After receiving the Holy Spirit at Pentecost who did the freshly empowered and comprehending Peter say Jesus was?

From the Introduction to the must-read new book A Man Attested by God: The Human Jesus of the Synoptic Gospels by Professor J.R. Daniel Kirk. This work is a gold mine of historical and textual evidence and scholarly argument to refute the Trinitarian error. Muslims will benefit from this book greatly.

Advertisements


Categories: Bible, Biblical scholarship, Recommended Reading

77 replies

  1. How “ignorant” Peter was! Didn’t he know that the most important thing about Jesus is his deity?!
    Then where is the trinity ?
    If I were a missionary, I would give Peter (F) for this really bad preaching!

    Like

    • So dumb. Christians affirm what Peter said.

      Will you guys never learn?

      Like

    • “So dumb”
      Have we believed in a god who used to defecate? Have we believed in a god who worships and fears his own god!? That’s called christianity in case you don’t know.
      ================
      Then what’s the big deal with preaching that Jesus is a man whom God supported by miracles! I mean muslims say that.
      Are you suggesting that jews should have understood that Jesus was divine from that preaching?
      It seems the holy spirit had a big issue with priority. He didn’t have the smartness of missionaries these days.

      Liked by 3 people

    • It’s dumb because Christians have been reading and affirming that text long before some Muslim polemicists like yourself began thinking it disproved anything. The only thing your use of that text proves is that you have failed to understand two natured Christology.

      In other words, you’re trying to refute a strawman argument and that is dumb… and typical of bilals blog

      Liked by 1 person

    • But Paulus,

      Do you really think if Peter was a Trinitarian he would speak like that? Which Trinitarian do you know preaches to Muslims saying Jesus was a man attested by God?

      Liked by 3 people

    • ‘you have failed to understand two natured Christology’
      Really? Show me how it’s supposed from jews to understand that christ has 2 natures when you preach that Jesus is a(man) attested by God? The first speach for Peter should be given (F) by you.
      It’s just a fact that neither Jesus nor his own disciples spok your language. Just deal with it.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Of course Yahya- Trinitarian speak like that all the time. Because you spend your days debating Christians online you probably rarely get to see anything else. Perhaps step into a church sometime

      Like

    • “Trinitarian speak like that all the time”

      Really? I doubt it, I have never met any trinitarians in real life who talked like that when talking about Jesus..

      Like

  2. Since you are so confident of this heretic’s book and since I also have this book, care to debate me on the error of the Trinity to see how well you do defending his claims against your Triune God and Muhammad’s judge, and how well you do when I also take his own arguments and use it to prove Muhammad was a false prophet and antichrist?

    Like

  3. Paululus said; It’s dumb because Christians have been reading and affirming that text long before some Muslim polemicists like yourself began thinking it disproved anything.

    We muslims are such party poopers who refuse to partake in your polytheist nonsense fest.

    Like

    • Your prophet Isa said salvation is from the Jews. Ipso facto Mo is a false prophet and your pagan arab moon cult is false.

      Like

    • lol silly, stupid and ignorant.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Thats high praise coming from you.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Christian creeds affirmed monotheism long before Muhammad adopted pagan Arab rituals

      Like

    • “Christian creeds affirmed monotheism”
      Worshipping 3 persons, each of whom is fully god has nothing whatsoever to do with monotheism. You literally worship 3 gods.
      Idols and icons of christianity present this polytheism all the time.

      Like

    • “Paululus said; It’s dumb because Christians have been reading and affirming that text long before some Muslim polemicists like yourself be”

      That just makes it more embarrassing …

      Liked by 1 person

    • It hurts Islam, I get it. When you follow a religion that claims religion X is not monotheistic, to only then realize that religion X was teaching monotheism long before your own religion, it must be hard to swallow. But that is why Islam is so silly- it grew from an Arabian bubble of heretics never realizing that the Greco roman world was centuries ahead in theological developments. In other words, it’s the clearest example of the man made nature of Islam since Allah was completely ignorant of the greater geographical context.

      Like

    • Paulus,
      The Greco roman world was centuries ahead only in the “development” of theological innovations. In other words, it’s the clearest example of the man-made nature of Christianity. The Qur’an seems to be geographically aware that Christians had watered down the original Monotheistic Messianic Judaism that Jesus had preached. Which is why the Qur’an hammers home the Absolute Monotheistic nature of God, in opposition to all forms of idolatry including Trinitarianism, in order to purify the religion for the worship of God alone.

      Judaism and Islam agree on the Unitarian nature of God, while Christian Trinitarianism sticks out like a sore thumb in the house of Abraham. That has to be a hard pill for Christians to swallow.

      Like

    • Ibn Issam

      Islam is not a religion that worships god alone – it is a religion that bases all of its practices, laws and aspirations on the imitation of the example of a human being, mohammed. Islam is the religion of the hadith.

      Like

    • Kev,
      We follow God (swt), who sent down the Holy Qur’an, and who communed with, and directed his last Prophet and Messenger, Muhammad (sws). By following Prophet Muhammad (sws) we are following God (swt).

      You, however, follow the lies of Paul of Tarsus, and worship the Jesus of Myth and Legend, who has nothing to do with the teachings of the true historical Jesus (as). NT Criticism has exposed Christianity as the man made idolatrous cult that it really is.

      Like

    • Ibn

      Don’t be dishonest.

      The entire religion of islam is about imitating mohammed. End of.

      By following Prophet Muhammad (sws) we are following God (swt).

      LOL!!

      You said it LOUD AND CLEAR.

      By following mohammed you are following this allah thing – idolatry and man worship.

      Like

    • Kev,
      Isn’t that the Pot calling the Kettle Black!

      We follow Prophet Muhammad’s example, we don’t worship him. The entire religion of Islam, is absolutely directed at Worshipping God. Even the Great Jewish Rabbi Maimonides recognized this and stated that, “When Muslims worship Allah, their hearts are directed towards the one true God of Abraham.” However, he also recognized the idolatry that is called Christianity, in which you WORSHIP a mythologized Idol of a Greco-Roman Man God. I don’t think Islam comes anywhere close to the idolatry and man worship that is inherent in Christianity.

      It seems that it is your own faith that idolatrous, even according to Maimonides.

      Like

    • Ibn

      So you are giving credibility to your man worship by quoting another human being? Worship means to show reverence and adoration for something – you’ve admitted that you do this for mohammed.

      Besides, where in the quran are these worship rituals commanded…..circling the kaaba 7 times, praying 5 times daily, salat procedures and wudu rituals, going to mecca for the hajj, drinking camel’s urine, kissing a black stone?

      Like

    • The definition of Worship is in relation to a deity. This does not apply to Prophet Muhammad (sws), as we never claimed that he was a deity, and one can revere and honor him without literally worshipping him as Christians do in relation to their mythologized Jesus.

      It is the Christians who raised a man into the status of deity, and worship him as a Greco Roman Man God. It seems that when you are confronted with the blatant paganistic Idolatry inherent in your faith, you can only project your own dislike for the thought by accusing Islam of the same.

      However, Islam is far removed from the Man worship and Idolatry that you believe in.

      Like

    • Ibn

      Special pleading – you just can’t argue your case without lapsing into logical contortions. You said clearly that following mohammed is the same as following your god – your own words betray your idolatry.

      Your god does not command you to perform the pagan rituals that mohammed has you doing – therefore you revere and adore mohammed the human being more than your god.

      Like

    • As Samuel has pointed out, Christian thought and practice comes from all the prophets. We read all the prophets.

      Ibn Issam and co follow one man- Muhammad. Everything they think they know or believe about the prophets comes from Muhammad, not the prophets themselves. So in reality they dishonour the prophets by not reading and revering their works.

      Like

    • Paulus
      Christians do not “read the works of the prophets.” They read the works of the unknown pseudepigraphal authors who produced forgeries in the name of the patriarchs, and established the idolatry of man worship that you call Christianity.

      I prefer the Holy pristine Qur’an to your forgeries any day.

      Like

    • “As Samuel has pointed out, Christian thought and practice comes from all the prophets. ”

      Have I missed something here. Just 2 examples.

      OT Prophets – Circumcision is an everlasting covenant
      Christians – Not required to be practiced

      OT Prophets – Pork is unclean
      Christians – All foods are clean.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, you’ve missed lots with your overt literalism. It’s called progressive revelation- following the correct trajectory of God’s revelation.

      I’m sure you’ve heard of it, considering your own religion has the doctrine of abrogation, not so dissimilar a concept.

      E.g. 1. Muslims were allowed to drink alcohol, and then they weren’t.

      Ibn Assam,
      I know your into conjecture and fables, but you really are getting caught up in wild conspiracy theories. If you won’t listen to me, then at least listen to youw own Koran that teaches you not to follow conjecture.

      Like

    • “They read the works of the unknown pseudepigraphal authors who produced forgeries in the name of the patriarchs”

      Think about it. If they are “unknown”, how do you know they produced forgeries? The best example of a self refuting muhammadan that I’ve ever seen son of Issam (whoever the hell that is?)

      Like

    • Ibn

      If the quran is pristine, why must muslims rely on historically dubious human works like the hadith in order to practice your religion?

      Like

    • Gabriel Jesus

      Which OT prophets circled the kaaba 7 times, kissed the black stone, and prayed and performed wudu like the pagans?

      Like

    • Paulus,
      Resorting to personal attacks, twisting personal names into insults (Ibn Assam) does not prove any of your points. It just makes you look like a callous person with a cruel disregard, and lack of respect for others….which I am sure you regard as a fine example of a Good Christian.

      Kev,
      You are like a broken record, harping on about Hadith, and Pagans etc. all of your accusations about Islam have been refuted ad nauseum, but you keep bringing them up over and over, hoping that if you repeat them enough times some ignorant people will believe you. Most people are smart enough to see through your repeated lies. Your constant inaccurate repetitions are boring.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Brother Ibn Issam,
      Leave them! Those are just trolls. Don’t waste your time with them.

      Liked by 1 person

    • “they are just trolls”.

      Every muslim’s go to sentence on bilal’s blog when faced with the problems of Islamic theology, history and practice. You’ve learnt well from Bilal Abdullah.

      Ibn Issam.
      What points do I need to prove. You said that the OT was written by unknown people and I simply pointed out how absurd it is to claim this is one doesn’t know who the author is? Feel free to answer me: how do you know them if they are unknown?

      Like

    • Paulus,
      Your question is better directed at yourself. How do YOU know that the Bible is authentic word of the Prophets and Patriarchs if the authors are uknown? It is the scholarly consensus that the four Gospels are NOT written by Matthew, Mark, Luke or John, but by uknown authors who forged their stories in the name of the Patriarchs. There are many other books both the OT and NT that are pseudepigraphal as well.

      “…good Christian scholars of the Bible, including the top Protestant and Catholic scholars of America, will tell you that the Bible is full of lies, even if they refuse to use the term. And here is the truth: Many of the books of the New Testament were written by people who lied about their identity, claiming to be a famous apostle — Peter, Paul or James — knowing full well they were someone else. In modern parlance, that is a lie, and a book written by someone who lies about his identity is a forgery.” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bart-d-ehrman/the-bible-telling-lies-to_b_840301.html

      Forged: Writing in the Name of God–Why the Bible’s Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are

      https://bloggingtheology.net/2015/07/28/the-problem-of-forgery-in-the-new-testament/

      Again, I prefer the Holy pristine Qur’an to your forgeries any day.

      Like

    • Changing topics and rehashing erhmans tired arguments. Typical from you Mr Son of…

      BTW, do you understand what the word “patriarch” means in the biblical context? Cause I’m very interested how Mark, a Greek name, was trying to pretend to be a patriarch (a Jewish concept)? 😂😂😂

      Also, the gospels are not written under the name of someone else. Their names were attributed later by tradition. So how you think they “forged their name” into anything when they didn’t even attribute a name is sadly amusing. You really are daft- had hate Christ and the burch so much you will just make up anything. This isn’t the masjid pal.

      Like

    • Paulus,
      This isn’t the devotional Church either, where your Christian preacher avoids any controversial topics.

      Most historians agree that the Gospels and various OT and NT books are forgeries. Get the point.

      Sam – why you make try to twist my Arabic name into some form of insult or another I am not sure. But it is not very Christian of you. Notice that I never call you “Paul-Ass” or any other such insulting derivative of your nom de guerre. A little respect goes such a long way, we may disagree with each other theologically, but there is no need for such personal insults.

      Are you not a son of someone too? Even Arab Christians used the nasaab “ibn” or “bin” and their names are often indistinguishable from Muslim names (except that they do not use explicitly Muslim names). Maybe your Christian faith, and western secularist orientation has transformed you into a self-hating Arab?

      Like

    • How are the gospels a forgery when no name is attributed to them? 😂😂 I think you are confusing an epistle (which uses a name) for bios (what the gospels are).

      Like

    • The gospels are ancient bios. Are you familiar with the genre?

      Like

    • “with the problems of Islamic theology, history and practice”
      Where have you engaged about topics of Islamic theology?
      Your comments are ridiculous at the best. There have been many subjects on this blog about key issues in christianity, and I don’t find any serious comment from you. You’re a toy for christians if you’re from Indonesia.

      Like

    • Ibn

      Your question is better directed at yourself. How do YOU know that the Bible is authentic word of the Prophets and Patriarchs if the authors are uknown?

      The quran’s authors are unknown and your prophet was illiterate so he was completely incapable of knowing that what his scribes wrote down was what he wanted them to write. Any Tom, Dick, and Abdul with a sense of humour could have written the rubbish that is in the quran just for the LOLZ. Mohammed wouldn’t have known any better.

      Like

    • Kev,
      Your foolish accusation is easily refuted. Quality Assurance System was called “Recitation” and was repeated 5 x daily. Of Course Prophet Muhammad (sws) knew and approved what was written in Qur’an and certified it within his own lifetime.

      Did Jesus ever give his stamp of approval to New Testament which was written AFTER his lifetime? No? I didn’t think so.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Good point. Jesus never mentioned a New Testament.

      Like

    • Ibn

      Mohammed was an illiterate ignoramus who thought the sun set in a muddy pool of water and drinking camel’s urine was a great remedy. He could not possibly have been capable of reading what his scribes had written down.

      Like

  4. In 2 Peter, Peter calls Paul’s words scripture. In Colossians 1:16 Paul calls Jesus the creator of Heaven and Earth.

    Another muslim own goal.

    Like

  5. Yahya

    > Do you really think if Peter was a Trinitarian he would speak like that?

    See for yourself.

    Act 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to these words: This Jesus the Nazarene was a man pointed out to you by God with miracles, wonders, and signs that God did among you through Him, just as you yourselves know.

    Act 3:14 But you denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked to have a murderer given to you.
    Act 3:15 And you killed the author of life, whom God raised from the dead; we are witnesses of this.

    Act 20:28 Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among whom the Holy Spirit has appointed you as overseers, to shepherd the church of God, which He purchased with His own blood.

    Acts 2:22 is not the only reference to Jesus.

    Like

    • and none of these say Jesus is Yahweh!

      A better more scholarly translation of Acts 20:28 (New Revised Standard Version):

      ‘Keep watch over yourselves and over all the flock, of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son’

      Acts 2:36:

      ‘Therefore let the entire house of Israel know with certainty that God has made him both Lord and Messiah’

      Acts 17:31:

      ‘…because he has fixed a day on which he will have the world judged in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.’

      So God and Jesus are clearly different and separate beings. There are numerous verses like this in Acts.

      Like

    • SG,
      You realize that we’re talking about the first speach of Peter when he got the holy spirit, don’t you?

      Liked by 3 people

    • You do realise that us christians find it risible that muslims feel the the need to slice and dice our scriptures in desperation to disprove the trinity.

      What did Shakespeare say… he that protesteth too much.

      This technique has been beautifully satirised by McLatchie and Susic. They say they can prove atheism is correct from the shahada. As it contains the words: “there is no God…”

      Like

    • I’m not sure exactly what your Scriptures are. Christians are in utter disagreement about which books make up the Bible.

      Most NT scholars are agreed that the NT does not teach the Trinity doctrine.

      As for McLatchie – every time he debates Muslims (such as me and Mansur) he gets exposed as a heretic.

      Liked by 2 people

    • “and none of these say Jesus is Yahweh!”

      Bilal, Is Yahweh the author of life

      Like

    • Not so!

      it says: “and you killed the author of life, whom God raised from the dead”

      It says God raised him from death, so Jesus and God are clearly two different and separate entities in Acts.

      Also, remember God cannot die (see 1 Tim 6).

      So no, this verse actually proves my case and refutes yours.

      Liked by 2 people

    • In your case Yahweh are the authorS of life, no?

      Liked by 1 person

    • SG

      I see no evidence in your examples that precludes Acts from expressing some kind of heresy.

      Like

    • You didn’t answer my question. I’d be happy to address that issue you raise if you simply answered my question

      Like

    • “”Bilal, Is Yahweh the author of life?””

      Waiting for an answer, Bilal…

      Like

    • “”Bilal, Is Yahweh the author of life?””

      Why can’t you answe the question, Bilal?

      Like

    • I already answered it. Do play attention dosey

      Like

    • You did nothing of the sort. You evaded like you usually do when your stuck for answers.

      Let’s give you another chance.

      Here it is again.

      Is Yahweh the author of life?

      It’s not a difficult question. Now are you going to answer it or shall we note your concession?

      Like

    • lol nice try dude – you are just a troll

      Like

    • Paul, I know this is late …

      > and none of these say Jesus is Yahweh!

      Jesus is equated with Yahweh through the prophecy of Joel and his name being the name you call on to be saved. This is seen several times in Acts.

      > A better more scholarly translation of Acts 20:28 (New Revised Standard Version): ‘Keep watch over yourselves and over all the flock, of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son’

      What makes this more scholarly?

      Like

    • Samuel, did you know there are many humans in the Jewish scriptures who are either explicitly called “God”, or play the role of God vis a vis the world, or sit on God’s throne, or are worshiped.

      Jesus is not so unique it seems…

      Like

    • Dr Kirk must be your new “go to man” for your polemics Paul, since you seem to just be repeating this same thing ad nauseum.

      Do you plan on ever actually engaging with the criticisms of Kirk’s position?

      Like

    • Paul.

      Have you changed your position on this? Previously, you were happy to say that Jesus was considered God according to the NT. Now, you appear to be changing direction?

      Like

    • > Samuel, did you know there are many humans in the Jewish scriptures who are either explicitly called “God”, or play the role of God vis a vis the world, or sit on God’s throne, or are worshiped.

      Yes.

      > Jesus is not so unique it seems…

      That does not follow. It has to do with the doctrine and fulfilment of the image of God. The Qur’an fails to continue this message of the prophets, but without it you cannot understand the Torah, Prophets, Psalms or Gospel.

      Like

  6. “Jesus the Nazarene was a man”

    How come he is no human person?

    Like

  7. “In short, it is a fallacy to pose a genuinely human Jesus such as we have in the Gospels over against the “high” Christology reflected in Paul’s letters and other various early Christian texts. Instead, at least in the various circles that comprised the emerging “proto-orthodox” Christianity of the late first century and thereafter, various affirmations about Jesus were seen as compatible and complementary, and various literary genres were appropriated to express Jesus significance” Dr Larry Hurtado.

    It’s a shame that Kirk’s entire thesis is a fallacy 🙂

    Like

Trackbacks

  1. The Apostles’ inspired proclamation concerning The risen Christ in the book of Acts Pt. 1 – Answering Islam Blog

Please 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: