Hello

[Al Masihi]

I’m new to the forums, I’m an Arabic speaking Christian, but I prefer to talk and debate in English due to my weak Arabic, I’m from the Middle East obviously I was born into a Muslim family and decided on becoming Christian later, I never practiced or believed in Islam personally it was something I felt was inherited without personal choice to me by my parents. I’m a student of theology and try to do apologetics as best as possible, I’m experienced in having discussions on Islam and Christianity and Islamic objections to Christianity and so forth. So I’m hoping on having debates and discussions with any Muslim members here on any topic regarding Christian theology or scripture.

[الشهاب الثاقب.]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
و به نستعين

welcome ,
It is good that you are studying theology because in Christianity it is complex and needs the philosophy to covering its horrors .
Christian doctrines are not biblical doctrines from sayings the Christ
But from the invention of Paul , John the Apostle , the Fathers of the The Councils and those who followed their approach
I will discuss with you a complex theological issue of theological indicate on patchy

Follow me

[Al Masihi]

Quote

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
و به نستعين

welcome ,
It is good that you are studying theology because in Christianity it is complex and needs the philosophy to covering its horrors .
Christian doctrines are not biblical doctrines from sayings the Christ
But from the invention of Paul , John the Apostle , the Fathers of the The Councils and those who followed their approach
I will discuss with you a complex theological issue of theological indicate on patchy

Follow me

Christian Theology is the strength of Christianity, not its weakness, John the Apostle was an Apostle of Christ who knew him so he knew who he was better then you or me, the Apostle Paul was appointed by Christ and we know his testimony was true because it was confirmed by the other Apostles who knew Christ as we see in Acts. The Church councils define doctrine it times of great heresy that were already passed on to it by the Apostles they don’t invent doctrine out of thin air. Same goes for the Church Fathers. We can debate on theology if you want, but one at a time.

[الشهاب الثاقب.]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Quote

Christian Theology is the strength of Christianity, not its weakness, John the Apostle was an Apostle of Christ who knew him so he knew who he was better then you or me, the Apostle Paul was appointed by Christ and we know his testimony was true because it was confirmed by the other Apostles who knew Christ as we see in Acts. The Church councils define doctrine it times of great heresy that were already passed on to it by the Apostles they don’t invent doctrine out of thin air. Same goes for the Church Fathers. We can debate on theology if you want, but one at a time.

There is no evidence that John the Apostle of Christ is the author of his Gospel


If we impose Argument he is the Apostle of Christ
Paul deceive him, as did the deceive of the disciples chosen from Christ, and prophesied this Christ and warned them against him
Luke 6 - 13: And when it was day, he called out him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, which also he named apostles;
Matthew 24 - 23: Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24 - 24: For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophecies, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they will deceive the very elect.
24 - 25: Behold, I have told you before.
24 - 26: Wherefore if they say say you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.


See the topic that I have attached to the previous post
to learn that the Nicaea Fathers invented expressions that do not found in the Bible to reinforce corrupt theological thought

[الشهاب الثاقب.]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
و به نستعين

Christians believe that the Father is God and the Word is God and the Holy Spirit is God
If I ask you, is God incarnate?
Your answer will certainly be yes


I tell you that this answer proves that the Christians worship three gods and negation divinity of
The Father and the Holy Spirit
how is so that ?
I will explain it to you
For you believe only in the incarnation of the Word
If the Father , the Word , and the Holy Spirit were the God or one God .
this will meaning would be that the Father is incarnated and the Holy Spirit is incarnated based on your belief that the Father is God and the Word is God and the Holy Spirit is God


One can not say union in the One Essence because the word substance is not found in John 10:30
Also incarnate Hypostasis The word only means separation from other two Hypostasis
But the Essence word from the invention of Athanasius in the Council of Nicaea
There is no evidence of Jesus' saying that the Word is incarnate
Where did you come from this belief ?


As you are know Arabic Look the next topic
https://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t203043.html

[Al Masihi]

I can’t read your post properly in English, but like most Islamic assertions on the trinity it’s easy to address, so your basically saying because I say that the Father, is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God I must believe in three gods. I will explain why this assertion is false in two points firstly I as a Christian never say the Father is a god, the Son is a god, and Holy Spirit is a god, your assertion is only true if Christians believe that the essence of three persons or hypostatis is different which would make them three gods however this isn’t the case. There’s one being and entity called God, in three hypostasis partaking of the same nature. Secondly i can explain how this is fault with a simple logical analogy, do you believe the Hafs Quran is a Quran, you’d say yes, do you believe the Warsh Quran is a Quran, you’d say yes, do you believe the Doori Quran is a Quran, you’d say yes, so are three three different Qurans? You’d obviously reply by telling me that there is one Quran that has many sets of recitation that are distinct from one another yet are each the same Quran in content. If the Son or the Word incarnates the Father doesn’t incarnate because they are distinct hypostatises, now this doesn’t mean there are two gods, because a hypostatis is simply a state of existence or self awareness in the case of Christianity God is One one entity, being, and will and three in self existence. He’s not one hypostatis and three at the same respect, or one in being and three in being in the same respect, he’s one in divinity, nature, essence, substance, will, glory, and all things which constitute deity, and three in hypostatis or self existence. So when the Son incarnates, it doesn’t mean the Father does so as well. If you read the verses before John 10:30 you’d see there is an indication of Jesus being one in essence with the Father:

I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12 The hired hand, who is not the shepherd and does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and runs away—and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. 13 The hired hand runs away because a hired hand does not care for the sheep. 14 I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father. And I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. 17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to take it up again. 18 No one takes[a] it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again. I have received this command from my Father.”
Notice Jesus claims to be the good shepherd which is a claim to divinity if you’ve read Pslams and Ezekiel. And he claims to know the Father and then Father knows him which implies a unity in will and knowledge. And he has the power to lay himself down and raise himself again which he shares with his Father also implying unity in essence. And when the Jews questioned the messianic claims of Jesus this is how he responded:

Jesus answered, “I have told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name testify to me; 26 but you do not believe, because you do not belong to my sheep. 27 My sheep hear my voice. I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 What my Father has given me is greater than all else, and no one can snatch it out of the Father’s hand.[c]30 The Father and I are one.”

Jesus also claims here that just as the Fathee gives eternal life so does he and just as nothing can be taken form the Father nothing can be taken from him, again both of which imply a unity in divine being and divine will. Also your assertion that Athanasius invented the term one in essence in the Nicene council is also false as Saint Gregory Thaumaturgus uses the term “subsistence” 70 years before the Nicene council or the Nicene creed or the Arian dispute itself:

“There is one God, the Father of the living Word, who is His subsistent Wisdom and Power and Eternal Image: perfect Begetter of the perfect Begotten, Father of the only-begotten Son. There is one Lord, Only of the Only, God of God, Image and Likeness of Deity, Efficient Word, Wisdom comprehensive of the constitution of all things, and Power formative of the whole creation, true Son of true Father, Invisible of Invisible, and Incorruptible of Incorruptible, and Immortal of Immortal and Eternal of Eternal. And there is One Holy Spirit, having His subsistence from God, and being made manifest by the Son, to wit to men: Image of the Son, Perfect Image of the Perfect; Life, the Cause of the living; Holy Fount; Sanctity, the Supplier, or Leader, of Sanctification; in whom is manifested God the Father, who is above all and in all, and God the Son, who is through all. There is a perfect Trinity, in glory and eternity and sovereignty, neither divided nor estranged. Wherefore there is nothing either created or in servitude in the Trinity; nor anything superinduced, as if at some former period it was non-existent, and at some later period it was introduced. And thus neither was the Son ever wanting to the Father, nor the Spirit to the Son; but without variation and without change, the same Trinity abideth ever.” — Gregory Thaumaturgus, “A Declaration of Faith,” from 275AD

[Al Masihi]

By the way الشهاب الثاقب if you like to discuss Christianity or debate me I’d prefer to do it on
***
forums.com as I’m active on there daily and the replies pass through much instantly unlike here.

[Al Masihi]

Actually we do have substantial evidence that John is the author of this Gospel, early Church tradition is unanimous in affirming Apostle John’s authorship of his Gospel, we we see Irenaeus confirm this from what he learned from Saint Papias a person who personally knew John the Apostle:

“MATTHEW ALSO ISSUED A WRITTEN GOSPEL AMONG THE HEBREWS IN THEIR OWN DIALECT, WHILE PETER AND PAUL WERE PREACHING AT ROME, AND LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE CHURCH. AFTER THEIR DEPARTURE, MARK, THE DISCIPLE AND INTERPRETER OF PETER, DID ALSO HAND DOWN TO US IN WRITING WHAT HAD BEEN PREACHED BY PETER. LUKE ALSO, THE COMPANION OF PAUL, RECORDED IN A BOOK THE GOSPEL PREACHED BY HIM. AFTERWARDS, JOHN, THE DISCIPLE OF THE LORD, WHO ALSO HAD LEANED UPON HIS BREAST, DID HIMSELF PUBLISH A GOSPEL DURING HIS RESIDENCE AT EPHESUS IN ASIA” (AGAINST HERESIES 3.1.1).

Mark Hengel a historian on the subject says this:


In fact, “Anonymous works were relatively rare and must have been given a title in libraries. They were often given the name of a pseudepigraphical [false] author…Works without titles easily got double or multiple titles when names were given to them in different libraries.” Interestingly, the Gospels were never given more than one title (I will discuss this more in the next article in this series).

“The unanimity of the attributions in the second century cannot be explained by anything other than the assumption that the titles were part of the works from the beginning. It is inconceivable, [Hengel] argues, that the gospels could circulate anonymously for up to sixty years, and then in the second century suddenly display unanimous attribution to certain authors. If they had originally been anonymous, then surely there would have been some variation in second-century attributions (as was the case with some of the second-century apocryphal gospels). Hengel concludes that the four canonical gospels were never even formally anonymous.”
Martin Hengel. The Four Gospels and the One Gospel of Jesus (Trinity Press International, 2000). 8. Quoted in Holding, 140.

Carson and Moo, 141.

By the way all the verses you quoted refer to false prophets and apply to Mohammed better then they would to Paul since, Paul had his Apostleship confirmed by the original Apostles while people like Mani or Mohammed had their teachings confirmed by no one, but themselves. Furthermore 1 John 4 and 5 inform us who is an anti christ or a false prophet, anyone who denies Christ and denies he’s the Son of God is a false prophet as we see, last I checked it was Mohammed and not Paul who did so. Paul has more credibility to him then the man whose the center piece of your faith.

[Al Masihi]

Also, by the way the Church Fathers don’t invent theological expressions out of thin air, it either has its basis in scripture or in apostolic tradition one way or another, as for the Nicene Fathers pretty much everything they teach can be confirmed by refering back to the pre Nicene Fathers and Apostolic Fathers. Heres a few theological quotes from the pre Nicene and Apostolic Fathers, If you find a contradiction with the Nicene Fathers then let me know:

Polycarp (70-155/160). Bishop of Smyrna. Disciple of John the Apostle.
"O Lord God almighty . . . I bless you and glorify you through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, through whom be glory to you, with Him and the Holy Spirit, both now and forever" (n. 14, ed. Funk; PG 5.1040).
Justin Martyr (100?-165?). He was a Christian apologist and martyr.
"For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water" (First Apol., LXI).
Ignatius of Antioch (died 98/117). Bishop of Antioch. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.
"In Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father with the Holy Spirit for ever" (n. 7; PG 5.988).
"We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For ‘the Word was made flesh.' Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts." (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 1, p. 52, Ephesians 7.)
Irenaeus (115-190). As a boy he listened to Polycarp, the disciple of John. He became Bishop of Lyons.
"The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: . . . one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,' and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all . . . '" (Against Heresies X.l)
Tertullian (160-215). African apologist and theologian. He wrote much in defense of Christianity.
"We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation . . . [which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind. They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit." (Adv. Prax. 23; PL 2.156-7).
Origen (185-254). Alexandrian theologian. Defended Christianity and wrote much about Christianity.
"If anyone would say that the Word of God or the Wisdom of God had a beginning, let him beware lest he direct his impiety rather against the unbegotten Father, since he denies that he was always Father, and that he has always begotten the Word, and that he always had wisdom in all previous times or ages or whatever can be imagined in priority . . . There can be no more ancient title of almighty God than that of Father, and it is through the Son that he is Father" (De Princ. 1.2.; PG 11.132).
"For if [the Holy Spirit were not eternally as He is, and had received knowledge at some time and then became the Holy Spirit] this were the case, the Holy Spirit would never be reckoned in the unity of the Trinity, i.e., along with the unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy Spirit." (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 4, p. 253, de Principiis, 1.111.4)
"Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less, since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy of sanctification . . . " (Roberts and Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 4, p. 255, de Principii., I. iii. 7).

[الشهاب الثاقب.]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

I'm so sorry I have weak English
Such as you have weak Arabic


I will explain it further
The Father is not God , because you believe that the Father is not incarnate But you said that God incarnate
The Holy Spirit is not God because you believe that the Holy Spirit does not incarnate But you said that God incarnate
Did you understand Now?

For your example with regard The Trinity

The readings of the Qur'an are considered as adjectives because they contain the same meaning
Readings describe the meaning in the same meaning
The Readings from God but the Trinity is not from God

Do you believe that the hypostatises as adjective ?

with regard The Trinity
I asked you about the teachings of Jesus not asked about the teachings of the Fathers

with regard the writings of John
The writings of the fathers that you mentioned have no reliability
Their recordings are from Anonymous Fathers for Anonymous author ( John )