“O Jesus the son of Mary! Recount My favour to you and to your mother. Behold! I strengthened you with the holy spirit so that you did speak to the people in childhood and in maturity.” (Qur’an 110)
“To Jesus the son of Mary, We gave clear signs, and strengthened him with the holy spirit.” (Quran 2:253)
“We gave Jesus the son of Mary clear signs and strengthened him with the holy spirit.” (Qur’an 2:87)“And say, “Praise to Allah, who has not taken a son and has had no partner in His dominion and has no need of a protector out of weakness; and glorify Him with great glorification.” (Qur’an 17:111)
Here Jesus (a.s) is contrasted with Allah (swt).
Jesus needs to be strengthened with the Holy Spirit. Whereas Allah (swt) has no need of any protector. In fact, Allah (swt) emphasizes that the one who needs a protector is due to some inherent need.
“An angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him.” (Luke 22:43)
A) If the angel was there to strengthen Jesus’ human nature what was deficient about the presence of Almighty God himself in Jesus that couldn’t give Jesus that strength? An angel is redundant.
B) If the angel was there to strengthen Jesus’ divine nature that too does not make any sense. How does an angel strengthen God?
C) If the angel was there to strengthen the God-Man -than this leads us back to point A.
This is a dangerous concept because if Jesus could not turn to the Divine within himself which we are told the ‘whole fullness of godhead‘ dwells, then what precedent does this sent for the rest of humanity?
Some people will start to call upon angels rather than God. This is not acceptable. What also makes the above text doubly redundant is that Jesus is already filled with the Holy Spirit.
“And the Holy Spirit descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him.” (Luke 3:23)
Imagine if you will if it said that the ‘Father descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him‘. Why would the Holy Spirit whom we presume to be the divine, in essence, need to descend upon the son whom we presume to be divine in nature? If Jesus has the ‘fullness of the godhead’ which means the complete presence of the hypostatic union why the need for the Holy Spirit?
“And Jesus being full of the Holy Spirit returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness.” (Luke 4:1)
Imagine if you will if the text said, ‘being full of the Father returned from the Jordan‘. What kind of understanding is this? God is filled with God?
It looks as if Jesus is being assisted by an agent known as the Holy Spirit.
“How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil because God was with him.” (Acts 10:38)
“You men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know.” (Acts 2:22)
Is there power in the name of Jesus?
Many Christians believe that there is power in the name of Jesus. They also falsely assume that the name of God is Jesus.
We have answered that in our article here: https://primaquran.com/2020/04/26/why-jesus-is-not-the-name-of-god/
God has attributes that are possessed at all times. God is not God without his attributes. Did Jesus have these attributes at all times?
Christians often tell us that their concept is that Jesus is the ‘Godman’. The problem with this is not that Jesus ‘deity‘ empowers his humanity to do amazing feats like walking on water and so forth. The problem is that Jesus humanity overcomes his ‘deity‘ time and time again. The flesh can never overpower the divine might of God.
Example #1. Infinitude. God is self-existent. Is Jesus?
Allah in the Qur’an is self-existent and ever-living.
“Allah is that upon which all things are dependent, while Allah is dependent upon nothing.” (Qur’an 112:2)
“And rely upon the Ever-Living who does not die, and exalt His praise. And sufficient is He to be, with the sins of His servants, Acquainted -” (Quran 25:580)
However, Jesus is not self-sufficient.
“I live by the father.” (John 6:57)
Example #2. Unlimited Power. Allah is All-power in the Qur’an.
“Blessed be He in Whose hands is Dominion, and He over all things has power.” (Qur’an 67:1)
However, Jesus is not all-powerful.
“The Son can do nothing of himself…” (John 5:19)
Now Christians will obviously try and explain this away by saying that Jesus voluntarily lays aside some of these prerogatives of divinity. In accordance with their understanding of (Philippians 2:6-7).
Now there are huge theological problems with this which we will come back to insh’Allah. However, Christian theology opens itself up to enormous theological conundrums.
If God in any manifestation of the third of the three, can, “lay aside divine prerogatives” this means that God theoretically could “lay aside” divine prerogatives of being truthful, or of being just. This can mean that could be deceitful or unjust -authubillah min dhalik (We seek protection in Allah from these thoughts).
Now there is clear subordination in John 5:19 as well.
“ontological equality, but economic subordination,” in other words, “equal in being, but subordinate in role.” Source: (Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Zondervan, 1994), Chapter 14 The Trinity pp. 251-252.)
Interestingly he even quotes from A.H Strong who says:
“We frankly recognize an eternal subordination of Christ to the Father, but we maintain at the same time that this subordination is a subordination of order, office, and operation, not a subordination of essence.”
Whatever helps our Christian friends sleep well at night.
Example #3. Omniscient, Infinite Knowledge.
Allah is All-knowing in the Qur’an.
“It is He Who created for you all things that are on earth; moreover His design comprehended the heavens, for HE gave order and perfection to the seven firmaments; and of all things, He has perfect knowledge.” (Qur’an 2:29)
However, Jesus is not all-knowing.
“But of that hour no man knows, no not the angels which are in heaven neither the son, But the Father.” (Mark 13:32)
Note: Jesus gives priority to the angels because they are in heaven and he is on earth. Is Jesus still God’s son? Christians will say yes. So this verse still applies to him.
Not only that but if Jesus’ prayer was answered in John 17:5 “Give me the glory that I had with you before,” This would mean he would fully be in that essence; however his knowledge is obviously not the same in essence as the Father. The Father is keeping secrets from the person of the Son. Their knowledge is not the same in essence.
Is God a man or the son of man? Can we apply these terms to God?
“God is not a man, that he should lie, nor the son of man that he should repent.” (Numbers 23:19)
“Whom do men say that I, the son of man, am?” (Matthew 16:13)
Note: Jesus used the term ‘son of man‘ of himself. Also, Jesus was a man appointed by God. Since God is not a man or the son of man then Jesus is not God.
God does not have the ability to lie or to repent. So this also raises the questions: Did Jesus have the capacity to lie or to repent? If he didn’t was he ever really truly fully man?
Further irrefutable proof that Jesus was only a mortal human being.
“And as Peter was coming in Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet and worshiped him, but Peter took him up saying, stand up, “I myself also am a man (anthropos).” (Acts 10:25-26)
There above the Greek word for man is Anthropos.
Question: What does the word Anthropos mean?
Answer: It means a mortal human being, full man. It distinguishes man from the animal kingdom on one hand and distinguishes man from a deity and divine essence on the other.
Anthropos is where we get the word anthropology, which means the study of man.
Whereas Theos is where we get the word Theology, which means the study of God.
“You who are Israelites, hear these words, Jesus the Nazorean was a man(anthropos) commended to you by God with mighty deeds, wonders, and signs, which God worked through him in your midst, as you yourselves know.” (Acts 2:22)
“I am God and not man, the Holy One in your midst” (Hosea 11:9)
“But now you seek to kill me, a man (anthropos) who has told you the truth which I heard from.” (John 8:40)
Here Jesus applied a term to himself that allows therein no allowance for deity or terminology such as the ‘God-Man.’ Jesus stresses here that he is a mortal human being without a dual nature. Never in Greek literature has the term anthropos come to mean God, or ‘God-Man‘. Anthropos-by it’s definition is to be without a dual nature.
The Tri-theist will tell you that Jesus is fully God and full man. Now God being fully deity for the sake of argument could come in the guise of a man. Example history is replete with Hercules, Zeus, Aphrodite, Amen-Ra, and the plethora of other gods and goddesses that legend say came in the form of human beings. However, a person could not be fully man and also be fully deity, because to be fully man (anthropos) is not to be divine.
Now we could stop our discussion here in light of what Jesus said about being anthropos. There is no one in Christianity that can stand up to that argument. Sure a person can bring a slew of proof text (John 1:1, John 10:30, John 8:58, John 20:28, Colossians 2:9, Titus 2:13) but each and every one of those texts will fundamentally contradict John 8:40.
We could take another approach with Christians and ask:
Do Christians really believe that Jesus was ever truly a human being?
The Position of the Qur’an.
“The Messiah, son of Mary was only a messenger; messengers before him had indeed passed away. And his mother was a truthful woman. They both used to eat food. See how We make the message clear to them! Then behold, how they are turned away!” (Qur’an chapter 5:75)
“I say this because many deceivers have gone out into the world. They deny that Jesus Christ came in a real body. Such a person is a deceiver and an antichrist.” (2 John 1:7 New Living Translation)
It can be argued that this text of the Qur’an is directed towards those who took the first steps in making Jesus deity: namely the docetist or a group of Christians that held the belief of docetism.
Question: What is docetism?
Answer: The idea that Jesus did not come in the flesh or that Jesus the son of Mary was simply a spirit or apparition.
Docetism etymologically from the Greek verb dokeo, which means: “to seem, to appear to be.”
In fact, when we Muslims engage Christians in debates we point to the fact that he was simply anthropos (a mortal human being)
Jesus is reported to have said, “In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. ” (Mark 7:7)
“I do not accept human praise. moreover, I know that you do not have the love of God in you.” (John 5:41)
There is an ample amount of text in the New Testament that shows that Jesus was not really human but simply appeared human, took on human form, or was a glorified apparition. If a person doesn’t see the theological wranglings going on in the following text than something is wrong.
Take for example 1 Timothy 3:16
“Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He [a]APPEARED in a body [b] was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.”
- Some manuscripts God
- Or in the flesh
“The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” (John 1:14)
Jesus ‘beams down’ like in Star Trek! “The Word became Flesh“
In the Gospel of John, there is no virgin birth narrative.
John 3:16 which used to be translated as ‘Gave his only begotten son‘ has no been cast aside for the more famous ‘only unique‘ ‘only son‘ ‘only of his kind’‘ etc. Begotten would imply that Jesus came into existence and for this writer that is simply not a given.
Also, note that there is no mention of Mary in the Gospel according to John. It is simply some woman who is identified as Jesus’ mother. As if Jesus could have been adopted. Please see John 2:4 and John 19:25
So this writer has Jesus simply beam down or ‘materialize‘ like Captain Kirk on Star Trek.
What this text is saying is that Jesus took on the form of a human being. Just like the Holy Spirit took on the form of a dove. It doesn’t literally mean that the Holy Spirit incarnated as a dove or otherwise the Christians would believe in two incarnations.
It simply means that the Holy Spirit was “dokeo” meaning it seemed to be, supposed to be, or appeared to be.
For example, one can look at Philippians 2:6 for further collaboration. Philippians 2:6-7 is a passage that many Christian scholars believe is likely a fragment of an early Christian hymn. These early Christians had docetic tendencies and views. They held that Jesus was not really in the flesh as other human beings, but only seemed, or appeared to have a body or a form. The form he had was purely spiritual.
“Instead, he emptied himself by taking on the form(morphe) of a servant, by becoming like other humans, by having a human appearance.” (Philippians 2:7)
Oher Christians have quite a different interpretation of Philippians 2:7. They imagine the Son playing the role of Clarke Kent from Superman 2 where he powers down in the crystal chamber
“Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage. Instead, he emptied himself (kenosis) by taking on the form(morphe) of a servant, by becoming like other humans, by having a human appearance.” (Philippians 2:7)
So what is this Kenosis? What did the empty himself of? If a person says divine attributes than he is no longer God. God is not God without his attributes.
Kenosis means: (to empty, render void, perceived as valueless, deprived of content)
The other issue this brings up is the subordination doctrine. As mentioned earlier the Christians like to coin theological terminology that they feel helps them escape from difficult issues. Like the idea of their being subordination in the economy of the Trinity.
The text in Philippians 2:7 is also in direct contradiction to the text of Colossians 2:9 which states:
“For in Christ, all the fullness of deity dwells in bodily form.”
You can see my other entry where I talk about if Christians believe in two incarnations: Did God become a dove?
“For in Christ, all the fullness of deity dwells in bodily form” (Colossians 2:9)
Yet, we are told in Luke 3:22
“And The Holy Ghost descended in bodily form like a dove upon him and a voice came from heaven which said You are my beloved Son in you I am well pleased.”
Docetic Christians would have told us that they do not believe in two incarnations. That the Holy Spirit did not really become a bird/dove. Simply that it took on the bodily form. In the exact same way as Colossians 2:9 mentions a bodily form.
Original Word: εἶδος
Which means: (appearance, fashion, shape, sight. From eido a view, i.e. Form (literally or figuratively) — appearance, fashion, shape, sight.
It’s amazing that the early Tri-theist Christians burned the writings of Marcion’s Christian faction. He is such an interesting person. Marcion according to many was an advocate of Paul, and he rejected the Old Testament only accepting certain books that now comprise the 22/27 books of the New Testament depending upon the faction of Christianity you belong to.
Marcion formed the first Christian canon of the New Testament. Interestingly we do not have the writings of Marcion. We only know about Marcion through his opponents. I guess we all know how well our opponents can represent our views (wink, wink).
Now what most Christian scholars hide from the masses is the fact that the early Christians BURNED Marcion’s writings. You will also hear an interesting tale that he did a cut and paste job with the Gospel of Luke.
Especially interesting to us Muslims is the controversy regarding Marcion and the ‘Gospel according to Luke‘.
Take for example the controversy around the following text in the Gospel of Luke. This brings us back full circle to the beginning of this article.
“43An angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him.44 And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground.[a]
Luke 22:44 Some early manuscripts do not have verses 43 and 44.
Now put your detective hat on for a moment. If I held the position that Jesus was God but only appeared to be a human being why would the text above be problematic? Do the text above support that Jesus was also fully human or that he was simply God alone?
Once you ponder over this you will be able to see why “some early manuscripts do not have verses 43 and 44.”
“While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.” (Luke 24:36)
“37 They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost. 38 He said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your minds? 39 Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.” (Luke 24:37-39)
“40 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. 41And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, “Do you have anything here to eat?” 42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43 and he took it and ate it in their presence. (Luke 24:40-43)
“44 He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms.” (Luke 24:44)
Here is a link to an interesting discussion on Hort’s theory of Non-Interpolation and it’s influence on the English version of the New Testament text here: http://www.bible-researcher.com/noninterp.html
Here is some of the discussion on verse 40 above
“Luke 24:40. Was ver. 40 omitted by certain Western witnesses (D ita,b,d,e,ff2,l,r1 syrc,s) because it seemed superfluous after ver. 39? Or is it a gloss introduced by copyists in all other witnesses from Jn 20.20, with a necessary adaptation (the passage in John refers to Jesus’ hands and side; this passage refers to his hands and feet)? A minority of the Committee preferred to omit the verse as an interpolation (see the Note following 24.53); the majority, however, was of the opinion that, had the passage been interpolated from the Johannine account, copyists would probably have left some trace of its origin by retaining τὴν πλευράν in place of τοὺς πόδας (either here only, or in ver. 39 also). [p. 187]”
Now someone would probably counter that Luke 24 does a great job of countering the Christian docetic position based upon two points.
1) People cannot touch a glorified body, apparition, form, etc.
2) People cannot hold onto a glorified body, apparition, form, etc.
Now, this text is very tricky because one cannot have their cake and eat it too. Obviously according to Christians today they do believe that Jesus was a glorified body (a body that had nail prints in it) Not only this but what was the point of eating broiled fish and honeycomb?
Now as for the objections above. I find it strange that people would say you cannot touch a glorified body, or hold onto a being that is merely taking on the form or shape of a body.
Christians also believe that God eats yogurt, drinks milk, and eats roasted meat as well!
“When the food was ready, Abraham took some yogurt and milk and the roasted meat, and he served it to the men. As they ate, Abraham waited on them in the shade of the trees.” (Genesis 18:18)
So the Christians do not believe that Jesus is really a human being. Because to be really a human being is NOT to be God. They do not believe that he was human but simply that God came down and tabernacled among humanity. There has never been a human being in the existence of humankind that was God. If you want to argue that God comes and takes on a form or a shape drinks milk, and eats fish, honeycombs, yogurt, and roasted meat fine! However, no one can say that any of those entities or beings were truly human.
This is why it is my contention that the vast majority of Christianity today is Anti-Christ!
Anti is the Greek word which means in place of.
The Christians will claim that they believe that Jesus was fully God and fully man. However, to be fully man is not to be fully God. You can say that a circle can have three sides all you want it does not make it true.
Islam has the truth. We believe that Jesus is the Messiah. He was born of the virgin Mary (May Allah cover her in mercy) and that he is a mortal human being. It is Christian theology that has betrayed the real son of Mary.
The is a reason why the Qur’an above says Mary and Jesus BOTH ate food. The emphasis is that Jesus eats food in the same way that Mary does. He does it for the same reason and purpose. He is really a mortal human being. It is not the way the Christians (who are docetist in disguise) that Jesus eats broiled fish and honeycomb because he is a glorified apparition!
The problem that Islam has with Christians is not only that they claim that Jesus is God. The real problem is that Christians do not believe that Jesus was really a human being; they believe he took on the form of a servant or appeared in the likeness of men.
“I say this because many deceivers have gone out into the world. They deny that Jesus Christ came in a real body. Such a person is a deceiver and an antichrist.” (2 John 1:7 New Living Translation)
It is my hope that the sincere Christian is able to see these theological constructs for what they truly are.
Philosophical objection to the Trinity
The argument from Rene Descartes
Cogito ergo sum ( I think, therefore I am)
The Christian concept of the Trinity does not stand up to the philosophy of Rene Descartes.
Rene Descartes speaks of a person as the subject of self-awareness and freedom-in brief, a person as a conscious and autonomous self.
Is God aware of his own existence?
Does ‘God the Father’ think?
Does ‘God the Son’ think?
Does ‘God the Holy Spirit’ think?
If there is only one mind and one self-existence than God is absolutely one and not tri-unity. If there are three minds and three self existences than without doubt trinitarian Christians have slipped into Tri-theism and worship three gods.
Are the Trinitarian Gods one in mind, will, and action? If so, how can this be so? If the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are one in mind, will, and action, in what sense can they be three persons If the three-act as one and so are one in nature, what room is left to distinguish three persons?
One can slip into talk of three distinct centers of consciousness and decision making, and an interpretation of the divine persona that abandons monotheism and ends up with three gods in perfect dialogue among themselves.
Such a conception can hardly ward off tri-theism or the idea of three self-sufficient subjects who enjoy a separate existence, always act together as a closely meshed community of divine individuals, but do not constitute one God.
More examples of Jesus humanity overpowering his ‘deity’. The Big Theological and Philosophical challenge to Christianity.
Does God increase in wisdom?
“For if our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and knows all things.” (1 John 3:20)
“And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature and in favor with God and man.” (Luke 2:52)
We know that God does not increase in wisdom. God is All-Wise.
Does God Sleep?
“Behold, he that keeps Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep.” (Psalm 121:4)
“But he (Jesus) was asleep.” (Matthew 8:24)
Can Satan himself tempt God?
“God cannot be tempted with evil.” (James 1:13)
“And when the devil ended all the temptation (of Jesus), he departed from him for a season.” (Luke 4:13)
Now each of those points brought up above about Jesus sleeping, increasing in wisdom, and being tempted with evil we know what our Christian friends will say. That all of this is in regards to the humanity of Jesus. For example, we sleep, we have a soul, does our soul sleep?
Can God Die?
“God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.”(1 Timothy 6:15-16)
So now who or what died on the double-cross?
Just as God is not tempted, doesn’t increase in knowledge, doesn’t require sleep, God does not die.
God didn’t die. God’s essence did not die. God the Father did not die. God the Holy Spirit did not die. God the Son did not die.
That is the end of Christianity. It so frustrates Christians in debates with Muslims that the Christian immediately pushes a panic button and will either introduce a non sequitur, or statements that are not analogous at all.
“Even my Muslim friends don’t believe that death is the cessation of life!” I have heard one of them say. So the Christian tries a diversion tactic. Say something truthful about your opponent that they are forced to agree with. take the tension out of the room.
To my dismay time and time again Muslim debaters let Christians off the hook on this.
True, Muslims believe that there is life after death, but the Christian is trying to avoid the subject of death altogether. Muslims also believe that our souls are created; they are not eternal. Muslims believe that we do indeed die.
So that which Christians claim died on the double-cross, was it created or eternal? And notwithstanding the fact that there is life after death, back to the pointed question:
Who or what died on the double-cross?
“Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matthew 10:28)
Which also begs the question what did God really sacrifice?
We can’t say God sacrificed his life because God cannot die.
We can’t really say that God sacrificed his son because he got his son back.
We can’t even really say that God sacrificed time, as God exists outside space/time.
Which also still leaves our Christian friends in their sin. All that happened, in reality, was a cosmic charade. In the end, a man was left to suffer, God didn’t partake in any suffering. It was simply flesh that was abandoned on the double-cross.
It says, “About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice,” ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’” (Matthew 27:46)
Jesus is speaking as flesh here. The Father can never abandon the Son because they are co-eternally joined in one essence.
All that was left was flesh, the same flesh that we are told can’t please God.
“Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God.” (Romans 8:8)
In this continuation of this article: Is Christ Jesus God? We will look at the New Testament evidence that overwhelmingly shows that only the Father is God.
Who is God?
Answer: 1 Corinthians 8:6
“But to us, there is one God the Father.” (Not Trinity, not the son, -The Father.)
“Let us read from Young’s Literal Translation: “for even if there are those called gods, whether in heaven, whether upon earth — as there are gods many and lords many — yet to us [is] one God, the Father, of whom [are] the all things, and we to Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom [are] all things, and we through Him.” (1 Corinthians 8:5-6)
This is very important because of all those Elohim(gods/ which one is truly God? Paul says the FATHER. This verse clearly refutes Christian Tri-theism.
“That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation.” (Ephesians 1:17)
Who is the God of Lord Jesus Christ?
“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Peter 1:3)
Who is the God and Father of Lord Jesus Christ?
“We always give thanks to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you.” (1 Colossians 1:3)
“One God and Father of all.” (Ephesians 4:6)
“My Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28)
“My Father is greater than all.” (John 10:29)
“Jesus said, touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: But go to my brothers and say unto them, I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God, and your God.” (John 20:17)
“And surely Allah is My Lord, and your Lord, so worship Him. This is a Straight Path.” (Qur’an 19:36)
Note: Jesus should be ‘fully glorified’ God here, as he is saying these words in his post resurrected body!
“Have we all not one Father? Has not One God created us?” (Malachi 2:10)
This text is sufficient enough to put at rest the tired arguments that because Jesus called God his father he was making himself equal with God. This is not what Jesus said. This is what some Jews said about Jesus. However, Jesus never makes any claims that the Father belongs exclusively to him. John 20:17 made that abundantly clear to all those who can see.
Jesus also is reported to have told people to pray “Our Father who is in heaven.“
Now Christians (depending upon if they are Tri-theist as are the ‘Trinitarians’ or if they are Modalist as are the ‘Oneness Pentecostals’) will try and bring a proof text to support their respective positions to identify Jesus as the Father.
#1) The first proof text they try and use is Isaiah 9:6
“For to us a child is born, to us, a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”
Now more often than not the only thing that the Tri-theist wants from this passage is that Jesus is called ‘Mighty God‘. They do not really want to deal with the fact that it also says this person will be called “Everlasting Father,” because it deals some damage to their doctrine, and gives credence to the Modalism that the ‘Oneness Pentecostals‘ believe in. So what they normally do is say these are simply titles but not names of Jesus. Or they represent realities of Jesus (that the Father is expressed in him) etc.
Because the Trinity doctrine is very explicit that Jesus is not the Father. So I am always puzzled by their use of this passage.
Isaiah 7:14 comes to mind where it says,
“Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (Isaiah 7:14)
I mean pardon me but whoever really called him Immanuel? In his lifetime? So I wanted to bring the Isaiah 9:6 passage up because it’s the only passage beside John 10:30 (that we will soon be dealt with) that Christians would try and use to show that Jesus is the Father.
#2) The second proof text they try and use is John 10:30
Was Jesus one with the creator in essence or one in submission to the overall divine plan?
“If you be the Christ (Messiah) tell us plainly?” (John 10:24)
” I and my Father are one.” (John 10:30)
Now the Christian tri-theist will tell you this text proves that Jesus is God. However, are they consistent when we point out the following text to them?
“Neither I pray for those alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be ONE; Like you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be ONE in us: that the world may believe that you have sent me. And the glory which you gave me I have given them; that they may be ONE, even as we are ONE.” (John 17:20-22)
You see the Greek word Hen means one in purpose. It does not mean one in essence. Jesus said that the disciples would be one “Even as we are one”.
Think about that. If Jesus meant by saying ‘The Father and I are one‘ that he is in essence God; then this also means the 12 disciples are also in essence, God! So now the tri-theist who believe in three gods dwelling in community together would now have a godhead unity of 15 (inclusive of the 12 disciples). One would hope that common sense coupled with modesty would have kept Christians from going overboard with such conclusions but all we have to do is point out Benny Hinn.
Discussion on Benny Hinn’s theology of John 17:20-22
Little wonder we have world-famous televangelist Benny Hinn running around with his ‘little god‘ theology.
Benny Hinn is getting bolder and bolder these days telling his followers they are gods and even Christ Jesus. There is no end to Christian blasphemy of Allah (swt).
“When you say I am saved, what are you saying? You are saying, I am a Christian. What does that word mean? It means, I’m anointed. You know what the word anointed means? It means Christ. When you say I’m a Christian, you are saying I am Mashiyach in Hebrew I am a little messiah walking on earth, in other words. That’s a shocking revelation! We are not, we are not, having, we don’t have apart of Him running around in our stomach feeling goosebumps. His spirit and our spirit-man are one, united. There is no separation, it’s impossible. The new creation is created after God in righteousness and true holiness. The new man is after God, like God, Godlike, complete in Christ Jesus, the new creation is just like God May I say it like this, you are a little god on earth running around.” http://www.cephasministry.com/benny_hinn.html
Say what you want about Benny Hinn but a least he is interpreting the passage on a consistent basis than most tri-theist.
Conclusion: Only the Father is God. Jesus is not the Father.
I think the evidence above is abundantly clear that Jesus is not the Father, and that Christ Jesus has a God.
Who is the only true God according to Jesus?
“Good master what, must I do to have eternal life? Why call me good when none is good but God!” (Mark 10:17-18)
Christians will say that Jesus is asking a rhetorical question. However, the point I cannot agree with them on is that Jesus is indirectly asserting divinity for himself. This text of Mark 10:18 is arguably used more strongly as an anti-divinity statement than some esoteric knowledge the man who came to Jesus was receiving. Again I see the Christian argument and recognize it; however, as it is a rhetorical question it can also be argued as a strong statement of denying deity as well.
“This is life eternal that they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou, the only true God, has sent.” (John 17:3)
“He that is sent is not greater than he that sent him.” (John 13:16)
Comment: Here Jesus says that there is only one true God. If there is truly a distinction in the economy of the ‘godhead‘ as the Tri-theist say than it means that ‘God the Father’ sent ‘God the Son’. Jesus said, “he that is sent (himself) is not greater than he (God) that sent him.”
So this very distinction in the community of gods known as the “economic Trinity” is self-undoing. This is also why these two verses coupled together have been so damaging to their doctrine over the years.
“For there is one God, and one Mediator between God, and man, the man (anthropos) Christ Jesus.” (1 Timothy 2:5)
Comment: If Jesus were God we wouldn’t have need of a mediator because people could go to God directly. Think about it!
“Now there is no mediator when only one party is involved, and God is one.”(Galatians 3:20)
The Qur’an itself states that righteous people can make intercession on our behalf.
“Who can intercede (mediate) except by his permission.” (Qur’an 2:255)
Note: Allah does not say Holy Prophets and righteous people cannot intercede for us. Allah simply says that no one can except by Allah’s permission’; thereby focusing the prayer and request of the individual ultimately to Allah as the source of all power.
In Islam, the Prophet Muhammed (saw) will make intercession for the Muslims on the day of judgment.
Allah is the owner of the throne, not Jesus!
“But if they turn away, say: “Allah suffices me: there is no god but He; On Him is my trust, ‘He is the Lord of the Throne Supreme!” (Qur’an 9:129)
“If there were, in the heavens and the earth, other gods besides Allah, there would have been confusion in both! But glory to Allah, the Lord of the Throne: above what they attribute to Him!” (Qur’an 21:22)
“Say: “To who belong the earth and all beings therein? If you know!:” They will say, “To Allah!” Say: “Yet will you not receive admonition? ” Say” “Who is the Lord of the seven heavens and the Lord of the Throne Supreme?” “They will say,” to Allah. “Say: “Will you then not be filled with awe?” Say”: “Who is it in whose hands is the governance of all things,-who protects all, but is not protected by any? Say if you know:. They will say, “It belongs to Allah.” Say” “Then how are you deluded?” (Qur’an 23:84-89)
“Therefore exalted be Allah, the King, the Reality: there is no god but He, the Lord of the Throne of Honor!” (Qur’an 23:116)
“Glory to the Lord of the heavens and the earth, the Lord of the Throne He is Free from the things they attribute to Him! So leave them to babble and play until they meet that Day of theirs, which they have been promised.” (Qur’an 43:82-83)
“I am the Lord and there is no other, there is no God besides me, It is I who arm you, though you know me not.” (Isaiah 45:5)
“But he, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked up intently to heaven and saw the glory of God and Jesus standing at the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:55)
“and he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man, standing at the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:56)
Note: Holy Spirit strangely absent from the picture. Why is that?
“If then you were raised with Christ, seek what is above, where Christ is seated at the right hand of God.” (Colossians 3:1)
“Bathsheba, therefore, went unto king Solomon, to speak unto him for Adonijah. And the king rose up to meet her, and bowed himself unto her, and sat down on his throne, and caused a seat to be set for the king’s mother, and she sat on his right hand.” (1 Kings 2:19)
“Jesus said to them, “You will indeed drink from my cup, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father.” (Matthew 20:23)
Comments: The above verses show that Jesus is clearly not God. Not only that but if Jesus was God and he was standing/sitting next to God that would show obviously to those whose hearts are not blind that there were two gods! Reflect on what is stated in Isaiah above ‘there is no God beside me.“
So the text says Jesus was standing at the right hand of God. Then the text says Jesus was sitting at the right hand of God. Maybe after thousands of years of standing, one wants to sit down and take a break. The point being is that Jesus is in close proximity to the divine but clearly is not the one sitting on the main throne in the same way the mother of Solomon is not sitting on the main throne.
Christians should focus their prayer on the owner of the throne and not the one hanging out beside the throne!
Subordination of Jesus and the Holy Spirit to God: Are they truly equal?
“They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, “Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?” And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah gives power and direction to all things.” (Qur’an 5:17)
Anyone who studies early Christian theological debates and history will know that many early Christian theologians held the concept that Jesus and the Holy Spirit were both subordinate to God in some way or another.
The proponents of Tri-theism were against this as it would render their concept of three co-eternal, co-equal persons (deities) null and void.
One such powerful argument is as follows. If Jesus is the son of God he is not co-eternal as the Father beget him; Thus being time-barred he could not be co-eternal. (This was an argument from Bishop Arius)
If the Father begat the Son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence: and from this, it is evident, that there was a time when the Son was not. It therefore necessarily follows, that he [the Son] had his substance from nothing.
Bishop Arius could quote from proof text such as:
“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” (Colossians 1:15)
All human beings are the ‘image of God‘.
“So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” (Genesis 1:27)
Moreover, in response to this, the Tri-theist would argue that Jesus is eternally begotten (an oxymoron that has no real meaning).
Even though when asked to explain this concept of an ‘eternally begotten‘ son they fall flat. They will argue that if God is eternal Father then it logically follows that he should have an eternal son. The only way you can be a father is if you have offspring, in this case, a son.
The Tri-theist started to back away from scripture and use philosophical and theological arguments. An example being the sun and sunlight. No sunlight equals no sun; and no sun equals no sunlight. However, even this example falls flat under scrutiny.
Where the so-called logic fails in this argument is due to the fact that nowhere does the Bible say that the Son begets the Father. Nowhere does scripture say that the Father is generated by the Son. It is the Son that flows from the Father!
The argument is that the one who is called Father is a prior to all. The Father is un-begotten or un-originated.
Subordination of the Holy Spirit to the Father.
When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, he will testify on my behalf.” (John 15:26)
This perspective insists that only the Father is the ultimate source and fountainhead of divinity, from whom the Son and the Spirit derive-the former by generation and the latter by a procession.
Subordination of the Son to the Father.
“And you belong to Christ’s and Christ belongs to God.” (1 Corinthians 2:23)
“But, I would have you to know that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God.” (1 Corinthians 11:3)
“And when all things shall be subdued unto him (GOD), then shall the Son (Jesus) also himself be subject unto him (GOD) that put all things under him (Jesus), that God may be all in all!” (1 Corinthians 15:28)
God alone reigns supreme in the end! Subhan”Allah! (Glory be to Allah) does it get any more clear than this?
Note: You might have this concept of the son on the ‘right hand‘ of God but in the end, God will subdue him!
Text that clearly refutes Tri-theism!
The voice of Jesus is not the voice of God in essence.
“And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness to me. His voice you have never heard. His form you have never seen.” (John 5:37)
“No man has seen God at any time.” (1 John 4:12)
Note: Remember that if Jesus is the “God-Man” and his ‘deity‘ is the same essence of the Father than in essence his voice would be the voice of God in essence. However, Jesus clearly states that those present were not listening to the voice of God!
The people who were addressed by Jesus above (John 5:37) heard his voice. This shows the voice of Jesus in essence is not the same as God’s in essence. Thus Jesus is not God according to the above proof text.
God is not a spirit (one of many) = Compound Unity = Trinity.
John 4:24 “God is a spirit.” (King James Version)
The text above has been corrected to the following text.
John 4:24 “God is Spirit.” (Revised Standard Version).
Spirit in Greek is Pneuma -an intangible being.
Comment: The text of John 4:24 has been corrected to show that God is spirit (singular) and not ‘a’ spirit (compound unity). If God and the Holy Spirit were of the same essence than God would be ‘a spirit’. This text clearly refutes Tri-theism.
The Holy Spirit and God are not the same in essence.
“For He shall not speak of Himself; But whatsoever he shall hear (from God) that shall he speak; and he will show you things to come.” (John 16:13)
Comment: Holy Spirit-Whatever he shall hear that shall he speak. If the Holy Spirit were truly the same in essence as the Father in essence than what he speaks, in essence, would be his own in essence and not what he has heard in essence.
Jesus does not have the glory in essence that God has.
“Now glorify me Father with the glory that I had with you before the world began.” (John 17:5)
Is “I am the Lord this is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to idols.” (Isaiah 42:8)
Comment: Jesus the ‘God-Man’ is asking to have the same glory that he had with the Father before the world began. If that is the case then Jesus glory, in essence, is of a different glory, in essence, that of God. In essence, Jesus’ glory is not of the same essence as God.
Jesus has his own spirit.
“Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” (Luke 23:46)
Actually, if the trinity were true the statement above should be “Into your hands I commit our spirit.” Or, “into your hands, I commit this spirit” as a reference to the human spirit.
Comment: If Jesus and God had the same spirit in essence then the above text should read ‘into your hands I commit our spirit; because in essence, they would have the same spirit.
Jesus does not have the same will as God in essence.
“Not as I will, but as you will.” (Matthew 26:39)
Comment: If Jesus the “God-Man’ had, in essence, the same will as God has in essence than he would be God in essence. However, the will of Jesus, in essence, is different than the will of God in essence; and thus they are not the same in essence.”
Jesus and the Holy Spirit are not the same in essence.
“And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan.” (Luke 4:1)
Comment: If Jesus is already God in essence at his incarnation then there would be no need to make this distinction as Luke does here. Was he not full of the Holy Ghost before? Remember according to Tri-theist Jesus is the ‘fullness’ of the godhead’ bodily. Not only this but it would mean that God is full of God!
“And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, “Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.” (Qur’an 5:83)
Allah-willing part 2 coming this week.