Islamic teaching questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter JamesATyler
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No, you’re making the claim that a human was not a liar. You’re departing from the basic knowledge that humans are sinful. The burden of proof lies on the one making the claim, and you’re the one making the claim that Muhammad was totally trustworthy.
 
Capta(name removed by moderator)rudeman said:
No, you’re making the claim that a human was not a liar. You’re departing from the basic knowledge that humans are sinful. The burden of proof lies on the one making the claim, and you’re the one making the claim that Muhammad was totally trustworthy.
Click to expand...
No. I have done nothing more than quote the opinions of others. I have not stated my personal opinions at all.
 
Last edited:
Claim: Muhammad never lied.
Base knowledge: Humans lie.

You’re definitely making the claim here. If you can’t find anything to support your position, just say it, but don’t try passing off secondhand quotes as firsthand testimonies.
 
To whom it may concern:

It seems I am not permitted to post replies to a certain person more than three consecutive times.

If that person happens to be reading this I can only repeat that I have done nothing more than quote the opinions of others, and have not stated my personal opinions at all.

Would they please provide first-hand (non-Muslim) proof of their claim made against the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam). Until then, this conversation is adjourned.
 
Once more, I am not going to provide any proof, as I am not making a claim. Muhammad was a man, susceptible to all the same temptations. It wasn’t you that made the very wild claim that Muhammad was not a liar, but you supported them and that’s why I’m going after you. The burden of proof lies on the affirmative. Go ahead and prove that the claim of his non-lying originated outside Islam, and I’ll accept it. Otherwise, I have very good grounds to call your prophet a liar: he was human.
 
I find many errors in your commentary so I will be brief and redirect to one flaw in your misunderstanding and how tragically you falsify the Quran stating things that it never does. For example;

You stated; “The message is clear: The First Person of the Trinity begets. The Second Person of the Trinity is begotten.”

Wrong we never proclaim such a carnal understanding (of begetting or begotten) of the procession of God’s Presence. It appears your Quran again has a Wrong understanding of what God eternally begets (in divine revelation) and what is eternally begotten. Are you sure you want to claim the Quran makes such a terrible carnal blunder understanding (eternal begotten and eternal begetting of God’s divine revelation) of God’s divine revelations proceeds into time and space?
That which proceeds eternally is eternal. God eternally proceeds divine revelation God from God, That which is eternal Light proceeds from Light. What proceeds from God is God, or God begets eternally is God. The Father eternally begets the Son
“I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.”

You stated, ‘Al-Ikhlas’ is a Meccan Surah - the twenty-second to be revealed. Verses 1-4 read: ‘Say: ‘‘He is Allāh the One, Allāh the eternal. He begot no one nor was He begotten. No one is comparable to Him.’’’

If Your Quran is using it’s own definition of a carnal understanding of begotten, then it is wrong to use this error against the Nicene Creed. Because your Quran’s carnal begotten does not make since when placed up against the Nicene Creed eternally begotten.

You stated; “Again, the message is equally clear: Allāh (subḥānahu ūta’āla) states that He has begotten no one; therefore, He cannot be the First of the three Persons of the Trinity. Moreover, He is not begotten, and therefore cannot be the Second Person. This leaves only the third Person; the Holy Spirit”.
I have to agree with you here, God does not beget a biological Son. But to think in error that you are correcting the professed Eternal begotten with a carnal begotten. Then both you and the Quran are deeply stooped in grave error.
Unless you are misunderstand the Quran?
to be continued

We cannot proceed to the subject in the procession of the Holy Spirit until you and the 'Quran first understand what is the procession of God’s divine revelation in eternal begetting and eternal begotten of the Father.

If? the Quran teaches God cannot eternally beget or give divine revelation and make it known. Then the god of the Quran cannot speak or do anything from eternity to make present in space and time.

This is what eternally begetting and eternally begotten means when professed from the Nicene Creed, That God proceeds divine revelation and makes know divine revelation in the eternal sending or eternal begetting of the Word = Son, who makes known divine revelation in space and time,
The Quran does not reject this eternal begetting nor does the Quran clarify it…
to be continued
 
Last edited:
I’m just saying that a very important tenant of Islam is that Muhammad didn’t lie. Muhammad is a man, and so the claim is rather ridiculous in that light, that a human being wouldn’t lie. Not everything needs to come from outside, but such a quality would be easily observable by outsiders, no?
 
What is your justification for saying that the Qur’an is using the word ‘begotten’ in a way that is different from its use in the ‘Nicean Creed’? Please quote your sources.
 
Last edited:
Prove your source that the Quran teaches the way you are informing us here of a begotten or begetting? Is it eternal or carnal understanding?
I will yield to you, due to my time constraints and respond to you in kind.
peace be with you
 
Capta(name removed by moderator)rudeman said:
I’m just saying that a very important tenant of Islam is that Muhammad didn’t lie. Muhammad is a man, and so the claim is rather ridiculous in that light, that a human being wouldn’t lie. Not everything needs to come from outside, but such a quality would be easily observable by outsiders, no?
Click to expand...
Well Jesus was man but people claim he never lied. People even claim he was God. Seems like a better strech. Are there any claims of Jesus never lying and being God that come from outside Christianity?
 
See, that’s different. Christians believe that Jesus was fully God, so it’s not unbelievable for him to have not lied. Muslims believe that Muhammad was simultaneously human and able to do things like never lying.
 
The Church teaches that within the Trinity there are two internal divine processions: the ‘Begetting of the Son and the Procession of the Holy Spirit’. (cf. Denzinger 86).

By ‘procession’ is understood the origin of one from another. By ‘internal procession’ is meant an act that takes place within the Trinity (as opposed to ‘external procession’, by which is meant the creation of all that lies outside of the Trinity - their primary origin).

The Athanasian Creed confesses: ‘The Son is from the Father alone not made not created but generated.’ (Denzinger 39). Therefore, the Second Person is related to the First as a Son to a Father.

In Hebrews 1:5 we read: ‘You are my Son, today I have fathered you’ (New Jerusalem Bible). Other versions render ‘father’ as ‘begotten’. Is the author of Hebrew’s suggesting that God had sex with Mary? Of course not.

Compare these two:

‘The angel said: “Mary, God gives you news of a word from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, who will be held in honour in this world and the next, who will be one of those brought near to God……He will be one of the righteous.’ She said: “My Lord, how can I have a son when no man has touched me?’ (The angel) said: “This is how God creates what He will: when He has ordained something, He only says, “Be”, and it is.’ (Al‘Imran: 45-47).

‘(The angel) went in and said to her, “Rejoice, you who enjoy God’s favour! The Lord is with you”. She was deeply disturbed by these words and asked herself what this greeting could mean, but the angel said to her, “Mary, do not be afraid; you have won God’s favour. Look! You are to conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you must name him Jesus………Mary said to the angel, ‘But How can this come about, since I have no knowledge of man?’ The angel answered, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will cover you with its shadow”’ (Luke1: 28-35).

It is the very same God who is being spoken of in these accounts. I’m sure you will agree that only a perverted mind would see the act of sexual intercourse in either of them.

The Qur’an teaches that Allāh (subḥānahu ūta’āla) does not beget at all (and is not begotten). Therefore, Islam has no concept of ‘internal procession’ within the Godhead.

Peace.
 
Last edited:
First of all, The Nicene declares the eternal begotten of what follows in the Nicene Creed.
I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.

Here is the Catholic Church confirming the eternal begotten from CCC

CCC241
For this reason the apostles confess Jesus to be the Word: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”; as “the image of the invisible God”; as the "radiance of the glory of God and the very stamp of his nature."65
References: 465
242
Following this apostolic tradition, the Church confessed at the first ecumenical council at Nicaea (325) that the Son is “consubstantial” with the Father, that is, one only God with him.66 The second ecumenical council , held at Constantinople in 381, kept this expression in its formulation of the Nicene Creed and confessed "the only-begotten Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father."

The sources that I can provide which declare the Son is eternally begotten of the Father are too numerous to list here. Suffice to say, every Catholic since biblical times, Church councils and now the latest CCC all profess the eternal begotten Son of the Father.

Why would you provide sources to try and discredit the eternal begetting which the Catholic Church has professed since the resurrection of Jesus Christ. I have proven this eternal begotten faith is professed from the CCC.

Can you prove that the Quran is teaching the Truth of an eternal begetting and rejecting God’s divine revelation in procession, or a carnal Father who begets a son according to the flesh?
I believe the correct interpretation of the Quran needs to be qualified here of which it speaks of a carnal begetting which the Quran already hints at, or an eternal begetting understanding which the Catholic Christian has always professed.
Once you learn and understand what we Catholics profess and believe about the eternal begetting, the procession of the Holy Spirit will make perfect logical and reasonable faith of the divine Presence of God.
The burden of proof is upon you my friend. Prove your truth.
 
Last edited:
Speaking of the mercy and love of G-d, does Islam believe that those who are not Muslim but instead are Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, and so on can attain heaven rather than hell after death based on the faith of their own religions and their good works? Or does one have to convert to Islam to be saved (provided there is a notion of salvation in Islam)?
 
I don’t know about your two procession. What you relate to here is not speaking of two distinct orders but of ONE eternal procession, in short I believe your confusing theology with faith, So let’s stick to our sources. Here is what the CCC teaches about the divine procession in order to be clear.
CCC explains ONE Spiration of Love;
CCC246 The Latin tradition of the Creed confesses that the Spirit “proceeds from the Father and the Son (filioque)”. The Council of Florence in 1438 explains: "The Holy Spirit is eternally from Father and Son; He has his nature and subsistence at once (simul) from the Father and the Son. He proceeds eternally from both as from one principle and through one spiration of Love. . . . And, since the Father has through generation given to the only-begotten Son everything that belongs to the Father, except being Father, the Son has also eternally from the Father, from whom he is eternally born, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son."75

Here is Matthew where Jesus begins to fulfill God’s prophecies from the
prophet Isaiah; by Jesus conception. Imagine that, Jesus already begins to fulfill God’s prophecies before He is born.

Matthew 1:20 an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 21She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus,f because he will save his people from their sins.”

22All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23“The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”g (which means “God with us”).

Now we have a famous Prophet of God from antiquity who gives witness from a far, an angel who preannounces Immanuel =God is with us and Matthew the gospel writer. That is three historical witnesses.

You stated this; “The Qur’an teaches that Allāh (subḥānahu ūta’āla) does not beget at all (and is not begotten). Therefore, Islam has no concept of ‘internal procession’ within the Godhead.”

Correction; The Quran nor Islam has no concept of the Catholic Christian faith of what an eternal begetting is, thus you argue from the Quran at a disadvantage or mistakenly holding the Christian faith in contempt without no divine revelation declaring you to oppose.

The Quran teaches that Allah does not beget a bio-logical son. We can agree to reject such a heresy. This is Islam’s dichotomy of the True Christian faith. It tries to use Christian terminology with a different or confused definition to the Christian definition of the term.
Islam or Muslims pretend to reject a Christianity that never exist’s in the 2000 year Catholic Christian faith.
Peace be with you
 
Last edited:
Capta(name removed by moderator)rudeman said:
God is not a being in this universe. He exists outside of it, and our simple minds cannot comprehend the trinity in its fullness. Just because we can’t understand it doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
Click to expand...
Jesus and Holy spirit were in this universe so they were not God.

Our simple mind cannot comprehend the essence of God in fullness. And it is true. No one in that manner can say true or false for Trinity. But Trinity was not revealed. So if someone make comments about essence of God(for instance to claim that God has relations and three distinct personalties in essence) then those reading is to be nonsense. As you said we cannot comprehend. Like that we can make many interpretations. But all will be foolish. Our mind cannot comprehend eternal essence of God. But someone could make readings very easily!

And just we cannot understand it doesn’t mean it is not true but also it does not mean it is true.
 
OriginalGabrielof12 said:
If? the Quran teaches God cannot eternally beget or give divine revelation and make it known. Then the god of the Quran cannot speak or do anything from eternity to make present in space and time.
Click to expand...
Qur’an is eternal in originally but also is in time and space. And all acts of atoms and subatomic particles as a knowledge are in eternal knowledge of God but also we can see them in time and space. Qur’an teach that.
 
OriginalGabrielof12 said:
The Quran teaches that Allah does not beget a bio-logical son. We can agree to reject such a heresy. This is Islam’s dichotomy of the True Christian faith. It tries to use Christian terminology with a different or confused definition to the Christian definition of the term.
Islam or Muslims pretend to reject a Christianity that never exist’s in the 2000 year Catholic Christian faith.
Click to expand...
Biological or unbiloligical Qur’an means both. Because Jesus were a human but also you claim He had a divine nature. Here being importand is that God mention that God has no associates in Deity. God explain that very obviously in Qur’an. It is not importand how you definite Trinity but God rejects all kinds. And also there is no any eqivalent to God. That means Son is not equal to Father and nor Holy Spirit.

3- He neither begets nor is born,

4- Nor is there to Him any equivalent." Al-Ikhlas(112)
 
OriginalGabrielof12 said:
I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.

Here is the Catholic Church confirming the eternal begotten from CCC

CCC241
For this reason the apostles confess Jesus to be the Word: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”; as “the image of the invisible God”; as the "radiance of the glory of God and the very stamp of his nature."65
References: 465
242
Following this apostolic tradition, the Church confessed at the first ecumenical council at Nicaea (325) that the Son is “consubstantial” with the Father, that is, one only God with him.66 The second ecumenical council , held at Constantinople in 381, kept this expression in its formulation of the Nicene Creed and confessed "the only-begotten Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father."
Click to expand...
There are logical flaws in “begetting eternally” or “proceeding eternally”. God is eternal and there is no levels in eternal. Begetting eternally imply that there was first God eternally and later begot son in eternal. In that manner there must be levels and orders in eternity but that is not true.

And also God is full eternal. Something who begotten eternally cannot be eternal God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top