Dr. William Campbell destroyed by Dr. Zakir Naik on scientific errors in the Bible MUST WATCH!!

[Etagloc]

Etagloc, can I ask you one simple question: why are you here?
I've seen a lot of your posts against Christianity, but I didn't want to fight with you. I have Muslim friends even though I am Christian and I respect them.
Anyway... the point here is that while everyone on the forum discusses about conspiracy theories, you are always the one telling us that your religion is better and that the Bible is wrong.
You do know that the Vigilant Citizen that writes the articles is a Christian, right? I don't understand why you bothered to open an account just to attack another religion. I repeat that I don't want to fight, but seriously stop this.

So here you are suggesting that I shouldn't even be here.

Have I suggested anything like that with any Christians? Have I ever suggested to any Christians that they shouldn't be here? Am I out to silence them?

How can you act innocent when you're suggesting I shouldn't even be here.

Have you sat down and asked me about the context?

I get it- some people are more diplomatic, they want to be buddy-buddy, they want peace.

But am I supposed to deal with harassment and not respond?

I tried to be friendly and diplomatic with the Christians.

I tried to be friendly with them- and they didn't want to be friendly with me.

They wanted to harass me and antagonize me.

Why did Ahmed Deedat debate Christians?

If you listen to what Zakir Naik said- Ahmed Deedat didn't just wake up and say he wanted to go debunk Christianity.

Ahmed Deedat was being harassed and he got fed up with being harassed. He chose to respond.

The Christians weren't interested in sitting and having an intellectual discussion with me. Even you don't seem interested in having a calm discussion- you seem to be suggesting that I just shouldn't even be here.

I was peacefully minding my own business and I was trying to be friendly and diplomatic.

But they wanted to wage a harassment campaign. They didn't want to have a peaceful, intellectual discussion. They wanted to harass me. They wanted to humiliate me. They wanted to shame me, they wanted to insult me.

So they have no right to get mad if I respond. I already explained this on the previous page.

 

[Haich]

I am being blunt here - so please do not take this as a personal attack, this is directed at you Muslims as a group:

We do provide in our opinion proof. You immediately dismiss Jesus' words in favour of a mere man with questionable morals and illiteracy to boot. So be it.

I have been here long to know unless God is merciful enough to open your spiritual eyes you will remain a fervent Muslim. That is between you and God.

That's alright, no offence taken.

Right, but we're not talking about Mohammed and actually, to accept Mohammed solely and leave Jesus makes you a non muslim. To be a Muslim you have to accept Jesus and all the prophets since the time of Adam. (Peace be upon them all).

The burden of proof is on you. Please provide original manuscripts clearly detailing Jesus' divinity. I have explained that the English bible isn't a reliable source as this wasnt the language Jesus spoke. Where is the trinity mentioned in the original bible ?

 

[Haich]

Listen Haich, first of all I am glad you are one of the Muslims that wants to know the truth and research it themselves. Thank you for trying to understand us without being aggressive.
Anyway, my best friend in high school is a Muslim girl. I have interacted with Muslims before and I'll tell you the same thing that I told her a couple of months ago.
If you want to know if the Bible is true or fake, read it for yourself. Pray by saying 'God, show me the true faith' I am not telling you to say Jesus or Allah in your prayer. Just call Him 'God' or 'Creator'.
If you find something wrong in the Bible, just write us back here. If we fail to give an explanation, and you feel that the Bible is wrong, just tell us that.
You can never know for sure unless you try to read the Bible.

Yh I've prayed for guidance and truth and it has always lead me to Islam. I just want to understand Christianity better because I'm not well versed on the history of the bible and it would also help me at work.

 

[Ex-arianator4]

So here you are suggesting that I shouldn't even be here.

Have I suggested anything like that with any Christians? Have I ever suggested to any Christians that they shouldn't be here? Am I out to silence them?

How can you act innocent when you're suggesting I shouldn't even be here.

Have you sat down and asked me about the context?

I get it- some people are more diplomatic, they want to be buddy-buddy, they want peace.

But am I supposed to deal with harassment and not respond?

I tried to be friendly and diplomatic with the Christians.

I tried to be friendly with them- and they didn't want to be friendly with me.

They wanted to harass me and antagonize me.

Why did Ahmed Deedat debate Christians?

If you listen to what Zakir Naik said- Ahmed Deedat didn't just wake up and say he wanted to go debunk Christianity.

Ahmed Deedat was being harassed and he got fed up with being harassed. He chose to respond.

The Christians weren't interested in sitting and having an intellectual discussion with me. Even you don't seem interested in having a calm discussion- you seem to be suggesting that I just shouldn't even be here.

I was peacefully minding my own business and I was trying to be friendly and diplomatic.

But they wanted to wage a harassment campaign. They didn't want to have a peaceful, intellectual discussion. They wanted to harass me. They wanted to humiliate me. They wanted to shame me, they wanted to insult me.

So they have no right to get mad if I respond. I already explained this on the previous page.

Okay man first of all I apologize if I wasn't clear but I believe that I said 'I don't want to fight' at least two times. Yes, I want to be buddy-buddy with you because fighting will lead us nowhere.
I asked you that question because I have seen your posts before on this forum. Any religion can stay here, but you don't have to attack us. What's the point in telling us that we are wrong and you are better?
Just open a thread that says 'prove to me that Jesus is God' rather than writing threads like 'the bible has scientific errors, must watch!'
Last time someone sent me one of those videos, I blocked him. If you want a discussion, that's great. I'm sorry that other Christians harassed you. I want to be friendly to you, but I get the feeling that you're here because you want to express your opinion without listening to the other side of it.

 

[Etagloc]

And @JoChris you have no right to criticize me for making a thread criticizing Christianity.

You made a David Wood thread criticizing Islam.

You have no leg to stand on.

You made a David Wood thread where he was insulting and disrespectful towards Muslims.

I'm not disrespectful. I'm not insulting.

My thread isn't disrespectful, nor is it insulting. It's not about smirking and laughing at Christians like David Wood smirks and laughs at Muslims.

This is simply about facts.

I don't need to be disrespectful and insulting.

I'm coming from a position of power- I have facts. The David Woods are coming from a position of weakness- they have to rely on insults. I don't need insults. I have facts.

You have no right to make a thread insulting Islam and then try to paint me like a bad guy when I make a thread criticizing Christianity.

And speaking of David Wood

 

[JoChris]

That's alright, no offence taken.

Right, but we're not talking about Mohammed and actually, to accept Mohammed solely and leave Jesus makes you a non muslim. To be a Muslim you have to accept Jesus and all the prophets since the time of Adam. (Peace be upon them all).

The burden of proof is on you. Please provide original manuscripts clearly detailing Jesus' divinity. I have explained that the English bible isn't a reliable source as this wasnt the language Jesus spoke. Where is the trinity mentioned in the original bible ?

Referring to Jesus as the fulness of Godhead bodily can't get any clearer. (I know you will dismiss original bible as only being copies too. I have see the merry-go-round several times already.)

Godhead: https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Godhead/
https://www.gotquestions.org/Godhead.html

There are early Christian writings from second century that mention Father, Son and Holy Spirit too, but I predict you will dismiss these as only copies, they weren't written in modern English (making invalid) et.al.

This should be bookmarked by Christians for next "yeah but no early Christian writing said anything about the Trinity/ godhead/ Jesus being God":

2nd century Athenagoras: https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.v.ii.x.html
3rd century Tertullian - word trinity used - https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.ix.xii.html

 

[JoChris]

And @JoChris you have no right to criticize me for making a thread criticizing Christianity.

You made a David Wood thread criticizing Islam.

You have no leg to stand on.

You made a David Wood thread where he was insulting and disrespectful towards Muslims.

I'm not disrespectful. I'm not insulting.

My thread isn't disrespectful, nor is it insulting. It's not about smirking and laughing at Christians like David Wood smirks and laughs at Muslims.

This is simply about facts.

I don't need to be disrespectful and insulting.

I'm coming from a position of power- I have facts. The David Woods are coming from a position of weakness- they have to rely on insults. I don't need insults. I have facts.

You have no right to make a thread insulting Islam and then try to paint me like a bad guy when I make a thread criticizing Christianity.

And speaking of David Wood

I bet I could find a clip of Wood BBQing Muslims too....

Yeah that is right, just YOUTUBE Islamicize me and then Unislamicize me. Thanks for the chance to advertise the serious apologetics series.

 

[Etagloc]

Okay man first of all I apologize if I wasn't clear but I believe that I said 'I don't want to fight' at least two times. Yes, I want to be buddy-buddy with you because fighting will lead us nowhere.
I asked you that question because I have seen your posts before on this forum. Any religion can stay here, but you don't have to attack us. What's the point in telling us that we are wrong and you are better?
Just open a thread that says 'prove to me that Jesus is God' rather than writing threads like 'the bible has scientific errors, must watch!'
Last time someone sent me one of those videos, I blocked him. If you want a discussion, that's great. But I get the feeling that you're here because you want to express your opinion without listening to the other side of it.

If you want to be buddy-buddy with me, I want to be buddy-buddy with you.

I'm not lying- I really was dealing with a harassment campaign against me.

I got fed up with being harassed and antagonized.

And if someone harasses me, if someone antagonizes me- I have a right to respond.

Now... in conflicts, sometimes you have civilians who end up in the crossfire.

And I understand- you don't want to be in the crossfire.

I have respect for the real Christians, for the sincere Christians who really are friendly and peaceful people who are down-to-earth and easy to get along with.

I'm a friendly person. I'm a peaceful person. I'm a loving person. I'm not a bad guy.

I have nothing against you. If my thread bothers you- I'm sorry about that. I'm not out to bother you.

I have no problem with you- I'm not against you.

I am simply responding to harassment that was directed against me for no reason- just because people wanted to try to pressure me into shutting up and not able to say my point of view. I wasn't attacking them, I wasn't harassing them- none of that.

My feelings are hurt- if I'm peacefully minding my business like a cow in a pasture and other people want to antagonize me when I'm peacefully minding my business and even trying to be friendly with them- that hurts my feelings. So this is not a Christian-Muslim unity thread or a Christian-Muslim-let's-hold-hands-and-sing-kumbaya thread. With you- maybe we can sing kumbaya. If you're opposite sex- we'll have to skip the holding hands part but we can "sing kumbaya" metaphorically.

I saw your posts on the Ariana thread and seriously- I liked what you said and you seem cool. I'm not against you and I really am sorry if this thread bothers you.

As far as building bridges between Muslims and Christians like @Serveto was talking about
I like Serveto. Serveto is a cool guy and I like him.

I was trying to take the "build bridges" approach and like I've said- I was dealing with abuse and harassment. At first, I was surprised and I tried to ignore it. But if people keep poking.... they can't get mad when I respond. I was being attacked and antagonized- I wasn't out to cause confict.

So as far as Serveto, Claire Rousseau, JinnieAnne and some of the other Christians who I really have respect for- I really have respect for those Christians. And if you're cool and peaceful and respectful towards me, insha'Allah I hope I am cool and peaceful and respectful towards you. I'm not against Christians.

 

[Ex-arianator4]

If you want to be buddy-buddy with me, I want to be buddy-buddy with you.

I'm not lying- I really was dealing with a harassment campaign against me.

I got fed up with being harassed and antagonized.

And if someone harasses me, if someone antagonizes me- I have a right to respond.

Now... in conflicts, sometimes you have civilians who end up in the crossfire.

And I understand- you don't want to be in the crossfire.

I have respect for the real Christians, for the sincere Christians who really are friendly and peaceful people who are down-to-earth and easy to get along with.

I'm a friendly person. I'm a peaceful person. I'm a loving person. I'm not a bad guy.

I have nothing against you. If my thread bothers you- I'm sorry about that. I'm not out to bother you.

I have no problem with you- I'm not against you.

I am simply responding to harassment that was directed against me for no reason- just because people wanted to try to pressure me into shutting up and not able to say my point of view. I wasn't attacking them, I wasn't harassing them- none of that.

My feelings are hurt- if I'm peacefully minding my business like a cow in a pasture and other people want to antagonize me when I'm peacefully minding my business and even trying to be friendly with them- that hurts my feelings. So this is not a Christian-Muslim unity thread or a Christian-Muslim-let's-hold-hands-and-sing-kumbaya thread. With you- maybe we can sing kumbaya. If you're opposite sex- we'll have to skip the holding hands part but we can "sing kumbaya" metaphorically.

I saw your posts on the Ariana thread and seriously- I liked what you said and you seem cool. I'm not against you and I really am sorry if this thread bothers you.

As far as building bridges between Muslims and Christians like @Serveto was talking about
I like Serveto. Serveto is a cool guy and I like him.

I was trying to take the "build bridges" approach and like I've said- I was dealing with abuse and harassment. At first, I was surprised and I tried to ignore it. But if people keep poking.... they can't get mad when I respond. I was being attacked and antagonized- I wasn't out to cause confict.

So as far as Serveto, Claire Rousseau, JinnieAnne and some of the other Christians who I really have respect for- I really have respect for those Christians. And if you're cool and peaceful and respectful towards me, insha'Allah I hope I am cool and peaceful and respectful towards you. I'm not against Christians.

I am thankful that this discussion ended this way. I know that Christians can be bad sometimes. There are Christians with a good heart and Christians with a bad heart, the same way there are Muslims that are good and Muslims that are bad.
I don't know if you read it, but I wrote to Haich that I have a Muslim best friend from high school and she has been a really good person to me. But I also have Christian friends and they are my best friends as well.

Anyway, I don't see a problem in holding hands together haha I am male and I guess you must be too. Still, you can't say you are minding your own business while you post videos like that. I get it now that you don't want to fight, but to other Christians it looks like you are asking for it.

 

[JoChris]

Okay man first of all I apologize if I wasn't clear but I believe that I said 'I don't want to fight' at least two times. Yes, I want to be buddy-buddy with you because fighting will lead us nowhere.
I asked you that question because I have seen your posts before on this forum. Any religion can stay here, but you don't have to attack us. What's the point in telling us that we are wrong and you are better?
Just open a thread that says 'prove to me that Jesus is God' rather than writing threads like 'the bible has scientific errors, must watch!'
Last time someone sent me one of those videos, I blocked him. If you want a discussion, that's great. I'm sorry that other Christians harassed you. I want to be friendly to you, but I get the feeling that you're here because you want to express your opinion without listening to the other side of it.

Unfortunately **online** with Muslims you will have to be resigned to not "being friends" if you contradict their prophet Muhammad for long enough.
Of course be as polite as you can be but don't sacrifice Truth in the process.

 

[DesertRose]

The question @JoChris are they His words? or words attributed to him?
There is nothing wrong with respectful dialogue and civil discourse and as @Etagloc mentioned there are several Christians and Muslims who stay away from bigotry and disrespect when they discuss issues.

Praise be to Allah

Firstly:

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Surely, disbelievers are those who said: ‘Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity).’ But there is no llaah (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilaah (God -Allah). And if they cease not from what they say, verily, a painful torment will befall on the disbelievers among them”

[al-Maa’idah 5:73].

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The correct view is that this was revealed concerning the Christians in particular, as was stated by Mujaahid and others.

Then the scholars differed concerning that. It was said that what is meant by that is their disbelief (kufr) because they say that there are three hypostases (“persons” of the trinity), namely the hypostasis of the Father, the hypostasis of the Son and the hypostasis of the Word that was transmitted from the Father to the Son – exalted be Allah far above what they say.

As-Suddi and others said: This was revealed concerning their making the Messiah and his mother into two gods with Allah, thus making Allah the third of three, according to this concept. As-Suddi said: This is like what Allah, may He be exalted, says at the end of the soorah (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): "O 'Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: 'Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?'" He will say: "Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:116].

This view is the one that is more likely to be correct. And Allah knows best. End quote.

Tafseer Ibn Katheer (3/158).

This interpretation which was favoured by Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) is the one that is more likely to be correct, for the following reasons:

-1-

Ibn Katheer quoted, as further evidence, some reports from the righteous early generations, in which they follow the methodology of interpreting some parts of the Qur’an by means of other parts, which is one of the best and most appropriate ways of interpreting the Holy Qur’an.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

If someone were to ask: What are the best ways of interpreting the Qur’an? The answer is: The soundest way is to interpret the Qur’an by means of the Qur’an, because what is discussed in general terms in one place is explained elsewhere, and what is mentioned in brief in one place is mentioned in more detail elsewhere. End quote.

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (13/363).

The early generations thought that the words “Surely, disbelievers are those who said: ‘Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)” are explained by the words of Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): ‘O 'Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: “Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?”’ He will say: ‘Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would surely have known it. You know what is in my inner-self though I do not know what is in Yours, truly, You, only You, are the All-Knower of all that is hidden (and unseen).

‘Never did I say to them aught except what You (Allah) did command me to say: “Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them, and You are a Witness to all things’”

[al-Maa’idah 5:116-117].

-2-

This interpretation is supported by what follows the verse, confirming that Maryam (Mary – peace be upon her) is not divine, as Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Surely, disbelievers are those who said: "Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)." But there is no llaah (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilaah (God -Allah)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:73].

Then after that come the words (interpretation of the meaning):

“The Messiah ['Eesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary), was no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him. His mother [Maryam (Mary)] was a Siddeeqah [i.e. she believed in the words of Allah and His Books]. They both used to eat food (as any other human being, while Allah does not eat). Look how We make the Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) clear to them, yet look how they are deluded away (from the truth)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:75].

This verse confirms that Maryam (Mary – peace be upon her) is not divine, on two counts:

(i) Her status is that of siddeeqiyyah (being strong and true in faith), which is a status of servitude to Allah, may He be exalted.

(ii) She used to eat food, which is the description of a created being who has needs; it is not the description of God Who is independent of means and has no need of His creation.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

With regard to what the Qur’an says about what the Christians said, “Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)”, the commentators said that it refers to Allah, the Messiah and his mother, as Allah, may He be exalted, tells us that He will say (interpretation of the meaning): “‘O 'Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: “Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?”’” [al-Maa’idah 5:116]. Hence in the context of this passage He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The Messiah ['Eesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary), was no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him. His mother [Maryam (Mary)] was a Siddeeqah [i.e. she believed in the words of Allah and His Books]”

[al-Maa’idah 5:75].

The most that the Messiah can be is a Messenger, and the most that his mother can be is a siddeeqah; they could never reach the level of divinity. The one proves the other (that is, the fact that they are no more than that is proof that the Messiah is not God), and this is quite clear. End quote.

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (2/444).

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The words “They both used to eat food” mean: they both needed to be nourished by food, and to expel the resulting waste products. So they were two slaves of Allah, like all other people, and they were not gods as the ignorant Christians claim. End quote.

Tafseer Ibn Katheer (3/159).

-3-

The revelation came to expose misguidance and disbelief, and to explain the way of guidance. It did not come to rectify the terminology used by the disbelievers. The concept of Trinity in which the Christians believe, regardless of their various interpretations thereof, in reality boils down to exaggeration about ‘Eesa (peace be upon him) and his mother. Therefore the Qur’an dealt with and refuted this basic concept, and struck at the roots of the idea of Trinity, refuting the blasphemous idea that is common to all of their groups. Therefore we may say that the view that this verse was revealed to criticise their taking the Messiah and his mother as two gods besides Allah, may He be exalted, is not contrary to the reality of the Christians; rather it is highlighting the true essence of their blasphemy, that is common to all of their groups.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said, in the context of discussing the verses that refute the blasphemy of the Christians:

The words of Allah (interpretation of the meaning): “The Messiah ['Eesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary), was no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him” [al-Maa’idah 5:75] come after the words “Surely, disbelievers are those who said: ‘Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)’” [al-Maa’idah 5:73], which indicates that the trinity that Allah says they believe in involves regarding the Messiah son of Maryam and his mother as two gods.

This is clear, on the basis that what is narrated from the Christians is that they believe that the divine descended upon Mary and was incarnated in the Messiah. This is in accordance with their beliefs.

Based on that, every verse in which Allah mentions their views refers to all of their groups and refers to their belief in the Trinity and the notions of the divine descending upon Mary and being incarnated in the Messiah. Thus it includes all types of Christians and all types of their blasphemy. It is not the case that every verse that speaks of them is speaking of one type, as some have suggested, and there is not one verse that speaks about the Trinity and another that speaks about the descent of the divine and incarnation. Rather Allah, may He be glorified, mentions, in every single verse referred to, the blasphemy this is common to all of them, but He describes their blasphemy is being threefold, each aspect of which implies the other two: they say that the Messiah is God, and they say that he is the son of God, and they say that God is the third of three, as they took their Messiah and his mother as gods besides the true God, one on the basis of the divine descending upon her and the other on the basis of the divine being incarnated in him. Thus it becomes clear that they believe in three gods in one. This covers all the blasphemous concepts of the Christians. End quote.

Al-Fataawa al-Kubra (6/589-590).

Secondly:

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The Messiah ‘Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), was (no more than) a Messenger of Allah and His Word, ("Be!" - and he was) which He bestowed on Maryam (Mary) and a spirit (Rooh)[] created by Him; so believe in Allah and His Messengers. Say not: ‘Three (trinity)!’ Cease! (it is) better for you. For Allah is (the only) One Ilaah (God), glory be to Him (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is All-Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs”

[an-Nisa’ 4:171].

With regard to the words “Say not: ‘Three (trinity)!’”, the word translated here as three is the subject of a hidden predicate, and any word may be assumed to be the predicate that refers to the Trinity of the Christians. Hence the scholarly views vary in trying to determine what the omitted predicate could be.

Al-Qurtubi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: What is meant is “Say not” that our gods are three. This was narrated from az-Zajjaaj.

Ibn ‘Abbaas said: This refers to the Trinity: Allah, may He be exalted, and His wife and His son.

Al-Farraa’ and Abu ‘Ubayd said: This means: do not say they are three…

Abu ‘Ali said: The meaning implies: Do not say that He is the third of three… The Christians of all sects are unanimously agreed on the Trinity. End quote.

Tafseer al-Qurtubi (7/233).

Therefore this verse refers to all types of Christian belief in the Trinity.

At-Taahir Ibn ‘Ashoor (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The audience addressed by the words “Say not” is the Christians in particular.

The word “three” is the subject of a hidden predicate. The reason why it was omitted is so that the phrase will be fit to refer to all the ideas that they have of the Trinity, for the Christians varied with regard to the concept of the divine trinity, as we shall see below. Therefore we could figure out what the hidden predicate is, according to their various views regarding the nature of the Trinity, which could be described by the number three.

The Trinity is fundamental to the belief of all Christians, but they differ concerning its precise nature. End quote.

At-Tahreer wa’t-Tanweer (6/54)

If you interpret it on the basis of the report that al-Qurtubi narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allah be pleased with him), that what is meant by the Trinity is Allah, may He be exalted, and His wife and His son, then this interpretation is supported by the verses mentioned above in the first point.

According to this view, this verse forbids the Christians to exaggerate about ‘Eesa (peace be upon him) and his mother, which is the basis of the belief in Trinity that is common among them. Declaring their exaggeration to be false is declaring their belief in the Trinity to be false too.

Thirdly:

Although what is well-known about the Christians is that they do not regard Mary (peace be upon her as one of the three hypostases (persons of the trinity) in which they believe, this does not rule out the fact that they regard her as a sort of god (or goddess).

Taking Mary as a goddess means either clearly stating that she is divine, which was a belief attributed to some ancient Christian groups, or what we see of the Christian practice that is widespread among them of devoting some acts of worship to her, such as praying to her, seeking her help, and prostrating to her image. Whoever worships a thing has taken it as a god, even if he does not clearly state that.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

Mary is mentioned alongside the Messiah, because some Christians took her as another god and worshipped her as they worshipped the Messiah. As for those who do not believe in that, they still ask of her what should be asked of God, to the extent that they say to her: Forgive me, have mercy on me, and so on, based on a belief that she will intercede with her son concerning that.

Sometimes they say: O mother of God, intercede for us with God. And sometimes they ask her for their needs, which should be sought from God, and they do not mention intercession. Others worship her as they worshipped the Messiah.

Sa‘eed ibn al-Batreeq spoke of them doing this, when he mentioned the Councils of Constantinople and Nicaea. He said:

They held different views and different beliefs. Some of them said that the Messiah and his mother were two gods besides Allah; they were the Marianists. End quote.

Al-Jawaab as-Saheeh (4/255-256).

We have discussed this issue previously in fatwa no. 220391.

Fourthly:

The phrase “Holy Spirit” (Rooh al-Qudus) appears in the texts of revelation; what it refers to is Jibreel (Gabriel – peace be upon him).

For example, it is seen in the verse in which Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)) Ruh-ul-Qudus [Jibreel (Gabriel)] has brought it (the Qur'an) down from your Lord with truth, that it may make firm and strengthen (the Faith of) those who believe and as a guidance and glad tidings to those who have submitted (to Allah as Muslims)”

[an-Nahl 16:102].

Shaykh Muhammad al-Ameen ash-Shinqeeti (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The Holy Spirit is Jibreel. What is meant is a spirit that is sanctified, i.e., pure and free of anything that is not befitting.

This meaning is referred to in many verses, such as (interpretation of the meaning): “Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)): ‘Whoever is an enemy to Jibreel (Gabriel) (let him die in his fury), for indeed he has brought it (this Qur'an) down to your heart by Allah's Permission’” [al-Baqarah 2:97]. End quote.

Adwa’ al-Bayaan (3/442).

At-Tabari (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

Allah called Jibreel a “spirit” and described him as “holy” because Allah gave him a spirit created by Him, without needing a father to father him. Because of that, He called him a spirit and described him as holy. Holy means pure. By the same token, ‘Eesa ibn Maryam (Jesus son of Mary) was called “a spirit created by Allah”, because Allah gave him a spirit created by Him, without needing a father to father him. We have explained previously in this book of ours that what is meant by being holy is being pure, so the one who is holy is pure and free of that. End quote.

Tafseer at-Tabari (2/224)

In the books of the Christians, concerning the story of Maryam’s conception of ‘Eesa (peace be upon him), it says that it happened by means of the Holy Spirit. This is in accordance with what our religion teaches, that Allah sent an angel to her, namely Jibreel, and he breathed into her and she conceived ‘Eesa (peace be upon him).

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And mention in the Book (the Qur’an, O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)), the story of) Maryam (Mary), when she withdrew in seclusion from her family to a place facing east.

She placed a screen (to screen herself) from them; then We sent to her Our Rooh [angel Jibreel (Gabriel)], and he appeared before her in the form of a man in all respects.

She said: ‘Verily! I seek refuge with the Most Gracious (Allah) from you, if you do fear Allah.’

(The angel) said: ‘I am only a messenger from your Lord, (to announce) to you the gift of a righteous son’”

[Maryam 19:16-19].

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The Christians say in their creed (profession of faith) that the Messiah “was incarnate by the Holy Ghost [Spirit] of the Virgin Mary.” This is in accordance with what Allah says, that He sent His spirit, namely Jibreel, who is the Holy Spirit; he breathed into Maryam (Mary), and she conceived the Messiah. So the Messiah was a created, incarnate being created from his mother and from that spirit, and that spirit has nothing to do with the attributes of Allah or His life or anything else. Rather the Holy Spirit is mentioned frequently in the words of the Prophets, and what is meant by these words is either the angel or what Allah creates in the hearts of His Prophets and close friends (awliya’) of guidance, steadfastness and so on. End quote.

Al-Jawaab as-Saheeh (2/186).

But in the process of distorting their religion, the Christians thought that they could not prove that ‘Eesa is the son of God, – exalted be He far above that – except by interpreting the Holy Spirit that Allah sent to Maryam as referring to an attribute of God that exists in Him, and is the Giver of life.

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

They had a third council, fifty-eight years after the first Council of Nicaea. The emperor’s advisers and courtiers met with him and told him that the people’s beliefs had become corrupted and been influenced by the views of Arius and Macedonius, so he should write to all the bishops and patriarchs, instructing them to convene a meeting and explain the religion of Christianity. So the Emperor wrote to all the regions, and one hundred and fifty bishops gathered in Constantinople, where they examined and discussed the views of Arius, and found that his view stated that the Holy Spirit was a created being, not divine.

But the Patriarch of Alexandria said: In our view, the Holy Spirit is nothing but the spirit of God, and the spirit of God is nothing but His life. If we say that the Holy Spirit is created, then we are saying that God’s life is created, and if we say that His life is created, then we are implying that He is not alive, and that is blasphemy.

They all cursed whoever holds such a belief… And they stated that the Holy Spirit is a creator and not created, “very God from very God”, from the same essence as the Father and the Son, one essence and one nature. End quote.

Hidaayat al-Hayaara (p. 410).

They covered up this distortion and misguidance of theirs by playing with words that are mentioned in their Scriptures as being the words of ‘Eesa (peace be upon him).

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

This is how it is according to the People of the Book, that Jesus “was incarnate by the Holy Ghost [Spirit] of the Virgin Mary”, but their misguidance is based on their misunderstanding, when they said that the Holy Spirit was the life of God, and a God that creates, grants provision and is worshipped. But there is nothing in the divinely-revealed Books or in the words of the Prophets to suggest that Allah described an attribute that is part of His Essence as the Holy Spirit, or that He described His word or any of His attributes as a son. This is one of the things that proves that the Christians are misguided and that they distorted the words of the Prophets and interpreted them in a manner different from the meaning intended by the Prophets.

The origin of their concept of the Trinity is based on what is mentioned in one of the Gospels, that the Messiah (peace be upon him) said to them: “Baptise all people in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.”

It may be said to them: If the Messiah really said that, there is nothing in the language of the Messiah or the language of any of the Prophets that they described an attribute of Allah that is part of His Essence – neither His word nor His life – as His son or as the Holy Spirit. They did not call His word His son and they did not describe God Himself as a son or Holy Spirit.

As that is the case, then this may explain that what is meant by son is not the eternal Word of Allah, which they say was begotten of God, even if it is eternal, and what is meant by the Holy Spirit is not the life of God. Rather what is meant by the son is the human Messiah and what is meant by the Holy Spirit is what came down to him of revelation and the angel who brought it down. Thus the Messiah would have enjoined them to believe in Allah and His Messenger, and in what He revealed to His Messenger and in the angel who brought it down. This was enjoined upon all the Prophets. End quote.

Al-Jawaab as-Saheeh (2/152-153].

From the above it becomes clear that the Christian belief in the third hypostasis (person of the trinity), the Holy Spirit, is not an independent issue; rather it is an issue that is connected to their belief in Jesus being the son of God – exalted be He above that. Therefore proving false the belief that he is the son of God will lead to annulling their belief in the third person of the Trinity.

Hence the texts of revelation which state that Allah is One and unique, He begets not nor is He begotten, and all the texts which declare false the belief in Trinity and the divinity of Jesus (peace be upon him) – all of these texts are sufficient to refute the belief in the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit as held by the Christians. Perhaps this is the reason why the revelation did not discuss the issue of the Holy Spirit separately.

And Allah knows best.

 

[Ex-arianator4]

Unfortunately **online** with Muslims you will have to be resigned to not "being friends" if you contradict their prophet Muhammad for long enough.
Of course be as polite as you can be but don't sacrifice Truth in the process.

JoChris, I was never planning to sacrifice the truth. For me, Jesus is God and I have decided to follow and serve Him.
Still I want to be friendly, I don't want to have arguments online. I used to have a Facebook friend that was Muslim and I told him I was Christian and he started sending me videos like 'proof that Jesus isn't God' and stuff like that. I blocked him and never looked back.

What I want to say is that I'm cool with chatting with Muslims, but the moment that I see them acting superior, that's when I block/ignore them.

 

[Ex-arianator4]

The question @JoChris are they His words? or words attributed to him?

Praise be to Allah

Firstly:

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Surely, disbelievers are those who said: ‘Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity).’ But there is no llaah (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilaah (God -Allah). And if they cease not from what they say, verily, a painful torment will befall on the disbelievers among them”

[al-Maa’idah 5:73].

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The correct view is that this was revealed concerning the Christians in particular, as was stated by Mujaahid and others.

Then the scholars differed concerning that. It was said that what is meant by that is their disbelief (kufr) because they say that there are three hypostases (“persons” of the trinity), namely the hypostasis of the Father, the hypostasis of the Son and the hypostasis of the Word that was transmitted from the Father to the Son – exalted be Allah far above what they say.

As-Suddi and others said: This was revealed concerning their making the Messiah and his mother into two gods with Allah, thus making Allah the third of three, according to this concept. As-Suddi said: This is like what Allah, may He be exalted, says at the end of the soorah (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): "O 'Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: 'Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?'" He will say: "Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:116].

This view is the one that is more likely to be correct. And Allah knows best. End quote.

Tafseer Ibn Katheer (3/158).

This interpretation which was favoured by Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) is the one that is more likely to be correct, for the following reasons:

-1-

Ibn Katheer quoted, as further evidence, some reports from the righteous early generations, in which they follow the methodology of interpreting some parts of the Qur’an by means of other parts, which is one of the best and most appropriate ways of interpreting the Holy Qur’an.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

If someone were to ask: What are the best ways of interpreting the Qur’an? The answer is: The soundest way is to interpret the Qur’an by means of the Qur’an, because what is discussed in general terms in one place is explained elsewhere, and what is mentioned in brief in one place is mentioned in more detail elsewhere. End quote.

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (13/363).

The early generations thought that the words “Surely, disbelievers are those who said: ‘Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)” are explained by the words of Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): ‘O 'Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: “Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?”’ He will say: ‘Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would surely have known it. You know what is in my inner-self though I do not know what is in Yours, truly, You, only You, are the All-Knower of all that is hidden (and unseen).

‘Never did I say to them aught except what You (Allah) did command me to say: “Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them, and You are a Witness to all things’”

[al-Maa’idah 5:116-117].

-2-

This interpretation is supported by what follows the verse, confirming that Maryam (Mary – peace be upon her) is not divine, as Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Surely, disbelievers are those who said: "Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)." But there is no llaah (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilaah (God -Allah)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:73].

Then after that come the words (interpretation of the meaning):

“The Messiah ['Eesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary), was no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him. His mother [Maryam (Mary)] was a Siddeeqah [i.e. she believed in the words of Allah and His Books]. They both used to eat food (as any other human being, while Allah does not eat). Look how We make the Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) clear to them, yet look how they are deluded away (from the truth)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:75].

This verse confirms that Maryam (Mary – peace be upon her) is not divine, on two counts:

(i) Her status is that of siddeeqiyyah (being strong and true in faith), which is a status of servitude to Allah, may He be exalted.

(ii) She used to eat food, which is the description of a created being who has needs; it is not the description of God Who is independent of means and has no need of His creation.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

With regard to what the Qur’an says about what the Christians said, “Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)”, the commentators said that it refers to Allah, the Messiah and his mother, as Allah, may He be exalted, tells us that He will say (interpretation of the meaning): “‘O 'Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: “Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?”’” [al-Maa’idah 5:116]. Hence in the context of this passage He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The Messiah ['Eesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary), was no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him. His mother [Maryam (Mary)] was a Siddeeqah [i.e. she believed in the words of Allah and His Books]”

[al-Maa’idah 5:75].

The most that the Messiah can be is a Messenger, and the most that his mother can be is a siddeeqah; they could never reach the level of divinity. The one proves the other (that is, the fact that they are no more than that is proof that the Messiah is not God), and this is quite clear. End quote.

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (2/444).

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The words “They both used to eat food” mean: they both needed to be nourished by food, and to expel the resulting waste products. So they were two slaves of Allah, like all other people, and they were not gods as the ignorant Christians claim. End quote.

Tafseer Ibn Katheer (3/159).

-3-

The revelation came to expose misguidance and disbelief, and to explain the way of guidance. It did not come to rectify the terminology used by the disbelievers. The concept of Trinity in which the Christians believe, regardless of their various interpretations thereof, in reality boils down to exaggeration about ‘Eesa (peace be upon him) and his mother. Therefore the Qur’an dealt with and refuted this basic concept, and struck at the roots of the idea of Trinity, refuting the blasphemous idea that is common to all of their groups. Therefore we may say that the view that this verse was revealed to criticise their taking the Messiah and his mother as two gods besides Allah, may He be exalted, is not contrary to the reality of the Christians; rather it is highlighting the true essence of their blasphemy, that is common to all of their groups.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said, in the context of discussing the verses that refute the blasphemy of the Christians:

The words of Allah (interpretation of the meaning): “The Messiah ['Eesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary), was no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him” [al-Maa’idah 5:75] come after the words “Surely, disbelievers are those who said: ‘Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)’” [al-Maa’idah 5:73], which indicates that the trinity that Allah says they believe in involves regarding the Messiah son of Maryam and his mother as two gods.

This is clear, on the basis that what is narrated from the Christians is that they believe that the divine descended upon Mary and was incarnated in the Messiah. This is in accordance with their beliefs.

Based on that, every verse in which Allah mentions their views refers to all of their groups and refers to their belief in the Trinity and the notions of the divine descending upon Mary and being incarnated in the Messiah. Thus it includes all types of Christians and all types of their blasphemy. It is not the case that every verse that speaks of them is speaking of one type, as some have suggested, and there is not one verse that speaks about the Trinity and another that speaks about the descent of the divine and incarnation. Rather Allah, may He be glorified, mentions, in every single verse referred to, the blasphemy this is common to all of them, but He describes their blasphemy is being threefold, each aspect of which implies the other two: they say that the Messiah is God, and they say that he is the son of God, and they say that God is the third of three, as they took their Messiah and his mother as gods besides the true God, one on the basis of the divine descending upon her and the other on the basis of the divine being incarnated in him. Thus it becomes clear that they believe in three gods in one. This covers all the blasphemous concepts of the Christians. End quote.

Al-Fataawa al-Kubra (6/589-590).

Secondly:

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The Messiah ‘Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), was (no more than) a Messenger of Allah and His Word, ("Be!" - and he was) which He bestowed on Maryam (Mary) and a spirit (Rooh)[] created by Him; so believe in Allah and His Messengers. Say not: ‘Three (trinity)!’ Cease! (it is) better for you. For Allah is (the only) One Ilaah (God), glory be to Him (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is All-Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs”

[an-Nisa’ 4:171].

With regard to the words “Say not: ‘Three (trinity)!’”, the word translated here as three is the subject of a hidden predicate, and any word may be assumed to be the predicate that refers to the Trinity of the Christians. Hence the scholarly views vary in trying to determine what the omitted predicate could be.

Al-Qurtubi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: What is meant is “Say not” that our gods are three. This was narrated from az-Zajjaaj.

Ibn ‘Abbaas said: This refers to the Trinity: Allah, may He be exalted, and His wife and His son.

Al-Farraa’ and Abu ‘Ubayd said: This means: do not say they are three…

Abu ‘Ali said: The meaning implies: Do not say that He is the third of three… The Christians of all sects are unanimously agreed on the Trinity. End quote.

Tafseer al-Qurtubi (7/233).

Therefore this verse refers to all types of Christian belief in the Trinity.

At-Taahir Ibn ‘Ashoor (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The audience addressed by the words “Say not” is the Christians in particular.

The word “three” is the subject of a hidden predicate. The reason why it was omitted is so that the phrase will be fit to refer to all the ideas that they have of the Trinity, for the Christians varied with regard to the concept of the divine trinity, as we shall see below. Therefore we could figure out what the hidden predicate is, according to their various views regarding the nature of the Trinity, which could be described by the number three.

The Trinity is fundamental to the belief of all Christians, but they differ concerning its precise nature. End quote.

At-Tahreer wa’t-Tanweer (6/54)

If you interpret it on the basis of the report that al-Qurtubi narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allah be pleased with him), that what is meant by the Trinity is Allah, may He be exalted, and His wife and His son, then this interpretation is supported by the verses mentioned above in the first point.

According to this view, this verse forbids the Christians to exaggerate about ‘Eesa (peace be upon him) and his mother, which is the basis of the belief in Trinity that is common among them. Declaring their exaggeration to be false is declaring their belief in the Trinity to be false too.

Thirdly:

Although what is well-known about the Christians is that they do not regard Mary (peace be upon her as one of the three hypostases (persons of the trinity) in which they believe, this does not rule out the fact that they regard her as a sort of god (or goddess).

Taking Mary as a goddess means either clearly stating that she is divine, which was a belief attributed to some ancient Christian groups, or what we see of the Christian practice that is widespread among them of devoting some acts of worship to her, such as praying to her, seeking her help, and prostrating to her image. Whoever worships a thing has taken it as a god, even if he does not clearly state that.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

Mary is mentioned alongside the Messiah, because some Christians took her as another god and worshipped her as they worshipped the Messiah. As for those who do not believe in that, they still ask of her what should be asked of God, to the extent that they say to her: Forgive me, have mercy on me, and so on, based on a belief that she will intercede with her son concerning that.

Sometimes they say: O mother of God, intercede for us with God. And sometimes they ask her for their needs, which should be sought from God, and they do not mention intercession. Others worship her as they worshipped the Messiah.

Sa‘eed ibn al-Batreeq spoke of them doing this, when he mentioned the Councils of Constantinople and Nicaea. He said:

They held different views and different beliefs. Some of them said that the Messiah and his mother were two gods besides Allah; they were the Marianists. End quote.

Al-Jawaab as-Saheeh (4/255-256).

We have discussed this issue previously in fatwa no. 220391.

Fourthly:

The phrase “Holy Spirit” (Rooh al-Qudus) appears in the texts of revelation; what it refers to is Jibreel (Gabriel – peace be upon him).

For example, it is seen in the verse in which Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)) Ruh-ul-Qudus [Jibreel (Gabriel)] has brought it (the Qur'an) down from your Lord with truth, that it may make firm and strengthen (the Faith of) those who believe and as a guidance and glad tidings to those who have submitted (to Allah as Muslims)”

[an-Nahl 16:102].

Shaykh Muhammad al-Ameen ash-Shinqeeti (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The Holy Spirit is Jibreel. What is meant is a spirit that is sanctified, i.e., pure and free of anything that is not befitting.

This meaning is referred to in many verses, such as (interpretation of the meaning): “Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)): ‘Whoever is an enemy to Jibreel (Gabriel) (let him die in his fury), for indeed he has brought it (this Qur'an) down to your heart by Allah's Permission’” [al-Baqarah 2:97]. End quote.

Adwa’ al-Bayaan (3/442).

At-Tabari (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

Allah called Jibreel a “spirit” and described him as “holy” because Allah gave him a spirit created by Him, without needing a father to father him. Because of that, He called him a spirit and described him as holy. Holy means pure. By the same token, ‘Eesa ibn Maryam (Jesus son of Mary) was called “a spirit created by Allah”, because Allah gave him a spirit created by Him, without needing a father to father him. We have explained previously in this book of ours that what is meant by being holy is being pure, so the one who is holy is pure and free of that. End quote.

Tafseer at-Tabari (2/224)

In the books of the Christians, concerning the story of Maryam’s conception of ‘Eesa (peace be upon him), it says that it happened by means of the Holy Spirit. This is in accordance with what our religion teaches, that Allah sent an angel to her, namely Jibreel, and he breathed into her and she conceived ‘Eesa (peace be upon him).

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And mention in the Book (the Qur’an, O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)), the story of) Maryam (Mary), when she withdrew in seclusion from her family to a place facing east.

She placed a screen (to screen herself) from them; then We sent to her Our Rooh [angel Jibreel (Gabriel)], and he appeared before her in the form of a man in all respects.

She said: ‘Verily! I seek refuge with the Most Gracious (Allah) from you, if you do fear Allah.’

(The angel) said: ‘I am only a messenger from your Lord, (to announce) to you the gift of a righteous son’”

[Maryam 19:16-19].

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The Christians say in their creed (profession of faith) that the Messiah “was incarnate by the Holy Ghost [Spirit] of the Virgin Mary.” This is in accordance with what Allah says, that He sent His spirit, namely Jibreel, who is the Holy Spirit; he breathed into Maryam (Mary), and she conceived the Messiah. So the Messiah was a created, incarnate being created from his mother and from that spirit, and that spirit has nothing to do with the attributes of Allah or His life or anything else. Rather the Holy Spirit is mentioned frequently in the words of the Prophets, and what is meant by these words is either the angel or what Allah creates in the hearts of His Prophets and close friends (awliya’) of guidance, steadfastness and so on. End quote.

Al-Jawaab as-Saheeh (2/186).

But in the process of distorting their religion, the Christians thought that they could not prove that ‘Eesa is the son of God, – exalted be He far above that – except by interpreting the Holy Spirit that Allah sent to Maryam as referring to an attribute of God that exists in Him, and is the Giver of life.

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

They had a third council, fifty-eight years after the first Council of Nicaea. The emperor’s advisers and courtiers met with him and told him that the people’s beliefs had become corrupted and been influenced by the views of Arius and Macedonius, so he should write to all the bishops and patriarchs, instructing them to convene a meeting and explain the religion of Christianity. So the Emperor wrote to all the regions, and one hundred and fifty bishops gathered in Constantinople, where they examined and discussed the views of Arius, and found that his view stated that the Holy Spirit was a created being, not divine.

But the Patriarch of Alexandria said: In our view, the Holy Spirit is nothing but the spirit of God, and the spirit of God is nothing but His life. If we say that the Holy Spirit is created, then we are saying that God’s life is created, and if we say that His life is created, then we are implying that He is not alive, and that is blasphemy.

They all cursed whoever holds such a belief… And they stated that the Holy Spirit is a creator and not created, “very God from very God”, from the same essence as the Father and the Son, one essence and one nature. End quote.

Hidaayat al-Hayaara (p. 410).

They covered up this distortion and misguidance of theirs by playing with words that are mentioned in their Scriptures as being the words of ‘Eesa (peace be upon him).

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

This is how it is according to the People of the Book, that Jesus “was incarnate by the Holy Ghost [Spirit] of the Virgin Mary”, but their misguidance is based on their misunderstanding, when they said that the Holy Spirit was the life of God, and a God that creates, grants provision and is worshipped. But there is nothing in the divinely-revealed Books or in the words of the Prophets to suggest that Allah described an attribute that is part of His Essence as the Holy Spirit, or that He described His word or any of His attributes as a son. This is one of the things that proves that the Christians are misguided and that they distorted the words of the Prophets and interpreted them in a manner different from the meaning intended by the Prophets.

The origin of their concept of the Trinity is based on what is mentioned in one of the Gospels, that the Messiah (peace be upon him) said to them: “Baptise all people in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.”

It may be said to them: If the Messiah really said that, there is nothing in the language of the Messiah or the language of any of the Prophets that they described an attribute of Allah that is part of His Essence – neither His word nor His life – as His son or as the Holy Spirit. They did not call His word His son and they did not describe God Himself as a son or Holy Spirit.

As that is the case, then this may explain that what is meant by son is not the eternal Word of Allah, which they say was begotten of God, even if it is eternal, and what is meant by the Holy Spirit is not the life of God. Rather what is meant by the son is the human Messiah and what is meant by the Holy Spirit is what came down to him of revelation and the angel who brought it down. Thus the Messiah would have enjoined them to believe in Allah and His Messenger, and in what He revealed to His Messenger and in the angel who brought it down. This was enjoined upon all the Prophets. End quote.

Al-Jawaab as-Saheeh (2/152-153].

From the above it becomes clear that the Christian belief in the third hypostasis (person of the trinity), the Holy Spirit, is not an independent issue; rather it is an issue that is connected to their belief in Jesus being the son of God – exalted be He above that. Therefore proving false the belief that he is the son of God will lead to annulling their belief in the third person of the Trinity.

Hence the texts of revelation which state that Allah is One and unique, He begets not nor is He begotten, and all the texts which declare false the belief in Trinity and the divinity of Jesus (peace be upon him) – all of these texts are sufficient to refute the belief in the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit as held by the Christians. Perhaps this is the reason why the revelation did not discuss the issue of the Holy Spirit separately.

And Allah knows best.

Nice copy-paste Desert Rose, but it's better if you give us your own honest opinion rather than finding posts on the internet. Do you think someone will read ALL that? Because I know I'm not, for one.

 

[DesertRose]

Nice copy-paste Desert Rose, but it's better if you give us your own honest opinion rather than finding posts on the internet. Do you think someone will read ALL that? Because I know I'm not, for one.

I believe in giving people the best answers and if they are truth seekers a few paragraphs that will help their afterlife is well worth it.....
No one asked you to read it. Bye.

 

[Etagloc]

Nice copy-paste Desert Rose, but it's better if you give us your own honest opinion rather than finding posts on the internet. Do you think someone will read ALL that? Because I know I'm not, for one.

Don't knock what @DesertRose posted....
she's a cool sister : )

plus I think she is the Queen and Chairwoman of the Muslim-Christian-Let's-Get-Along-Organization- so y'all be nice to her!

and what she said is right. I was actually about to say the same as what she just said but she posted first-

what matters is the quality of what is said, not who says it

because for example...... if you want to understand, say.... hmm.... let me think of a topic insha'Allah.....
okay, for example, science and the Quran.... Zakir Naik is the man. Zakir Naik is the man when it comes to that stuff.

If you want to know about science and the Quran, your local neighborhood Muslim might be able to tell you some stuff
but I'm telling- Zakir Naik is the man when it comes to that topic.... he has the stuff basically memorized

and so @DesertRose being humble, wise and cool enough to post the relevant information which is explained in the best way and by the most qualified people- that is a good thing, not a bad thing

EDIT:

Plus she's right. If you are taking things seriously- people should take the time to examine the material. What she posted would only take a few minutes to read insha'Allah- it's not that much. It would take a lot less time than watching the videos I posted. But if people are serious, I think they should take the time to examine the relevant material- and that material is posted for the serious truth seekers. I hope insha'Allah that the serious truth seekers will take the time to examine the relevant material presented by the Muslims. I was raised Christian so I know the Christian side.

 

[JoChris]

The question @JoChris are they His words? or words attributed to him?

Praise be to Allah

Firstly:

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Surely, disbelievers are those who said: ‘Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity).’ But there is no llaah (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilaah (God -Allah). And if they cease not from what they say, verily, a painful torment will befall on the disbelievers among them”

[al-Maa’idah 5:73].

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The correct view is that this was revealed concerning the Christians in particular, as was stated by Mujaahid and others.

Then the scholars differed concerning that. It was said that what is meant by that is their disbelief (kufr) because they say that there are three hypostases (“persons” of the trinity), namely the hypostasis of the Father, the hypostasis of the Son and the hypostasis of the Word that was transmitted from the Father to the Son – exalted be Allah far above what they say.

As-Suddi and others said: This was revealed concerning their making the Messiah and his mother into two gods with Allah, thus making Allah the third of three, according to this concept. As-Suddi said: This is like what Allah, may He be exalted, says at the end of the soorah (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): "O 'Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: 'Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?'" He will say: "Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:116].

This view is the one that is more likely to be correct. And Allah knows best. End quote.

Tafseer Ibn Katheer (3/158).

This interpretation which was favoured by Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) is the one that is more likely to be correct, for the following reasons:

-1-

Ibn Katheer quoted, as further evidence, some reports from the righteous early generations, in which they follow the methodology of interpreting some parts of the Qur’an by means of other parts, which is one of the best and most appropriate ways of interpreting the Holy Qur’an.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

If someone were to ask: What are the best ways of interpreting the Qur’an? The answer is: The soundest way is to interpret the Qur’an by means of the Qur’an, because what is discussed in general terms in one place is explained elsewhere, and what is mentioned in brief in one place is mentioned in more detail elsewhere. End quote.

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (13/363).

The early generations thought that the words “Surely, disbelievers are those who said: ‘Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)” are explained by the words of Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): ‘O 'Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: “Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?”’ He will say: ‘Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would surely have known it. You know what is in my inner-self though I do not know what is in Yours, truly, You, only You, are the All-Knower of all that is hidden (and unseen).

‘Never did I say to them aught except what You (Allah) did command me to say: “Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them, and You are a Witness to all things’”

[al-Maa’idah 5:116-117].

-2-

This interpretation is supported by what follows the verse, confirming that Maryam (Mary – peace be upon her) is not divine, as Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Surely, disbelievers are those who said: "Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)." But there is no llaah (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilaah (God -Allah)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:73].

Then after that come the words (interpretation of the meaning):

“The Messiah ['Eesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary), was no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him. His mother [Maryam (Mary)] was a Siddeeqah [i.e. she believed in the words of Allah and His Books]. They both used to eat food (as any other human being, while Allah does not eat). Look how We make the Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) clear to them, yet look how they are deluded away (from the truth)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:75].

This verse confirms that Maryam (Mary – peace be upon her) is not divine, on two counts:

(i) Her status is that of siddeeqiyyah (being strong and true in faith), which is a status of servitude to Allah, may He be exalted.

(ii) She used to eat food, which is the description of a created being who has needs; it is not the description of God Who is independent of means and has no need of His creation.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

With regard to what the Qur’an says about what the Christians said, “Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)”, the commentators said that it refers to Allah, the Messiah and his mother, as Allah, may He be exalted, tells us that He will say (interpretation of the meaning): “‘O 'Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: “Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?”’” [al-Maa’idah 5:116]. Hence in the context of this passage He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The Messiah ['Eesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary), was no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him. His mother [Maryam (Mary)] was a Siddeeqah [i.e. she believed in the words of Allah and His Books]”

[al-Maa’idah 5:75].

The most that the Messiah can be is a Messenger, and the most that his mother can be is a siddeeqah; they could never reach the level of divinity. The one proves the other (that is, the fact that they are no more than that is proof that the Messiah is not God), and this is quite clear. End quote.

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (2/444).

Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The words “They both used to eat food” mean: they both needed to be nourished by food, and to expel the resulting waste products. So they were two slaves of Allah, like all other people, and they were not gods as the ignorant Christians claim. End quote.

Tafseer Ibn Katheer (3/159).

-3-

The revelation came to expose misguidance and disbelief, and to explain the way of guidance. It did not come to rectify the terminology used by the disbelievers. The concept of Trinity in which the Christians believe, regardless of their various interpretations thereof, in reality boils down to exaggeration about ‘Eesa (peace be upon him) and his mother. Therefore the Qur’an dealt with and refuted this basic concept, and struck at the roots of the idea of Trinity, refuting the blasphemous idea that is common to all of their groups. Therefore we may say that the view that this verse was revealed to criticise their taking the Messiah and his mother as two gods besides Allah, may He be exalted, is not contrary to the reality of the Christians; rather it is highlighting the true essence of their blasphemy, that is common to all of their groups.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said, in the context of discussing the verses that refute the blasphemy of the Christians:

The words of Allah (interpretation of the meaning): “The Messiah ['Eesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary), was no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him” [al-Maa’idah 5:75] come after the words “Surely, disbelievers are those who said: ‘Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)’” [al-Maa’idah 5:73], which indicates that the trinity that Allah says they believe in involves regarding the Messiah son of Maryam and his mother as two gods.

This is clear, on the basis that what is narrated from the Christians is that they believe that the divine descended upon Mary and was incarnated in the Messiah. This is in accordance with their beliefs.

Based on that, every verse in which Allah mentions their views refers to all of their groups and refers to their belief in the Trinity and the notions of the divine descending upon Mary and being incarnated in the Messiah. Thus it includes all types of Christians and all types of their blasphemy. It is not the case that every verse that speaks of them is speaking of one type, as some have suggested, and there is not one verse that speaks about the Trinity and another that speaks about the descent of the divine and incarnation. Rather Allah, may He be glorified, mentions, in every single verse referred to, the blasphemy this is common to all of them, but He describes their blasphemy is being threefold, each aspect of which implies the other two: they say that the Messiah is God, and they say that he is the son of God, and they say that God is the third of three, as they took their Messiah and his mother as gods besides the true God, one on the basis of the divine descending upon her and the other on the basis of the divine being incarnated in him. Thus it becomes clear that they believe in three gods in one. This covers all the blasphemous concepts of the Christians. End quote.

Al-Fataawa al-Kubra (6/589-590).

Secondly:

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The Messiah ‘Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), was (no more than) a Messenger of Allah and His Word, ("Be!" - and he was) which He bestowed on Maryam (Mary) and a spirit (Rooh)[] created by Him; so believe in Allah and His Messengers. Say not: ‘Three (trinity)!’ Cease! (it is) better for you. For Allah is (the only) One Ilaah (God), glory be to Him (Far Exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is All-Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs”

[an-Nisa’ 4:171].

With regard to the words “Say not: ‘Three (trinity)!’”, the word translated here as three is the subject of a hidden predicate, and any word may be assumed to be the predicate that refers to the Trinity of the Christians. Hence the scholarly views vary in trying to determine what the omitted predicate could be.

Al-Qurtubi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: What is meant is “Say not” that our gods are three. This was narrated from az-Zajjaaj.

Ibn ‘Abbaas said: This refers to the Trinity: Allah, may He be exalted, and His wife and His son.

Al-Farraa’ and Abu ‘Ubayd said: This means: do not say they are three…

Abu ‘Ali said: The meaning implies: Do not say that He is the third of three… The Christians of all sects are unanimously agreed on the Trinity. End quote.

Tafseer al-Qurtubi (7/233).

Therefore this verse refers to all types of Christian belief in the Trinity.

At-Taahir Ibn ‘Ashoor (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The audience addressed by the words “Say not” is the Christians in particular.

The word “three” is the subject of a hidden predicate. The reason why it was omitted is so that the phrase will be fit to refer to all the ideas that they have of the Trinity, for the Christians varied with regard to the concept of the divine trinity, as we shall see below. Therefore we could figure out what the hidden predicate is, according to their various views regarding the nature of the Trinity, which could be described by the number three.

The Trinity is fundamental to the belief of all Christians, but they differ concerning its precise nature. End quote.

At-Tahreer wa’t-Tanweer (6/54)

If you interpret it on the basis of the report that al-Qurtubi narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allah be pleased with him), that what is meant by the Trinity is Allah, may He be exalted, and His wife and His son, then this interpretation is supported by the verses mentioned above in the first point.

According to this view, this verse forbids the Christians to exaggerate about ‘Eesa (peace be upon him) and his mother, which is the basis of the belief in Trinity that is common among them. Declaring their exaggeration to be false is declaring their belief in the Trinity to be false too.

Thirdly:

Although what is well-known about the Christians is that they do not regard Mary (peace be upon her as one of the three hypostases (persons of the trinity) in which they believe, this does not rule out the fact that they regard her as a sort of god (or goddess).

Taking Mary as a goddess means either clearly stating that she is divine, which was a belief attributed to some ancient Christian groups, or what we see of the Christian practice that is widespread among them of devoting some acts of worship to her, such as praying to her, seeking her help, and prostrating to her image. Whoever worships a thing has taken it as a god, even if he does not clearly state that.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

Mary is mentioned alongside the Messiah, because some Christians took her as another god and worshipped her as they worshipped the Messiah. As for those who do not believe in that, they still ask of her what should be asked of God, to the extent that they say to her: Forgive me, have mercy on me, and so on, based on a belief that she will intercede with her son concerning that.

Sometimes they say: O mother of God, intercede for us with God. And sometimes they ask her for their needs, which should be sought from God, and they do not mention intercession. Others worship her as they worshipped the Messiah.

Sa‘eed ibn al-Batreeq spoke of them doing this, when he mentioned the Councils of Constantinople and Nicaea. He said:

They held different views and different beliefs. Some of them said that the Messiah and his mother were two gods besides Allah; they were the Marianists. End quote.

Al-Jawaab as-Saheeh (4/255-256).

We have discussed this issue previously in fatwa no. 220391.

Fourthly:

The phrase “Holy Spirit” (Rooh al-Qudus) appears in the texts of revelation; what it refers to is Jibreel (Gabriel – peace be upon him).

For example, it is seen in the verse in which Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)) Ruh-ul-Qudus [Jibreel (Gabriel)] has brought it (the Qur'an) down from your Lord with truth, that it may make firm and strengthen (the Faith of) those who believe and as a guidance and glad tidings to those who have submitted (to Allah as Muslims)”

[an-Nahl 16:102].

Shaykh Muhammad al-Ameen ash-Shinqeeti (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The Holy Spirit is Jibreel. What is meant is a spirit that is sanctified, i.e., pure and free of anything that is not befitting.

This meaning is referred to in many verses, such as (interpretation of the meaning): “Say (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)): ‘Whoever is an enemy to Jibreel (Gabriel) (let him die in his fury), for indeed he has brought it (this Qur'an) down to your heart by Allah's Permission’” [al-Baqarah 2:97]. End quote.

Adwa’ al-Bayaan (3/442).

At-Tabari (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

Allah called Jibreel a “spirit” and described him as “holy” because Allah gave him a spirit created by Him, without needing a father to father him. Because of that, He called him a spirit and described him as holy. Holy means pure. By the same token, ‘Eesa ibn Maryam (Jesus son of Mary) was called “a spirit created by Allah”, because Allah gave him a spirit created by Him, without needing a father to father him. We have explained previously in this book of ours that what is meant by being holy is being pure, so the one who is holy is pure and free of that. End quote.

Tafseer at-Tabari (2/224)

In the books of the Christians, concerning the story of Maryam’s conception of ‘Eesa (peace be upon him), it says that it happened by means of the Holy Spirit. This is in accordance with what our religion teaches, that Allah sent an angel to her, namely Jibreel, and he breathed into her and she conceived ‘Eesa (peace be upon him).

Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And mention in the Book (the Qur’an, O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)), the story of) Maryam (Mary), when she withdrew in seclusion from her family to a place facing east.

She placed a screen (to screen herself) from them; then We sent to her Our Rooh [angel Jibreel (Gabriel)], and he appeared before her in the form of a man in all respects.

She said: ‘Verily! I seek refuge with the Most Gracious (Allah) from you, if you do fear Allah.’

(The angel) said: ‘I am only a messenger from your Lord, (to announce) to you the gift of a righteous son’”

[Maryam 19:16-19].

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The Christians say in their creed (profession of faith) that the Messiah “was incarnate by the Holy Ghost [Spirit] of the Virgin Mary.” This is in accordance with what Allah says, that He sent His spirit, namely Jibreel, who is the Holy Spirit; he breathed into Maryam (Mary), and she conceived the Messiah. So the Messiah was a created, incarnate being created from his mother and from that spirit, and that spirit has nothing to do with the attributes of Allah or His life or anything else. Rather the Holy Spirit is mentioned frequently in the words of the Prophets, and what is meant by these words is either the angel or what Allah creates in the hearts of His Prophets and close friends (awliya’) of guidance, steadfastness and so on. End quote.

Al-Jawaab as-Saheeh (2/186).

But in the process of distorting their religion, the Christians thought that they could not prove that ‘Eesa is the son of God, – exalted be He far above that – except by interpreting the Holy Spirit that Allah sent to Maryam as referring to an attribute of God that exists in Him, and is the Giver of life.

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

They had a third council, fifty-eight years after the first Council of Nicaea. The emperor’s advisers and courtiers met with him and told him that the people’s beliefs had become corrupted and been influenced by the views of Arius and Macedonius, so he should write to all the bishops and patriarchs, instructing them to convene a meeting and explain the religion of Christianity. So the Emperor wrote to all the regions, and one hundred and fifty bishops gathered in Constantinople, where they examined and discussed the views of Arius, and found that his view stated that the Holy Spirit was a created being, not divine.

But the Patriarch of Alexandria said: In our view, the Holy Spirit is nothing but the spirit of God, and the spirit of God is nothing but His life. If we say that the Holy Spirit is created, then we are saying that God’s life is created, and if we say that His life is created, then we are implying that He is not alive, and that is blasphemy.

They all cursed whoever holds such a belief… And they stated that the Holy Spirit is a creator and not created, “very God from very God”, from the same essence as the Father and the Son, one essence and one nature. End quote.

Hidaayat al-Hayaara (p. 410).

They covered up this distortion and misguidance of theirs by playing with words that are mentioned in their Scriptures as being the words of ‘Eesa (peace be upon him).

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

This is how it is according to the People of the Book, that Jesus “was incarnate by the Holy Ghost [Spirit] of the Virgin Mary”, but their misguidance is based on their misunderstanding, when they said that the Holy Spirit was the life of God, and a God that creates, grants provision and is worshipped. But there is nothing in the divinely-revealed Books or in the words of the Prophets to suggest that Allah described an attribute that is part of His Essence as the Holy Spirit, or that He described His word or any of His attributes as a son. This is one of the things that proves that the Christians are misguided and that they distorted the words of the Prophets and interpreted them in a manner different from the meaning intended by the Prophets.

The origin of their concept of the Trinity is based on what is mentioned in one of the Gospels, that the Messiah (peace be upon him) said to them: “Baptise all people in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.”

It may be said to them: If the Messiah really said that, there is nothing in the language of the Messiah or the language of any of the Prophets that they described an attribute of Allah that is part of His Essence – neither His word nor His life – as His son or as the Holy Spirit. They did not call His word His son and they did not describe God Himself as a son or Holy Spirit.

As that is the case, then this may explain that what is meant by son is not the eternal Word of Allah, which they say was begotten of God, even if it is eternal, and what is meant by the Holy Spirit is not the life of God. Rather what is meant by the son is the human Messiah and what is meant by the Holy Spirit is what came down to him of revelation and the angel who brought it down. Thus the Messiah would have enjoined them to believe in Allah and His Messenger, and in what He revealed to His Messenger and in the angel who brought it down. This was enjoined upon all the Prophets. End quote.

Al-Jawaab as-Saheeh (2/152-153].

From the above it becomes clear that the Christian belief in the third hypostasis (person of the trinity), the Holy Spirit, is not an independent issue; rather it is an issue that is connected to their belief in Jesus being the son of God – exalted be He above that. Therefore proving false the belief that he is the son of God will lead to annulling their belief in the third person of the Trinity.

Hence the texts of revelation which state that Allah is One and unique, He begets not nor is He begotten, and all the texts which declare false the belief in Trinity and the divinity of Jesus (peace be upon him) – all of these texts are sufficient to refute the belief in the hypostasis of the Holy Spirit as held by the Christians. Perhaps this is the reason why the revelation did not discuss the issue of the Holy Spirit separately.

And Allah knows best.

I am going to be blunt again:
As soon as I see Islam's writings against the Trinity (word later invented to summarize teaching) I ignore them.

Writings of a man who was born in the 6th century versus apostles/ apostles' disciples writings who walked with Jesus Himself... I will go with the eyewitnesses and leave the Islam versus Christianity debate to the experts.

I do not know how to read any other language (except pre-school level French), therefore "all" I can do to defend Christianity is to use the bible. That does not seem to be sufficient for you Muslims. You would rather believe the words of a writer born approximately 500 years later. That is why I personally give up in exasperation every time.

There are plenty of Christian apologists who do know how to read the Q'uran in original language/s (?), you should go to them instead. e.g. Dr. James White is a very polite Christian apologist. Youtube has a lot of his debates with Muslim scholars.

e.g. Debate on whether bible is corrupted.

 

[DesertRose]

Plus she's right. If you are taking things seriously- people should take the time to examine the material. What she posted would only take a few minutes to read insha'Allah- it's not that much. It would take a lot less time than watching the videos I posted. But if people are serious, I think they should take the time to examine the relevant material- and that material is posted for the serious truth seekers. I hope insha'Allah that the serious truth seekers will take the time to examine the relevant material presented by the Muslims. I was raised Christian so I know the Christian side

Thank you for the endorsement.. @Etagloc. May the Creator help us live up to those standards.
Wisdom & Beautiful Preaching

Quran teaches us to:

Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance. And if ye do catch them out, catch them out no worse than they catch you out: But if ye show patience, that is indeed the best (course) for those who are patient.

An- Nisaa: 4:163-165)​

We learn better from respectful dialogue and civil discourse.

Really sad that you were targeted, btw.

As soon as I see Islam's writings against the Trinity (word later invented to summarize teaching) I ignore them.

Just remember 1+1+1 does not equal 1 that is like Orwellian thought that. It won't cut it on the day of judgement. By the way all the Prophets before Christ PEACE BE UPON ALL OF THEM had the One God and zero trinity. And he also had zero trinity. He worshipped the One God too.
To you your way and to me mine.

 

[Etagloc]

I am thankful that this discussion ended this way. I know that Christians can be bad sometimes. There are Christians with a good heart and Christians with a bad heart, the same way there are Muslims that are good and Muslims that are bad.
I don't know if you read it, but I wrote to Haich that I have a Muslim best friend from high school and she has been a really good person to me. But I also have Christian friends and they are my best friends as well.

Anyway, I don't see a problem in holding hands together haha I am male and I guess you must be too. Still, you can't say you are minding your own business while you post videos like that. I get it now that you don't want to fight, but to other Christians it looks like you are asking for it.

Like DesertRose said

There is nothing wrong with respectful dialogue and civil disclose

This is why I don't have a problem with Claire Rouseau. I actually really respect her.

She made a thread which was meant as a criticism of Islam. I don't think her points were particularly strong but- from what I understand, my impression is that she's respectful towards Muslims. She disagrees- but it's nothing personal.

And look at it from her perspective- from her perspective, she's trying to save our souls. If you're a Christian and you look at it from my perspetive- I'm trying to save the Christian souls.

So the question is whether the end justifies the means.

Is it right for me to abuse Christians?
Is it right for me to try to degrade Christians?
Is it right for me to disrespect or insult Christians?

Of course not. I would be wrong if I did that.

What I am entitled to do- is I am entitled to have a civil discussion.
I am entitled to disagree with them- in a civil manner.
I am entitled to debate with them- in a civil manner.
I am entitled to post evidence- in a civil manner.

With the Christians- I was raised Christian. I know Christianity. I know the Bible. I was raised in that religion, I know how it works.
I understand the Christian point of view.

I understand- from their point of view, when they sit down and debate us- it might be that they're trying to save our souls from their perspective.

I had a Christian invite me out to lunch to talk to me about Christianity and try to win me over to Christianity.
We sat there- and we had a great discussion. We had a civil discussion.

If you want to come and have a civil discussion- I understand that.
If you want to criticize Islam and say Christianity- of course I disagree but I understand.

If you want to have a civil discourse- I'm open to it.
If I am insulting or disrespectful- let me know and point it out so insha'Allah I can apologize for wronging you and not respecting your honor.

Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is [rightly] guided.

-Surah An-Nahl [16:125]

I am for respectful dialogue. I am for civil discourse.
There should be peaceful, respectful and civil discourse between Muslims and Christians and there is nothing wrong with civil, intellectual debate.

I know Christianity and I'm open to hearing the Christian side. I just ask that it be peaceful and civil.
And yes I do promote my beliefs- but I am civil about it. I don't want to demean any Christians personally. That's the last thing I want to do.

 

[JoChris]

Thank you for the endorsement.. @Etagloc. May the Creator help us live up to those standards.
Wisdom & Beautiful Preaching

Quran teaches us to:

Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance. And if ye do catch them out, catch them out no worse than they catch you out: But if ye show patience, that is indeed the best (course) for those who are patient.


We learn better from respectful dialogue and civil discourse.

Really sad that you were targeted, btw.



Just remember 1+1+1 does not equal 1 that is like Orwellian thought that. It won't cut it on the day of judgement. By the way all the Prophets before Christ PEACE BE UPON ALL OF THEM had the One God and zero trinity. And he also had zero trinity. He worshipped the One God too.
To you your way and to me mine.

I think I saw Red Sky say RE Trinity 1 × 1 x 1 = 1. Who ever said that deserves a thumbs up.

Again I go with eyewitness accounts not speculations of a man born approximately 500 years later.
The apostles who denied Jesus before He was crucified all died for their faith in Him later (except John). They believed He was God. I trust them.

 

[DesertRose]

eyewitness accounts

Right, God luck with that. You are supposed to follow the Prophets not people refer to the video below.

not speculations of a man born approximately 500 years later.

That means nothing or do you not see the irony of that if you preach to Jews for example that they can say the same thing to you?

If they died for Jesus peace be upon him I feel sorry for them if they died for the cause of the Creator who lives and does not die than good for them.