Mike Licona highlights non-trinitarian Bible verse

Perhaps unwittingly (then again perhaps not) Mike Licona highlights a New Testament verse that clearly states that Jesus has a God.

Advertisements


Categories: Bible

79 replies

  1. Man, talk about a parrot

    Like

  2. The Father is God; in relation to the Son, – so this is not a non-Trinitarian verse, but just by the fact that “the Father” is there, makes it inherently Trinitarian.

    John 17:5

    Jesus says He had the same glory with the Father in eternity past, which also points to the Trinity.

    I John 2:18-28

    whoever denies the Father and the Son, is the spirit of the anti-Christ.

    You don’t know God without knowing Him through the Son.

    Whoever denies the Son denies the Father also.

    Like

    • The use of the word “Father” does not make any and every verse “inherently Trinitarian.” The jews used the term “Father” as another name for the one monotheistic, Unitarian (not Trinitarian) God.

      “Why do we Jews have to go through the son to get to the Father….whom we are already with” ~ Jewish author Franz Rosenzwieg.

      The same could be doubly said for the Muslims, who are already with the Father and who additionally believe in the Prophethood of Jesus.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Did Jesus get created by his God? If not, then why did Jesus believe that he has a God?

      Like

    • Ken Temple
      October 24, 2017 • 8:29 pm
      no contraction, since there is only ONE God – the oneness of God is in substance/essence/being and the three persons are persons, but only One God.

      Mark 12:29

      I say;
      My dear friend and the Rt. Reverend. I get you. That is what all idol worshipers and polytheists say-their many Gods are somewhat the same one God. That is, any addition to the only one true God of Jesus is polytheism/idol worship. Mormons will also say all the persons Gods are God like your believe of the possibility of such thing happening.

      The verse that Licona quoted, clearly said Jesus(God) has a God. But God is one, only and alone. Trying to add more persons to the one God opens the “cans of worms” where any idol worshipers can justify his many gods as the possibility of more/many/more than one persons as God.

      God has closed the can of worms by the following clear verses

      “there is no one like Yahweh our God.” Exodus 8:10
      “Yahweh, He is God; there is no other besides Him.” Deuteronomy 4:35
      “Yahweh, He is God in heaven above and on the earth below; there is no other.” Deuteronomy 4:39
      “See now that I, I am He, And there is no god besides Me” Deuteronomy 32:39
      “Hear, O Israel! Yahweh is our God, Yahweh is one [echad]!” Deuteronomy 6:4
      “You are great, O Lord God; for there is none like You, and there is no God besides You” 2 Samuel 7:22
      “For who is God, besides Yahweh? And who is a rock, besides our God?” 2 Samuel 22:32
      “Yahweh is God; there is no one else.” 1 Kings 8:60
      “You are the God, You alone [bad], of all the kingdoms of the earth.” 2 Kings 19:15
      “O Lord, there is none like You, nor is there any God besides You” 1 Chronicles 17:20
      “You alone [bad] are Yahweh.” Nehemiah 9:6
      “For who is God, but Yahweh? And who is a rock, except our God” Psalm 18:31
      “You alone [bad], Lord, are God.” Isaiah 37:20
      “Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me.” Isaiah 43:10
      “‘I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me.” Isaiah 44:6
      “Is there any God besides Me, Or is there any other Rock? I know of none.” Isaiah 44:8
      “I am Yahweh, and there is no other; Besides Me there is no God.” Isaiah 45:5
      “Surely, God is with you, and there is none else, No other God.” Isaiah 45:14
      “I am Yahweh, and there is none else.” Isaiah 45:18

      Samaritan
      October 25, 2017 • 11:44 am
      Omar Suarez,

      ” In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth ”
      Genesis 1:1

      I say;
      The Jews got the above revealed in their language and the never believed it to be multipersonal God as Moses was called Elohim in the Bible. Does that makes Moses multipersonal God?

      Thanks.,

      Like

  3. Father is God and he is God of Jesus who is also God! But there is still only one God and not a hierarchy of gods.
    Clear cut self contradiction.
    And the Christians start their verbal gymnastics in 3, 2, 1 …

    Like

    • no contraction, since there is only ONE God – the oneness of God is in substance/essence/being and the three persons are persons, but only One God.

      Mark 12:29

      Like

    • Verbal gymnastics……right on queue!!

      Liked by 3 people

    • Here we go again!
      Mark 12:29 doesn’t refute what I said. Yes there is only ONE God. The point is that no matter what verbal gymnastics you use, the trinity remains a contradiction.
      A, B and C all equal X but yet they are different from one another. That’s a contradiction.
      By substituting words like apples and orange, chairs and table or in this case ‘person’s and ‘being’ does NOT remove the contradiction! There is a reason why more and more Christians are admitting now that it’s a logical fallacy but argue that it’s ok cus God created logic in the first place.
      I actually respect this view A LOT more than pretending that there is no logical contradiction.

      Like

    • “since there is only ONE God – the oneness of God is in substance/essence/being and the three persons are persons, but only One God.”

      translation :

      “since there is only SHARED thing – the shared God is in substance/essence/being and the three aren’t each other , but only shared one .”

      this is what you just uttered .

      Like

    • it is all poetical crap. ken temple and all other christians are all admitting they are polythiests .

      they are all admitting that the ghost has full experiential feeling of “substance” and @ the SAME time KNOWS it is not the father.

      here we have 1 person, 10 heads. trinitarians believe that each person FULLY EXPERIENCE the “center god” and @ same time it(person) knows it is not the other.

      ken, how much person and how much being did the father send?

      Liked by 2 people

    • Is that a picture of the “Deci-tarian” Jesus?

      Liked by 4 people

    • Ibn Issam, this is Ravan, a demon, he’s the main antagonist in hindu Ramayana…he had ten heads and he was the kind of the golden city of Lanka…pretty funny isn’t it?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Shaad,
      I was only joking. But thanks for informing me, I do enjoy learning about other faiths, including Hinduism. The more I learn about other religions the more I appreciate Islam!

      Liked by 2 people

    • Ibn Issam, you’re welcome mate…

      Liked by 1 person

    • KT🤣 “no contraction, since there is only ONE God – the oneness of God is in substance/essence/being and the three persons are persons, but only One God”

      32. “And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but *HE*

      33 “And to love **HIM** with all the heart,”

      Now Kenny you quoted Mark 12:29 , and following on those verses it identifies the one God as “HE” and “HIM”.. Can you please entertain us here by providing biblical support that “HE” and “HIM” is comprised of 3 district divine persons that form one God!? 👍 in other words, in reference to The one God identifed as HE or HIM, demonstrate HE or HIM denotes 3 district divine persons that form one divine being?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Omar you nailed it. But you will not get an answer, I’m afraid.

      Like

    • Omar Suarez,

      ” In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth ”
      Genesis 1:1

      God here in the original Hebrew is “Elohim”, which is a plural noun, but in this verse is used with a singular verb.

      Whenever Elohim is used to refer to the true God, it is always used with a singular verb.

      “Then God said, “Let US make humankind in OUR image, according to OUR likeness”

      God uses plural phrases “Let us” and “in our” when speaking of himself.

      Both these pieces of evidence give an indication that in some sense God is both singular and plural, corroborating with the doctrine of the trinity.

      Like

    • Good respons Omar!
      He/him is a single personal pronoun. The jew thought that of only the Father and hence was a unitarian. If Jesus was All knowing then why did’t he say: no no no it’s not just my Father but also me and the Holy Spirit? He didn’t cus Jesus didn’t believe in the trinity.

      Like

    • Omer

      Your comment doesn’t make any sense – are you deliberately trying to be dense?

      There are lots of passages in the NT that don’t teach the trinity – that doesn’t mean it isn’t taught.

      Why can’t you guys reason logically?

      Like

    • “Your comment doesn’t make any sense – are you deliberately trying to be dense?”

      Buahahahahahahaha! The usual ‘response’ from joel the troll.
      “You doooon’t make seeeeeeeeeeenseeeee.” The trinity is a logical fallacy, a self contradiction but STOP exposing it! Cus I’ll reply everytime by saying “You doooon’t make seeeeeeeeeeenseeeee.”

      Like

    • Ken Temple
      October 24, 2017 • 8:29 pm
      no contraction, since there is only ONE God – the oneness of God is in substance/essence/being and the three persons are persons, but only One God.

      Mark 12:29

      I say;
      I get you Reverend. The problem here is that, most idol worshipers and polytheists have similar gods one is ONE God-the oneness of God is in substance/essence/being and the three persons are persons, but only One God.

      It above contradicts the God of Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed etc. who is ONE only and alone and no one else. No one else means no one else. You add any person to make God multi persons, then you fall into idolatry and polytheism. Repent and convert to Islam on bloggingtheology before it is too late my friend the Rt. Reverend. Convert all your congregation and get a big reward from Allah.

      Thanks.

      Like

    • Samaritan:

      “God uses plural phrases “Let us” and “in our” when speaking of himself. Both these pieces of evidence give an indication that in some sense God is both singular and plural, corroborating with the doctrine of the trinity.”

      The evangelical Christian author Gordon J. Wenham, who authored a widely respected two-volume commentary on the Book of Genesis, writes on this verse,

      “Christians have traditionally seen [Genesis 1:26] as adumbrating [foreshadowing] the Trinity. It is now universally admitted that this was not what the plural meant to the original author.”

      Like

  4. LOL!!

    There’s nothing anti-trinitarian about Licona’s tweet.

    You guys are getting desperate.

    Like

    • My point is:

      Mike Licona highlights a New Testament verse that clearly states that Jesus has a God.

      As such the trinity doctrine must be false.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Paul

      What is the trinity doctrine? What is the trinity doctrine according to allah in the quran?

      How does jesus having a god undercut the doctrine of the trinity?

      Like

    • “How does jesus having a god undercut the doctrine of the trinity?”

      If a god has a god of his own then we are dealing with a hierarchy of gods. Not one God.
      What does it take for the xtians to admit that this is a hierarchy of gods?

      Like

    • “How does jesus having a god undercut the doctrine of the trinity?”

      does jesus have oneness like a goat has oneness?
      if 1 person, 2 natures is calling out to his DADDY , is he calling out to :

      1. triune god

      2. a what

      3. a person

      4. a DEFORMED person

      ?

      Like

    • belieber

      “If a god has a god of his own then we are dealing with a hierarchy of gods. Not one God.
      What does it take for the xtians to admit that this is a hierarchy of gods?”

      Idiot.

      That doesn’t follow at all you moron – more illogical reasoning from a brainwashed muslim. Please learn to think and stop embarrassing yourself. How stupid can one person be? You are too dumb to even explain your silly reasoning. LOL!!

      What is the doctrine of the trinity? What is the doctrine of the trinity according to goaty allah and his holey book?

      Like

    • Well as expected, the usual joel comment with tons of crying and denial:
      “That doesn’t follow at all you moron – more illogical reasoning from a brainwashed muslim. Please learn to think and stop embarrassing yourself. How stupid can one person be? You are too dumb to even explain your silly reasoning. LOL!!”

      This is it brothers. This right here shows perfectly what xtianity does to the mind!
      You have to be in total denial!
      “A god having a god is not a hierarchy of gods!” Is the next level of garbage they’ll go to to justify their pagan concept.
      Dear Lord!

      Someone that has a GOD means that individual is a servant and a WORSHIPER of that God. If the Son and the Father are equal (as your pagan concept claims them to be after calling all the previous church daddies heretics for claiming that they weren’t equal) then one is not worthy of worship of the other!
      Worship of an individual and being equal to that individual are symmetrically opposed.

      “But but but, you make nooooo seeeennnnnseeee. Even though you do but I must say this cus I’m getting embarrassed. You make no seeeennnseee. Now let me use my verbal gymnastics to twist the meaning of God and worship and the term equal to make me feel good about my pagan belief”

      Liked by 1 person

    • belieber

      You are just an idiot. Do you seriously beliebe that you have made a successful argument to support your silly assertions?

      I can’t do the logical heavy lifting for you and I won;t spell it out. Your reasoning is so flawed it’s almost like commanding someone to stay away from menstruating women and then having your prophet ignore you completely.

      The problem is that you are ignorant of the doctrine of the trinity – just like your prophet and his goat god was ignorant of the doctrine of the trinity. Nothing about jesus worshiping god contravenes the doctrine, and neither does it show multiple gods.

      You are just too stupid to have it explained to you. So, so dumb.

      Like

    • Wahahahahahahhaa!!!!!
      Busted!!!

      And then you jump to Q 2:222. Oooo poor kid! Allow me to kick your *** again!
      here is the hadith (yes we Muslims can actually back up what we are saying istead of doing verbal gymnastics)

      Book 003, Number 0592:

      “Thabit narrated it from Anas: Among the Jews, when a woman menstruated, they did not dine with her, nor did they live with them in their houses; so the Companions of the Apostle (may peace be upon him) asked The Apostle (may peace be upon him), and Allah, the Exalted revealed:” And they ask you about menstruation; say it is a pollution, so keep away from woman during menstruation” to the end (Qur’an, ii. 222). The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: DO EVERYTHING EXCEPT INTERCOURSE. The Jews heard of that and said: This man does not want to leave anything we do without opposing us in it. Usaid b. Hudair and Abbad b. Bishr came and said: Messenger of Allah, the Jews say such and such thing. We should not have, therefore, any contactwith them (as the Jews do). The face of the Messenger of Allah (way peace be upon him) underwent such a change that we thought he was angry with them, but when they went out, they happened to receive a gift of milk which was sent to the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him). He (the Holy Prophet) called for them and gave them drink, whereby they knew that he was not angry with them.”
      So the prophet IMMEDIATELY after the revelation of that verse said that it means that you can do everything except intercourse. Nothing about not touching them.

      Bitchslapped again!
      Love it!

      Like

    • the spiritual man worshiping homosexual wrote :

      Nothing about jesus worshiping god contravenes the doctrine, and neither does it show multiple gods.

      , the faggot has lost it due to being filled by his “holy ruah”

      if 1 person , 2 natures was CALLING out to “father in heaven”

      HOW is it possible you do not SEE MULTIPLE gods HERE?

      you have 1 person, 2 natures CALLING OUT TO 1 person (how much being ???) in heaven

      Like

    • belieber

      LOL!! You moron.

      You are just too dumb and brainwashed to comprehend the ramifications of your argument. You fool!!

      Your goaty god clearly says in his plagiarized holey book that men are to STAY AWAY FROM THEIR WIVES during menstruation.

      You prophet on the other hand commands his followers to contradict this direct and clear command. OMG, you are so, so, stupid!!

      Even worse, your prophet says – according to you – that muslims can “DO EVERYTHING EXCEPT INTERCOURSE”. Does that mean he permitted oral sex on menstruating wives? Fondling? Or both in addition to reciting the quran at the same time?

      Your prophet DISOBEYED the clear word of your god’s book and led his followers to do the same. You just cannot get more stupid than you.

      I’ll spell it out for you imbecile…..your goat says “STAY AWAY”, your prophet says “DON’T STAY AWAY”.

      Muslims revere the words of a human being who disrespected the word of his god by reciting with smelling distance of menstrual blood – you definitely do not submit to allah in this case.lOL!!

      Like

    • this piece of homosexual faggot needs to read carefully :

      and do not come near them until they enter into cleanliness. So, if they entered cleanliness then come to them from where ALLAH ordered you.

      WHY CAN’T THE “COME NEAR” INTERPRETED IN LIGHT OF “COME TO THEM FROM…”

      ?

      but any way.

      will you have the guts to comment here :

      https://turchisrong.blogspot.co.uk/2017/10/frank-tureks-dishonesty-concerning.html

      Like

    • what do you expect from faggot homosexual who worships a MALE jew leaving a tomb with no linen clothing ?

      the whole point about asking about menses clearly indicates if intercourse would be allowed because the verse says the following :

      So, if they entered cleanliness then come to them from where God ordered you.

      why would it even mention this? what would be the point ?

      Like

    • You’re a lowlife piece of **** joel.
      The prophet right after the revelation of the verse says that you can everything with your wife except intercourse. Yet you try and pretend that there is a problem. The verse is to be interpreted according to what the Prophet said. We look at how the Prophet interprets the Quran. Not a piece of garbage named joel living in the 21st century.
      No one here takes you seriously.

      Like

    • belieber

      LOL!! You’ve lost it.

      I think the beatings you are getting have gotten to you.

      “Yet you try and pretend that there is a problem. The verse is to be interpreted according to what the Prophet said. We look at how the Prophet interprets the Quran.”

      The brainwashing is strong with you, idiot. This is one of the clearest commands of the your goat god – it does not need any interpretation – it clearly says “STAY AWAY” from menstruating wives. It doesn’t say recite the quran within inches of menstrual blood, it doesn’t say do anything but have sex, it says “STAY AWAY”.

      What about that can’t you understand? Your prophet DISOBEYED his god.

      Deal with it.

      Like

    • O boy!
      Can I now interpret all the biblepassages like that too. I mean you scum always say “it’s a parable” whenever it suits you. And now you come to the Quran demanding the very same thing which you pagans NEVER do.
      Right AFTER the passage was revealed the Prophet explained that stay away implies stay way from intercourse. It’s in the SAME hadith you idiot! He didn’t say it years after. He is the one that brought the Quran so we’ll listen to him instead of a pagan crossworshiper of the 21st century.
      It’s not my problem you’re braindead because of crosstianity with all the bullshit you’re taught when you were little.

      And btw we were talking about your pagan gods remember? You lowlife can’t defend your barbarian god that sends to bears to shred 42 boys to pieces. You can’t defend him/them ever. So you just change the subject to a PATHETIC topic which has ZERO potential for crosstians to make arguments about.
      Why is your mangod worshiping another god loser? Act of worship and equality are diametrically opposed to one another. Yet ANOTHER self contradiction. They just never end in crosstianity do they. Everything is build on paradoxes and self contradictions.
      Now go ahead change the topic again. Cry like a lil bitch.

      Like

    • belieber

      You are just stupid. An imbecile.

      The NT is full of parables, the text makes that clear.

      A clear command from your goat god is not a parable – you cannot possibly be that stupid. You just can’t.

      Obviously, you are not dealing well with the realization that your prophet DISOBEYED your goat. Imbecile.

      Like

    • O and your Shamoun OBVIOUSLY tried to go down this road (of interpreting the verse in a literal sense which he would NEVER allow for countless of bibleverses)

      Shamoun said:

      Some Muslims get rather ingenious and claim that the Quran is not prohibiting all physical contact with women, but forbidding sexual intercourse, which is not the plain reading of the text.

      Bassam Zawadi responds:

      Shamoun should have said “literal reading” and not “plain reading”. Literal reading is to force a literal interpretation unto the text, which is what Shamoun is doing. Plain reading is the obvious meaning one gets from reading the text. The plain reading does not suggest in any way that one is to avoid all physical contact with menstruating women.

      The verse states “keep away from women”, yet what does “keep away” mean? Does it mean to keep away from the same bed, room, house, square mile, etc.? Obviously the “keep away” in the verse appears to be the opposite of “go in unto them” after the cycle is over. Well, what does “go in unto them” in the verse mean? Well it obviously implies sexual intercourse. Hence, the plain reading of the text actually suggests that “keep away” refers to keeping away from having sexual intercourse with one’s wife during the cycle.

      Like

    • Lol!!!
      It’s parables whenever it suits your ass.
      It has passages which if taken literally would bitchslap your cult.
      Here we have a hadith where the Prophet clearly explains what the verse means and a 21 century crossworshiper is crying about it. I’ll stick with what the Prophet said since he is the one that brought us the Quran not a pagan worshiping asshole like you.
      O and speaking about disobeying god, explain the following:

      Matthew 5:19
      Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever PRACTICES and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

      Your potato of tarsus doesn’t practice nor teach the law. So explain why your pauly of tarsus is disobeying his mangod.

      Like

    • And since you have been bitchslapped on the Q 2:222 passage countless of times how about you go back to the topic of this thread which is your mangod having a god.
      Why is your mangod worshiping another god? Act of worship and equality are diametrically opposed to one another.

      Like

    • I’ll repeat again and again for ya since you keep running away like a coward.

      Why is your mangod (who is one person and hence a goat) worshiping another god (who is also one person and hence a goat) when act of worship and equality are DIAMETRICALLY opposed to one another?
      Why is your mangod (who is one person and hence a goat) worshiping another god (who is also one person and hence a goat) when act of worship and equality are DIAMETRICALLY opposed to one another?
      Why is your mangod (who is one person and hence a goat) worshiping another god (who is also one person and hence a goat) when act of worship and equality are DIAMETRICALLY opposed to one another?
      Why is your mangod (who is one person and hence a goat) worshiping another god (who is also one person and hence a goat) when act of worship and equality are DIAMETRICALLY opposed to one another?
      Why is your mangod (who is one person and hence a goat) worshiping another god (who is also one person and hence a goat) when act of worship and equality are DIAMETRICALLY opposed to one another?

      You see the literal and the clear interpretation here is that there are multiple gods. But the crosstians come up with verbal gymnastics to try and avoid it and then have the audacity to talk about Q 2:222.
      Let us hear your verbal gymnastics.

      Like

    • “The NT is full of parables, the text makes that clear.”
      No the NT is full of BS. And your own scholars are ripping it to pieces as we speak. What a pathetic display.

      Like

  5. smurf wrote :

    Omar Suarez,

    ” In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth ”
    Genesis 1:1

    God here in the original Hebrew is “Elohim”, which is a plural noun, but in this verse is used with a singular verb.

    Whenever Elohim is used to refer to the true God, it is always used with a singular verb.

    “Then God said, “Let US make humankind in OUR image, according to OUR likeness”

    God uses plural phrases “Let us” and “in our” when speaking of himself.

    Both these pieces of evidence give an indication that in some sense God is both singular and plural, corroborating with the doctrine of the trinity.

    it gets destroyed by your own “heretic”

    Like

    • @Heathcliff, i wonder why they ignore the majestic plurality and other theories…

      Pluralis majestatis: Majestic “we” or royal “we”; plural of Majesty

      Pluralis excellentiae: Hebraic pluralization to reflect excellence and/or fullness

      God and His Wisdom: Plural of deliberation

      God and His Angels: God and His royal court of angels

      God and His Creation: Man is made by God and the materials of His creation

      God and the Earth: Man, adam, is made from the dust of the adamah (ground: feminine).

      Combination: Some combination of the above

      Miscellaneous: Miscellaneous other interpretations

      Like

    • Plural of majesty isn’t ignored- it is simply a weaker exegetical conclusion. I think you would do well to read a biblical commentary on relevant passages

      Like

    • Paulus, okay so how exactly it is weaker? Can you please elaborate?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paulus, i’m not necessarily pushing the idea of plural of majesty by the way because i’ve got my own opinion, but still i want to know why it is weaker….

      Liked by 1 person

  6. Here’s an interesting tradition on the personhood of the Holy Spirit….

    Narrated Sa’id bin Al-Musaiyab:

    ‘Umar came to the Mosque while Hassan was reciting a poem. (‘Umar disapproved of that). On that Hassan said, “I used to recite poetry in this very Mosque in the presence of one (i.e. the Prophet ) who was better than you.” Then he turned towards Abu Huraira and said (to him), “I ask you by Allah, did you hear Allah’s Apostle saying (to me), “Retort on my behalf. O Allah! Support him (i.e. Hassan) with the Holy Spirit?” Abu Huraira said, “Yes.”

    Bukhari 4:434

    Mohammed calls on the Holy spirit to enter creation and provide support for a follower. Ouch!

    Like

    • Aaaam I don’t see what you’re point is.
      Islam position: HS is a person
      implies HS is part of trinity?
      We identify the HS as angel Jibreel, of course he is a person.

      Liked by 1 person

    • you’re –> your

      Like

    • belieber

      “Islam position: HS is a person
      implies HS is part of trinity?
      We identify the HS as angel Jibreel, of course he is a person.”

      The problem with that is that the quran never says that – it never states that teh spirit is jibril. In fact 21:91 makes a clear distinction between gabriel and allah’s spirit.

      But that isn’t the only problem with 21:91 – it implies blasphemy. According to muslims allah cannot be divided or apportioned, yet 21:91 clearly states that allah’s spirit – which is not jibril – is somehow get detached from allah and is imparted via a third party.

      Like

    • “The problem with that is that the quran never says that – it never states that teh spirit is jibril. In fact 21:91 makes a clear distinction between gabriel and allah’s spirit.”

      i know you are a christian who worships a god who has oneness like two co-equal testicles, but show where GOD identifies Himself as a spirit.

      quote :
      Sahih International: The angels and the Spirit will ascend to Him during a Day the extent of which is fifty thousand years.

      simple question, where does God refer to Himself as “the spirit” or ” a spirit”

      Like

    • heathcliff

      You really are as stupid as your stupid comments suggest.

      That quote from your holey book makes a clear distinction between angels and the spirit of allah. Imbecile.

      Like

    • “That quote from your holey book makes a clear distinction between angels and the spirit of allah. Imbecile.”

      “the spirit” is one who ASCENDS to Him.
      the messengers ALSO ascend to HIM

      where does ALLAH IDENTIFY HIMSELF AS “A SPIRIT” OR “THE SPIRIT”

      WHere in the entire quran is “the spirit” called “the knower of seen and unseen”
      “the one who has power over everything ”

      your job is to prove that the ITEM which is POSSESSED IS ALLAH Himself or IDENTIFIED AS ALLAH

      Like

    • Heathcliff, sorry to jump between you guys, i would like to add, read Surah An Nahl 16:102 in parallel with Sural Al Baqarah 2:97…

      Like

    • you are a bum who has no idea of how possessives work in arabic , so what argument do you have which means that the possessed thing is actually PART OF ALLAH ?

      Liked by 1 person

    • “Sahih International: The angels and the Spirit will ascend to Him during a Day the extent of which is fifty thousand years.”

      hey co-equal balls worshiper . we “THE spirit”
      “the angels” and they are ALL going to HIM

      now look at how “the spirit” looks in arabic and look at how “OUR spirit” looks in 21 : 91 in arabic

      if “the spirit” was IDENTIFIED AS ALLAH, IN WHICH LANGUAGE, other than christian religion, would it be allowed to say ALLAH IS GOING TO ALLAH?

      Like

    • heathcliff

      You are a moron.

      The text makes a distinction between the angels and the spirit – meaning that the spirit is not an angel. Idiot.

      Now, if the text says “the” spirit, that would imply a pre-eminence that goes beyond the level of an angel. If it is not allah’s spirit, then this implies an entity that is somewhere between angels and god – a demi-god if you will. Your theory makes you a blasphemer and imbecile.

      Like

    • shaad

      COuld elaborate on how those verses impact the discussion between myself and the imbecile?

      Like

    • Yeah i saw that you guys about Spirit, Gabriel and stuff…i’ve elaborated down below in my reply to heathcliff

      Like

    • heathcliff

      You are a moron.

      The text makes a distinction between the angels and the spirit – meaning that the spirit is not an angel. Idiot.

      Now, if the text says “the” spirit, that would imply a pre-eminence that goes beyond the level of an angel. If it is not allah’s spirit, then this implies an entity that is somewhere between angels and god – a demi-god if you will. Your theory makes you a blasphemer and imbecile.

      ///

      shaad, can you explain this shit ?

      i don’t understand it , and i don’t even understand how it UNDERSTOOD what i was trying to say.

      Like

    • Heathcliff, whoaa calm down… you guys are discussing whether the Spirit is Gabriel right?

      Well compare the verses and you’ll get the answer…

      Holy Quran 16:102
      SAY: The Holy Spirit has brought it down as Truth from your Lord to brace those who believe and as guidance and good news for Muslims.

      Holy Quran2:97
      Say:”Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel,then know that He has brought it down for your heart with God’s permission, to confirm what came before it and as guidance and good news for believers.

      Both of these verses talk about the coming of the Quran….

      Like

    • “If it is not allah’s spirit, then this implies an entity that is somewhere between angels and god – a demi-god if you will”

      so are the elohims in the torah HAVE yhwhs divinity in them?

      Like

    • do the el GIBORIM /singul EL gibor
      have yhwhs DIVINITY in them?

      Like

    • “The text makes a distinction between the angels and the spirit – meaning that the spirit is not an angel. Idiot.”

      Liked by 1 person

    • “it never states that teh spirit is jibril”
      Actually it does like shaad has shown. Bitchslap!

      Like

  7. if each head is having FULLY “experiential feelings” of the middle person, how many persons?

    Liked by 2 people

  8. shaad ,

    [–]SirVentricleAncient Near Eastern mythology | Origins of Judaism 7 points an hour ago
    Most scholars would argue against it because Hebrew doesn’t have a pluralis majestatis. The prevailing view is that it reflects a remnant of the divine council, which in most ancient Near Eastern cultures was responsible for the creation of humanity.
    permalinkembedsavereportgive goldreply
    [–]Ur_NammuNELC Ph.D. 2 points 35 minutes ago
    Yes, and it should be noted that Jews even up through the turn of the era apparently had no qualms with the idea of referring to the ministering angels as “gods”, ᵓēlīm or even ᵓəlōhīm. In the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice, where the ministers of the presence are referred to by these terms regularly, it is often only by context that we know if the author(s) are referring to God or the angels.
    permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive goldreply
    about

    Liked by 1 person

  9. @Heathcliff, yeah apparently this is the view of Jews as well as some Christians….According to some interpretations God was making an announcement to the heavenly hosts…this can be confirmed by reading Isaiah 6:8 in parallel to Genesis 1:26…

    Another claim is that it was referring to God and his Wisdom(Proverbs 3:19)…some hardcore Trinitarians would try to prove that the wisdom of God is Jesus by quoting some verses but it’s generally out of context…i’m not being biased or whatever, i’m only stating what i’ve seen

    Like

    • I forgot to mention that if trinitarians want to prove that Jesus is the Wisdom of God, then it would backfire against their doctrine due to some pretty good reasons explicitly demonstrated in the bible…

      Like

Trackbacks

  1. Mike Licona highlights non-trinitarian Bible verse | kokicat

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: