Where Did Jesus Say, “I Am God; Worship Me”?

[floss]

I appreciate the response, but it doesn't make much cognitive sense. You haven't really answered the question and told me what Jesus meant when he said "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do", as you've only justified your position. It's basically a non sequitur stating that Jesus say he DIDN'T say He's NOT God, therefore, He MUST be God. It's reminiscent of a stalker claiming because their victim smiled at them, they MUST like/love them.

Isn't that the same logic Muslim been using? Since Jesus never explicitly say "I am God, worship me", therefore He is not God?

 

[TokiEl]

There is nothing rational about God incarnating as man or God having a son or needing an innocent to be sacrificed to forgive us!
God is Omnipotent and has the full authority to forgive our sins!

If you commit a crime... you will be judged and thrown into prison or punished capitally.

You can try and repent as much as you want... but to no avail as the judge is just.


Same with Jesus who is the just Judge... except He will respect your repentance because He personally paid the price for your sins.

You're free to go... or if you insist and refuse to repent... you will be justly judged by Jesus who is God's Word.

The Creator of this universe.

 

[Svabhava]

Lets back up a bit since you're quoting the GOSPEL OF JOHN. What's your understand of Chapter 1?

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me; for he was before me. And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”
‭‭John‬ ‭1:1-18‬ ‭Kjv

 

[Svabhava]

If you commit a crime... you will be judged and thrown into prison or punished capitally.

You can try and repent as much as you want... but to no avail as the judge is just.


Same with Jesus who is the just Judge... except He will respect your repentance because He personally paid the price for your sins.

You're free to go... or if you insist and refuse to repent... you will be justly judged by Jesus who is God's Word.

The Creator of this universe.

Repent.



“I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.
3 “You shall have no other gods before[a] me.
4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
7 “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.

 

[TokiEl]

Muslims must abandon the quran and embrace the Bible in order to understand salvation.

The devil's dictation must be abandoned and God's writ must be embraced in order to correctly comprehend God.

 

[TokiEl]

It's not we christians... but it's you muslims who are wrong.

 

[TokiEl]

Although a lot of christians got their doctrine wrong.


You either repent or you perish.

That's the correct doctrine.

 

[A Freeman]

Here are a few unequivocal statements directly out of the mouth of Jesus telling everyone that He is NOT God and that everyone should pray to and worship Father, Who IS God.

John 10:29 MY FATHER, which gave [them] me, IS GREATER THAN ALL; and no [man] is able to pluck [them] out of my Father's hand.

John 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come [again] unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for MY FATHER IS GREATER THAN I.

Matthew 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, MY GOD, MY GOD, why hast Thou forsaken me? (Eno. 89:20; Psalm 22; Isaiah 52:13 to 54:1; Sura 4:157-8.)

John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto MY FATHER, and your Father; AND [to] MY GOD, and your God.

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in The Temple of MY GOD, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of MY GOD, and the name of the city of MY GOD, [which is] New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from MY GOD: and [I will write upon him] my NEW name.

How could God have a God? How could anyone be higher than THE MOST HIGH GOD?

Matthew 6:9-10
6:9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be THY name.
6:10 THY Kingdom come. Thy Will be done in earth, as [it is] in heaven.

John 13:16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; NEITHER HE THAT IS SENT GREATER THAN HE THAT SENT HIM.

References in the Gospels to Christ being sent by God (52):-

Matthew (3): 10:40, 15:24, 21:37

Mark (2): 9:37, 12:6

Luke (6): 4:18, 4:26, 4:43, 9:48, 10:16, 20:13

John (41): 3:17, 3:34, 4:34, 5:23, 5:24, 5:30, 5:36, 5:37, 5:38, 6:29, 6:38, 6:39, 6:40, 6:44, 6:57, 7:16, 7:28, 7:29, 7:33, 8:7, 8:9, 8:17, 8:20, 8:33, 9:4, 10:36, 11:42, 12:44, 12:45, 12:49, 13:16, 13:20, 14:24, 15:21, 16:5, 17:3, 17:18, 17:21, 17:23, 17:25, 20:21

Jesus also referred to Himself as “the Son of Man” over 80 times, proving He couldn't possibly be claiming to be God, as Father (Who IS God) made it crystal clear He is NOT, and NEVER will be the “son of man”.

Numbers 23:19 GOD [IS] NOT A MAN, that He should lie; NEITHER THE SON OF MAN, that He should repent: hath He said, and shall He not do [it]? or hath He spoken, and shall He not make it good (i.e. God is omnipotent – Christ, by His own admission, is NOT omnipotent – John 5:30)?

Jesus referring to Himself as the “Son of Man” (at least 81 times):-

Matthew (30): 8:20, 9:6, 10:23, 11:19, 12:8, 12:32, 12:40, 13:37, 13:41, 16:13, 16:27, 16:28, 17:9, 17:12, 17:22, 18:11, 19:28, 20:18, 20:28, 24:27, 24:30, 24:37, 24:39, 24:44, 25:13, 25:31, 26:2, 26:24, 26:45, 26:64

Mark (14): 2:10, 2:28, 8:31, 8:38, 9:9, 9:12, 9:31, 10:33, 10:45, 13:26, 13:34, 14:21, 14:41, 14:62,

Luke (26): 5:24, 6:4, 6:22, 7:34, 9:22, 9:26, 9:44, 9:56, 9:58, 11:30, 12:8, 12:10, 12:40, 17:22, 17:24, 17:26, 17:30, 18:8, 18:31, 19:10, 21:27, 21:36, 22:22, 22:48, 22:69, 24:7

John (11): 1:51, 3:13, 3:14, 5:27, 6:27, 6:53, 6:62, 8:19, 12:23, 12:34, 13:31

Anyone who mistakenly thinks that Jesus is/was God is calling Christ-Jesus a liar, and is obviously working for Satan (the Opposer), as Christ told us repeatedly (at least 144 times in just the verses listed above) that He is NOT God and that His Father is His (Christ's) God, just as Father is our God.

John 4:23-24
4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in Spirit and in Truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship Him.
4:24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship Him must worship [Him] with their spirit (Being) and in Truth.

 

[TokiEl]

Jesus Christ is truly God.


There are only two things that are certain... and that is death and Jesus is God... and i'm not so sure about the former.

 

[grateful servant]

They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah – Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers. (Quran 5:72)​

 

[Daze]

"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the Son, but the Father only. "(Matthew 24:36)
How does this verse make sense? If Jesus is god incarnate, how does he not know when the last hour is?


My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me, yet not as I will, but as Thou will. (Matthew 26:39)
How do we rationalize Jesus will being different from Gods will, if both entities are indeed the same?


By myself, I can do nothing: I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who has sent me.
(John 5:30)
Not only does Jesus admit he is powerless without the Father... If Jesus is god incarnate can he possibly please himself and not God?
If Jesus is god incarnate, how does one "send himself"?


Why do you call me good? No one is good, except God alone. (Mark 10:18)
The distinction here is pretty clear. Jesus says God alone is good, not him.


The Father is greater than I. (John 14:28)
Self explanatory.


My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me? (Matthew 27:46)
If Jesus is god incarnate, why does he ask the father if he was forsaken?



Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is.. (Matthew 26:39)
Jesus prayed, with his head on the ground. He was a worshiper, a submitter to the Almighty.

Put your head on the ground, exactly like Jesus did. Ask the Almighty to show you the truth. Ask Him to separate the lies and the falsehood and ask Him to lead you to the correct path. Don't let pride and arrogance place you into eternal torment.



Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?' (Matthew 7:22)

Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' (Matthew 7:23)

 

[TokiEl]

They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah – Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers. (Quran 5:27)​

It's the devil's dictation 5:17.

What exactly is the point of quoting the devil to a christian ?

 

[pescatarian09]

An excellent refutation of the Christian articulation of God here (first comment) -
https://www.reddit.com/r/islam/comments/6m8xnu/_/djzxfm6

 

[TokiEl]

"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the Son, but the Father only. "(Matthew 24:36)
How does this verse make sense? If Jesus is god incarnate, how does he not know when the last hour is?


My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me, yet not as I will, but as Thou will. (Matthew 26:39)
How do we rationalize Jesus will being different from Gods will, if both entities are indeed the same?


By myself, I can do nothing: I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who has sent me.
(John 5:30)
Not only does Jesus admit he is powerless without the Father... If Jesus is god incarnate can he possibly please himself and not God?
If Jesus is god incarnate, how does one "send himself"?


Why do you call me good? No one is good, except God alone. (Mark 10:18)
The distinction here is pretty clear. Jesus says God alone is good, not him.


The Father is greater than I. (John 14:28)
Self explanatory.


My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me? (Matthew 27:46)
If Jesus is god incarnate, why does he ask the father if he was forsaken?



Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is.. (Matthew 26:39)
Jesus prayed, with his head on the ground. He was a worshiper, a submitter to the Almighty.

Matthew 28 18Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. 19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey all that I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, even to the end of the age.

John 5 21For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to whom He wishes. 22Furthermore, the Father judges no one, but has assigned all judgment to the Son, 23so that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.



Jesus is the highest authority in heaven and on earth... and your Judge.

 

[Svabhava]

Now, of the article in the OP.
I decided to read it, it was predictably very baseless and crude.

From the article:

When sharing the gospel with Muslims, it is not uncommon to hear the objection: “Where did Jesus say, ‘I am God; worship me’?” This is because many Muslims have been trained (by Muslim apologists) to ask this question of Christians and demand that the answer must be in those exact words.

This is both condescending to Muslims and intentionally obfuscating the situation within the false presumption that the Trinitarian is automatically correct.
In posts such as: https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/where-did-jesus-say-“i-am-god-worship-me”.8420/post-370968
We have seen that the Trinity has nothing to stand on, it is a late philosophical and apologetic invention used to stamp out heresies such as Arianism and enforce separate Christian identity from Jews (even though that already occurred as early as Marcion and Paul).

Muslims are not trained by Muslim apologists to say anything, this is just conjecture. The irony here is that the writer of this article is "training Christians to say" what is in the article and repeat it without being critical of the basis of their own beliefs.
So this article is just obfuscation and sophistry, as the Trinity itself is, in order to simply dodge the problem which they created, not Muslims.
Jews and Unitarian Christians reject the Trinity for a reason, as to Christians apostatize and become Exchristians over this problem.

If the Trinity was a Biblical doctrine (which it historically isn't, as it originated at Nicea but took till Constantinople to being fully fleshed-out) then it would be directly stated, however the contrary is true: https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/where-did-jesus-say-“i-am-god-worship-me”.8420/post-370994

As, if we applied the same criteria, then we could ask them to show us in the Qur’an where it says that to become a Muslim you have to use the exact words of the shahada (1st pillar of Islam): “There is no god but God. Muhammad is the messenger of God.” Although both statements in the shahada are in the Qur’an (Surah 37:35 and 48:29), they are not found in those exact words in that order as a formula for someone to become a Muslim.

It is however found throughout Hadith.

E.g.

Abu Mahdhura said that Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) taught him Adhan like this: "God is the Greatest, God is the Greatest; I testify that there is no god but God, I testify that there is no god but Allah; I testify that Muhammad Is the Messenger of Allah"

The concept of Tawhid is on almost ever page of the Qur'an.

Variations of La ilaha illa'llah; such as La ilaha illa'huwa, are found in famous ayahs like Ayat al-Kursi (Surah 2:255).

"Muhammad is the messenger of God" is directly found in Surah 48:29. The importance of Muhammad is outlined in many passages of the Qur'an, of which refer to him as the Prophet or Messenger.

Nevertheless, often when Christians do show Muslims that Jesus claimed to be divine, their response is to argue that the Gospels have been corrupted and therefore we cannot trust what they say about Jesus

No, that's not what they do on this matter. The writer is falsely equating multiple things here. The idea of Jesus being divine, while denied by Muslims, does not equate to the doctrine of the Trinity.
There are Christians in the 2nd and 3rd century who attached divinity to Jesus but did not believe in the Trinity (again as the Trinity is a much later doctrine and it would be an anachronism to attach it to what earlier people believed).

The closest we have to the Trinity in the earlier period was a kind of Duotheism where Jesus was in some way regarded as God but there was no Holy Spirit (which was not seen as a deity, etc). In this view we have two different gods who are both seen as equal (even though Jesus says in the NT that he is subservient to the Father and only takes orders).

This is a strange claim since the Qur’an does not teach that the Gospels have been corrupted, but rather commands Christians and Muslims to judge by what is written in the Gospels

Then you would not complain about verses like Surah 4:157 would you? or only when convenient to your argument?

It's important to note that this writer says "the Gospels", but the Qur'an speaks of a singular Gospel, not four biographies of Jesus.
The Qur'an never directly mentions or engages with the Bible, but where it crosses over in it's material it serves the role of refuting and rebuking (such as Jesus' crucifixion).

If the Gospels have been corrupted, then why would the Qur’an tell Christians to judge by them?

This writer is stuck in their own world, with no intentions of sincerely considering this, so they selectively take what they want in these areas.

These are some good refutations on the subject: https://truthanvil.blogspot.com/2020/07/acts17apologetics-take-brief-look-at.html

Acts17apologetics hit rock bottom; the state of Biblical writings?

Islam prophet allah shamoun apostate critiqued cira international spirit christian Jesus muhammad aisha jew bible moses messiah jihad caravan war

truthanvil.blogspot.com

Acts17apologetics protest the divine practice; God allows bible corruption?

Islam prophet allah shamoun apostate critiqued cira international spirit christian Jesus muhammad aisha jew bible moses messiah jihad caravan war

truthanvil.blogspot.com

The four canonical Gospels are the earliest we have and the only ones that can be dated to the first century.

This is factually incorrect, they are dated to the second century and only speculated to being dated in the late first century.

The four canonical Gospels were written at a time when there were still eyewitnesses alive who had seen these things happen (written by the apostles or a companion who had access to the information – cf., Luke 1:1–4; John 21:24).

This is presupposition, there is no internal evidence that the contents of Matthew Mark Luke and John have anything to do with any eyewitnesses and they are self-evidently not written from the point of view of an eyewitness, nor disciple.
They are written just as the quoted verses state, that they are compiled oral tradition.
On John 21:24, this must be contrasted with John 20:30.

The canonical Gospels were recognized as authoritative Scripture (cf., 1 Timothy 5:18) within the first century, and the testimony of the patristic authors (e.g., Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria) bears this out.

Irenaeus was the first to start constructing the version of the canon that resembles the one most Christian sects use, this was in 190CE.
As for Clement, his view of the canon doesn't resemble Clements, nor the later Christian NT canon. There were lots of books he both included and rejected. For instance he considered: Gospel of the Egyptians, Gospel of the Hebrews, Traditions of Matthias, Preaching of Peter, I Clement, Epistle of Barnabas, Didache, Shepherd of Hermas and Apocalypse of Peter to all be canonical, inspired books.

Muslims may object to these reasons by stating, “You no longer have the original manuscripts!”

Well that is objective fact, and their earliest manuscripts aren't in the language Jesus spoke either.

we do have the original text of Scripture, which is important as it is the text that is inspired and not the ink on the parchment

The NT texts are considered "inspired", not the literal direct dictated speech of God (of which the Qur'an claims). The NT texts, as compositions and compilations considered "inspired", to hold ground in this argument mustn't fall into these massive pitfalls. If you had any intellectual honesty you'd realize how bad the Christian situation is.
Plus, there are more variations in manuscripts than there are words in the entire NT, this is massively problematic because ever attempt to synthesize manuscripts to reconstruct a NT will only be the guess and bias of the person attempting to reconstruct it (as we get with critical editions which make their way to English translations long down the line).

The original text can exist without the original manuscripts it can be preserved and rendered from the multitude of manuscripts we do have (through the process of textual criticism).

That is just a lie, there is no 'original text'. All academic scholars are permanently left in the dark about this, unless ancient 1st century documents were uncovered, which is not realistically to be expected.

If you want to know about the historical Jesus, then the places to look are Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

This is an unfounded assumption and an example of circular reasoning.

After this passage in the article, the writer goes on to a usual Christian apologetic to which has already been refuted in this thread.

But in the following section the writer continues:

Jesus’ reference to himself as being “seated at the right hand of Power” is most likely a reference to Psalm 110:1 where King David speaks about the Messiah in an exalted fashion calling him “Lord”

Which is an example of misquotations that the NT authors are convicted of.

Psalm 110:1 means “The LORD says to my King/Ruler: “Sit at My right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.”

Which in it's historical context is very obviously about David himself.

Jesus had argued previously, based on this Psalm, that the Messiah was greater than David

Or that the NT authors are simply trying to compare Jesus to David for polemical reasons.

It is clear here that “Son of Man” is an exalted human figure who has divine characteristics.

In a selective reading of Daniel 7.

However Daniel 7 interprets itself directly:

23 “He gave me this explanation: ‘The fourth beast is a fourth kingdom that will appear on earth. It will be different from all the other kingdoms and will devour the whole earth, trampling it down and crushing it. 24 The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom. After them another king will arise, different from the earlier ones; he will subdue three kings. 25 He will speak against the Most High and oppress his holy people and try to change the set times and the laws. The holy people will be delivered into his hands for a time, times and half a time.[b]
26 “‘But the court will sit, and his power will be taken away and completely destroyed forever. 27 Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of all the kingdoms under heaven will be handed over to the holy people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him.’
28 “This is the end of the matter. I, Daniel, was deeply troubled by my thoughts, and my face turned pale, but I kept the matter to myself.”

and that is why they cry “blasphemy”—because the claim to divinity brings with it the death penalty

Christian interpretations of this passage go completely against what follows, where Jesus denies such an interpretation:


33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’[d]? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?


Jesus immediately refutes their claims to blasphemy against him.

Muslims may ask the question, “How would people know that Jesus said these things since there were no disciples around at this examination before the Sanhedrin?” Well, there would have been witnesses present at the Jewish Sanhedrin, such as Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus (Mark 15:43; John 19:38–39, cf. 3:1) who were members of this council and part of the early church. Therefore, these men would provide the valid eyewitness testimonies that were necessary.

Presupposition as to eyewitnesses. And circular reasoning as to using the Bible to prove the Bible, if we were to take such presuppositions seriously.

 

[TokiEl]

Now, of the article in the OP.
I decided to read it, it was predictably very baseless and crude.

From the article:



This is both condescending to Muslims and intentionally obfuscating the situation within the false presumption that the Trinitarian is automatically correct.
In posts such as: https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/where-did-jesus-say-“i-am-god-worship-me”.8420/post-370968
We have seen that the Trinity has nothing to stand on, it is a late philosophical and apologetic invention used to stamp out heresies such as Arianism and enforce separate Christian identity from Jews (even though that already occurred as early as Marcion and Paul).

Muslims are not trained by Muslim apologists to say anything, this is just conjecture. The irony here is that the writer of this article is "training Christians to say" what is in the article and repeat it without being critical of the basis of their own beliefs.
So this article is just obfuscation and sophistry, as the Trinity itself is, in order to simply dodge the problem which they created, not Muslims.
Jews and Unitarian Christians reject the Trinity for a reason, as to Christians apostatize and become Exchristians over this problem.

If the Trinity was a Biblical doctrine (which it historically isn't, as it originated at Nicea but took till Constantinople to being fully fleshed-out) then it would be directly stated, however the contrary is true: https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/where-did-jesus-say-“i-am-god-worship-me”.8420/post-370994



It is however found throughout Hadith.

E.g.

Abu Mahdhura said that Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) taught him Adhan like this: "God is the Greatest, God is the Greatest; I testify that there is no god but God, I testify that there is no god but Allah; I testify that Muhammad Is the Messenger of Allah"

The concept of Tawhid is on almost ever page of the Qur'an.

Variations of La ilaha illa'llah; such as La ilaha illa'huwa, are found in famous ayahs like Ayat al-Kursi (Surah 2:255).

"Muhammad is the messenger of God" is directly found in Surah 48:29. The importance of Muhammad is outlined in many passages of the Qur'an, of which refer to him as the Prophet or Messenger.



No, that's not what they do on this matter. The writer is falsely equating multiple things here. The idea of Jesus being divine, while denied by Muslims, does not equate to the doctrine of the Trinity.
There are Christians in the 2nd and 3rd century who attached divinity to Jesus but did not believe in the Trinity (again as the Trinity is a much later doctrine and it would be an anachronism to attach it to what earlier people believed).

The closest we have to the Trinity in the earlier period was a kind of Duotheism where Jesus was in some way regarded as God but there was no Holy Spirit (which was not seen as a deity, etc). In this view we have two different gods who are both seen as equal (even though Jesus says in the NT that he is subservient to the Father and only takes orders).



Then you would not complain about verses like Surah 4:157 would you? or only when convenient to your argument?

It's important to note that this writer says "the Gospels", but the Qur'an speaks of a singular Gospel, not four biographies of Jesus.
The Qur'an never directly mentions or engages with the Bible, but where it crosses over in it's material it serves the role of refuting and rebuking (such as Jesus' crucifixion).



This writer is stuck in their own world, with no intentions of sincerely considering this, so they selectively take what they want in these areas.

These are some good refutations on the subject: https://truthanvil.blogspot.com/2020/07/acts17apologetics-take-brief-look-at.html

Acts17apologetics hit rock bottom; the state of Biblical writings?

Islam prophet allah shamoun apostate critiqued cira international spirit christian Jesus muhammad aisha jew bible moses messiah jihad caravan war

truthanvil.blogspot.com

Acts17apologetics protest the divine practice; God allows bible corruption?

Islam prophet allah shamoun apostate critiqued cira international spirit christian Jesus muhammad aisha jew bible moses messiah jihad caravan war

truthanvil.blogspot.com

This is factually incorrect, they are dated to the second century and only speculated to being dated in the late first century.



This is presupposition, there is no internal evidence that the contents of Matthew Mark Luke and John have anything to do with any eyewitnesses and they are self-evidently not written from the point of view of an eyewitness, nor disciple.
They are written just as the quoted verses state, that they are compiled oral tradition.
On John 21:24, this must be contrasted with John 20:30.



Irenaeus was the first to start constructing the version of the canon that resembles the one most Christian sects use, this was in 190CE.
As for Clement, his view of the canon doesn't resemble Clements, nor the later Christian NT canon. There were lots of books he both included and rejected. For instance he considered: Gospel of the Egyptians, Gospel of the Hebrews, Traditions of Matthias, Preaching of Peter, I Clement, Epistle of Barnabas, Didache, Shepherd of Hermas and Apocalypse of Peter to all be canonical, inspired books.



Well that is objective fact, and their earliest manuscripts aren't in the language Jesus spoke either.



The NT texts are considered "inspired", not the literal direct dictated speech of God (of which the Qur'an claims). The NT texts, as compositions and compilations considered "inspired", to hold ground in this argument mustn't fall into these massive pitfalls. If you had any intellectual honesty you'd realize how bad the Christian situation is.
Plus, there are more variations in manuscripts than there are words in the entire NT, this is massively problematic because ever attempt to synthesize manuscripts to reconstruct a NT will only be the guess and bias of the person attempting to reconstruct it (as we get with critical editions which make their way to English translations long down the line).



That is just a lie, there is no 'original text'. All academic scholars are permanently left in the dark about this, unless ancient 1st century documents were uncovered, which is not realistically to be expected.



This is an unfounded assumption and an example of circular reasoning.

After this passage in the article, the writer goes on to a usual Christian apologetic to which has already been refuted in this thread.

But in the following section the writer continues:



Which is an example of misquotations that the NT authors are convicted of.

Psalm 110:1 means “The LORD says to my King/Ruler: “Sit at My right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.”

Which in it's historical context is very obviously about David himself.



Or that the NT authors are simply trying to compare Jesus to David for polemical reasons.



In a selective reading of Daniel 7.

However Daniel 7 interprets itself directly:

23 “He gave me this explanation: ‘The fourth beast is a fourth kingdom that will appear on earth. It will be different from all the other kingdoms and will devour the whole earth, trampling it down and crushing it. 24 The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom. After them another king will arise, different from the earlier ones; he will subdue three kings. 25 He will speak against the Most High and oppress his holy people and try to change the set times and the laws. The holy people will be delivered into his hands for a time, times and half a time.[b]
26 “‘But the court will sit, and his power will be taken away and completely destroyed forever. 27 Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of all the kingdoms under heaven will be handed over to the holy people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship and obey him.’
28 “This is the end of the matter. I, Daniel, was deeply troubled by my thoughts, and my face turned pale, but I kept the matter to myself.”



Christian interpretations of this passage go completely against what follows, where Jesus denies such an interpretation:


33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’[d]? 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?


Jesus immediately refutes their claims to blasphemy against him.



Presupposition as to eyewitnesses. And circular reasoning as to using the Bible to prove the Bible, if we were to take such presuppositions seriously.

What do we have here ?

Someone seriously in love with his/her own voice... some sort of besserwisser...?


Sit down and shut up when the shepherde is speaking.

 

[Svabhava]

Someone seriously in love with his/her own voice...

Oh my, looky here? https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/bible-the-book-of-books.2088/
Now who's talking?

 

[TokiEl]

Oh my, looky here? https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/bible-the-book-of-books.2088/
Now who's talking?

The shepherde is speaking short and sweet stuff... pink cotton candy.

 

[Daze]

..

So, you're incapable of replying to the verses I quoted above? This is what we are too assume with your deflection, correct? Why do you even bother quoting my post when you literally ignore all of it?

The questions i posed above are simple. Can you not field a single one? This is why i tend to avoid these topics. It doesn't matter what proof is offered, its always ignored and "countered" with different verses. Its a waste of time for me.. and you.

Don't worry, pretty much every trinny does what you do. Ignores and attempts to save face by quoting other obscure verses ignoring the questions at hand. As if this gives vindication.

 

[Daze]

Matthew 28 18Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.

If Jesus is god, who gave him this authority?

If you can't answer then just don't bother. Don't waste our time by posting more verses ignoring the questions thinking it gives you validity.