, O People of the Scripture], the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He cast down to Mary and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, 'Three'; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs."

Who should we believe, you or Allah?
1. Jesus is a Messenger of Allah
2. Jesus is the Word of Allah (His Word) cast down to Mary
3. Jesus is the Spirit FROM Allah

You have to redefine Spirit to mean Soul even against your prophet who calls Jesus Ruhullah!

Can you see how Muslims have no respect for Allah's word or their prophet's word in order that they might propagate an Islam according to their corrections



God is ONE according to Christians BUT in order to sell Islam, Allah, his prophet and you Muslims must claim we mean that God is THREE.

As Christians, Jesus is our ransom from Hell Fire: but for you as Muslims, Jews and Christians are your own ransom. Does this make any sense to you that people who need to be ransomed are your own ransom.?

JimRohn:
Thank you for your reply and for your continued engagement.
Before proceeding, I would like to address a concern regarding the nature of our dialogue.

It appears that we are beginning to repeat ground that has already been covered. The theological points I presented earlier were not primarily about the state of the prophets in their graves, but about the logical coherence of attributing divine and human limitations simultaneously to Jesus, and the philosophical tensions within Trinitarian theology.

Nonetheless, I will address your current observations for the sake of clarity — though they are unrelated to the core argument I raised. Let me clarify the Islamic perspective on the points you mentioned:

✅ Affirmations from Islamic Theology

1. Are the Prophets alive in their graves worshipping Allah?
Yes — according to several authentic Islamic traditions (e.g., Sahih Muslim), the Prophets are alive in a special barzakh (intermediate) state, and they continue to worship Allah. This is a matter of the unseen (ghayb) that we affirm based on revelation.

2. Are their bodies preserved from decay?
Yes — according to authentic ahadith, the earth does not consume the bodies of the Prophets, as a special honor given to them by Allah.

3. Has any prophet, including Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, been resurrected before the Day of Judgment?
No. In Islamic belief, none of the deceased — prophets or otherwise — have been bodily resurrected yet. The Day of Resurrection (Yawm al-Qiyāmah) is when all humans will be raised and judged.

4. Will Prophet Muhammad ﷺ be the first to be resurrected?
According to some narrations, he will be the first to be raised and intercede on behalf of humanity, but again, this will happen on the Day of Resurrection, not before.

📌 A Request for Clarity and Progress

Now that I’ve answered your observations with direct Islamic positions, I kindly ask: what is the relevance of these points to the original theological issue I raised — namely, whether a being who is truly God can be ignorant, tempted, or die without compromising divine perfection?

Additionally, I must respectfully ask:
Why are we circling back to previously answered questions without addressing the main argument?

A productive dialogue requires progress, not repetition. I am more than willing to continue this discussion sincerely and respectfully, but only if it remains focused and forward-moving. If your next set of questions simply reiterates the same points without engaging the core logic of the Islamic perspective or responding meaningfully to the concerns I’ve raised, I suggest — respectfully — that we pause the dialogue here.

I remain open to genuine exchange, grounded in logic, clarity, and mutual respect.

If you believe the Trinity and incarnation are rationally coherent, I invite you to explain how God can be fully divine and fully subject to human limitation without contradiction.

Simply saying “the Word became flesh” does not resolve the philosophical contradiction — it relocates it. If “Jesus is God,” and Jesus is ignorant of the Hour (Mark 13:32), the divine attribute of omniscience is compromised in the person of Jesus. This is not a question of rejecting the Trinity outright, but of pointing out that, by its own terms, the doctrine raises unresolved contradictions between divinity and humanity that cannot be ignored.

sonmvayina:
2nd chronicles 7:14
"If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves ,confess and forsake their evil ways, I will hear from heaven, I will forgive their sins and heal their land".....
No talk of a human sacrifice.....

God does not need a human sacrifice, he never asked for it.... human sacrifice belongs to the realm of Lucifer....

TenQ:

Isa 53:3-12:
"He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he has borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was on him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way ; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all . He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opens not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he has put him to grief: when you shall make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he has poured out his soul to death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors."

sonmvayina:
For the last time TenQ I have explained this Isaiah 53. It is about a suffering servant. Isaiah already told you who the servant is. See Isaiah 45:1-7. The suffering servant is Israel.

First question to ask your self is
Who is talking in those passages ?
You answer will make it clearer for you. Hint: it is not Isaiah.

You can't just take so e text out of a story and run away with it. You guys don't grow at all.

TenQ:
Thank you for your response. The questions I asked seem on the surface unconnected to your main question but trust me, it does. I asked these questions so that
1. You would not turn around to say that the plain hadith is not saying exactly what it is saying.
2. That the same rule you are using for repeatedly asking a question that we have explained over and over, you will use it for yourself and be consistent.


This being said: Your repeated Question was:
> If Jesus is fully God, how can he possess attributes that contradict divinity — such as ignorance (Mark 13:32), weakness, temptation, and death?
OR
> How can the same being who is said to be all-knowing, all-powerful, and unchanging also be ignorant of the Hour, tired, tempted, and crucified?


Every attempt to explain with the Trinity and the fact that YHWH the Word became human and thus necessarily would have human attributes and weaknesses did not change your mind as you repeatedly restated the question as if it wasn't answered according to the Christian theology and scripture.

Your argument was that the nature of YHWH is a contradiction, thus necessarily a fallacy.
You said:

You also said:

Even though, I asked you before this question which you answered but refused to use the same logic to resolve your own query:
I asked you;
When Jibril became a perfect man, did he cease being an Angel?
And you answered correctly; Jibril remain an angel even in his incarnation.
To pull you harder, I even teased you with mundane questions like did Jibril as a man have intestines, does he have saliva in his mouth etc.

Consistency on your part required that:
If Jibril was a perfect man, then he is NOT distinguishable from any man and this must possess ALL of mans nature.
Note:
An Angels nature is completely different from a man's nature.

Thus, if we will use your principle on this post, this is a CONTRADICTION that an Angel is a Physical Being with human eyes, hair, tongue, sweat glands possessing NORMAL human heights, complexion and probably voice and accent and thus a Fallacy and inconsistent.

As a reminder, you wonder how impossible it is that YHWH the Word can put on human nature and have human characteristics and limitations.

I ask again,
When Jibril came as a perfect man, did he cease being and Angel knowing that Angels do not have human characteristics?

When YHWH the Word came as Jesus Christ (a man), did he cease being YHWH the Word, knowing that God do not have human characteristics?

TenQ:
Here are my promised Questions to which I require some logically consistent answers. Just like you, I will choose not to entertain any explanation about the DUAL nature of persons or death or Qur'an.
I want you to convince me with the same kind of explanations that would have satisfied you with respect to your question to me.


1. The Problem of Death in Islam:
While not yet the time of RESURRECTION and noting that your prophet would be the first to be resurrected in the future;
How is it that Abraham, Moses , David etc are dead and buried, yet your prophet related with them in paradise? Is this not a logical contradiction that a person is dead yet not dead at the same time? Meaning that this Islamic report cannot be true!
(Please be careful not to tell me about the nature of Souls as you refused to accept the explanation of Trinity)

2. The Problem of Person-hood:
Are the persons seen by your prophet in paradise the real persons or something impersonating them? Because they are supposed to be DEAD and in their GRAVES doing Worship and Prayers? Can you explain why it is NOT a logical contradiction for the persons of Adam, Moses to be spoken to by your prophet while their persons are supposed to be on earth at the same time?
Is this not a Logical contradiction that a person is interacted with as a person but is not alive Alive?
Just as you expect my answers from the Taoheed point of view, Explain logically how a person can be Dead and Buried yet is NOT dead?



3. The Problem of Bodies:
Are the bodies of the prophets still in their graves while Mohammed was interacting with them in paradise? (Don't forget that it isn't yet the time of resurrection) Can you explain logically why it is NOT a logical contradiction for the Adam, Moses etc to have their bodies both on earth and in paradise at the same time?
(Note: That just like everyone else, even the bodies of the Prophets have not been resurrected yet)


4. The Eternal Qur'an Problem:
Muslims believe that the Qur'an is eternal. It is not created! It is an attribute of Allah! Unfortunately, I have a Qur'an by Yusuf Ali. It was first published in 1934 by Shaik Muhammad Ashraf Publishers, Lahore, Punjab.
Are you sure that this my Qur'an eternal? How come it has a publisher and a date of publication. How come that the Qur'an can be burnt and destroyed if it supposed to be eternal?
(Be sure to tell me that my Qur'an is NOT the Qur'an but a Translation: However, remember that the Hafs Qur'an has a date AND the Qur'an of Mohammed has a date which is certainly not eternal even according to recitation)
Is this not a logical contradiction that something is eternal and uncreated yet we find it having a date of first recital or writing in a book or translation?



Remember that, your problem is that it is a logical contradiction for the One Eternal, Omnipresent, Omniscient and Omnipresent God YHWH who is a Trinity to be Almighty and to have human limitations at the same time: thus a Fallacy!

Thank you as I wait for your response!

JimRohn:
Thank you again for your response and for attempting to draw parallels in order to make your point clearer. I appreciate the effort to establish consistency.

Let me first directly address your comparison between the Islamic belief about Angel Jibrīl (Gabriel) appearing in human form and the Christian claim of the Incarnation — namely, that God (YHWH) became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ.

🧭 On the Comparison Between Jibrīl and the Incarnation

Your argument seems to be that if Muslims accept that Angel Jibrīl can appear in human form without ceasing to be an angel, then it is inconsistent for Muslims to reject the idea that God (YHWH) can become man without ceasing to be God. On the surface, this seems like a symmetry, but it fundamentally fails under closer scrutiny. Here's why:

1. Category Distinction: Functional Manifestation vs. Ontological Fusion

In the case of Jibrīl:

He assumes the outward form of a human being.

He does not become human in essence — his angelic nature is intact and unchanged.

He is merely perceived as a man, and this transformation is external and temporary.

At no point is Jibrīl subject to human limitations like ignorance, sin, death, or hunger in essence. These are not imposed on his being — he remains fully angelic.

In the case of Jesus (according to Christian theology):

The claim is not that God merely appeared in human form, but that God became man.

The divine nature is said to have fused with human nature — in one person.

Jesus, as per Christian doctrine, experienced ignorance (Mark 13:32), temptation, suffering, and death.

These are not surface attributes — they affect the essence of the person.

Hence, you are comparing appearance (Jibrīl) with ontological union (Jesus) — two fundamentally different concepts.

JimRohn:
2. Contradiction of Essential Attributes
In Islamic theology:

Angels are created beings with specific attributes; their form can vary without contradiction because their essence remains consistent. They are not omniscient, omnipotent, or eternal, so transforming formally does not result in a logical contradiction.

In Christian theology:

God is said to be eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, and unchanging.

Becoming man (who is by nature finite, ignorant, changeable, and mortal) entails a direct contradiction of essential attributes.

You cannot say that someone is simultaneously omniscient and ignorant, omnipotent and weak, eternal and subject to death — in the same person — without invoking contradiction.

This is not about failing to "understand" the Trinity; this is a matter of logic. Two contradictory attributes cannot exist in a single essence without violating the principle of non-contradiction.

3. Incarnation ≠ Delegation or Representation

If you claimed that Jesus was representing God, that would be a separate discussion (though Islam would still reject it). But to say that God became Jesus means attributing to God the full reality of human limitations.

By contrast, in Islam, no Prophet or Angel is believed to embody God's essence. All creation — including Prophets — are servants of God, not His incarnations.

📌 Clarifying Consistency

You challenged me on consistency. But I submit that the Islamic view is consistent:

An angel taking on an appearance does not compromise its essence.

But God assuming human attributes, including ignorance and death, does compromise divine essence.

The burden of proof remains on you to logically reconcile how the same being can be both fully omniscient and ignorant at the same time without contradiction — not just theologically assert it.

🔄 On Progress and Engagement

You rightly note that I have repeated the core question. But that repetition is not without reason — it's because the answers provided thus far have not addressed the philosophical contradiction itself, only reiterated doctrinal affirmations.

Saying “the Word became flesh” is a claim, not a resolution of the logical problem. To move forward, a theological assertion must be coherently explained, not just repeated.

✍️ Concluding Thoughts

Let me close with this:

I fully respect your right to affirm the Trinity and Incarnation as matters of faith.

But when discussing these doctrines philosophically, one must be prepared to answer how seemingly contradictory attributes can coexist rationally within one being.

As a Muslim, I affirm:

> “There is nothing like unto Him” (Qur’an 42:11)
God is utterly distinct from His creation — and to merge the divine with the mortal is to collapse that essential distinction.

If you wish to continue, I invite you to respond not with analogies, but with a clear logical framework that resolves the contradiction in attributes. That, I believe, is where true interfaith clarity lies.

Kind regards.

JimRohn:
Dear TenQ,

Thank you for your reply and for taking the time to engage with the question I posed. I appreciate the effort you’ve made to raise what you perceive as parallel challenges from Islamic theology.

However, I must respectfully note that your response does not directly engage the core issue I raised — namely, how the doctrine of the Incarnation and Trinity can be logically coherent if the same being is simultaneously all-knowing, untemptable, and immortal, yet also ignorant, tempted, and subject to death.

Rather than addressing this theological contradiction, you have shifted the discussion to various perceived "contradictions" in Islamic belief. I will respond to your points for the sake of clarity and fairness, but I must ask: Why did you deviate from addressing the central philosophical question about the nature of God in Christianity?

Let us proceed, then, to your objections — one by one — and clarify their premises and implications.

JimRohn:
❓ 1. Are the Prophets Dead or Alive? Is There a Contradiction?

In Islamic theology, death is understood as the separation of the soul from the body, not annihilation. The Qur’an teaches that the deceased enter a barzakh (intermediate realm) where they remain in a conscious state awaiting resurrection (Qur’an 23:100). The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was shown the souls of Prophets during the Isra’ and Mi’raj (Night Journey), not their bodies. These souls are alive in the barzakh, as affirmed by both the Qur’an and authentic hadith.

This is not a contradiction. There is no claim that they are alive in the physical, bodily sense in Paradise while simultaneously buried in the grave. Their souls are what he encountered — and this is clearly stated in Islamic sources.

Your framing assumes that death must mean nonexistence or total unconsciousness — a materialist assumption not shared by either Islam or Christianity, both of which affirm the continued existence of the soul. If you reject Islamic teachings about the soul because I reject the Trinity as illogical, that would be a category error. My rejection of the Trinity is based on the logical contradiction of essential attributes (omniscience + ignorance), not on a dismissal of spiritual realities as such.

JimRohn:
❓ 2. Did the Prophet Speak to Dead People in Two Places?

Again, this objection conflates essence with location. When Prophet Muhammad ﷺ encountered the souls of earlier Prophets during the Mi’raj, he was not speaking to their earthly bodies, which remain in the grave. He was speaking to their conscious souls, preserved in the barzakh. Their "personhood" is not extinguished by death.

There is no contradiction here — because Islam does not claim that the same body is in two places, nor that their human essence is both dead and alive in the same sense. Rather:

Their bodies remain buried.

Their souls are alive in the unseen world.

This duality of soul and body is not a paradox, but a foundational metaphysical distinction recognized in both Islam and classical Christian theology.

JimRohn:
❓ 3. Bodies in the Grave vs. Presence in Paradise
You ask: “How can the Prophets’ bodies be in the grave while they are in Paradise?”

Answer: The bodies are not in Paradise — their souls are. Islamic belief distinguishes clearly between soul and body, especially before the resurrection. Resurrection has not occurred yet, so bodily resurrection is not in question here.

To claim contradiction, you would need Islam to teach that the same body is both in the grave and in Paradise — which it clearly does not. Hence, there is no contradiction, logically or theologically.

JimRohn:
❓ 4. Is the Qur’an Eternal but Also Printed?

Here, you conflate the eternal attribute of the Qur’an (kalām Allāh — the speech of Allah) with created physical manifestations of that speech, such as:

Written mushafs (codices)

Translations

Audio recitations

Islamic theology makes an explicit distinction:

The Qur’an as the eternal speech of God (His attribute) is uncreated.

The written form, like ink on paper, is created, as it is simply a physical recording of God's uncreated speech.

This is akin (for analogy's sake) to a composer’s melody existing in his mind (abstractly), while also being performed by an orchestra or written in notation. The performance is created, but the composition preexisted it.

There is no logical contradiction here. The attribute of God (His Speech) is uncreated, but the means through which humans access or preserve it (books, memory, recitation) are created.

In Islam, these issues involve different levels of reality (physical vs. metaphysical). In Christianity, the contradiction is within a single being: omniscience and ignorance coexisting in Jesus as the God-man. That is the logical impasse I originally raised — and which still remains unanswered.

JimRohn:
❓ Return to the Core Question

So I return to my original inquiry, now more pressing:

> How do you logically reconcile the claim that Jesus is God with the fact that he is described as ignorant of the Hour, tempted by Satan, tired, and subject to death — all of which are incompatible with divinity?

Analogies with angels or souls do not resolve this because in your theology, Jesus is not merely representing God — he is God. Thus, his ignorance or temptation affects God Himself in your framework.

That, respectfully, is the contradiction that remains outstanding.

🤝 Concluding Remarks

I sincerely appreciate your willingness to engage. I trust that this response clarifies the false parallels drawn, and I hope we can return to the central theological issue that was raised.

I welcome your response — especially if it directly addresses the logical coherence of claiming Jesus is fully God while subject to attributes that compromise divine perfection.

Kind regards,
Jimrohn

TenQ:
Too bad!
I am using exactly your rules.
If it is physically logically contradictory, it must be a fallacy (falsehood)

All I did was to show you yourself in the mirror, so, do not complain.

I had promised you that I will use your rule against you.





You want me to believe that a human being exist in a DUAL state as a solution to this contradiction!?
1. A human being exist as a Soul
2. A human being exist physically (on earth)

But you vehemently reject Trinity as explanation!?
SMH!

Please find any other explanation as the soul isn't an explanation!


Again, the contradiction of the prophets having their human bodies here on earth but Mohammed also interacting with them in paradise is resolved by appealing to the DUALITY of human existence.

How do you wante to accept your explanation?
Deal with the logical impossibility of the fact that a person doesn't have two physical bodies!



If I get you correctly, Mohammed saw the ghosts of the prophets in paradise and not the real persons!?

I am sorry. Your explanation doesn't resolve any issues as only One Moses exist, Only one prophet Joseph exist etc. It is a logical contradiction for Moses or the other prophets to be two in one.

Okay. Which is the real Moses? The one in the grave or the one in paradise or both?
LOL!


It seems your argument is that the printed Qur'an is NOT the Qur'an.

Is that your final answer?

Because, if the printed Qur'an is the Qur'an, it cannot be eternal. It is a logical contradiction.



I have used your rules:
You have NOT answered ANY of the Logical contradictions raised, therefore either re-explain to resolve it or stop your meaningless repetition of questions you really don't want an answer to.

Again:
1. There is one prophet Moses: but we are seeing TWO. One in Paradise and the other in the grave.
Please don't tell me about the soul as we know of only one Moses NOT two!
Is Moses a BODY or a SOUL or Both?
Please Resolve this contradiction. Is it logical to be dead and alive at the same time?

2. You say the Qur'an is eternal and uncreated. Every Qur'an we have seen down to the recitation of Mohammed had a beginning and thus cannot be eternal not uncreated.
Does it make sense for the Qur'an to be eternal and destructible? Is this not a contradiction?
Are these two not contrary attributes?


+Moses can be dead yet alive is a logical contradiction
+The Qur'an is eternal yet can be burnt and destroyed is a logical contradiction!



Mr JimRohn
I have used exactly your strategy!
It was extremely hypocritical of you to even attempt to explain these so-called logical contradictions with the explanation using DUALITY of natures but you reject explanations by the TRINITY of God's nature.

It is either you quietly accept that
1. The Qur'an cannot be eternal
2. Your prophet didn't see Moses or the other prophets
3. The Prophets are not in paradise
For their logical contradictions or be consistent with your logic. I will understand if you were an Atheist as they don't believe in anything other than the physical nature.

I can choose to be obstinate exactly like you and repeat these my questions a million times while refusing your explanation by DUALITY of Natures.

Have a nice day

JimRohn:
Thank you again for your continued engagement. I value meaningful interfaith dialogue, particularly when it is rooted in logic, clarity, and mutual respect. That said, your response unfortunately does not advance the discussion meaningfully. Instead, it repeats previously addressed points while misrepresenting fundamental Islamic metaphysical concepts.

Let me clarify your missteps and respectfully show how you are, in fact, moving in circles and evading the original philosophical problem posed to your doctrine.

🔄 1. You Are Committing a Category Error by Equating Metaphysical Duality with Ontological Contradiction

You repeatedly invoke what you call a "duality" in Islamic beliefs regarding the soul and body, and claim this should justify belief in the Trinity. This is a false equivalence.

Let me explain the difference in precise philosophical terms:

In Islam, the body-soul distinction is a metaphysical duality, not a contradiction. The soul and body are not the same thing, and are not claimed to be so. Death separates the soul from the body; the soul continues to exist in the barzakh (intermediate realm). There is no contradiction in saying a person is dead in body and alive in soul.

In Christian Trinitarian theology, however, you are asserting that one and the same being (Jesus) is:

Fully God (omniscient, immortal, all-powerful)
Fully man (ignorant, tempted, and mortal)

This creates an ontological contradiction — because these attributes are mutually exclusive within one single person. One cannot logically be both omniscient and ignorant, eternal and subject to death, within the same individual nature.

You are conflating metaphysical composition (body/soul) with a logical contradiction of essential attributes.

That is not parity. That is a category mistake.

JimRohn:
📌 2. You Still Have Not Answered the Core Question
Let me remind you what the original challenge was — and still is:

> How do you logically reconcile Jesus being God while possessing attributes (ignorance, mortality, susceptibility to temptation) that contradict divine perfection?

Your reply ignores this contradiction and instead attempts to accuse Islam of its own alleged paradoxes — but this does not resolve the contradiction within your own theology. It merely shifts the topic.

This is a textbook case of a red herring fallacy. Whether or not you believe Islam has paradoxes, the question remains: Can your Christology stand up to the test of logical coherence?

So far, your answer is still absent.

JimRohn:
🧠 3. You Misrepresent Islamic Belief About the Prophets and the Soul
You say:
> “There is only one Moses — so how can he be both in the grave and in Paradise?”

This is a strawman. Islam does not teach that there are two physical Moseses. It teaches what is entirely coherent:

Moses' body remains in the grave.

Moses' soul exists in the barzakh, in a conscious state.

You ask: “Which is the real Moses?”
The answer is: The same Moses — but his body and soul are currently separated, just as occurs with every human being after death.

This is the consistent position of virtually all religious traditions that affirm life after death, including Christianity. If you find that contradictory, you’re actually refuting your own religion as well.

So again, no contradiction exists — unless you adopt a purely materialist view of death, in which case you'd be better classified as a secularist, not a Christian.

JimRohn:
📜 4. Misunderstanding of the Qur’an’s Nature
You argue:
> “If the Qur’an is eternal, how can it be written on paper and burned?”
Again, you are confusing God’s speech as an eternal attribute with the physical representations of that speech.
Islam distinguishes between:

Kalām Allāh — the uncreated speech of God (eternal attribute).

Mushaf — the created, physical form (ink, paper, sound).

Let me draw a clear analogy:

> Suppose you have a thought — that thought is abstract, part of your immaterial mind. If you then write it on paper, the paper can be destroyed, but the thought in your mind remains.

Likewise, the eternal Qur’an (God’s speech) can be written, recited, and memorized — all of which are created forms representing something uncreated.

Thus, there is no contradiction, because the essence and the manifestation are not the same thing.

JimRohn:
🔄 5. You Are Circling Back Without Addressing the Initial Contradiction

You accuse me of "repetition," yet your entire reply merely reasserts points that were already addressed in detail — without engaging their logical content.

You do not resolve how God can be both omniscient and ignorant.

You do not resolve how God can be untemptable (James 1:13) yet tempted (Matthew 4:1).

You do not resolve how immortal God (1 Timothy 6:16) can be subject to death on the cross.

Instead, you:

Shift to Islamic topics without first resolving your own.

Demand that “duality” justifies “Trinity” — when one is a non-contradictory metaphysical distinction, and the other a logical impossibility.

If your only defense of the Trinity is that "Islam also has things I don’t understand," then you are conceding that the Trinity is illogical and hoping to deflect rather than justify.

✅ Conclusion: Be Consistent — and Return to the Point

If you want to argue for the Trinity, then do so on its own terms. Show how the same Jesus can be fully God and fully man without violating the law of non-contradiction. That is the challenge before you — and I still welcome your attempt to answer it directly.

As Muslims, we affirm:

One God with no partners, no contradictions, and no confusion.

Clear metaphysical categories: soul/body, created/uncreated.

Logical consistency in divine attributes: omniscience, perfection, immortality — all of which apply only to Allah.

I invite you to examine the clarity and consistency of Tawḥīd, rather than dtradiction by accusing others.

Respectfully,

TenQ:
But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was on him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way ; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all

sonmvayina:
It is the kings of the earth that are talking about Israel. Israel is the suffering servant. I have said this a thousand times. It is not Isaiah that is talking. This is what the kings of the earth will say when they realize that Israel was innocent of all the crimes levelled against them.
Nobody dies in Isaiah 53.
It continues "He shall see his offspring and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hands."...that does not sound like j.man..


Stop taking text out of context. If you continue like this, you won't learn anything.
Thank you.