Muslims and Christ Divinity

[PRmerger]

Because it’s a poor argument for Muslims.

Look, I’m not even here to say you’re wrong because that’s not the point of this thread, my point is that you’re not being helpful.

Let’s say I want to prove to an Atheist that abortion is wrong, I don’t simply say to him “it’s wrong because the Church says so and that’s it.” Although it would be true, it’s not the right argument to use.

So again, you’ve thrown a wedge in the conversation by saying that the Trinity cannot be found in the Bible.

Frankly, you are not the arbiter of what is helpful or not in discussions here.

We are all free to comment and add our thoughts, and as long as we abide by the CAFs rules/stickies, there ought to be no objection to arguments presented.

That you do not like the fact that I agree with Muslims and JWs and Christadelphians and all other non-Trinitarians in that the Trinity cannot be found in the Bible (outside of the lens of the CC which directs our gaze correctly) is an inutile objection.

 

[PRmerger]

Ah, so your criticism is not that my arguments are redundant.

It is that they are too sophisticated for the readers here.

Is that a better synopsis of your objection?

Yes, that too.

Respectfully, you are also not the arbiter of how un-sophisticated the Muslim (and other non-Trinitarian) readers are, and how I ought to tailor my arguments here.

That is wayyyy beyond your paygrade, ronald.

Have you been reading the Islamic objections?

Yes.

And even if I were to judge that there are imbecilic Muslims here (which, BTW, I have not!) and that it would be better if I only used mono-syllabic words to better suit these posters, I also post for lurkers.

Do you have an objection to my posting to lurkers also?

 

[dronald]

Frankly, you are not the arbiter of what is helpful or not in discussions here.

We are all free to comment and add our thoughts, and as long as we abide by the CAFs rules/stickies, there ought to be no objection to arguments presented.

That you do not like the fact that I agree with Muslims and JWs and Christadelphians and all other non-Trinitarians in that the Trinity cannot be found in the Bible (outside of the lens of the CC which directs our gaze correctly) is an inutile objection.

When Christians and Muslims are discussing the Trinity in the Bible and a Christian says, “the Trinity is not in the Bible” I do have every right to call you out on your poor apologetic skills.

 

[PRmerger]

When Christians and Muslims are discussing the Trinity in the Bible and a Christian says, “the Trinity is not in the Bible” I do have every right to call you out on your poor apologetic skills.

It is the Catholic position.

As such, as a Catholic here on a Catholic forum, I have every right to post this.

We received the teaching of the Trinity from the Apostles. NOT from the Bible.

We do not distill our doctrines from a book, no matter how holy.

Muslims are People of the Book.

Christians are People of the Word.

 

[dronald]

It is the Catholic position.

As such, as a Catholic here on a Catholic forum, I have every right to post this.

We received the teaching of the Trinity from the Apostles. NOT from the Bible.

We do not distill our doctrines from a book, no matter how holy.

Muslims are People of the Book.

Christians are People of the Word.

Yes PR, but because Muslims accept the Gospels based on their Qur’an when I’m discussing with Muslims I’ll quote the Gospel. Assuming that a Muslim does not believe the Bible is entirely corrupt (some do some dont.) However, they do not accept the CC’s authority but they are willing to ponder some words in the Bible. That is why I present my arguments from the Bible, as nothing else is worth discussing regards to Christianity for a Muslim.

 

[PRmerger]

Yes PR, but because Muslims accept the Gospels based on their Qur’an when I’m discussing with Muslims I’ll quote the Gospel. Assuming that a Muslim does not believe the Bible is entirely corrupt (some do some dont.) However, they do not accept the CC’s authority but they are willing to ponder some words in the Bible. That is why I present my arguments from the Bible, as nothing else is worth discussing regards to Christianity for a Muslim.

Please show me from the Gospels alone the Trinity.

 

[dronald]

Please show me from the Gospels alone the Trinity.

Certainly.

Now the actual passage in question before you arrived was Matthew 28:19* Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit*

The idea that God would equate Himself with a lesser being (be it Jesus) and have Baptism done in God’s name and something lesser than God would never be accepted by a Muslim. Nonetheless Jesus also commands the disciples to, “go out into all nations” and do such. So here either Jesus is blaspheming by putting Himself on the same level with God, as well as the Holy Spirit (if He is not God as well) or Jesus is making Himself equal with God.

This ties in well with John’s Gospel as he sets the stage in how the entire Gospel ought to be read: 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

John is stating that not only was the Word (Jesus) with God, but the Word was also God at the exact same time. The belief that not only Jesus was God and with God is found at the beginning of John and is believed by both you and I. We believe that Jesus was fully God, and with God at the same time and we also believe the following passage 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. This is in direct contradiction of, “Allah begetteth not.”

After John sets the stage he continues to explain the context of his Gospel: *5:18Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God. *

This also works hand in hand here: *Mark 14:61But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. 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.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?” They all condemned him as worthy of death.
*
A High Priest would have known exactly what Jesus was saying here, and he was so angry that he even tore his clothes and accused Jesus of blasphemy. High Priests were very well versed in their Theology and would have had no reason to over-react if Jesus was not saying what is obvious.

Also, for further evidence from Mark (because Muslims rather like Mark.) we have the entirety of the Trinity found in 1:10 And immediately, coming up from the water, He saw the heavens parting and the Spirit descending upon Him like a dove. 11 Then a voice came from heaven, “You are My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

The idea that God would call Jesus His Son is foreign to Islam but is found all throughout Scripture. Let’s take a look at the Transfiguration:

Matthew 17:1After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves.2There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light… 5While he was still speaking, a bright cloud covered them, and a voice from the cloud said, **“This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. **Listen to him!”

Mark 9:2 Now after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John, and led them up on a high mountain apart by themselves; and He was transfigured before them…7 And a cloud came and overshadowed them; and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “**This is My beloved Son. **Hear Him!”

Luke 9:28 Now it came to pass, about eight days after these sayings, that He took Peter, John, and James and went up on the mountain to pray…35 And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is My beloved Son. Hear Him!”

Not only is it found in Matthew, Mark and Luke but Peter even relates this story:

2 Peter 1:16 For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. 17 For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” 18 And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the** holy mountain.**

There’s much more than this, and I know the Church is important to you and I’m not arguing that, but I feel like you didn’t need to say what you said for this specific conversation. Hope we’re still friends! Merry Christmas!

 

[PRmerger]

Certainly.

Now the actual passage in question before you arrived was Matthew 28:19* Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit*

The idea that God would equate Himself with a lesser being (be it Jesus) and have Baptism done in God’s name and something lesser than God would never be accepted by a Muslim. Nonetheless Jesus also commands the disciples to, “go out into all nations” and do such. So here either Jesus is blaspheming by putting Himself on the same level with God, as well as the Holy Spirit (if He is not God as well) or Jesus is making Himself equal with God.

So Jesus was making Himself equal with God.

My husband and I are equals. That does not make us One Person.

This ties in well with John’s Gospel as he sets the stage in how the entire Gospel ought to be read: 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

John is stating that not only was the Word (Jesus) with God, but the Word was also God at the exact same time. The belief that not only Jesus was God and with God is found at the beginning of John and is believed by both you and I. We believe that Jesus was fully God, and with God at the same time and we also believe the following passage 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. This is in direct contradiction of, “Allah begetteth not.”

After John sets the stage he continues to explain the context of his Gospel: *5:18Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God. *

This also works hand in hand here: *Mark 14:61But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. 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.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?” They all condemned him as worthy of death.
*
A High Priest would have known exactly what Jesus was saying here, and he was so angry that he even tore his clothes and accused Jesus of blasphemy. High Priests were very well versed in their Theology and would have had no reason to over-react if Jesus was not saying what is obvious.

Also, for further evidence from Mark (because Muslims rather like Mark.) we have the entirety of the Trinity found in 1:10 And immediately, coming up from the water, He saw the heavens parting and the Spirit descending upon Him like a dove. 11 Then a voice came from heaven, “You are My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

The idea that God would call Jesus His Son is foreign to Islam but is found all throughout Scripture. Let’s take a look at the Transfiguration:

Matthew 17:1After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves.2There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light… 5While he was still speaking, a bright cloud covered them, and a voice from the cloud said, **“This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. **Listen to him!”

Mark 9:2 Now after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John, and led them up on a high mountain apart by themselves; and He was transfigured before them…7 And a cloud came and overshadowed them; and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “**This is My beloved Son. **Hear Him!”

Luke 9:28 Now it came to pass, about eight days after these sayings, that He took Peter, John, and James and went up on the mountain to pray…35 And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is My beloved Son. Hear Him!”

Not only is it found in Matthew, Mark and Luke but Peter even relates this story:

2 Peter 1:16 For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. 17 For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” 18 And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the** holy mountain.**

You can’t include Peter because that is not part of the Gospels you referenced.

And where in all of the above is any apologia for the Holy Spirit being a person?

There’s much more than this, and I know the Church is important to you and I’m not arguing that, but I feel like you didn’t need to say what you said for this specific conversation. Hope we’re still friends! Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas to you, too!

But I don’t understand your point in this little section. Is not the point of being on a CAFs to discuss religion?

It’s like you’re going to a Cruciverbalist Convention and saying, “Look, I don’t really know why you feel like you have to do crossword puzzles here.”

 

[PRmerger]

Yes PR, but because Muslims accept the Gospels based on their Qur’an when I’m discussing with Muslims I’ll quote the Gospel. Assuming that a Muslim does not believe the Bible is entirely corrupt (some do some dont.) However, they do not accept the CC’s authority but they are willing to ponder some words in the Bible. That is why I present my arguments from the Bible, as nothing else is worth discussing regards to Christianity for a Muslim.

Let me just say that I do understand the emotion you have attached to this.

A similar, but not exact, analogy is how I feel when I am in a discussion with a Protestant regarding the CC’s position of “Outside the Church there is no salvation”. I will feel like we are making headway, and the Protestant is just beginning to grasp the nuances of the teaching…

when a Traditionalist Catholic will step in and say, “Nope! If you are not a baptized Catholic registered in a traditionalist parish who attends only the Latin Mass and receives communion only on the tongue, the Church says you are going to go to hell.”

My reaction is:



The difference, however, between my scenario and the one on this thread is that in my scenario the Traditionalist Catholic has proclaimed something that is not true.

In this thread here, what I have professed is indeed true.

 

[dronald]

So Jesus was making Himself equal with God.

My husband and I are equals. That does not make us One Person.

Remember, the discussion is on Christ’s divinity. No doubt you and your husband are equals, in the same way Christ and God are equals. However Muslims don’t accept this, so while this point may not work for proving Catholicism vs Protestantism from Scripture, it’s certainly strong enough for this discussion with Muslims.

So Jesus was making Himself equal with God.

You can’t include Peter because that is not part of the Gospels you referenced.

I knew you would say that, but it adds a little fuel to my example. God referring Jesus to His Son, while the Qur’an explicitly says Allah is above having a son.

And where in all of the above is any apologia for the Holy Spirit being a person?

I just showed how Jesus is equal with God from John 1 and all throughout John, including the Synoptic’s. The point is to prove Christ’s divinity from the Gospels, and such can easily be done. You and I could have an in depth discussion on the Trinity as it relates to your Religion and mine, but that’s for another place.

Merry Christmas to you, too!

But I don’t understand your point in this little section. Is not the point of being on a CAFs to discuss religion?

It’s like you’re going to a Cruciverbalist Convention and saying, “Look, I don’t really know why you feel like you have to do crossword puzzles here.”

Let me just say that I do understand the emotion you have attached to this.

A similar, but not exact, analogy is how I feel when I am in a discussion with a Protestant regarding the CC’s position of “Outside the Church there is no salvation”. I will feel like we are making headway, and the Protestant is just beginning to grasp the nuances of the teaching…

when a Traditionalist Catholic will step in and say, “Nope! If you are not a baptized Catholic registered in a traditionalist parish who attends only the Latin Mass and receives communion only on the tongue, the Church says you are going to go to hell.”

My reaction is:

https://imgur.com/xl3HNaC

The difference, however, between my scenario and the one on this thread is that in my scenario the Traditionalist Catholic has proclaimed something that is not true.

In this thread here, what I have professed is indeed true.

True or untrue you nailed it.

 

[PRmerger]

Remember, the discussion is on Christ’s divinity.

And so my point still remains incontrovertible: the Trinity can not be found in the Bible, as the Muslim poster stated.

You cannot prove the Trinity from the Bible, and esp. not only from the Gospels, which was what you were trying to assert.

 

[dronald]

And so my point still remains incontrovertible: the Trinity can not be found in the Bible, as the Muslim poster stated.

You cannot prove the Trinity from the Bible, and esp. not only from the Gospels, which was what you were trying to assert.

So then you would assert that Christ’s divinity, His equality with God, etc can be found in the Gospels but not The Trinity as you would define it?

 

[PRmerger]

So then you would assert that Christ’s divinity, His equality with God, etc can be found in the Gospels but not The Trinity as you would define it?

No. Each and every time you offer a verse about Christ’s divinity, a JW or Muslim or other Bible reader is going to offer another verse which states Jesus’ humanity.

That’s why you need the Church to settle things.

Otherwise, you get into Bible quoting wars, which are inutile.

 

[Kliska]

You cannot prove the Trinity from the Bible,

To the thread in general; I’d really like to know if any other Christian on here believes that one cannot prove the Trinity from the Bible?

From Catholic.com "The doctrine of the Trinity is encapsulated in Matthew 28:19, where Jesus instructs the apostles: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”

To encapsulate; contain, summarize, encase…

There are also many sources on the 'net showing forth the idea of the Triune nature of God in the Gospels, also throw in the OT references, and the rest of the NT and it is quite clear.

 

[PRmerger]

To the thread in general; I’d really like to know if any other Christian on here believes that one cannot prove the Trinity from the Bible?

From Catholic.com "The doctrine of the Trinity is encapsulated in Matthew 28:19, where Jesus instructs the apostles: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”

To encapsulate; contain, summarize, encase…

There are also many sources on the 'net showing forth the idea of the Triune nature of God in the Gospels, also throw in the OT references, and the rest of the NT and it is quite clear.

It is only because you have read the Scriptures through the lens of the Catholic Church that you can see the Trinity encapsulated in some verses.

 

[Kliska]

It is only because you see the Scriptures through the lens of the Catholic Church that you can see the Trinity encapsulated in some verses.

PR, a Roman Catholic said that, not me, though I agree with whoever wrote that up.

 

[PRmerger]

PR, a Roman Catholic said that, not me, though I agree with whoever wrote that up.

Said what?

 

[Kliska]

Said what?

From Catholic.com "The doctrine of the Trinity is encapsulated in Matthew 28:19, where Jesus instructs the apostles: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”

Again; encapsulate means contain, summarize, encase.

 

[PRmerger]

From Catholic.com "The doctrine of the Trinity is encapsulated in Matthew 28:19, where Jesus instructs the apostles: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”

Again; encapsulate means contain, summarize, encase.

Sure.

But it is because you have read the Scriptures through the lens of the CC.

I suggest you show that verse to a JW and see if he says, “Ah, yes, The Trinity!”

Actually, don’t do it. It will be futile.

And it will be futile because he has rejected the glasses of the CC which show him what that verse means.

And, in your paradigm, his own glasses that he uses are just fine.

Unfortunately, that means that he can’t see the Trinity in the Bible.

 

[Kliska]

But it is because you have read the Scriptures through the lens of the CC.

That’s what you have to believe, the alternative would create extremely uncomfortable cognitive dissonance for you.