₦airaland Forum

AntiChristian:
But some are destined not to eat like you did? Some ate through the nose! Even the quality of the meals are destined! Everything is destined and written!

If i were a Christian i would also believe God sent the woman to die for some people like Jesus! So she was destined by God to die. So we can talk about Yahweh's thought process now to destine his son to be killed right from the old testament!

Such a cantankerous and preposterous destiny for Jesus and John the Baptist! What a wicked Yahweh!



Will Yahweh Judge the killers of Jesus for their crime?

Will Judas be forgiven for making the biblical Jesus die?

See your verses!

Misinterpretation of scriptures won't save u or your destiny formulator U call Allah.
Show me where the scriptures claim God decides the destiny of mankind or individuals otherwise meshionu.


Deut 30
15 See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. 16 For I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.

17 But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them, 18 I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess.

19 This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live 20 and that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the Lord is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.


God gave mankind a choice. God makes it clear- Your destiny is in your hands.

AntiChristian:
Yeah, Allah willed it that you'll write this post and you still wrote it.

Allah willed it you will eat whatever you ate yesterday and you still ate it without anyone flogging you to eat by force!



I know the only thing most Christians believe was destined biblically was the birth and death of Jesus!

Every other thing wasn't!

Hypocrites!

Eating and communication are part of human activities of human. Whether your Allah wrote it or not is irrelevant. Humans will always eat and communicate they are necessary attributes of human life.

But for your Allah to sit above his throne and write that a woman will exit this world when she's killed and beheaded for money ritual says a lot about his thought process.
Such a wicked and despicable destiny to will to a poor woman.
Let's not forget that Allah also wrote it that Musa will one day kidnap a woman, behead her and them mine her skill for money ritual.
Allah willed this to Musa even b4 was born.
And to imagine Allah will still judge Musa and punish him for carrying out what Allah destined for him.

Above is the miracle of Qur'an they want us to accept.

YeyeGbami:
Na him be say the matter long, mental slavery

Na really long matter. We Yoruba are not ready.
The day we want this nonsense to stop, we know the first set of people to attack- politicians.

AntiChristian:
Let the law have its way!

Poor and failed parenting everywhere!

I would said they should cut his head with a blunt UTC and give it to him to hold for a few seconds after such excruciating pains!

There shouldn't be any conscience for people with no conscience!

But if na Jesus, he go say:

Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at him John 8:7

Anyways, whenever your time is up you'll die! Make NPF no waste tax payer's money feeding you!

According to your Qur'an, Allah willed it that the woman will die such gruesome death.
Before she was born, Allah had already written it and declared she will be killed and beheaded by Musa.
That's what Allah destined for the poor woman.

YeyeGbami:
Why is it hard for our southwest lawmakers to enact a very strict law against these menace. What a disgrace!

Give them death penalty or life in prison

Politicians are the biggest customers.

RepoMan007:
whites too have their own dirty practices but that has nothing to do with christianity. Calling christianity white man's religion is false and divisive. It is cheap tactic used to brainwash blacks by more crooked blacks like yourself and Osun worshippers.

Calm down.
U are as ignorant as those U accusing.
Learn to differentiate occultic practice from the faith itself.
Yoruba spirituality do not advocate for cannibalism or killing of humans. Just like U rightly said Christianity was never a white man's religion - if anything early Christianity was heavily influenced by native African church fathers.

But we all know atrocities the white man committed in the name of the bible and Christianity.
They justified enslavement of the black man using the bible, the Spaniard conquistador was tale of horror for the native Americans all in the name of spreading Christianity to the new world. Catholic inquisition burnt to death lots of women in Europe accusing them of being witches. Soldiers sanctioned by Catholic fathers carried out brutal torture, forced confession and fake exorcism all in a bid to get rid of opposing views n perceived enemies
Today we will say whatever they did wasn't Christianity and not related to Jesus Christ.

So how come U can't apply same principle and standard to Yoruba spirituality. People use religion to do evil, that's not the faith

I will advise U to educate yourself first on the religion of your ancestors b4 making blunders online.

Qasim6:
U should keep swimming in your delusion.

NONE of the evidence you brought indicates the Jews prior to the coming of Christ believed the Messiah is going to be divine

The fact that they used the term son of God does not indicate they believed in the Divinity of the Messiah. To the Jews son of God simply means a righteous servant of God. You can not read your blasphemous doctrine into their writings.

Nor the fact that Son of man was seen brought near the father indicate divinity.

The hardcore irrefutable evidence is just in your head, but anything that makes you sleep at night.

I am not ready to go into Deuteronomy 18 18 with you now.
It's a new week, have a great week.

Claim, claim, claim. Why don't U bring just one evidence to back your claim. Just one.
Is it so difficult to do research

Let's go back to Daniel 7.13

Sanhedrin 98a

"Rabbi Alexandri says: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi raises a contradiction between two depictions of the coming of the Messiah. It is written: “There came with the clouds of heaven, one like unto a son of man…and there was given him dominion and glory and a kingdom…his dominion is an everlasting dominion” (Daniel 7:13–14). And it is written: “Behold, your king will come to you; he is just and victorious; lowly and riding upon a donkey and upon a colt, the foal of a donkey” (Zechariah 9:9). Rabbi Alexandri explains: If the Jewish people merit redemption, the Messiah will come in a miraculous manner with the clouds of heaven. If they do not merit redemption, the Messiah will come lowly and riding upon a donkey."

Both Rabbi Alexandri and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi interpreted (Daniel 7:13–14) as a reference to a possible miraculous coming of the messiah to the Jewish people..

First know that Rabbi yeshua Ben Levi was considered a legend in his own right, compared to Elijah in his days and his interpretation are considered valid.

No ordinary man can come with the clouds of heaven. It's impossible. It has to be someone divine.

Jesus himself referenced Daniel 7.13 during his trial against the Sanhedrin.

Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”

62 “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

The response from the Sanhedrin was expected. Making such claim would be considered blasphemy and their response was appropriate.

63 The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked. 64 “You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?”

So it's up to U. Either accept the evidence or stick to your delusion.

Anyway I dont have any problem leaving out rabbinical Jews exegesis in our debates so long as U don't bring them up.

Qasim6:
Stop wasting your time on what ancient Rabbinical Jews believed about a prophecy.

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

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

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

This guy is funny. All of a sudden ancient rabbinical Jews cannot be trusted.
Are U not the one that earlier claimed no Jew believed in divine Messiah. U were fighting tooth and nail earlier that Jews don't believe in a redeeming Messiah.
After slapping u with hardcore irrefutable evidence contrary to your claim... U don change mouth into ancient rabbinical Jews cannot be trusted.
Ok o...no wahala. But don't ever use rabbinical Jews as evidence against Christian belief again otherwise I will remind U of your double speak- elenu meji.

Yes, ancient rabbinical Jews believed in multiple Messiahs. That's why I said U should research 'THE MESSIAH'
In fact they believe in Messiah for Son of man, another one coming as Son of God, another one for priest of God, another one as interpreter of the Law. They believed in a Messiah coming as servant of God, branch of David, righteous one.
They even believe in the redemption Messiah- mashiach Ben Joseph, a Messiah who is coming to die for the sins of the world- Isaiah 53.
Then 'the ultimate Messiah' who will establish the everlasting kingdom of God here on earth
What they don't know was that only ONE MAN will fulfill it all.
Jesus fulfilled all the Messianic attributes and description revealed in the scriptures. He fulfilled everyone of them, not a single one left out including your deut 18.18, a prophet like Moses.

John 5.46
If you believe in Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.

Peter confirmed the prophet after Moses is Jesus.
Acts 3
19 Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord, 20 and that he may send the Messiah, who has been appointed for you—even Jesus. 21 Heaven must receive him until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets. 22[b] For Moses said, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells you. 23 Anyone who does not listen to him will be completely cut off from their people[/b].’

John 1.29
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, " Behold the Lamb of God , who takes away the son of the world!

Acts 7- Stephen also affirmed that the prophet after Moses is Jesus.

37 “This is the Moses who told the Israelites, ‘God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your own people.’ 38 He was in the assembly in the wilderness, with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our ancestors; and he received living words to pass on to us.

Qasim6:
Are you saying the Jews knew the correct pronunciation of the word YHVH during the time of Jesus?

YHWH is written in the Hebrew scripture which is read loud to the people in the synagogue on Sabbath day.

It's impossible for Jesus not to have mentioned the name YHWH. His name literally means 'YHWH saves'.

Moreso he told the Jews in the book of John
' Before Abraham was, I AM' referring to the name God gave Moses in the burning bush.

Qasim6:
Just like it is only in your head that it was not the Islamic empire that defeat the 4th empire from Babylon.

Just a coincidence huh?

Don't run over your head my friend. U seeing things not there in Daniel 7.
There's no Roman empire in Daniel 7
The 4 beasts described are Babylon, medes, Persia and Greece.
The 10 horns on the 4th beasts are the Seleucid kings, the 4th little horn is Anthiochus Epiphanes.
He was the one described as setting up abomination of the holy place leading to desolation of high places.
Anthiochus called himself God manifest.
'Persecution of the holy one' talked about was the persecution of the Jews by Anthiochus. He stopped the Jewish law and customs during his reign, He set up worship of Zeus in the Jewish temple, slaughtered pig on the holy alter and forced the priests to eat it.
His actions led to the successful Maccabean revolt and restoration of Jewish religion.

That's what Daniel 7 was describing and not any Roman empire.

Besides the Germanic were the ones that sacked Rome and not islamic empire. Islamic caliphate only fought the Byzantine empire in the east. The Roman empire had already ceased to exist in the west.

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

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

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

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

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

Qasim6:
Nope

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

They only affirmed "we believe in holy spirit"

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More on ancient rabinnaical interpretation of Daniel 7.13

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now does pre Nicene church fathers said about Trinity.


Ignatius of Antioch (AD 30-110)

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

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

Justin Martyr (AD 110-170)

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

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

Theophilus of Antioch (AD 110-178)

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

Origen (AD 180-254)

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

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

Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria (AD 195-265)

(From the First Book.)

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

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

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


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

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

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

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






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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hahahaha

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

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

Qasim6:
No bro, the joke is on Christainity.

WE KNOW WHO WE WORSHIP!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Below is Tertullian quote on trinity.

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

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

Yes of course. Go for it.
It's common knowledge God is one. No doubt about it.
Even satan himself knows that there's only one God.

James 2
You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that and they tremble.

Jesus makes it clear there's only one God. He quoted the shema The Lord our God is One.

That one God is triune in nature, this is the Christian belief and it's backed by the old testament, new testament and ancient Jewish religious books.

Being triune doesn't make U three. It's ignorance from Muslims to think such.

Human beings are tripartite beings. Our essence as humans is made up of soul, spirit and body. That doesn't make us three beings, YOU ARE one being despite being 3 in nature.
Your soul, spirit and body are not separate. They are one being.

Also read about multiple personality disorder. These are people who have multiple personality syndrome and manifest as multiple persons.

That one being manifest as 1 million persons doesn't change the fact he's one.
No matter the number of persons he choose to manifest, he remain ONE BEING, he's one existence. The day he dies, all the persons in him stop existing because he's only one being.

So people argue what they don't know because they do not understand the difference between a being and a person.
A being is an existence. A person is manifestation of that existence.
God is one existence, not three existence.
When we get to heaven, we will only see ONE GOD NOT THREE GODS. HE IS ONE BEING.
THE FATHER AND THE SON AND THE HOLY SPIRIT WILL NOT BE SEEN SEPARATELY IN HEAVEN.
CHRISTIAN BELIEF IS NOT POLYTHEISTIC AT ALL, IT'S IGNORANCE TO SAY SUCH.

Qasim6:
What exactly are you showing here?

The Jews do not understand the term son of God to mean divine son of God. To them It simply mean a righteous servant of God.

So what exactly are we supposed to make out of this qumran document??

Did U read the documents at all or U trying to play blind. These are evidence from ancient rabbinical Judaism, not your modern day Jews who are misinterpreting their scripture so Jesus won't be the Messiah.

Qasim6:
No, the divine messaih is not evident any where in the tanakh, you are just deceiving yourself.

The word translated as worshipped could be translated as obey/serve. I don't know why you chose worshipped which is against the teachings of the tanakh (worshipping other than God).

Number 23:19God is not man, that he should lie, not a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?


Is the kingdom of the son of man not supposed to end the 4th kingdom from Babylon (which is the Romans) or Is this going to be another wuru-wuru to the answer like Isaiah 53?

If I bring evidence that the ancient rabbinical Judaism before Jesus was born believed this passage was about divine Messiah.
What will U do?
because I did the same for Isaiah 53. I brought multiple evidence- including from dead sea scrolls, that ancient Jews believed Isaiah 53 is about the Messiah coming to die for the sins of mankind.
Even your fellow black Jew in the thread was weak. He couldn't say anything.
If I do the same for Daniel 7 passage, what will U do?
I want to know your response, because I don't want to waste my time bringing evidence and U still being obstinate.

Qasim6:
Lol!

See what doctrine of trinity has done to an intelligent young man.
You just use your own hand to expose Christainity as a false religion.

Maybe you don't know, NONE of the first 3 century church fathers believed in the doctrine of trinity as you Christian believe it since the councils of Nicea&Constantinople. What they believed in was subordination at worst.

After christendom realize the pitfall of polytheism they have digged into by exalting Jesus as a god that is lesser than God almighty, that is when they started coming up with the nonsense God incarnate, hypostatic union and the likes to explain their confusion.


Bro! this is what Qur'an have to say about God having a son

Q 19:88-93

"And they say, "The Most Merciful has taken [for Himself] a son".

You have done an atrocious thing.

The heavens almost rupture therefrom and the earth splits open and the mountains collapse in devastation.

That they attribute to the Most Merciful a son.

And it is not appropriate for the Most Merciful that He should take a son.

There is no one in the heavens and earth but that he comes to the Most Merciful as a servant."

So the idea of Allah having blasphemous thought is just nonsense that doesn't hold water.




Catholics refer to Mary as mother of God, hence they give her some divine attributes by praying to her. Do you think it is wrong?

Q 10:68 They say, “Allah has taken a son.” Glory be to Him! He is the Self-Sufficient. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. You have no proof of this! Do you say about Allah what you do not know?

God is self sufficient, He does not need a Mother or a Son(in any shape or form) to dispose all his affairs.

Why do you think God needs a Son in any shape or form?

The joke is on you and Islam.
Christian don't worship 2 gods whether U believe it or not isn't my headache.
But the bigger problem is Allah made it clear it's permissible to worship 2 gods ' under some special circumstances'- if he has a son.
Polytheism is a sin under any circumstances or context whatever whether real or imagined.
That's the problem with that verse 43.81

Even if Allah has a family- He should be the only one to be worshipped in that family. If anyone else is worshipped- it automatically becomes polytheism.


Most ancient mythology including greek, Egypt, near east all had god deity with families who were all worshipped.
God called it POLYTHEISM.

Your problem stems from lack of understanding of who the Son of God is in Christian theology. He's the word of God NOT a physical son.

Son of God is an anthropomorphism for the incarnate word of God. He's not a physical Son. God needs his word...not a physical son.
Go and read Read John 1.

Regarding trinity, I don't know if I'm in the mood to debate with U because it's so obvious U haven't done any independent research on trinity except what U learnt in Muslim apologetics.

Start by reading Tertullian- the first church father to coin the word trinity. He died in 240 AD at the age of 80.
That was 100 yrs b4 council of Constantinople.

AntiChristian:
As usual of most Christians you'll cut out words to mean exactly what you want!

Even Bible verses are done like that!

It's a Christian thing!

YAHWEH AND WOMEN!!!

If u like copy and paste what u dont understand, na your business
U admit in your own words that in Islam, men are superior to women in intellect, thus making women deficient in knowledge.

regarding how Islam treat women, let me ask u a question.
Can a woman on her period pray in the mosque?

AntiChristian:

Yes, the testimony of two women is regarded as that of one man in Islam. The men are the protectors of the women and they are superior to them in terms of knowledge





You just spilled hypocrisy!

Leemzyy, come and see what your muslim brother wrote about YOU.

This antichristian na baba fanatic and extremist. see what he wrote about women!!!!
Qasim, do u agree with him.

Leemzyy:
Auhm pls if you dont mind can we cont this tmrw?

No problem, anytime anyday.
As I said earlier, I'm not here to convert anyone. That's the work of the holy spirit.
But what we do here is to use divine knowledge and inspiration open the eyes of those who have been misguided in their belief.
U need an alternative perspective for U to review that belief U think it's true and that's what we offer here with the help of the holy spirit.

Qasim6:
If you think an illetrate in 7th century Arabia can come up with the text of the Qur'an by just making it up in his head or just doing copy and paste job then it is very obvious how ignorant you are of the Qur'an.

When Muhammad presented his Qurans to the people, they did not believe him, instead they accused him of copying his Qurans from legends or tales of the ancient books i.e the gospel and Torah.

The Quranic verses below are testimonies how the people at the start of Islam reacted to the Qurans of Muhammad.

[Quran 8:31] And when Our verses are recited to them, they say, “We have heard before. If we want to, we could say something like this. This is not but legends of the former peoples.”

[Quran 16:24] And when it is said to them, “What has your Lord sent down?” They say, “Legends of the former peoples,”

[Quran 23:83] We have been promised this, we and our forefathers, before; this is not but legends of the former peoples.”

[Quran 25:5] And they say, “Legends of the former peoples which he has written down, and they are dictated to him morning and afternoon.”

This proves people during the time of Muhammed were very much familiar with bible stories, contrary to what Muslims want us to believe, the Qur'an confirms that bible stories were in circulation among commoners on those period.

Illiteracy was rampant, yet the peope heard and knew the bible stories. Even to the literates, copies of gospel and Torah was rare and hard to come by, let alone one written in Arabic.
The commonest way to know the stories is through word of mouth.

So how come people around Muhammed heard these bible stories but Muslims wants us to believe somehow Muhammed who wasn't deaf never heard this stories until Jibril started telling him.

Muslims will tell us Muhammed hated polytheism which was rampant in his days but didn't bother to acquaint himself with the only source of monotheism around him- the Torah and injil.
Something is seriously missing.

I keep saying it the miracle of Islam is not the Qur'an which is a false book anyway.
The miracle of Islam is that everyone in Mecca have heard the bible stories except Muhammed. He never knew the bible stories until angel Jibril appeared on stage BUT everyone else around him were familiar with this same stories. Hmmmmm...

It's a miracle indeed. May God help our Muslims brothers. They really need help.

Qasim6:
What kinda strawman argument is this?
Why are you lying bro?

No one expects the messaih to be divine. and the term is not only used to describe the messaih. At least be truthful if you care about the truth!

Learn the difference btw the phrase 'messiah' and 'the messiah'. The later is called 'Al mashiach'.
Once U learn the difference, come back and debate.

Meanwhile the divine Messiah is evident in the book of Daniel 7

13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man,[a] coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

Qasim6:
If you think an illetrate in 7th century Arabia can come up with the text of the Qur'an by just making it up in his head or just doing copy and paste job then it is very obvious how ignorant you are of the Qur'an.

Muslims will never cease to amaze me, it's like U guys don't think.
because What I will never understand is this....your Qur'an clearly stated that the people of Mecca told Muhammed they have heard his message b4, they were not new or novel to them.
The people of Mecca told Muhammed they are familiar with the tales he's reciting.
They told him he's just reciting tales and myths of the ancient.
This mean the people of Arabia were very much aware of bible stories.

So how can people living around Muhammed know the bible stories but Muhammed had no clue until this Angel started telling him.

Illiteracy is widespread in ancient Arabia, Muhammed wasn't the only one who couldn't read or write. Yet majority of people knew the bible stories without reading the gospel or Torah.

Muhammed is not deaf, he had ears and could hear. Where was he when others became listening to bible stories? How come everyone around him were familiar with bible stories but Muhammed who hated polytheism didn't bother to acquaint himself with the only source of monotheism around him- the Torah and injil.
He had an uncle called waraka bin nafi who was a Christian and used to read out loud the gospel and Torah.
Yet U want me to believe Muhammad had to wait for one angel to learn bible stories.

Common man, don't play people for a fool. It's high time U young Muslims start asking your imams hard questions and not just repeating weak apologetics statement up and down.

When Our Signs are rehearsed to them, they say: "We have heard this before: if we wished, we could say words like these: these are nothing but tales of the ancients."

Qasim6:
You have no Idea what we have in our possession.


If Muhammad is not a prophet then no one is!

Yinmu....
In fact I'm beginning to think that there's nothing wrong in being a Muslim. Muslim is someone who submits to God.

We just have to cut out Muhammed and his fables as well as his false religion from the list of prophets; gbam and we will have TRUE MUSLIMS.

Muhammed is a confirmed gbajue ogboju false prophet.

Qasim6:
What kinda strawman argument is this?
Why are you lying bro?

What I pointed out to you is that the Qur'an refutes your(Christain) understanding of the term son of God. That the term son of God is an honorific title, it simply means a righteous servant of God and that is how the Jews understood it. It was the pagan Romans that took the meaning with Jesus to another level.

I'm not even going to bother debate this with U. Either produce evidence Son of God as a divine title came from Pagan Romans or stop confabulating.

Meanwhile I leave you with evidence of Son of God as divine Messiah from the dead sea scrolls.

Thrasher2024:
I’m sure that the Roman Empire would agree with you

The Christian creed was developed at a time the Roman empire was killing Christians and sending them to the colosseum as lunch for lions.

Most apostolic fathers who developed the doctrine of Christianity were killed by the Roman empire.
Majority were natives of Africa.
Start with Tertullian the first Christian to coin the word trinity.

While at it research the Garima gospel. It existed even b4 the white man knew anything about Jesus Christ.

It's one thing to reject Christianity because U think it's not for U. But it's another thing to reject it based on ignorance.
The later is YOU.