The Trinity

AhmadJoyia wrote: DavidC wrote: >>�And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, E�li, E�li la�ma sa-bach�tha-ni? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?� (Matt: 27-46)<< This was not an original utterance. Jesus was reciting Psalm 22. One cannot understand what Jesus was saying here without reading the entire psalm. Okay!! Very interesting indeed. At such a critical juncture of his life, Jesus recalling and quoting just a phrase from Psalm 22, could mean different to different people. So, brother DavidC, please enlighten us as what do you understand of it. Secondly, I still waiting for your in depth response on two aspects of Christian history. 1) Development and evolution of Trinity through centuries of human effort as against God inspired. 2) Anonymous authorship of Biblical books (both OT & NT) negating initial stance of being true Eye Witness accounts. Best regards.

The essence of Psalm 22 is a prayer that God's will be done, and an affirmation of the wisdom of God in spite of personal suffering.

Please focus question one. Kindly give me a question suitable for a one or two sentence answer. My history isn't that strong, and your question requires a book to answer.

The gospels are all titled "The Gospel According to . . ." The oral histories of the four Apostles were all dictated to anonymous scribes. We know who told the stories but we don't know who wrote the books.

Edited by DavidC - 14 November 2016 at 6:29am

AhmadJoyia wrote: Secondly, I still waiting for your in depth response on two aspects of Christian history. 1) Development and evolution of Trinity through centuries of human effort as against God inspired.

I have addressed this. There is no need for a long explanation.

AhmadJoyia wrote: This implies either god is deceiving himself or Jesus can never be God. Since first is not possible, one can only conclude that Jesus was not God. Can you see it?

The Bible doesn't claim Jesus is the father God and neither do Christians. He is the word of God that the Scriptures state was God. Jn. 1

AhmadJoyia wrote: Good to know that, if not all, at least this part of history is acknowledged. But Question remains when these scribes (Whosoever they were) wrote from the so called "Oral traditions" and from whom (I can pen down my grand grand grand father's stories and to put credence to my version, I can simply omit the intermediaries)? Of course there were so many other versions of such "Oral traditions", and the question is why picked these 4 and not others and who selected them and on what merit or criteria and rejected others? Best regards.

The different versions of oral tradition incorporated in the gospel never contradict the central gospel message. God made sure we had that intact. One message that contradicts the central gospel message is the Quran that came centuries after the gospel was written. What I don't understand is the Quran is suppose to confirm the gospel it states Allah sent for guidance and light. I find that it doesn't confirm but attempts to usurp the gospel. I could be wrong but I cannot see how.

The gospel had been plagiarized many times I am sure, but there are couple of examples I can give off the top of my head. Let's say I trust the primary source over a secondary one. Well, I'll give one little example:

The prophet Joseph Smith came up with the BOOK of Mormon. Mormons claim he is the seal of the prophets, but we can see that the Smith's book borrowed from the Bible; he even copied translational errors that are in the KJV of the Bible. I can go on, but I'll stop here.

Edited by Saved - 14 November 2016 at 7:08pm

Saved wrote: You say: "Allah makes it clear in the Quran (at least to me) when he states "They do disbelieve who say Allah is the third of three." So, Allah implies that Christians worship Allah as the third person of the trinity,"

Dear Saved,

Do you read the Quran or just people say? or your own embroider Allah words?
The truth is: "... Walaataquuluu tsalaatsatun (And please do not say God is three) .. intahuu khairallakum (please stop you say it, it's better for you) .. innallaahu ilaahuwwahidun (only Allah, the only one God)" and the next sentence is: "Glory to Allah from the assumption has a son,..."

Most people know that Islam is famous with "Tawheed" and very different with the Trinity (Quran 112:1-4)

Now I want to ask you, what is the name of the religion brought by Jesus when he was still on earth? Nazrani, Christian, Catholic, or are there other names? Thank you.

Regards,
Asep

Saved wrote: AhmadJoyia wrote: Secondly, I still waiting for your in depth response on two aspects of Christian history. 1) Development and evolution of Trinity through centuries of human effort as against God inspired. I have addressed this. There is no need for a long explanation.

Okay,I have responded it after this post, accordingly.

Saved wrote: AhmadJoyia wrote: This implies either god is deceiving himself or Jesus can never be God. Since first is not possible, one can only conclude that Jesus was not God. Can you see it? The Bible doesn't claim Jesus is the father God and neither do Christians. He is the word of God that the Scriptures state was God. Jn. 1

Come on brother, there is no need to play with the words like Father God, God, Son God, all equal etc. Your similar effort is also not very convincing when you were bent upon making us understand that a verb "Word" somehow = Noun "Word". Are you challenging the grammatical rules to fit your concept of triune god more plausible? I don't think so.

Saved wrote: AhmadJoyia wrote: Good to know that, if not all, at least this part of history is acknowledged. But Question remains when these scribes (Whosoever they were) wrote from the so called "Oral traditions" and from whom (I can pen down my grand grand grand father's stories and to put credence to my version, I can simply omit the intermediaries)? Of course there were so many other versions of such "Oral traditions", and the question is why picked these 4 and not others and who selected them and on what merit or criteria and rejected others? Best regards. The different versions of oral tradition incorporated in the gospel never contradict the central gospel message.

Yes, my brother again you have tried to answer to a wrong question. I didn't question about variations within Gospels (that could be an important question of some other time), but the soundness in being an eye-witness account. You some how didn't bother to answer it.

Saved wrote: God made sure we had that intact.

Exactly how? Can you be specific as this is my basic question where series of canonization councils have had books added or removed from the Canon? What was the criteria and who decided it?

Saved wrote: One message that contradicts the central gospel message is the Quran that came centuries after the gospel was written. What I don't understand is the Quran is suppose to confirm the gospel it states Allah sent for guidance and light. I find that it doesn't confirm but attempts to usurp the gospel. I could be wrong but I cannot see how.

For example? Can you quote which verse or part of Quran does that? Quran specifically negates Trinity and for this you have already admitted that it is not explicitly stated in the anonymous gospels. Even if you find such a conflict with Quran, how can you be so sure that the anonymous gospels provide an inspired message of God? BTW do you seriously believe these books are truely inspired by God? If yes, inspired to whom?

Saved wrote: The gospel had been plagiarized many times I am sure, but there are couple of examples I can give off the top of my head. Let's say I trust the primary source over a secondary one. Well, I'll give one little example: The prophet Joseph Smith came up with the BOOK of Mormon. Mormons claim he is the seal of the prophets, but we can see that the Smith's book borrowed from the Bible; he even copied translational errors that are in the KJV of the Bible. I can go on, but I'll stop here.

Your admission of plagiarized gospel and then explain it away through an irrelevant example of LDS, is not understood. I assume, and I am sure I am wrong in this assumption, that if you are trying to equate somehow LDS with Islam, I would only be surprised by your ignorance.

Best regards.

Edited by AhmadJoyia - 16 November 2016 at 8:51am