Truth stands out clear from error!

13502025_1203285463039358_7493326860226336388_n

Calling Christians: The Trinitarian God is a new god. A three person god was not the God of the Israelites nor was a three person being the God of Jesus. We have absolutely no reason to believe the Old Testament Jews, or Jesus, knew anything about serving a three person God. The Israelite God was not a three person God. Jesus, an Israelite, also served a one person God, his Father and only his Father.

“My Father and your Father, my God and your God.” – Jesus

Admin – Imtiyaz



Categories: Christian extremism, Christianity, God

58 replies

  1. Bauckham has already demolished this Unitarian bias applied to first century Judaism. Time for Muslims to understand the experts.

    Like

    • Baukham has demolished the idea that the words attributed to Jesus in the Fourth Gospel (the famous I AMs for example) were actually spoken by Jesus. Time for Christians to understand the experts.

      Like

    • I think Bauckham agrees that Jesus was no trinitarian.

      Like

    • Red herring much?

      Fact is, Unitarianism as taught by Muslims was foreign to Jews and Jesus. Scholars acknowledge this and it is demonstrable jp peal to Jewish documents of the first century.

      You and ijaz need to stop your selective irrational scholarship cherry picking

      Like

    • LOL typical inconsistency and cherry picking of scholarship.

      You say: ‘Time for Muslims to understand the experts’ – ie certain Biblical scholars you cite, but these SAME scholars reject your belief that the words attributed to Jesus in the Fourth Gospel were actually spoken by Jesus.

      Why are you so inconsistent?

      Like

    • Paul’s: Fact is, Unitarianism as taught by Muslims was foreign to Jews and Jesus.

      Not according to Maimonides who said Muslims ascribe to Allah a proper unity.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Bauckham also doesn’t think the Sermon on the Mount is totally historical.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paulus, the cheating missionary:

      “Fact is, Unitarianism as taught by Muslims was foreign to Jews and Jesus.”

      That’s a bit of a mouthful if you REALLY want to be so scholarly correct as want to appear?

      It was probably foreign to SOME Jews in 1 century, and concerning Jesus it’s guesswork.

      Now you can go back to your scholarly correct preaching. Oh, I forgot, when it comes to preying on unsuspecting Muslims, you have no problems with being dishonest.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Burhanuddin1

      “It was probably foreign to SOME Jews in 1 century, and concerning Jesus it’s guesswork.”

      The aramiac translations of the OT were the standard jewish bible at the time and clearly show that islam’s strict unitarianism with its impotent god was nothing like the god of the OT who enters creation at will, and whose persons – his spirit and word – acted within creation as persons of the single godhead.

      John Ronning has shown that the gospel of john owes its high christology of jesus as the word of god to the targums and not to hellenistic philosophy. This makes John – in some ways – the most jewish of the four gospels since it reflects the scriptures in common usage at the time in both language and theology.

      Like

    • D you are aware that virtually all NT scholars judge that John’s gospel is the least historical of the four in terms of Jesus’ teaching and Christology?

      And are you aware that Muslims believe that the Jewish Scriptures have been changed and corrupted?

      Like

    • Paul Williams

      “D you are aware that virtually all NT scholars judge that John’s gospel is the least historical of the four in terms of Jesus’ teaching and Christology?

      And are you aware that Muslims believe that the Jewish Scriptures have been changed and corrupted?”

      I never said it was more historical, I said it was in some ways the most jewish of the gospels according to Ronning.

      But seriously, you appeal to scholars and historicity in the same post where you posit a completely ahistorical belief in the corruption of the jewish scriptures?

      That is a pretty disturbing cognitive dissonance Paul.

      Like

    • Clearly you have never studied biblical scholarship. Any introduction to the Bible will tell you about its multiple corruptions textual, historical etc. Would you care for some examples dude?

      Liked by 1 person

    • D

      “… and whose persons – his spirit and word – acted within creation as persons of the single godhead.”

      Nice, D, very creative. Maybe there is a career a for you as dedicated teller of fairy tales? LOL. Muuuaaaahhhahhhaaaa.

      Now we are expected to “discover” God is three persons in the “aramaic translation of the OT?”

      Why is this three person being so elusive about His true identity?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Burhanuddin1

      “Muuuaaaahhhahhhaaaa.”

      I didn’t realize you were the neighbourhood muezzin.

      “Now we are expected to “discover” God is three persons in the “aramaic translation of the OT?”

      Why is this three person being so elusive about His true identity?”

      I’m not sure what you are trying to say here. Regardless of what you expect, you will find that jews of the 1st century had a concept of god’s plurality that shows islam’s tawheed to be an alien doctrine.

      Also, jesus made clear statements about his deity – no elusiveness here I’m afraid.

      Like

    • Where did the historical Jesus make clear statements about his deity?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paul Williams

      “Where did the historical Jesus make clear statements about his deity?”

      It seems that all of this blogs threads end up with this question. I could – as I have several times in other posts – quote verses that show this, but two days later, you or one of the other muslims on the blog will ask the same question all over again.

      It’s kind of pointless. Suffice it to say that jesus made several claims to deity.

      Like

    • Suffice it to say that you have offered no evidence at all for your dubious claim

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paul Williams

      “Suffice it to say that you have offered no evidence at all for your dubious claim”

      You are basing your beliefs about jesus and the jews on islamic sources that no scholar accepts as legitimate sources for the study of 1st century jews, 1st century palestine or the life of jesus and his apostles.

      And I have in many posts quoted chapter and verse where jesus claims deity – I just don’t feel like repeating myself, again and again and again and again…….

      Like

    • Any examples you gave have been refuted. That is why you will not repeat them here

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paul Williams

      “Any examples you gave have been refuted. That is why you will not repeat them here”

      ?

      Like

  2. I am curious about something Paul . Recently you posted a picture of a kid whose veins were bulging out of his forehead. The caption was something along the lines of atheists struggling to resist talking about God and religion.

    I must ask – does this not apply to you and the Trinity? You devote a lot of your time to tearing down one of the most important pillars of Christianity – for what purpose and to what end?

    Like

  3. One of the few things things we can be certain about is that we are fallible. So I worry when religions or political parties claim access to ‘Truth’

    Like

    • We are fallible but God is not. But you do not believe in God so do I see the problem.

      Like

    • Good point Andy!
      Although I feel that religions can carry a certain truth with them. In particular ethical or moral truths that transcend just one religion, such as the golden rule which is found in many religious traditions.

      Like

  4. Paul
    You may be right about God. But as you agree, we are fallible, so we can’t know whether God exists or not.
    “.. I see the problem” – are you agreeing with me that there is a problem when religions claim access to ‘Truth’?

    Like

    • Andy, I know God exists. Absolutely certain. The mystery to me is why atheists exist. But the Quran does explain that oddity.

      I agree with Carl Jung a Swiss psychiatrist and psychotherapist who founded analytical psychology. In a newspaper interview he said:

      All that I have learned has led me step by step to an unshakable conviction of the existence of God. I only believe in what I know. And that eliminates believing. Therefore I do not take his existence on belief – I know that he exists

      Like

    • Paul how do you know with absolute certainty that God exists?
      Would help me a lot.
      Thanks

      Like

    • I thought it was obvious. Are you an atheist?

      Like

    • Agnostic/Deist, don’t really know for sure lol

      Like

    • Paul,
      There are several ways of using the word ‘know’:

      “I know all bachelors are unmarried”
      “How?”
      “Well, that’s the definition of bachelor”

      “I know I have a pain in my foot”
      “How?”
      “I have a pain in my foot”

      “I know the next bus will arrive in 5 minutes”
      “How?”
      “I’ve looked at the timetable”

      “I know all swans are white”
      “How?”
      “Every swan I’ve seen is white”
      “Here is a black swan”
      “Err…maybe I was mistaken”

      “I know God does not exist”
      “How?”
      “I just know”

      “I know God exists”
      “How?”
      “It’s obvious”

      It seems to me that your justification of knowledge in the case of God’s existence is a statement of your personal psychological state. Fine for you, and you are justified in using ‘know’ to describe this, but this knowledge can’t be said to extend to the psychological states of others, nor can it be used as a certain description of how the world actually is. Nor should it be used as the basis for asserting infallible moral truths.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Andy

      If you want to survey Twenty Arguments For The Existence Of God see here:

      http://www.peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existence.htm

      The existence of God is known through reason, logic, the created order, religious experience, Revelation, the lives of the Prophets and messengers, beauty, art, music, etc etc.

      Like

  5. ‘Paul how do you know with absolute certainty that God exists?’

    I don’t know about Paul but I believe God exists because an impersonal, non-creative mechanism cannot be responsible for the diversity that is the universe.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. D

    “you will find that jews of the 1st century had a concept of god’s plurality that shows islam’s tawheed to be an alien doctrine.”

    Exactly. That’s what Islam teaches. Jesus (as) came to correct corrupt understandings of SOME jews.

    You don’t want to tell us the fairytale that Moses was a trinitarian, do you?

    Like

    • burhanuddin1

      “You don’t want to tell us the fairytale that Moses was a trinitarian, do you?”

      Moses spoke to god face to face – no muslim can or has ever say that anyone can do that. Your god is hidden from man and excluded from his creation and only detectable through his finite attributes which do not reveal who he is. That is not the god of moses.

      “Exactly. That’s what Islam teaches. Jesus (as) came to correct corrupt understandings of SOME jews.”

      No historians take islamic sources as legitimate sources for the life of jesus. That is a fantasy and delusion.

      Like

    • D

      Thank you, I think we agree then Moses was no trinitarian.

      And most historians see Jesus as a jewish prophet who argued against corrupt understandings of SOME jewish contemporaries, which is the Islamic understanding of Jesus. Thank you.

      Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      “Thank you, I think we agree then Moses was no trinitarian.”

      We agree that moses would think the islamic concept of god was unjewish and alien. You will have to point out where the Torah calls on jews to circle teh kaaba, kiss the black stone, and all the rest of it.

      “And most historians see Jesus as a jewish prophet who argued against corrupt understandings of SOME jewish contemporaries, which is the Islamic understanding of Jesus. Thank you.”

      Christians see jesus as a jewish prophet who taught against the corrupt misunderstandings of some jews, and who fulfilled the law, and who claimed deity. Glad we agree.

      And no one takes islamic sources as legitimate sources for the life of jesus.

      Like

    • Nice try, Mr. Weasel.

      Most historians see Jesus as a jewish prophet who never claimed “divinity”.

      Like

    • bumhead1

      “Nice try, Mr. Weasel.

      Most historians see Jesus as a jewish prophet who never claimed “divinity”.”

      So we agree that islamic sources are not taken seriously as sources for the life of jesus, 1st century jewish history and 1st century palestine?

      Like

    • Most historians see Jesus as a jewish prophet who never claimed “divinity”.

      That’s the Islamic position based on Islamic sources.

      It’s not the trinitarian position based on trinitarian sources.

      Like

    • The quran claims that jews worship ezra as the son of allah so itis not clear what islamic sources mean when they say “jewish” nor is it clear what they mean when they talk about jesus – whom they actually refer to as “isa” which is not a jewish name, nor a name from 1st century palestine.

      Nowhere in the quran does it mention the names and acts of teh apostles and nowhere does it say make accurate statements about the actual beliefs of either jews or christians.

      That’s why scholars don’t look to islamic sources to investigate 1st century, jews, palestine or jesus. WHich liberal biblical scholars cite the quran as a legitimate source for their study of these things?

      Like

    • Come on D, please stop waisting my time

      ‘Lines lead from the very first Jewish Christianity to the seventh century, indeed to Islam…The analogies between the Qur’anic picture of Jesus and a Christology with a Jewish-Christian stamp are perplexing. These parallels are irrefutable and call for more intensive historical and systematic reflection.’

      Hans Kung, Islam, Past, Present and Future (2007, One World Publications, pp 37, 44)

      Fr Hans Küng is a professor emeritus of ecumenical theology at the University of Tübingen. He is considered by many a leading intellectual giant of the Roman Catholic Church.

      Like

    • Oh please.

      Hans Kung is not an islamic scholar and does not speak arabic. If you take kung as an expert on islam, then you have to take me as an expert on islam. LOL!!!

      Nice try, no dice.

      Like

    • Your tactics are so boring. weasel.

      Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      “Your tactics are so boring. weasel.”

      If by “tactics” you mean facts and truth, then yes, they can be boring when you follow the teachings of a book that was culled from jewish, christian, and pagan, fables, apocrypha and sectarian writings that were all rejected by orthodoxy.

      And good job showing the true face of islamic “peacefulness” with your childish name-calling. BUMHEAD!!!

      Like

    • Your “tactics”: Defending ultimate truth (!) by pointing to the alleged shortcomings of Islam. Nice red herring fairy tales. Yawn.

      Like

  7. Yes, thank you.

    Should I take you as a liberal biblical scholar, too? Another fairytale.

    Like

    • Burhanuddin1

      “Should I take you as a liberal biblical scholar, too? Another fairytale.”

      Huh? You’re the one claiming that hand kung is qualified to assess islamic literature and its relevance to jewish and christian beliefs even though he is not an islamic scholar nor does he speak arabic, and his work that you cite ignores most of the extra-quranic literature.

      Come on man, don’t be a bloody moron, think!

      Like

    • Yes sure.

      Like

    • D, between you and Hans Kung who is more qualified to speak on Islam?

      Liked by 1 person

    • D: I AM

      I didn’t ask wether you thought Yahweh is more qualified to assess Islam. I specfically asked wether YOU are more qualified than Hans Kung. So are you more qualified? If so, what are your qualifications apart from being a really dumb troll?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Kmak

      ” didn’t ask wether you thought Yahweh is more qualified to assess Islam. I specfically asked wether YOU are more qualified than Hans Kung. So are you more qualified? If so, what are your qualifications apart from being a really dumb troll?”

      That is just the most awesome thing I’ve read on this blog and dumb beyond belief!! LOL!!! You admit that saying “I AM” is a claim to deity!!!!!

      Stupidity! Know thyself!!!

      Like

    • D
      As we know you are inhabited by a spirit (yes, that “holy” one) should we understand this as your personal claim to “deity”?

      Like

    • In other words, you are unqualified to speak on Islam relative to Hans Kung. You get points for being a troll though.

      Like

  8. “And if I ask you a question, you will not answer. But from now on the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God.” So they all asked, “Are You then the Son of God?” He replied, “You say that I am.…Why do we need any more testimony?” they declared. “We have heard it for ourselves from His own lips.”…Then the whole council rose and led Jesus away to Pilate. And they began to accuse Him, saying, “We found this man subverting our nation, forbidding payment of taxes to Caesar, and proclaiming Himself to be Christ, a king.”…

    This judicial process was a hoax, the greatest miscarriage of justice ever recorded. Many who despise Him and His message of love and forgiveness and compassion turn their hatred into “truth” that never was. He never forbid payment to Caesar, He was King of Kings and Lord of Lords and He told folks to be quiet about it. He subverted the ones who knew everything about religion but couldn’t even recognize Him, GOD ALMIGHTY.

    The sense of panic and urgency to get rid of Him once and for all increased rapidly-rabidly. His foes were seized with an almost other worldly frenzy to kill Him and end the threat He posed to ignite all people on fire with Him, with His love. That same intensity of His enemies keeps building right now like a southwestern fire. Makes one wonder if His return isn’t imminent.

    Even so, Lord Jesus, COME

    Like

    • LOL. Could you please stop your nonsensical preaching. You do not want Jesus to come, believe me. You can’t even abide in Christ.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: