La ilaha illAllah - No God except Allah?

[Khalfan]

It is also wrong to conclude that we cannot be sure about the meaning of the word, for the Evangelists use different signifiers to use the same NOTION. Both the word “Lord” and the phrase “Master of the House” are linguistically and logically associated. This is an undeniable thing we know exactly.

You have to know atleast the translation of what he exactly said rather than assuming he could have called something that mean something like this or this. And if possible, its always better to go as deep as possible, trace his gestures and facial expressions while he was saying something. We know that Jesus (a) never said clearly that he is God or asked to worship him. Instead, the gospel says he pointed to his God and our God. But still you claim that Jesus (a) mentioned his divinity in his sayings like ‘I am the way, truth and life’ or ‘I and my father are one’ or ‘neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him’ when you don’t know and YOU DON’T CARE to know what exactly Jesus (a) said.

It is also wrong to conclude that we cannot be sure about the meaning of the word, for the Evangelists use different signifiers to use the same NOTION. Both the word “Lord” and the phrase “Master of the House” are linguistically and logically associated. This is an undeniable thing we know exactly.

I am not worried about any association. Does the word ‘Lord’ and ‘Master of the House’ mean the same thing? Simple logic, Unless you know the notion, how could you be so sure of the meaning?

Nope. They were inspired and controlled by God to write their testimonies although they were free to determine the vocabulary, plot, literary figures, etc.

If they were free to determine the vocabulary, plot, literary figures, etc., even in assuming situations, where do you think the control and inspiration of God worked?

Again you are repeating the assumption that such an important statement must be in the synoptic Gospels. You cannot teach the Evangelists what to add and what to leave out.

It is not a ‘must be’, it is natural to expect that quote in all gospels. Because from the very beginning, not only his disciples but jews also was looking for one quote as claim of divinity. If the passsages like ‘I am the way, truth and life’ or ‘I and my father are one’ are truly claim of his divinity as the christians hold today, why wasn’t it an issue among the disciples and how come any of the scenoptic gospel writers didn’t feel like to write about such contraversial issues? So we assume, it is highly possible that such issue never existed, because Jesus (a) never made such claims to mention his divinity. Again if it indeed claim of his divinity as the christians hold today. You said,

“this by no means implies that those Christians had been unaware of the teachings in John’s Gospel”

If so, then the writers did know about these claims but they never thought these claims as evidence of the divinity of Jesus (a) and they never felt it is something that should be written down.

This is your presumption. It is an essentially mistaken presumption because there are many verses referring to Jesus’ divinity in the synoptic Gospels. For instance:

Matthew 11:27
All things are delivered to me by my Father. And no one knoweth the Son but the Father: neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him.

See, you have to assume the divinity of Jesus (a) from any of his sayings. These words can be said by any messenger of God. Tell me where did you find the claim divinity? What he said in the original language is another question which you already said you don’t know and you don’t care.

This is because John did not employ in his Gospel the major plot used by the other three Evangelists. His Gospel is the most theological and didactic one in content.

The development of the story over time could result the same effect.

How can you be so sure about your personal assumptions? What helps you present yourself as an accurate statistician?

Besides, you are still evading my question: what is the significant information about Jesus’ life that is allegedly missing from the Gospels??? Please provide an example.

The very monotheistic faith of Jesus (a) is what missing in the gospels. When OT says, all the prophets before him said about One God, when the gospels in one hand says, Jesus (a) himself repeated the same teaching about One God many times, when Jesus (a) worshiped and prayed to his God, the vary same gospels gives a developed picture of the same Jesus (a) in the other hand. And the later books in the NT confirms it like in 1 Jn 5:7.

 

[Khalfan]

Why is that? This argument is by no means related to my statement. Your conclusion only functions to show that you either deliberately or intentionally misunderstand me.

But you said,

‘Your statements get illogical since none of the Gospels claim to report the exact event.’

If it is so, I am saying, none of the gospels can be taken literally. Is that a misunderstanding?

Where is the actual event that you can find?

Both of us doesn’t have it. That is what we are trying to reconstruct. I am using the idea Quran as I believe it is the word of God. And many passages in the gospels do support me in that reconstruction.

When the Gospels are in question, you somehow discard this possibility as an assumption.

The example gives the answer.

You are finally agreeing with me that there are differences in the alleged one book of Allah.

There are differences in the context. The event is the same. Please do not misunderstand me.

]Which verse reports the actual event? Which are the exact words Allah used while instructing Moses’ mother??? I see that you cannot give an answer.

This response is completely irrelevant to my questions. Please answer those questions because I want to know what Allah said to Moses’ mother exactly.

God told the Mother of Moses (a) as follows.

`Suckle (thy child), but when Thou hast Fears about him, Cast him into the river, But Fear not nor grieve: For We shall restore him To Thee, and We shall make Him one of Our apostles…

Now, read the underlined part once again. God saying this to a mother. She must be worried how God going to save her child. God revealed again.

`Throw (the child) Into the chest, and throw (The chest) into the river: The river will cast him Up the bank, and he will be taken up by one Who is an enemy to Me And an enemy to him’

I hope the situation is clear now.

 

[inJESUS]

But still you claim that Jesus (a) mentioned his divinity in his sayings like ‘I am the way, truth and life’ or ‘I and my father are one’ or ‘neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him’ when you don’t know and YOU DON’T CARE to know what exactly Jesus (a) said.

we care about what the evangelist wanted to say since they surely know more that muhammad…and we read what the evangelists’ disciples believed in as well…now if we prove that Jesus claimed divinity, you will shout “corruption” so it is of no use…and if we prove that the NT and tradition preached the crucifixion, you will still deny it…why? because some spirit made you doubt God’s words…

“For the Message of the Cross is foolishness to those who are on the way to perdition, but it is the power of God to those whom He is saving”

anything is foolishness to you as long as you do not believe God is Faithful and that passage was written long before muhammad.

Now if you want to read where Jesus claimed divinity, you will have to tell me first what do you understand from a man telling a bunch of al-azhar sheikhs that he is the Rahman the Raheem

I am not worried about any association. Does the word ‘Lord’ and ‘Master of the House’ mean the same thing? Simple logic, Unless you know the notion, how could you be so sure of the meaning?

 

[inJESUS]

Matthew 11:27
All things are delivered to me by my Father. And no one knoweth the Son but the Father: neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him.

See, you have to assume the divinity of Jesus (a) from any of his sayings. These words can be said by any messenger of God. Tell me where did you find the claim divinity? What he said in the original language is another question which you already said you don’t know and you don’t care.

.

any messenger of God can say nobody knows the Father except himself?

can you please provide one Biblical prophet who uttered such claim?

 

[inJESUS]

But you said,

‘Your statements get illogical since none of the Gospels claim to report the exact event.’

 

[Khalfan]

any messenger of God can say nobody knows the Father except himself?

can you please provide one Biblical prophet who uttered such claim?

The messengership itself proves they are the one who know God exactly at their time.

 

[inJESUS]

The messengership itself proves they are the one who know God exactly at their time.

do not assume. Please quote one Biblical prophet saying no one knows the Father except him…

 

[Khalfan]

no, that’s narrow-mindedness … the 4 gospels talk about the crucifixion, what made you reject it? lack of details or Muhammad?

Who rejected it?

no it is not because we are not asking about the meaning but about the use of different words and different details yet the author is supposed to be one and all-knowing so which ones were the exact words uttered?

I have given it already. Not different words, but details of the same event in two context.

 

[Khalfan]

do not assume. Please quote one Biblical prophet saying no one knows the Father except him…

Again, do you think all the sayings of all prophets are mentioned in the Bible?

 

[Khalfan]

…they never support the stupid Islamic theory that a book named Injeel had been revealed to Jesus.

Mk 1:14 After John was put in prison, Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God.

What the word ‘Injeel’ mean?

 

[Angelos]

You have to know atleast the translation of what he exactly said rather than assuming he could have called something that mean something like this or this. And if possible, its always better to go as deep as possible, trace his gestures and facial expressions while he was saying something. We know that Jesus (a) never said clearly that he is God or asked to worship him. Instead, the gospel says he pointed to his God and our God. But still you claim that Jesus (a) mentioned his divinity in his sayings like ‘I am the way, truth and life’ or ‘I and my father are one’ or ‘neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him’ when you don’t know and YOU DON’T CARE to know what exactly Jesus (a) said.

The fact that you are repeating the same assumptions of yours I have already rebutted (you have simply copied and pasted your previous post) shows that you do not want to know anyhting about the Gospels and that you don’t care about history and logic.

Your obssession with Jesus’ divinity is almost a malady now. Despite several statements by Jesus in all of the Gospels, you do not want to admit that Jesus referred to His divine personality. You first want us to cite the verses where Jesus claimed to be equal to God, whom He called His Father, but choose to deny the authenticity of the Gospels when we quote a few verses in response to your primary question. You are not consistent.

There is a fact we both know perfectly well: You would not believe in Jesus’ divinity even if a verse in the New Testament contained Jesus’ statement “I am God, worship me”. Why is that? Because you believe in the Koran, which presumes to know better about Jesus than Jesus Himself and than His disciples despite the fact that it was written down by a number of unknown authors who knew almost nothing about Jesus and His message!

Jesus prayed to God, His Father, as the Son in flesh. Your argument that Jesus cannot be divine because He prayed to God is not rational unless one deliberately denies the fact of Incarnation.

I am not worried about any association. Does the word ‘Lord’ and ‘Master of the House’ mean the same thing? Simple logic, Unless you know the notion, how could you be so sure of the meaning?

The word Lord and master means the same thing, of course. What do you understand if a man says “I am your Master” or “I am your Lord”??? Don’t you understand that the speaker considers the addressee his servant???

I can’t believe I have to repeat this for the 3rd time: We know the NOTION! The Evangelists knew what Jesus meant when He delivered that speech. Jesus is BOTH the Master of the House and the Lord. These two signifiers can be used interchangeably to mean the same thing.

If they were free to determine the vocabulary, plot, literary figures, etc., even in assuming situations, where do you think the control and inspiration of God worked?

You are not free to add into my post.I never said they were free even in assuming situations! Please be honest.

God controls the Evangelists so that they can express the truth about Jesus as He inspires and strengthens them.

It is not a ‘must be’, it is natural to expect that quote in all gospels. Because from the very beginning, not only his disciples but jews also was looking for one quote as claim of divinity. If the passsages like ‘I am the way, truth and life’ or ‘I and my father are one’ are truly claim of his divinity as the christians hold today, why wasn’t it an issue among the disciples and how come any of the scenoptic gospel writers didn’t feel like to write about such contraversial issues? So we assume, it is highly possible that such issue never existed, because Jesus (a) never made such claims to mention his divinity. Again if it indeed claim of his divinity as the christians hold today. You said,

“this by no means implies that those Christians had been unaware of the teachings in John’s Gospel”

If so, then the writers did know about these claims but they never thought these claims as evidence of the divinity of Jesus (a) and they never felt it is something that should be written down.

This is the fourth time we are debating Jesus’ statements, but you are still presenting your presumptions and expectations. The Evangelists were free to write what they wanted and to leave out what they did not deem crucial to write. You must, in the first place, know that the Gospels were not written to make some doubtful Jews happy or to hush a bunch of Muslims.

Besides, I have already proven that the synoptic Gospels confirmed Jesus’ divinity through different statements of Jesus. If you choose to deny those verses, there is no use keeping up this debate with your circular assumptions.

 

[inJESUS]

Who rejected it?

don’t you, as a Muslim criticizing the gospels, don’t you reject Jesus’ crucifixion even though all the gospels agree?

I have given it already. Not different words, but details of the same event in two context.

 

[Angelos]

See, you have to assume the divinity of Jesus (a) from any of his sayings. These words can be said by any messenger of God. Tell me where did you find the claim divinity? What he said in the original language is another question which you already said you don’t know and you don’t care.

You are the one who has to assume that Jesus could not have meant His divinity due to your assumption that Jesus never claimed to be divine due to your other assumption that Islam tells the truth about Jesus.

You say, “These words can be said by any messenger of God”, which is another assumption in your chain of assumptions. Could you please show me passages or verses from the whole Bible ( even from your Koran) where a messenger other than Jesus says He is the only person (Son) to know and reveal the Father??? How can an ordinary messenger can claim that no one else but He can know and reveal God to mankind???

The development of the story over time could result the same effect.

This is a new link you have to add to your chain of assumptions.

The very monotheistic faith of Jesus (a) is what missing in the gospels. When OT says, all the prophets before him said about One God, when the gospels in one hand says, Jesus (a) himself repeated the same teaching about One God many times, when Jesus (a) worshiped and prayed to his God, the vary same gospels gives a developed picture of the same Jesus (a) in the other hand. And the later books in the NT confirms it like in 1 Jn 5:7.

You are not being kind by evading my question and being irrelevant now. You said there were many things missing from Jesus’ life in the Gospels. Now the only missing thing, according to your interpretation and assumptions, is monotheistic faith. I can only say I am very disappointed. You only assume that Christianity is not a monotheistic faith and that monotheism is missing from the Gospels in sharp contrast to your other assumption that the Islamic monotheism occurs in Jesus’ statements in the same Gospels. It is high time you decided

Finally, still waiting for answers to my questions about the Koran. Please tell me the exact statements God used while instructing Moses’ mother: did God tell her to cast Moses into the river or to put Moses into an ark and cast the ark into the river? Did God tell Moses’ mother anything about the identitiy of the person that would take Moses from the river or not?

 

[Angelos]

Mk 1:14 After John was put in prison, Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God.

What the word ‘Injeel’ mean?

Injeel is the Arabic transliteration of the Greek word Evangelion for “Good News”. Show me a single verse from the New Testament where Jesus says “God has given me a scripture named Injeel”.

 

[inJESUS]

Again, do you think all the sayings of all prophets are mentioned in the Bible?

you are turning round the bush…you have plenty of prophets in the Bible throughout thousands of years…and you claimed, so prove your claim and try to find just one who claimed what Jesus said…

besides, Jesus does not say “no one knows the Father except prophets” but says “no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son *wishes *to reveal him”, and which applies to biblical prophets to whom the Son revealed about the Father…so again, neither assume nor twist Jesus’ words because He was specific about Himself.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

again, Allah is not the name of a once ignorant arab god…that was a different name…allot…allat…that is totally different.

Allah is the name He chose for Himself.

The only problem is that a) it’s not a name and b) God didn’t chose it for Himself. We Arabs did that.

 

[Angelos]

But you said,

‘Your statements get illogical since none of the Gospels claim to report the exact event.’

If it is so, I am saying, none of the gospels can be taken literally. Is that a misunderstanding?

You are either kidding or have serious problems with understanding me. The report of the exact event in the same way requires dictation, which is an alien notion to Christianity. Minor differences in the writing style or details of the same event do not mean that the report has no connection to the reality.

Besides, not even in the Koran, which sticks to the notion of dictation, can we find the report of the exact event due to textual variations. You can understand what I mean if you check the following verses:

Surah 20:70
Then the wizards were (all) flung down prostrate, crying: We believe in the Lord of Aaron and Moses.

Surah 7:120-122
And the wizards fell down prostrate, Crying: We believe in the Lord of the Worlds, The Lord of Moses and Aaron.

Surah 26:46-48
And the wizards were flung prostrate, Crying: We believe in the Lord of the Worlds, The Lord of Moses and Aaron.

God supposedly revealed that narrative to Mohammad in His one book. However, it is impossible to know the exact statement of the wizards! The writer or reciter of Surah 20 did not know that the wizards used the phrase “Lord of the Worlds” and formulated their phrase “The Lord of Moses and Aaron” in a different order.

There are differences in the context. The event is the same. Please do not misunderstand me.

Nope, sorry but what is different is not only the context, but also the way God’s instructions to Moses’ mother are formulated. These differences are clear with the help of my quotation and questions.

God told the Mother of Moses (a) as follows.

`Suckle (thy child), but when Thou hast Fears about him, Cast him into the river, But Fear not nor grieve: For We shall restore him To Thee, and We shall make Him one of Our apostles…

Now, read the underlined part once again. God saying this to a mother. She must be worried how God going to save her child. God revealed again.

`Throw (the child) Into the chest, and throw (The chest) into the river: The river will cast him Up the bank, and he will be taken up by one Who is an enemy to Me And an enemy to him’

I hope the situation is clear now.

It is still not clear because I want to see the original words used by God in His instructions to Moses’ mother. We still do not know if God told Moses mother to cast the baby or the ark into the river.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Why john’s gospel is different from the scenoptics?

Because it was the last, written a generation after the rest, and could presuppose his readers already had the Synoptics.

Only 10 % from the life of Jesus (a) is mentioned in the gospels. In that 10 %, 99 % of his teachings are assumptions.

Where do you create that figure?

(I give 1% chance to you if there is even a single saying of Jesus (a) mentioned all 4 gospels with exact same words.
)

Christ spoke Aramaic. The NT is in Greek. Differing of wording can catch the various nuances of the original.

Then some of my assumption has to be facts as you know every assumption got 50% possibility.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Always you say the gospels are in agreement and then assume of a possibility of agreement. If the gospels are already in agreement, why do you still have to assume the possibility by saying, “it is possible and reasonable for humans…” ? You have to assume becasue the gospels are not in agreement in the case, how the disciples expressed their fear, by rebuke or prayer?

It is not a minor detail. It teaches a big lesson, if Jesus (a) was worshiped by his disciples. To know that we have to make sure the passeges mentioning such cases are not assumptions of the writers or of the people where the writers were getting their information.



If the gospels gives us enough supporting to assume that the story about Jesus (a) was evolving over time, why don’t assume so?

You have to know atleast the translation of what he exactly said rather than assuming he could have called something that mean something like this or this. And if possible, its always better to go as deep as possible, trace his gestures and facial expressions while he was saying something. We know

oh, how do you know?

that Jesus (a) never said clearly that he is God or asked to worship him. Instead, he pointed to his God and our God. But still you claim that Jesus (a) mentioned his divinity in his sayings like ‘I am the way, truth and life’ or ‘I and my father are one’ or ‘neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him’ when you don’t know and YOU DON’T CARE to know what exactly Jesus (a) said.

The Jews throwing rocks at Him for claiming He was God knew EXACTLY what He said.
So do we.

It is not a minor detail. It teaches a big lesson, if Jesus (a) was worshiped by his disciples. To know that we have to make sure the passeges mentioning such cases are not assumptions of the writers or of the people where the writers were getting their information.

Matthew 28:17 When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

**First of all St. Mark and St. Luke.were not apostles.

As far the author of NT’s first Gospel attributed to a certain saint named ‘Matthew’ is actually unknown even to your NAB’s commentators:

"The unknown author**, whom we shall continue to call Matthew for the sake of convenience, drew not only upon the Gospel according to Mark but upon a large body of material (principally, sayings of Jesus) not found in Mark that corresponds, sometimes exactly, to material found also in the Gospel according to Luke.

“This material, called “Q” (probably from the first letter of the German word Quelle, meaning “source”), represents traditions, written and oral, used by both Matthew and Luke. Mark and Q are sources common to the two other synoptic gospels; hence the name the “Two-Source Theory” given to this explanation of the relation among the synoptics.”

“In addition to what Matthew drew from Mark and Q, his gospel contains material that is found only there. This is often designated “M,” written or oral tradition that was available to the author. Since Mark was written shortly before or shortly after A.D. 70 (see Introduction to Mark), Matthew was composed certainly after that date, which marks the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans at the time of the First Jewish Revolt (A.D. 66-70), and probably at least a decade later since Matthew’s use of Mark presupposes a wide diffusion of that gospel. The post-A.D. 70 date is confirmed within the text by Matthew 22:7, which refers to the destruction of Jerusalem.”

So author of Matthew too cannot be Jesus’ disciple. Now left non-synoptic John’s gospel:

“[The Gospel according to John] does not follow the same order or reproduce the same stories as the synoptic gospels. To a much greater degree, it is the product of a developed theological reflection and grows out of a different circle and tradition. It was probably written in the 90s of the first century.”

usccb.org/nab/bible/index.htm#matthew

All these statements are of your Bible’s commentators. From this none of your “cononized” gospels were wrtitten by Apostles of Jesus.

Now by whom was the first list of the books of the Catholic Bible drawn up?
By Pope Damasus, at the Roman Council of 382 A.D. In the fourth centuryINDENT]

Would you like to know what the same “higher critics” say about the Quran?

And according to your own Tradition, Muhammad did not write the Quran.
​

​