Muslims: Did Jesus Die on the Cross?

[Methos]

Human.

Why can’t God do whatever He wants to do? Why do you place limitations on Him? Could God not become flesh if that what He desired? Does he not have the power?

Steve

Hence, another contradiction in the Quran. It denies the Incarnation, yet in Sura 4:64

“The Jews say: Allah’s hand is fettered. Their hands are fettered and they are accursed for saying so. Nay, but both His hands are spread out wide in bounty. He bestoweth as He will. That which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord is certain to increase the contumacy and disbelief of many of them, and We have cast among them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection. As often as they light a fire for war, Allah extinguisheth it. Their effort is for corruption in the land, and Allah loveth not corrupters.”

 

[hasantas]

hasantas-

There are over 5,000 manuscript copies of the New Testament scattered around the libraries and museums of the world. We can compare them to determine whether any additions have been made to the text. For example, if 4,999 texts say one thing, and one text says something slightly different, odds are that the one text is wrong and the 4,999 are correct.

Make sense?

Muslims believe that the Bible has been corrupted, but let’s stay focused on the New Testament since that tells the story of Jesus and Christianity. I have over 5,000 manuscripts which support the common Christian view.

Can you produce a single early manuscript of Matthew, Mark, Luke or John which demonstrates that these books did not teach the death and resurrection of Jesus before all the other manuscripts were corrupted by later additions?

Thanks.

Can you tell that where is the original texts of Gospels in their original languages?

 

[TheotokosSaveUs]

Can you tell that where is the original texts of Gospels in their original languages?

You answered a question with a question.

Randy did not ask you anything about the originals. He asked you to produce an early manuscript copy of one of the four gospels which does not teach the death and resurrection of Christ.

If it is your position as a Muslim that the NT is corrupted by later additions, then the burden of proof is on you to prove that there are uncorrupted manuscripts that teach Islamic doctrine. The burden isn’t on Randy, because the manuscript tradition already supports the Christian view of the death of Christ. You can’t ask him to disprove a negative.

 

[hasantas]

Human.

In heaven, within Jesus’ glorified human Body, sitting at the right hand of the Father.

Yes. He will always be Jesus, fully human (now glorified) and fully divine.

Well the good news is that he didn’t destroy that soul. He lives for eternity.

Jesus’ human soul did not have omniscience or omnipotence. Our soul comprises our intellect and our will. Christ had a human intellect and will (He had to grow in human knowledge), but he also had the infinite intellect and will of God (he could read people’s hearts and perform miracles).

Why can’t God do whatever He wants to do? Why do you place limitations on Him? Could God not become flesh if that what He desired? Does he not have the power?

God did not “settle in a body”. He assumed human flesh and came into this world the way all of us come into this world (with the exception that He was born of a virgin). He became man and dwelt among us. Why do you not believe this to be possible when all things are possible with God?

Peace.

Steve

So there are three Gods in Heavens and beside them Jesus human body? And we have three and a half Gods?

And you did not explain that exactly: İs the soul which was in Jesus body apart from Son’s (God, as you assume) soul? And how did the human soul contact with divine soul? Or if there has been only one soul then of whom was it? Will we assume the Jesus human body as a God in Heavens?

Did God have His diivine attributes while He dwelled in body? Or was human soul aware of divinity?

I cannot point the problem exactly because of poor English. You generally say Jesus had two natures: one divine and other human. Well how can these match and concur in one personality without refuting each other? A man is a man and a God is a God in every situations. If God drop divine attributes(that is not possible) then God is not God any more? …

 

[hasantas]

You answered a question with a question.

Randy did not ask you anything about the originals. He asked you to produce an early manuscript copy of one of the four gospels which does not teach the death and resurrection of Christ.

If it is your position as a Muslim that the NT is corrupted by later additions, then the burden of proof is on you to prove that there are uncorrupted manuscripts that teach Islamic doctrine. The burden isn’t on Randy, because the manuscript tradition already supports the Christian view of the death of Christ. You can’t ask him to disprove a negative.

Quran is exactly words of Allah so we can trust. But the Gospels were written by the perhaps tertiary people. Even that texts were translated in diffrerent languages for many times. So there may be some misinterpretation and that is usual.

If we had the original text then we could prove if Bible was corrupted or not. But since there is Quran and Quran is so correct. Quran say some truths and indicate that these facts were corrupted in Bible and Torah by the time. Quran verify the real and original texts but also inform that some part were changed by people for profits and interests. Since we have not the original texts of Bible then we must trust Quran.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Jesus did not forgive sins but Jesus inform that the sins are being forgiven.(Jesus got that knowledge from God and then express)

:nope:

Jesus was not simply expressing forgiveness after hearing from God; Jesus claimed that He Himself had authority to forgive sins, and He performed miraculous healings to prove that He had such authority. Forgiving sins and performing miracles are two proofs that Jesus is God.

Three witnesses testified that Jesus claimed the authority to forgive sins.

Matthew 9
Jesus stepped into a boat, crossed over and came to his own town. 2 Some men brought to him a paralyzed man, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the man, “Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven.” 3 At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, “This fellow is blaspheming!” 4 Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, “Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? 5 Which is easier: to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up and walk’? 6** But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” **So he said to the paralyzed man, “Get up, take your mat and go home.” 7 Then the man got up and went home. 8 When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to man.

Mark 2
5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralyzed man, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”
6 Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7 “Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?” 8 Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, “Why are you thinking these things? 9 Which is easier: to say to this paralyzed man, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up, take your mat and walk’? 10 But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” So he said to the man, 11 “I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.” 12 He got up, took his mat and walked out in full view of them all. This amazed everyone and they praised God, saying, “We have never seen anything like this!”

Luke 5
20 When Jesus saw their faith, he said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven.” 21 The Pharisees and the teachers of the law began thinking to themselves, “Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” 22 Jesus knew what they were thinking and asked, “Why are you thinking these things in your hearts? 23 Which is easier: to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up and walk’? 24 But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” So he said to the paralyzed man, “I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.” 25 Immediately he stood up in front of them, took what he had been lying on and went home praising God. 26 Everyone was amazed and gave praise to God. They were filled with awe and said, “We have seen remarkable things today.”

 

[hasantas]

Hence, another contradiction in the Quran. It denies the Incarnation, yet in Sura 4:64

“The Jews say: Allah’s hand is fettered. Their hands are fettered and they are accursed for saying so. Nay, but both His hands are spread out wide in bounty. He bestoweth as He will. That which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord is certain to increase the contumacy and disbelief of many of them, and We have cast among them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection. As often as they light a fire for war, Allah extinguisheth it. Their effort is for corruption in the land, and Allah loveth not corrupters.”

Sura 5 :64 not 4:64

Quran reject incarnation that is true. But there is nothing about incarnation in that verse?

Look at that:

(1. Say: He is Allah, the One;

1. Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
2. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
3. And there is none like unto Him. Al-Ikhlâs)

 

[Randy_Carson]

Can you tell that where is the original texts of Gospels in their original languages?

The originals eventually fell apart because parchment/paper/papyrus does not last forever. More on this in a moment.

However, we have one copy from the first century and seventeen from the second century. Compare this to the oldest copy of the Koran which dates from the year AD 651.

So, I ask again, have Muslim scholars discovered a copy of the NT which was NOT corrupted and can be used to disprove the Christian belief that Jesus is God, that He died upon the Cross, and that He rose again on the third day?

Remember, Islam insists that Jesus did not die and that the Bible is corrupted. The Bible says that Jesus did die. Therefore, I am eager to learn what physical evidence you have to prove this corruption.

Now, back to the heart of your question concerning the original texts of the NT. Is this a problem for Christianity? The answer is “no”, and here’s why:

Each author of a NT book wrote an original manuscript which I’ll call “M”. Using M, copies were made and sent to various Churches in the NT era. I’ll call these second-generation copies, C1, C2 & C3. The number of copies is not important for this illustration. Now, imagine that copies of the copies were made as the Christian Church expanded since every local congregation wanted to have a copy of these important texts. I’ll call the copies of C1, C1a, C1b & C1c. There would also be C2a, C2b, and so forth. With me so far?

In the following diagram, each column represents a generation. For example, M is the original, C1 a copy of M, C1a is a copy of C1, and C1a1 is a copy of C1a. Like this:

M > C1 > C1a > C1a1

Over the course of history, some copies are lost or destroyed. The copies which have not been lost are in portrayed in red.

M—C1—C1a—C1a1
-------------C1b—C1b1
----------------------C1b2
-------------C1c—C1c1
----------------------C1c2
------C2—C2a—C2a1
-------------C2b—C2b1
------C3—C3a—C3a1
----------------------C3a2
-------------C3b—C3b1
-------------C3c—C3c1
----------------------C3c2
----------------------C3c3

Now, imagine further that M, C1, C2 & C3 along with C1a, C2a, C3a & C3b have all been lost, but that C1b, C1c, C2b & C3c are all in museums scattered around the world - Moscow, London, the Vatican, etc. Additionally, all of the copies of those copies still exist (I’m simplifying, of course).

We know that M must have existed, and logic dictates that C1, C2 & C3 must have existed (though we may be unsure of the number of first-generation copies). We can learn that both C1 & C2 must have existed by comparing the extant copies C1b & C2b and discovering subtle variations in the texts - copyists glosses or “typos”, if you will. If C1 was slightly different from C2, then those differences will be reflected in C1a and C2a along with all of the subsequent copies of those copies. Variations were passed on from generation to generation. Make sense?

So, how can we know with certainty what the Bible actually said if we don’t have the original autograph (M) or if errors (variations) crept into the text? By comparing the existing texts, scholars can work backwards to determine what M actually said. This process, called Textual Criticism, can never be perfect since humans are involved (along with the Holy Spirit!), but we can have a high degree of confidence that the Bible we have to day contains the message that the original authors intended to convey.

 

[Kliska]

Quran is exactly words of Allah so we can trust.

It’s not claimed, to my knowledge, that Allah personally wrote the Quran down in it’s final form. In fact, it was dictated by a human, and recorded by various humans on various materials later compiled and ordered by still more humans.

But the Gospels were written by the perhaps tertiary people. Even that texts were translated in diffrerent languages for many times. So there may be some misinterpretation and that is usual.

That is why humans have ways and means of “textual criticism” that are even applied to the Quran. There is more textual evidence for the validity of the OT and NT than any ancient work. Further, the Bible has been found to be prophetically accurate, historically accurate, archaeologically accurate, internally and externally consistent. Islamic denial of the accuracy of scriptures is one of it’s fundamental flaws.

If we had the original text then we could prove if Bible was corrupted or not. But since there is Quran and Quran is so correct. Quran say some truths and indicate that these facts were corrupted in Bible and Torah by the time. Quran verify the real and original texts but also inform that some part were changed by people for profits and interests. Since we have not the original texts of Bible then we must trust Quran.

What you have here is a later written book claiming something about an earlier written set of books, as the Bible is not one monolith, but rather a collection of documents that support each other because those that wrote it were guided directly by God. Logic dictates that the burden of proof falls on Islam to show the errors in scripture according to textual criticism. It has failed to do so. There is no compelling evidence that “parts were changed by people for profits and interests” quite the opposite actually.

 

[Kliska]

The originals eventually fell apart because parchment/paper/papyrus does not last forever. More on this in a moment.

However, we have one copy from the first century and seventeen from the second century. Compare this to the oldest copy of the Koran which dates from the year AD 651.

So, I ask again, have Muslim scholars discovered a copy of the NT which was NOT corrupted and can be used to disprove the Christian belief that Jesus is God, that He died upon the Cross, and that He rose again on the third day?

Remember, Islam insists that Jesus did not die and that the Bible is corrupted. The Bible says that Jesus did die. Therefore, I am eager to learn what physical evidence you have to prove this corruption.

Now, back to the heart of your question concerning the original texts of the NT. Is this a problem for Christianity? The answer is “no”, and here’s why:

Each author of a NT book wrote an original manuscript which I’ll call “M”. Using M, copies were made and sent to various Churches in the NT era. I’ll call these second-generation copies, C1, C2 & C3. The number of copies is not important for this illustration. Now, imagine that copies of the copies were made as the Christian Church expanded since every local congregation wanted to have a copy of these important texts. I’ll call the copies of C1, C1a, C1b & C1c. There would also be C2a, C2b, and so forth. With me so far? I sure hope the following diagram reproduces well…think of each column as a generation. The copies which have not been lost are in red.

M—C1—C1a—C1a1
-------------C1b—C1b1
----------------------C1b2
-------------C1c—C1c1
----------------------C1c2
------C2—C2a—C2a1
-------------C2b—C2b1
------C3—C3a—C3a1
----------------------C3a2
-------------C3b—C3b1
-------------C3c—C3c1
----------------------C3c2
----------------------C3c3

Now, imagine further that M, C1, C2 & C3 along with C1a, C2a, C3a & C3b have all been lost, but that C1b, C1c, C2b & C3c are all in museums scattered around the world - Moscow, London, the Vatican, etc. Additionally, all of the copies of those copies still exist (I’m simplifying, of course).

We know that M must have existed, and logic dictates that C1, C2 & C3 must have existed (though we may be unsure of the number of first-generation copies). We can learn that both C1 & C2 must have existed by comparing the extant copies C1b & C2b and discovering subtle variations in the texts - copyists glosses or “typos”, if you will. If C1 was slightly different from C2, then those differences will be reflected in C1a and C2a along with all of the subsequent copies of those copies. Variations were passed on from generation to generation. Make sense?

So, how can we know with certainty what the Bible actually said if we don’t have the original autograph (M) or if errors (variations) crept into the text? By comparing the existing texts, scholars can work backwards to determine what M actually said. This process, called Textual Criticism, can never be perfect since humans are involved (along with the Holy Spirit!), but we can have a high degree of confidence that the Bible we have to day contains the message that the original authors intended to convey.

You beat me to it.

 

[Trekker47]

Whew, thread’s moving fast again, that’s good, I’m gonna get back to some of the stuff from yesterday.

hasantas:

With His human nature Jesus is not a perfect sacrifice. And with His divine nature Jesus cannot be sacrifice or mediator because in that way Jesus is assumed to be a God. With attributes of a God Jesus cannot be model for human.

As a human nobody is perfect neither Muhammed nor Jesus. Becuase human needs many things and is very weak. But God is perfect and needs nothing and is omnipotent. So prophets were perfect model as prophethood’s job. But also they may do some faults as a human but never commit sins.

I feel like the problem here is that you keep trying to separate Jesus’ human nature from His divine. He’s at once fully God and fully man. He’s the perfect sacrifice precisely because He’s both at once; the shedding of human blood atones for human sins, and His divinity makes it of infinite worth. Also I don’t understand why His being divine would mean He can’t be a sacrifice, since God is the only one able to pay the price for us.
Secondly, with the attributes of God Jesus is the best model we could have. We always try to model ourselves after God anyway; when we tell the truth, or forgive others for hurting us, or try to love others, we’re trying to be more like God.
Thirdly, Muhammed may not have been perfect, but Jesus was. Since He chose to assume human nature, He wasn’t dependent the way we are. If you look at how in the desert the devil tried to tempt Him to turn a stone into bread, or at the parable of the loaves and fishes, where Jesus effectively creates food, you can see He wasn’t exactly ‘helpless’. He could have returned to heaven any time He chose, or have chosen to not need food, but He had already chosen to live a life as a human, so it’s not to say that Jesus is any less divine because He chose to create needs in Himself.

You see every prophet was a perfect model for human. There is no need for a perfect man God model. Every prophet taught people how to repent and worship.

I disagree, you already stated that none of the other prophets were perfect, so why should we choose imperfect people as our models? I wouldn’t like to model myself after Moses in the desert, striking the rock three times instead of the one time God told him to, or after Abraham, who didn’t trust in God’s promise and slept with Hagar. Instead I try to model myself after the perfect human, who was perfectly loving, perfectly humble, etc.

I want to ask: If Jessu has two nature where did the soul go which animates body of human nature? Is that soul yet existing? Or did that soul dissolve? Or was the God’s soul(Indeed God has not a soul as we assume) in human nature body? If that was so then why we say that Jesus had two nature? Dose God’s soul have not attributes of divinity even in a material(indeed that is not true for God) body?

You make that issue very difficult. Firstly you assume God as three person/character then you assume one of them to have two natures either

As far as I know on this, and it seems you agree, God doesn’t have a soul, since He is pure spirit. When Jesus assumed a human body, He also assumed a human soul (since not to have a human soul wouldn’t be human), and that’s what animated His human body, but Jesus, as a divine being, still possessed the divine nature.
As for making it difficult, I hope you don’t expect God to be simple to understand! Have you ever heard of wave-particle duality in science? Scientists are still trying hard to understand how light can be both a wave and a particle at once, and if we can’t even understand God’s creation, we can hardly expect Him to be any less complex than it.

Why do not father show any humble? Is Jesus(Son) a more good God?

Simple, the Father had nobody to be humble to. Jesus is begotten of the Father, not the other way around. Still though, the Father does show humility in that He only comes into our lives if we let Him, but I don’t know if that counts.

I will tell much about Muhammed. So was Muhammed a God? We(Muslims) believe in that everything was created from light of Muhammed. Muhammed could see many different times some centuries before and after…

Did Muhammed actually claim to be God? Seeing the past and future isn’t the same as being timeless. Eternal existence is a trait claimed by God alone. Let’s compare the OT and the NT for a moment.

• Moses said to God, “Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ Then what shall I tell them?”

14 God said to Moses, “I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”*
The important thing here is that God identifies Himself as the one who is eternally existent. I already explained, but you may have missed it, that for the Jews, they aren’t allowed to pronounce those words, “I am”. When they conjugate the verb ‘to be’, they don’t have a first person for it, because that’s the name of God. That’s why it’s all the more incredible that Jesus claimed “Before Abraham was, I am”. And the fact that the Jews realised that what He was saying amounted to blasphemy is shown in how they tried to stone Him.

 

[Trekker47]

hasantas:

trekker47:

My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. 30**“I and the Father are one.”**

31 **The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him.**Yes Jesus’s Father(God) has given those to Jesus and nobody can snatch. You see Jesus gave all honor to God and gave honor Himself to be with God(under God’s subject)

This is probably my fault for quoting more than necessary, so I’ve bolded/coloured the important bits. Jesus here is claiming to be one with God, it’s pretty much a direct claim to being God, and definitely supports the Trinity. Again, if you’re not sure whether it’s actually a claim to be God, just look at the reactions of the Jews, who tried once again to stone Him for blaspheming.

Yes who believe in Jesus is on the true way and believer do not die because they will have a ever last life in Heavens after world.

He’s not saying “I am the way to life”, He’s saying “I am the way and the life”. Has any other prophet claimed to actually be ‘life’ itself? I doubt it, because the source of all life is God, so here again Jesus must be saying He is God.

A) Jesus was lord(master) and prophet of them. But that term of “God” easily might be comment of writer.

B) that “Son” is messenger or prophet of God.
C) Jesus was messenger of God.
D) They verified that He was messenger of God.

A) It’s highly unlikely that the term “God” is only a comment. The writers were trying to write an accurate history of Jesus’ life, they’re not going to put in comments that completely alter the meaning of what was said, especially at such a significant moment. Besides, you can’t just dismiss an inconvenient word as “probably an extra by the writer” when there’s no reason to believe that.

B) Son doesn’t mean messenger or prophet, it means son. It doesn’t make sense to explain this by substituting another word with a meaning that’s entirely different.
Besides, Jesus specifies "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son If Son here means prophet/messenger, that would mean Jesus is God’s only prophet, which doesn’t make sense. And also, to ‘beget’ means to create something of the same nature as yourself - a human man begets a human child, but an artist doesn’t beget a painting, for instance. If God begot a son, then that means that son also shares in the divine nature, ie. Jesus is God.

C) Same thing applies here, Son doesn’t equal messenger.

D) Worshipping isn’t ‘verifying that someone is a messenger’. Why would they worship a mere human, and why would Jesus accept worship? Would Muhammed be happy if people worshipped him? I doubt it.

Muhammed is spirit of every truth.

Even world does not kow exactly but believer know Him very well and Muhammed is in hearts of believers.

Right, I’ll try not to spend long on this. Muhammed isn’t ‘the Spirit of truth’, Muhammed is a human, and the world did see him, because, well, he was pretty visible when he was around. And do you really consider Muhammed to be ‘in’ you? I don’t consider other prophets to be ‘in’ me, because speaking honestly that’s kinda weird. As a Christian though, I believe God’s spirit is in me.
Anyway, here’s something else, Jesus says “You know Him, because He abides with you.” If this spirit abides with them at the present time, not some 600 years in the future, how can it be Muhammed? It must be someone who’s with them now, and since we believe that the Holy Spirit is the third person of the Trinity, then it makes sense that the Holy Spirit is in Jesus, and is thus ‘with’ the apostles.
As it happens, Jesus later says “Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. (Acts 1:4), and scare 10 days later the Holy Spirit comes to the apostles at Pentecost, so again it can’t be Muhammed.

So there are three Gods in Heavens and beside them Jesus human body? And we have three and a half Gods?

No, there aren’t three Gods in heaven. There’s one God, in whom there are three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. One of our saints explained it with a shamrock - three leaves but all the same plant. There’s no half God either, Jesus’ human nature is an integrated part of Him.

And you did not explain that exactly: İs the soul which was in Jesus body apart from Son’s (God, as you assume) soul? And how did the human soul contact with divine soul? Or if there has been only one soul then of whom was it? Will we assume the Jesus human body as a God in Heavens?

Did God have His diivine attributes while He dwelled in body? Or was human soul aware of divinity?

It’s hard to explain because it’s a complex matter. I think I mentioned earlier that God doesn’t have a soul, since He is existence itself and pure spirit, so that it’s not a matter of conflicting souls, exactly. Jesus is one person with the divine nature, and when he assumed a human body He also added a human soul to His person so that He could be fully human, especially since a soul is what animates the human body. Of course He still possessed the divine nature, but how exactly the two interacted isn’t something I’m sure about. I do know that Jesus’ body isn’t its own God up in Heaven though, but Jesus Himself still has the glorified body which was crucified.
As for divine attributes, yes He certainly had a number of them. We’ve seen that He’s able to see into people’s hearts and know what they’re thinking:
The scribes and the Pharisees were watching Him closely to see if He healed on the Sabbath, so that they might find reason to accuse Him. But He knew what they were thinking, and He said to the man with the withered hand,
Also of course He was able to perform miracles, heal the sick, raise the dead, and of course forgive sins.

 

[hasantas]

:nope:

Jesus was not simply expressing forgiveness after hearing from God; Jesus claimed that He Himself had authority to forgive sins, and He performed miraculous healings to prove that He had such authority. Forgiving sins and performing miracles are two proofs that Jesus is God.

Three witnesses testified that Jesus claimed the authority to forgive sins.

Matthew 9
Jesus stepped into a boat, crossed over and came to his own town. 2 Some men brought to him a paralyzed man, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the man, “Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven.” 3 At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, “This fellow is blaspheming!” 4 Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, “Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? 5 Which is easier: to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up and walk’? 6** But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” **So he said to the paralyzed man, “Get up, take your mat and go home.” 7 Then the man got up and went home. 8 When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to man.

Mark 2
5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralyzed man, “Son, your sins are forgiven.”
6 Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7 “Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?” 8 Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, “Why are you thinking these things? 9 Which is easier: to say to this paralyzed man, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up, take your mat and walk’? 10 But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” So he said to the man, 11 “I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.” 12 He got up, took his mat and walked out in full view of them all. This amazed everyone and they praised God, saying, “We have never seen anything like this!”

Luke 5
20 When Jesus saw their faith, he said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven.” 21 The Pharisees and the teachers of the law began thinking to themselves, “Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” 22 Jesus knew what they were thinking and asked, “Why are you thinking these things in your hearts? 23 Which is easier: to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up and walk’? 24 But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.” So he said to the paralyzed man, “I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.” 25 Immediately he stood up in front of them, took what he had been lying on and went home praising God. 26 Everyone was amazed and gave praise to God. They were filled with awe and said, “We have seen remarkable things today.”

The conclusion Jesus to be God is interpreted amiss from verses. But there is no noticeable statement which demonstrate that Jesus is a God. Forexample you claim that Jesus forgive sins so He must be a God. But there is no directly statements from Jesus tha He forgive sins. I red verses very carefully. Jesus never said that “I forgave your sins”. But instead He say your sins are forgiven. That means someone else forgive sins and Jesus inform that.

Jesus was a prophet. Prophet Muhammed informed to some Sahabas that Allah forgave their sins. Jesus did same.

Jesus saw their faith and then express that their sins are being forgiven. So the reason of being forgiven is the faith. Yes faith clean the dirts of rejection.

The issue that people say “who is that claim to frogive sins” can be interpret in many ways. These people saw many miracles from Jesus.So they could be convinced that Jesus is a very holy man. And they gave praise to God for meeting with Jesus. And also they might be convinced that Jesus could know the information of being forgiven. But some people might not be convinced that Jesus was sent by God. So they might have objection about Jesus.

For Muslims there is no any responsibility about Jesus to be God or not. Because Jesus lived just like a human and prophet. Beyond of that is a mystery which is not so noticeable and has very conflicts. And also Quran inform that exactly Jesus was a prophet and humanbeing. But for Christians there is a very serious responsibility. If Jesus is not God!

 

[hasantas]

Right, I’ll try not to spend long on this. Muhammed isn’t ‘the Spirit of truth’, Muhammed is a human, and the world did see him, because, well, he was pretty visible when he was around. And do you really consider Muhammed to be ‘in’ you? I don’t consider other prophets to be ‘in’ me, because speaking honestly that’s kinda weird. As a Christian though, I believe God’s spirit is in me.

 

[SteveVH]

So there are three Gods in Heavens and beside them Jesus human body? And we have three and a half Gods?

Christianity has never claimed three gods. There is one God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

And you did not explain that exactly: İs the soul which was in Jesus body apart from Son’s (God, as you assume) soul? And how did the human soul contact with divine soul? Or if there has been only one soul then of whom was it?

God does not have a soul. The soul is the animating principle of our bodies. Christ has a soul as part of his humanity, but does not have two souls, one human and one divine. Prior to his incarnation the Second Person of the Trinity had no soul.

And how did the human soul contact with divine soul? Or if there has been only one soul then of whom was it?

It is Jesus’ soul which he has as part of his humanity. One soul, not two.

Will we assume the Jesus human body as a God in Heavens?

Jesus will always be Jesus for eternity; fully human and fully divine. His body has been glorified, just as ours will be at the resurrection, transformed so that it may dwell in heaven.

Did God have His diivine attributes while He dwelled in body? Or was human soul aware of divinity?

Yes, Jesus, in his humanness, was aware of his divinity. He knew he was the Son of the living God.

I cannot point the problem exactly because of poor English.

I think you do very well.

You generally say Jesus had two natures: one divine and other human. Well how can these match and concur in one personality without refuting each other?

Because God willed it. Jesus is one Person, both human and divine, with no confusion and no separation between his humanity and his divinity. Yes, this is certainly a mystery which is beyond our human understanding, but it is a revealed truth and therefore we must accept it whether it makes sense in human terms or not.

A man is a man and a God is a God in every situations. If God drop divine attributes(that is not possible) then God is not God any more? …

Well, God never “dropped” his divine attributes. That is why Jesus could perform such extraordinary miracles such as raising people from the dead, giving sight to the blind, walking on water, commanding the wind and the seas, making a fig tree wilt in a moment…

Peace.

Steve

 

[TheotokosSaveUs]

Christianity has never claimed three gods. There is one God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

God does not have a soul. The soul is the animating principle of our bodies. Christ has a soul as part of his humanity, but does not have two souls, one human and one divine. Prior to his incarnation the Second Person of the Trinity had no soul.

It is Jesus’ soul which he has as part of his humanity. One soul, not two.

Jesus will always be Jesus for eternity; fully human and fully divine. His body has been glorified, just as ours will be at the resurrection, transformed so that it may dwell in heaven.

Yes, Jesus, in his humanness, was aware of his divinity. He knew he was the Son of the living God.

I think you do very well.

Because God willed it. Jesus is one Person, both human and divine, with no confusion and no separation between his humanity and his divinity. Yes, this is certainly a mystery which is beyond our human understanding, but it is a revealed truth and therefore we must accept it whether it makes sense in human terms or not.

Well, God never “dropped” his divine attributes. That is why Jesus could perform such extraordinary miracles such as raising people from the dead, giving sight to the blind, walking on water, commanding the wind and the seas, making a fig tree wilt in a moment…

Peace.

Steve

St. Steve Athanasius

 

[Kliska]

The conclusion Jesus to be God is interpreted amiss from verses.

So there are no verses that point to Jesus as God, and if there are, they are being interpreted incorrectly, and if not interpreted incorrectly, then the scriptures were actually changed? You’ve now created an illogical loop for yourself to be able to dismiss any evidence. The truth is this; Jesus claimed divinity, clearly He did indeed forgive sins, His enemies knew both of those facts and verified them, and the scriptures are trustworthy. There is both old testament and new testament evidence of Jesus being God, as well as historical evidence. But no evidence will reach you if you have already closed out any possibility that what others have told you is wrong.

The only answer; God is truly the One in control, let’s both pray to Him that whichever one of us is wrong, that He will guide us to Truth.

 

[Trekker47]

The conclusion Jesus to be God is interpreted amiss from verses. But there is no noticeable statement which demonstrate that Jesus is a God. Forexample you claim that Jesus forgive sins so He must be a God. But there is no directly statements from Jesus tha He forgive sins. I red verses very carefully. Jesus never said that “I forgave your sins”. But instead He say your sins are forgiven. That means someone else forgive sins and Jesus inform that.

Jesus was a prophet. Prophet Muhammed informed to some Sahabas that Allah forgave their sins. Jesus did same.

To put it simply, there is a statement where Jesus claims to have forgiven the man’s sins, He says “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”, not “the Son of Man has authority to announce that God has forgiven sins”. This can’t be anything other than a direct claim, and it boils down to “I can forgive sins”, and to prove to the people around Him that He does indeed have this authority, He demonstrates His authority to heal the man physically, just as He healed his soul.
If you want further proof that Jesus is the one who forgives sins, and isn’t just passing on a message, look at John 1:29 - The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! ie. Jesus is identified as the one who forgives our sins.
As for why He says ‘your sins are forgiven’ rather than ‘I have forgiven them’, personally I think it just sounds more definitive to say it in the passive, it seems like a symantics thing.
By the way, all through the Old Testament I’ve found that whenever anyone says someone else’s sins are forgiven, they specify God as having done it, for example:
*Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.” Nathan replied, “The Lord has taken away your sin. * (2 Samuel 12:13)
Jesus apparently doesn’t feel the need to mention that God has forgiven sins, precisely because Jesus IS God, and God is the only one who can forgive sins on His own authority.

Jesus saw their faith and then express that their sins are being forgiven. So the reason of being forgiven is the faith. Yes faith clean the dirts of rejection.

Imagine if my mother said to me “I won’t make your dinner until you’ve cleaned your room”. When I do finish cleaning my room, my dinner isn’t somehow magically made simply because my room is clean, my mother sees that my room is clean and then she makes the dinner. Same thing here, faith doesn’t magically forgive our sins, Jesus forgives them because He sees that we have faith.

The issue that people say “who is that claim to frogive sins” can be interpret in many ways. These people saw many miracles from Jesus.So they could be convinced that Jesus is a very holy man. And they gave praise to God for meeting with Jesus. And also they might be convinced that Jesus could know the information of being forgiven. But some people might not be convinced that Jesus was sent by God. So they might have objection about Jesus.

The way I see it, the people are making the very valid point that only God can forgive sins, which is why Mark points out that they thought He was blaspheming. That’s why it’s so extraordinary when Jesus says that He is indeed able to forgive sins.

Still though, you keep offhandedly asserting that Jesus was just a prophet, but you’re ignoring all the other evidence. I mean look:

1. Jesus accepts worship.
2. He claims to have existed from eternity.
3. He calls Himself by God’s name (which nobody else was allowed to even utter).
4. Claiming to be one with God.
5. Calling Himself “the only Son of God”.
6. Claiming to be the source of life.

 

[Trekker47]

Jesus was a prophet so He talk for all believers not people during His time. Jesus abides with people as a human and prophet. And so Muhammed was with us in same way. Jesus did not tell about some real spirits. Everyhuman has a spirit and every believer’s soul can receive something from God as moraly.

So wait, when Jesus told his disciples specifically that the Holy Spirit was with them (in the present tense), He was actually referring to 600 years in the future, and not his disciples at all? That doesn’t make sense.
It makes even less sense that He would tell the disciples to wait in Jerusalem for someone who wasn’t going to come for another 600 years (especially when Muhammed never even went to Jersualem). It makes much more sense if you realise that the Holy Spirit is indeed the person in question, considering (as I said before) that the Holy Spirit did indeed come to them only a few days after Jesus said to wait for Him.

If there is not three gods what about “trinity” Father, Son and Holy Spirit. You give divine attributes to three. And if there are three people in somewhere then it is very obvious that there are three people in somewhere. Three persons in one person! That is funny. Or you try to say that: God has three personalities? So God deceive Muslims and all other People of Book as one unique person but indeed God was three persons in one person! and informed that only to Christians?

You’re misunderstanding the nature of the Trinity, it really is just one God, in whom there are three persons. It’s not three separate gods. It can be kinda tricky to grasp at first. I don’t suppose you ever read the book ‘Flatland’? The main character in it is a square, and he had an awful lot of trouble imagining that there could be such a thing as a ‘cube’, which was its own entity, but contained 6 squares. I think we’re a bit like the square in that story, it’s hard for us to imagine anything more than a square
Not three persons in one person either, or three personalities, three persons in one being.
As for God deceiving Muslims, you recall that we Christians don’t believe that the Quran is God’s word, so it’s not an issue for us of God deceiving you. As for the Jews, we don’t think God deceived them, we think He revealed Himself gradually. That’s why for us, the Father is revealed in the Old Testament, the Son is revealed in the Gospels, and the Holy Spirit is revealed in the Acts of the Apostles, but the Son and Holy Spirit are also hinted at in the earlier books.
You may or may not know that the Jews for a long time didn’t believe there was such a place as Heaven, they thought they would all go to sheol, where both the righteous and unrighteous would be cut off from God. That wasn’t God deceiving them, He was just waiting until a better time to tell them about Heaven.

Some moraly high people(Avliya) can know what other people think and that is Karamat. Jesus was a great prophet. We must not be surprise that when He performed some miracles.

You asked if Jesus had any divine attributes, I said He did. I wasn’t really trying to argue anything with that, just answering a question.

 

[Randy_Carson]

The conclusion Jesus to be God is interpreted amiss from verses. But there is no noticeable statement which demonstrate that Jesus is a God. Forexample you claim that Jesus forgive sins so He must be a God. But there is no directly statements from Jesus tha He forgive sins. I red verses very carefully. Jesus never said that “I forgave your sins”. But instead He say your sins are forgiven. That means someone else forgive sins and Jesus inform that.

Then you have not read carefully. Look again:

Matthew 9
Jesus stepped into a boat, crossed over and came to his own town. 2 Some men brought to him a paralyzed man, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the man, “Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven.” 3 At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, “This fellow is blaspheming!” 4 Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, “Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? 5 Which is easier: to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up and walk’?

Which is easier, hasantas? Is it easier for Jesus to heal the man or to forgive the man’s sins?

6 But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.”

Jesus did not say, “I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to hear from God and tell this man that Allah has forgiven him.”

Jesus is not merely acting as a mouthpiece for Allah as Muhammad did. Jesus said, "I want you to know that I have authority to forgive sins.

So he said to the paralyzed man, “Get up, take your mat and go home.” 7 Then the man got up and went home. 8 When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to man.

As proof of His authority to forgive sins, He demonstrated how easy it was for Him to heal, also.

Jesus was a prophet. Prophet Muhammed informed to some Sahabas that Allah forgave their sins. Jesus did same.

Muhammad was human but not divine. Jesus is both fully human and fully Divine. Muhammad let people know that God had forgiven them. Jesus forgave people by His own divine authority.

Which of the two is greater?​