Big question for Muslims: Koran 5:116????

[Catholic_Dude]

I keep reading this on these forums, I even looked in up in a Koran online and it said the same thing:
005.116 And when Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he saith: Be glorified! It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then Thou knewest it. Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I know not what is in Thy Mind. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Knower of Things Hidden ?
If this is a correct translation then that is an utterly false charge, nowhere taught in Christianity or the Bible.

The QUESTION now is, is this a correct translation, is that passage saying Christians considered Mary to be a god?

Further, I have been told Christians were said to believe Mary was part of the Trinity…is this true? I have been told this is a misinterpretation, but at this point I dont know who to trust.

 

[Publisher]

From what I remember of my Islamic history, wasn’t Muhammad influenced by a heretical sect of Christianity? He looked into Christianity but because of some the teachings of this particular group, received a very poor understanding of what Christianity really believed. His understanding of Christianity is reflected in the Holy Quran, right or wrong, it’s what he understood Christianity to be teaching at the time.

 

[Ahimsa]

I keep reading this on these forums, I even looked in up in a Koran online and it said the same thing: 005.116 And when Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he saith: Be glorified! It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then Thou knewest it. Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I know not what is in Thy Mind. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Knower of Things Hidden ?
If this is a correct translation then that is an utterly false charge, nowhere taught in Christianity or the Bible.

The QUESTION now is, is this a correct translation, is that passage saying Christians considered Mary to be a god?

Further, I have been told Christians were said to believe Mary was part of the Trinity…is this true? I have been told this is a misinterpretation, but at this point I dont know who to trust.

First, you have to understand what this quote means when it says ‘god’. How is ‘god’ defined here?

 

[exoflare]

First, you have to understand what this quote means when it says ‘god’. How is ‘god’ defined here?

I would say that it means one who is afforded the worship entitled to God alone (Catholics call this “adoration”). What is your take?

 

[Ahimsa]

I would say that it means one who is afforded the worship entitled to God alone (Catholics call this “adoration”). What is your take?

That’s my suspicion too: many Muslims see any sort of adoration, or veneration, as a form of ‘worship due to God alone’. Whereas many Christians, and Catholics in particular, see adoration and veneration as separate from ‘worship’.

For many Muslims, a ‘god’ is anyone who receives adoration, veneration, or worship; whereas for Catholics, only ‘God’ receives worship; whereas saints and BVM receive veneration and adoration.

 

[mark_a]

From what I remember of my Islamic history, wasn’t Muhammad influenced by a heretical sect of Christianity?

Nestorians, I believe.

I also read that respect for Mary was a Muslim “add in” made for political profit.

 

[Kadaveri]

The replies you’ve been given are along the right lines, to understand this verse correctly we need to properly conceive what the Qur’an means by ‘god’ here. Now the Arabic word there is ‘ilah’, which although most commonly translated as ‘god’, there is a subtle difference. The word ‘god’ in English is used to denote an object by the properties that it has, whereas ‘ilah’ in Arabic is used to denote an object by the properties ascribed to it, so the word would most accurately be translated as ‘object of worship’ if that weren’t too impractical for readability purposes.

Christians of course don’t consider Mary to be a part of the Trinity, and this isn’t what the Qur’an claims Christians believe (and the Qur’an only discusses mainstream Christian beliefs) since 5:116 is not referring to the Trinity, but something else entirely. The verses that directly discuss/criticise the Trinity in the Qur’an are 4:171 and 5:72/73, you’ll notice that they all mention the saying of ‘three’ which is missing in 5:116; and that neither 4:171 or 5:72/73 makes any mention of Mary being part of the ‘three’, instead only God (i.e. the Father in Christian theology), Jesus and the ‘Spirit’ are mentioned in relation to this.

Delving into the context of 5:116 it becomes more apparent that such a condemnation of the Trinity would be very out of place there; you’ll see that it’s describing the Day of Judgement in which Christians are brought before God to be judged, and Jesus (as) is brought as a witness that he did not instruct them to take him or his mother as *ilahayn *(plural of ‘ilah’) besides God. In Islamic/Qur’anic terminology, adhering to the proper meaning of the Arabic term, if you ‘take as a god’ it doesn’t mean that you literally believe that object is God or a god, it means that you attribute properties to it that in Islam belong to God alone, and there are many things that Christians (Catholics and Eastern Orthodox particularly) do involving Jesus (as) and Mary which would be considered serious blasphemy in Islam, such as praying to them and believing they can hear us pray, when in Islam only God is All-Hearing and giving anything else this attribute is blasphemous (and in Islam remember, Jesus is not considered to be God or any way divine); the crucial point in this is that doing so in Islamic/Qur’anic terminology would be to effectively take them as a god (ilah).

To give another example to complement this, 9:31 condemns Christians and Jews for taking their Priests and Rabbis as gods besides God, I think you’ll agree Muhammad (saaw) couldn’t possibly have been so ignorant of Christianity and Judaism that he thought they considered their Priests and Rabbis to be gods, so evidently this verse isn’t meant to be interpreted in an absolutely literal fashion, instead it is to be interpreted in the same way 5:116 is as I described above. 36:60 also tells mankind not to worship Satan, again not something to be interpreted absolutely literally.

Hope that helps.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

…The word ‘god’ in English is used to denote an object by the properties that it has, whereas ‘ilah’ in Arabic is used to denote an object by the properties ascribed to it, so the word would most accurately be translated as ‘object of worship’ if that weren’t too impractical for readability purposes.

The context says: “Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah” gives me the impression they are contrasted to Allah as a whole.

Christians of course don’t consider Mary to be a part of the Trinity, and this isn’t what the Qur’an claims Christians believe (and the Qur’an only discusses mainstream Christian beliefs) since 5:116 is not referring to the Trinity, but something else entirely. The verses that directly discuss/criticise the Trinity in the Qur’an are 4:171
004.171 O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not “Three” - Cease! (it is) better for you! - Allah is only One God. Far is it removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender.]

and

5:72/73 005.072 They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah (himself) said: O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Lo! whoso ascribeth partners unto Allah, for him Allah hath forbidden paradise. His abode is the Fire. For evil-doers there will be no helpers.

005.073 They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three; when there is no God save the One God. If they desist not from so saying a painful doom will fall on those of them who disbelieve.] ,
you’ll notice that they all mention the saying of ‘three’ which is missing in 5:116; and that neither 4:171 or 5:72/73 makes any mention of Mary being part of the ‘three’, instead only God (i.e. the Father in Christian theology), Jesus and the ‘Spirit’ are mentioned in relation to this.

Neither of these passages mention the “Spirit” is the “third”.

I looked up all the references to “holy Spirit” and it appears that is simply a reference to God’s power.
islam.tc/cgi-bin/quran/qsearch.pl?kw=Holy+Spirit&action=search

Just using Book 5, I see a clear indication the “third” is most likely Mary, after all 5:73 says “They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three; when there is no God save the One God.” and yet 5:116, the only other reference in this book to “god(s)” and “two” says: “Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah”. This is pretty powerful evidence to me.

(continued)

 

[Catholic_Dude]

(continued)

… In Islamic/Qur’anic terminology, adhering to the proper meaning of the Arabic term, if you ‘take as a god’ it doesn’t mean that you literally believe that object is God or a god, it means that you attribute properties to it that in Islam belong to God alone, and there are many things that Christians (Catholics and Eastern Orthodox particularly) do involving Jesus (as) and Mary which would be considered serious blasphemy in Islam, such as praying to them and believing they can hear us pray, when in Islam only God is All-Hearing and giving anything else this attribute is blasphemous…

I would like to see where it states Jesus and Mary were merely ascribed divine qualities, not seen gods themselves. After all the Koran condemns the claim Jesus is the “son of God”, not a mere divine quality, but godhood itself. It also appears they see “son of God” as a literal son, thus I would say the charge of Mary being a goddess is no stretch.

To give another example to complement this, 9:31
009.030 And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they!

009.031 They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One God. There is no God save Him. Be He Glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)!

*]
**009.031 *
YUSUFALI: They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One Allah: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him).
PICKTHAL: They have taken as lords beside Allah their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One Allah. There is no Allah save Him. Be He Glorified from all that they ascribe as partner (unto Him)!
SHAKIR: They have taken their doctors of law and their monks for lords besides Allah, and (also) the Messiah son of Marium and they were enjoined that they should serve one Allah only, there is no god but He; far from His glory be what they set up (with Him).]
condemns Christians and Jews for taking their Priests and Rabbis as gods besides God, I think you’ll agree Muhammad (saaw) couldn’t possibly have been so ignorant of Christianity and Judaism that he thought they considered their Priests and Rabbis to be gods, so evidently this verse isn’t meant to be interpreted in an absolutely literal fashion, instead it is to be interpreted in the same way 5:116 is as I described above.It doesnt appear the term is “gods” here, and 9:30 singles out Jesus as it condemns the “son of God” claim.

36:60
036.060 Did I not charge you, O ye sons of Adam, that ye worship not the devil - Lo! he is your open foe! -
036.061 But that ye worship Me ? That was the right path.
036.062 Yet he hath led astray of you a great multitude. Had ye then no sense ?
036.063 This is hell which ye were promised (if ye followed him).

]
also tells mankind not to worship Satan, again not something to be interpreted absolutely literally.

Hope that helps.
This context of “worship satan” is in reference to disobeying Allah.

 

[paarsurrey]

That’s my suspicion too: many Muslims see any sort of adoration, or veneration, as a form of ‘worship due to God alone’. Whereas many Christians, and Catholics in particular, see adoration and veneration as separate from ‘worship’.
For many Muslims, a ‘god’ is anyone who receives adoration, veneration, or worship; whereas for Catholics, only ‘God’ receives worship; whereas saints and BVM receive veneration and adoration.

Hi
I endorse your views.
Thanks
I am an Ahmadi – a peaceful faith in Islam bridging gaps between faiths/denominations/religions/agnostics

 

[paarsurrey]

Christians of course don’t consider Mary to be a part of the Trinity, and this isn’t what the Qur’an claims Christians believe (and the Qur’an only discusses mainstream Christian beliefs) since 5:116 is not referring to the Trinity, but something else entirely.

Hi
Your reply is very appropriate. I appreciate it.
Thanks
I am an Ahmadi – a peaceful faith in Islam bridging gaps between faiths/denominations/religions/agnostics

 

[Kadaveri]

Catholic Dude:

The context says: “Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah” gives me the impression they are contrasted to Allah as a whole.

It shouldn’t give that impression, the actual term used would be more accurately translated as ‘in derogation of God’ such as Yusuf Ali’s translation does; since it simply means to detract from something. It doesn’t mean that what’s being detracted is equal to the thing it’s being detracted from, if that makes sense.
Catholic Dude:

Neither of these passages mention the “Spirit” is the “third”.

I looked up all the references to “holy Spirit” and it appears that is simply a reference to God’s power.

Just using Book 5, I see a clear indication the “third” is most likely Mary, after all 5:73 says “They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three; when there is no God save the One God.” and yet 5:116, the only other reference in this book to “god(s)” and “two” says: “Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah”. This is pretty powerful evidence to me.

What you’ve looked up in that search as ‘the Holy Spirit’ is actually the Qur’an’s title for the Angel Gabriel ‘Ruh Al-Qudus’, which would be more accurately translated as ‘Spirit of the Holiness’ (where ‘the Holiness’ = God) and isn’t meant to have anything to do with the Biblical Holy Spirit, which is ‘**Al-**Ruh Al-Qudus’ in Arabic.

But where the word ‘ruh’ (spirit) is used alone then yes sometimes it is used as a reference to God’s power, and is the closest equivalent to the Biblical Holy Spirit; the term is used like this however because it means just that, it’s not identified as a separate hypostasis such as in Trinitarian doctrine. There is a reason why ‘spirit’ is mentioned in a verse criticising the Trinity afterall.

Equating 5:73 with 5:116 isn’t correct, for one thing they’re 40 verses apart and in totally different contexts, it’s poor exegesis to assume they’re talking about the same thing, they’re not. Note how both 4:171 and 5:73 criticise Christians for saying ‘three’ yet it never says three *what *exactly, or to the point it never says three gods? This is deliberate, since ending the sentence at ‘three’ would be a very strange thing to do without a reason, and is inconsistent with other verses such as 16:51, which condemns Zoroastrians outright for worshipping two gods, and with the Qur’an’s general calculative wording.

Now, look at 5:72, paying attention to the first few words in particular, and you’ll notice that there is a very subtle contradiction with 5:73, which shows that whoever wrote the Qur’an couldn’t possibly think that Christians worship three separate gods. Once you understand 5:72 you’ll find that it’s quite impossible to claim 5:116 says Christians worship three gods, it coming just before 5:73 highlights this even more so.

Continued…

 

[Kadaveri]

Catholic Dude:

I would like to see where it states Jesus and Mary were merely ascribed divine qualities, not seen gods themselves. After all the Koran condemns the claim Jesus is the “son of God”, not a mere divine quality, but godhood itself. It also appears they see “son of God” as a literal son, thus I would say the charge of Mary being a goddess is no stretch.

As I explained earlier, something is called an ‘ilah’ not by the divine qualities it has, but by the divine qualities ascribed to it, this doesn’t require explanation within the text as it’s simply what the word means. And the Qur’an does not say Christians believe Jesus (as) to be the literal ‘son’ of God but depicts the sonship as the belief of Jesus (as) being God incarnate on Earth, as 5:17 and 5:72 illustrate.

What is a stretch however, is the author of the Qur’an understanding the complexity of Trinitarian doctrine to be able to describe it in such concise terms, yet making such a elementary error of mistaking the spirit for Mary.
Catholic Dude:

It doesnt appear the term is “gods” here, and 9:30 singles out Jesus as it condemns the “son of God” claim.

Regardless, the word ‘Lords’ is all but synonymous with ‘gods’; God is referred to as ‘Lord’ countless times in the Qur’an (as well as in the Bible), the fact that the phrasing is all but identical to 5:116 should make it obvious what it means, and that it’s important to analysis if the meaning of both verses are to be understood. Insisting on being particular however, do Christians and Jews believe their Priests and Rabbis to be Lords? No they don’t, and it would be quite ludicrous to argue that the author of the Qur’an believed this to be true, so it can’t be interpreted so literally, logically 5:116 should follow in the same fashion since there’s no good reason why it shouldn’t.
Catholic Dude:

This context of “worship satan” is in reference to disobeying Allah.

Indeed, hence it’s not meant to be interpreted as condemning the *literal *worship of Satan is it?

Peace.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

It shouldn’t give that impression, the actual term used would be more accurately translated as ‘in derogation of God’ such as Yusuf Ali’s translation does; since it simply means to detract from something. It doesn’t mean that what’s being detracted is equal to the thing it’s being detracted from, if that makes sense.

But Christians believe Jesus is God, while Mary is not, so it is misrepresentation to put Jesus and Mary both “as gods”.

But where the word ‘ruh’ (spirit) is used alone then yes sometimes it is used as a reference to God’s power, and is the closest equivalent to the Biblical Holy Spirit; the term is used like this however because it means just that, it’s not identified as a separate hypostasis such as in Trinitarian doctrine. **There is a reason why ‘spirit’ is mentioned in a verse criticising the Trinity afterall. **

I dont see “spirit” being explicitly criticized, infact I dont think you can make a case of just what the “three” are in reference to, or (after “Allah is the Messiah”) at least the “third” is unclear.

Equating 5:73 with 5:116 isn’t correct, for one thing they’re 40 verses apart and in totally different contexts, it’s poor exegesis to assume they’re talking about the same thing, they’re not. Note how both 4:171 and 5:73 criticise Christians for saying ‘three’ **yet it never says three *what ***exactly, or to the point it never says three gods? This is deliberate, since ending the sentence at ‘three’ would be a very strange thing to do without a reason, and is inconsistent with other verses such as 16:51, which condemns Zoroastrians outright for worshipping two gods, and with the Qur’an’s general calculative wording.

Given it doesnt say what exactly the three are, the point “two” others are mentioned gives my claim credence.

The context of 116 (110-120) is talking about Jesus, while 72 (65-85) is where the Christians are mentioned. To brush this off as a matter of 40 verses apart doesnt do justice to the fact one is talking about Christ, the other about Christians and the common ground is that Jesus is being exalted.

Regarding 16:51, that is a totally different book, not to mention I saw no mention of “Zoroastrians”

Now, look at 5:72, paying attention to the first few words in particular, and you’ll notice that there is a very subtle contradiction with 5:73, which shows that whoever wrote the Qur’an couldn’t possibly think that Christians worship three separate gods. Once you understand 5:72 you’ll find that it’s quite impossible to claim 5:116 says Christians worship three gods, it coming just before 5:73 highlights this even more so.

Here are the first few words “They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary” This can only be in reference to Christians. The fact is Christians do believe Jesus is God, the Second Person of the Trinity. Interestingly 73 starts off the same way “They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three when there is no God save the** One** God.” Again, this can only be in reference to Christians. Now “third of three” what? It is pretty clear one of that “third” is “Allah the Messiah”, which Christians claim. Now at 116 Allah is asking Jesus if Jesus ever told people to ascribe divinity to Himself. Again, as in 72-73, in 116 Allah is brining up the subject of the Christian “heresy”.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

As I explained earlier, something is called an ‘ilah’ not by the divine qualities it has, but by the divine qualities ascribed to it, this doesn’t require explanation within the text as it’s simply what the word means. And the Qur’an does not say Christians believe Jesus (as) to be the literal ‘son’ of God but depicts the sonship as the belief of Jesus (as) being God incarnate on Earth, as 5:17 and 5:72 illustrate.

I did a word search and multiple references of “son of Allah” came up, in 9:30 it says:“The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths.” It also says in 5:72 “Allah is the Messiah” These are accurate claims because Christians believe this. If you are arguing Christians exalt Christ as less than God with merely a few “divine qualities” means the Quran is misrepresenting us.

What is a stretch however, is the author of the Qur’an understanding the complexity of Trinitarian doctrine to be able to describe it in such concise terms, yet making such a elementary error of mistaking the spirit for Mary.

The ironic thing about this is that it does attempt to refute the complexity of the Trinity with a few brief claims such as “say not “Three” - Cease! (it is) better for you! - Allah is only One God. Far is it removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son.” It does not infact use “concise terms” and that is precisely why “elementary errors” are likely.

Regardless, the word ‘Lords’ is all but synonymous with ‘gods’; God is referred to as ‘Lord’ countless times in the Qur’an (as well as in the Bible), the fact that the phrasing is all but identical to 5:116 should make it obvious what it means, and that it’s important to analysis if the meaning of both verses are to be understood. Insisting on being particular however, do Christians and Jews believe their Priests and Rabbis to be Lords? No they don’t, and it would be quite ludicrous to argue that the author of the Qur’an believed this to be true, so it can’t be interpreted so literally, logically 5:116 should follow in the same fashion since there’s no good reason why it shouldn’t.

But it singles out the “son of God” claim, if you or the Quaran are saying Christians believe Jesus has divine qualities but is less than God, that is an error. It is interesting one translation singles out Jesus: “YUSUFALI: They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary”

Indeed, hence it’s not meant to be interpreted as condemning the *literal *worship of Satan is it?

It is a figure of speech, in a sense a person is worshiping Satan when they disobey God.

 

[Kadaveri]

Catholic Dude:

But Christians believe Jesus is God, while Mary is not, so it is misrepresentation to put Jesus and Mary both “as gods”.

It’s not a misrepresentation, as it’s only speaking about Christians taking things for ilahayn in derogation of God, in which case Jesus (as), Mary and in some cases Priests all fall into this category in that certain qualities are given to them which in Islamic theology belong to God alone. If the Qur’an said Christians say Mary is God then that would be a totally different story of course, and would be wrong, but it doesn’t, the only person the Qur’an ever says Christians believe is *Allah *(ilah and Allah are not the same word remember) is Jesus Christ.

Again, 9:31 puts both Priests and Jesus (as) ‘as gods’, but I’ve yet to witness any Christian arguing that this is a misrepresentation of Christianity, most likely because the claim that the author of the Qur’an was so totally ignorant of Christianity he thought Priests were believed to be gods is too absurd for anyone to fall for, yet it uses the exact same phrasing as 5:116, only it’s Priests instead of Mary.
Catholic Dude:

I dont see “spirit” being explicitly criticized, infact I dont think you can make a case of just what the “three” are in reference to, or (after “Allah is the Messiah”) at least the “third” is unclear.

A careful reading of the verse with knowledge of Christian theology would allow you to understand what is being criticised and corrected, even if it isn’t all entirely explicit. First it says ‘Jesus Christ was no more than a Messenger of God’, cutting him out of any Godhead, then that Jesus is ‘His word, that he conveyed to Mary’, the ‘word’ in Christian theology meaning Jesus (as) as part of the Godhead, but the Qur’an here shoots this down and says the word (which is ‘be’) is how God created Jesus (as), then it says ‘and a spirit from him’, shooting down the notion that ‘the spirit’ is part of the Godhead, saying that ‘the spirit’ is simply God’s power and not a separate person in any Godhead. The Qur’an then tells Christians to not say ‘three’, and that God is only one *ilah *(object of worship). Now the things that were shot down in this verse as being a ‘separate part of a Godhead’ are Jesus (as), the word, and the spirit; of course we know that in Christianity Jesus is the word, so it’s just Jesus being a separate part of a Godhead and the spirit being a separate part of a Godhead that are shot down, those two added to God Himself (the Father) make up the ‘three’ the Qur’an says not to say.

It’s quite a stretch to claim that the ‘spirit’ being mentioned in this verse criticising the Trinity as not being a separate part of a Godhead isn’t meant to have anything to do with the Trinity, that the Qur’an doesn’t know who the three hypostases of the Trinity are, and Jesus (as) and the ‘spirit’ being the only two things mentioned in a corrective fashion in a verse criticising the Trinity is just a fluke.

Continued…

 

[Kadaveri]

Catholic Dude:

Here are the first few words “They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary” This can only be in reference to Christians. The fact is Christians do believe Jesus is God, the Second Person of the Trinity. Interestingly 73 starts off the same way “They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three when there is no God save the One God.” Again, this can only be in reference to Christians. Now “third of three” what? It is pretty clear one of that “third” is “Allah the Messiah”, which Christians claim. Now at 116 Allah is asking Jesus if Jesus ever told people to ascribe divinity to Himself. Again, as in 72-73, in 116 Allah is brining up the subject of the Christian “heresy”.

I’m afraid you haven’t understood what I was alluding to, so allow me to make it clearer for you. The first few words I meant were:
‘They surely disbelieve who say: God is the Messiah’ and
‘They surely disbelieve who say: God is one of three’

Now, 5:72 says Christians believe Jesus ***IS ***God, yet the very next verse says Christians believe God is one of three. And since of course Jesus (as) is another one of those three separate to God, this becomes a contradiction. How can Jesus and God (read, the Father, in Christian theology) be two *separate *persons in a Godhead, yet be one and the same God? This contradiction is deliberate, since it perfectly mirrors the apparent contraidiction in Trinitarian doctrine.

Now, if the Qur’an says that Christians believe the Father and Jesus (as) are one and the same God (in 5:72), then how can you interpret 5:116 as saying Christians believe in three gods? It simply cannot be done, as 5:72 shows Christians believe in one God whom they believe the ‘three’ *are *one.

Going back to 4:171 you’ll witness this again. Now, this isn’t something you’d notice in a translation since the Qur’an’s very delicate and calculative wording here is somewhat lost in translation, but you see how it says near the end ‘Say not ‘three’ … for Allah is only One God’, there Arabic for the second part is ‘Allahu ilahun wahidun’ (Allah = God, ilah = object of worship and wahid = one, the ‘u’ and ‘un’ at the end of words are just grammar); which if you’ve picked up on some of the Arabic terminology I’ve noted thus far in this thread isn’t quite what the translation says, but there’s even more to it than that.

Now this is difficult to explain coherently so forgive me if it’s hard to understand, but I’ll try my best:

‘Allah’ in Arabic means ‘God’, but in a much more specific sense than the English word does in that it cannot be pluralised like God can in English (Gods), so in Arabic ‘Allah’ by definition is One; thus you’ll get verses in the Qur’an saying ‘Allahu ahad’ like in the oft-quoted 112:1. However, the word used for ‘one’ in 4:171 is not ‘ahad’ (which means ‘one’ as in ‘only’) like in 112:1 and every other verse saying that God (Allah) is one, but wahid; which means ‘one’ as in counting (one, two, three…).

This is very significant, for (as I explained earlier) *Allah *in Arabic is by definition singular, so saying that *Allah *is one (wahid) numerically would be pleonastic and poor grammar. This is why the Qur’an always says ‘Allahu ahad’, meaning there is *only *one God, nothing wrong with that.

So why out of all places does the Qur’an turn its usual speech on its head and say that God is wahid (one numerically), when this is such a superfluous statement? Of course, the Qur’an with its extremely calculative style of wording has a very good reason for this, as saying ‘Allahu ahad’ works perfectly well in refuting polytheistic beliefs since it simply says that there is only one God, but this statement does not work against Christians since they do not believe that there is more than one god, but they believe in *internal *division within a Godhead. Thus, in this rare moment saying *Allah *is *wahid *is correct, as this isn’t saying that there is only one God (that’s already been established), but in contrast to the Christians saying of ‘three’ says that God is one internally, that there are no separate hypostases within the Godhead.

This brilliant shift of wording shows that author of the Qur’an understands Christian doctrine of there being only one God who consists of three separate hypostases within a Godhead, and that the author of the Qur’an understands that Christians do not believe in three gods (otherwise he would not have changed the normal ‘ahad’ to the usually superfluous ‘wahid’).

And again, it’s quite a stretch to claim that the author of the Qur’an could understand Trinitarian doctrine this well to make such calculative wording to avoid error, yet would make such elementary mistakes as switching the spirit for Mary.

Continued…

 

[Kadaveri]

Catholic Dude:

I did a word search and multiple references of “son of Allah” came up, in 9:30 it says:“The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths.” It also says in 5:72 “Allah is the Messiah” These are accurate claims because Christians believe this. If you are arguing Christians exalt Christ as less than God with merely a few “divine qualities” means the Quran is misrepresenting us.

I’m not arguing that Christians exalt Christ as less than God, as this isn’t what Christians believe and it certainly isn’t what the Qur’an says; since it says several times that Christians believe Jesus (as) ISGod (that they are one and the same God) and that they believe Jesus is the Son of God (which is refuted by saying God is one (wahid) object of worship (ilah), which also shows the Qur’an understands Christians view Jesus (as) as being an internal part of a Godhead of ‘three’.

Apologies for the length.

Peace.

 

[paarsurrey]

Hi
I would like to past here from, I think, a Catholic source for benefit of the discussion:
** Veneration of Mary**
**Both Catholics and Orthodox Christians venerate Mary by praying to her: kneeling in front of her images (statues, in the case of most Catholics, and icons in the case of the Orthodox), and entreating her aid. **Both Catholics and Orthodox make a clear distinction between such veneration (which is also due to the other saints) and worship, which is due to God alone. Mary, they point out, is not in herself divine, and has only such powers to help as are granted to her by God in response to her prayers. Roman Catholicism distinguishes three forms of honour: “latria”, due only to God, and usually translated by the English word adoration; “hyperdulia”, accorded only to the Blessed Virgin Mary, usually translated simply as veneration; and “dulia”, accorded to the rest of the saints, also usually translated as veneration.
First, one must understand what a graven image is in the context of the Old Testament. To make a graven image is to create an image out of some medium, such as clay or wood, and worship it as a God. The statues or pictures of Mary are not worshipped as a God. If a Catholic worships a statue of Mary as a God, they are guilty of idolatry.
God did not forbid the making of images. In fact, God commanded Moses to shape a brazen serpent. This serpent was able to cure the people of the serpent bite, if they looked upon it (Numbers 21:8). Later, when the people turned to idolatry of the serpent, Hezekiah had it destroyed (II Kings 18:4). Here you see the balance. Images are good, if they are helpful, but not if they encourage idolatry.
Moreover, the God commanded that the image of two Cherubim be constructed on the top of the Ark of the Covenant on either side of the Mercy seat. Was this the sin of idolatry? I think not.
Mary is the mother of God and the saints are the friends of God. If keeping their pictures or statues helps to inspire us to a more holy life, then it is a good thing. Don’t you have pictures of your family in your home? Is this idolatry? Or when someone dies, should you destroy all images or pictures of them, lest you be guilty of worshipping them?
Idolatry is heresy in the Catholic Church, and in all Protestant churches as well. We had a long discussion on this topic many times in the past few years, but unfortunately you were not here yet. I wish you had been a member then.
Mary was not the cause of the split in the Church. Martin Luther, a priest, became unhappy with the selling of indulgences (which WAS WRONG) and began the Protestant Reformation. In those times the Protestants still venerated the Holy Mother Mary. They made many changes in their doctrines through the years. The Catholic Church has remained faithful to the teachings of Jesus, the disciples, the prophets and God. You have to remember, in the lifetime of Jesus there was no Catholic Church…or any other “church”. But Jesus established his Church when he made St. Peter the first pope. “Thou are Peter (in Greek, Rock) and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gate of Hell shall not prevail against it.”
Unquote
This is the first one.
Thanks
I am an Ahmadi – a peaceful faith in Islam bridging gaps between faiths/denominations/religions/agnostics

 

[MH84]

I have asked a similar question on another post and I am still not sure to the answer.

Did Mohammed include include in the Quran that Christians claim that Mary was part of the Trinity? If so, if the supposed revelation given to Mohammed was from God Himself, why would He say that about Christians, when we believe in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit?