The Theology of the Quran, by Mark Durie, pt 1

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

56 Responses to The Theology of the Quran, by Mark Durie, pt 1

  1. θ says:

    Al-Fatihah, which is a building block of Moslems’ daily prayers, is a cry for assistance to stay on the path of the rightly guided, rather than forgiveness: “Guide us on the straight path, path of those whom Thou bestow mercy, not of those who earn Thine anger, nor of those who have gone astray”. It is because there’s no Prophet else to guide Moslems directly after the time of Prophet Muhammad.

    It is striking that the theological preoccupation of the NT Bible is a forgiveness, hence the so-called “Lord’s Prayer” focuses on forgiveness for sin and a prayer for deliverance “Forgive us our sins, as we forgive those who sin against us. Let us not be led into temptation, but deliver us from evil”, yet it is a big question that there’s no a slight indication that Jesus’ blood shall be a tool for that, let alone any gratitude for his blood.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Jesus after resurrection doesn’t tell that his death has somewhat atoned all sins of early Christians, nor does he require them to believe in atonement by his blood either.
    There are a lot of gaps and blank spots appearing between what Jesus teaches and what early Christians, notably Paul, say. Worse, there are a lot of gaps and blank spots appearing between what Jesus teaches and what later Trinitarians say.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Isn’t it too awkward that prematurely Jesus leaves the token of New testament with a banquet of the Last Supper * before * going to the cross instead of * after * destroying the death along 40 days of his post-resurrection?
    Why do they celebrate before accomplishing any victory?
    Worse, why doesn’t Jesus celebrate after achieving a supposed victory?

    After resurrection, Jesus in the Gospels is rather busied by a troubling “unbelief” of his disciples. It is apparent they can’t settle with a kind of “victory” Jesus offers, namely a victory over sins. They expect “more than that”.

  4. θ says:

    In earlier verses of the Book of Acts, it is revealed that the disciples openly demand a risen Jesus to immediately restore the kingdom of David with a victorious power he’s supposedly gotten, but what is his answer? No, Jesus just straightly refuses to do so.

    A lot of questions remain unanswered between the day of resurrection and Pentecost.
    – Is the Spirit which Jesus breathes to ten disciples a kind of different Spirit of the Pentecost?
    Aren’t they supposed to immediately go out to preach, baptise, and heal the sickness after being breathed with the same Spirit?
    Jn 20:22
    And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

    Along 40 days post-resurrection and prior to Pentecost, why have Peter and others done nothing, such as to prove resurrection or victory or something, shortly after Jesus allegedly defeated the death? It proves that even the Spirit has no authority for showing a power or conducting a miracle.

    – Prior to the Ascension, the disciples have more concerned with going to fishing on the sea of Tiberias. Why is there a wrong impression that a risen Jesus walks more slower than those men to reach Galilee?
    Jn 21
    3 Simon Peter saith unto them, I go a fishing. They say unto him, We also go with thee. They went forth, and entered into a ship immediately; and that night they caught nothing. Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved saith unto Peter, It is the Lord. Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt his fisher’s coat unto him, for he was naked, and did cast himself into the sea.

    – The scene of doubting Thomas is a profound example how Jesus fails to convey even the most simplest message of his resurrection on the third day. Worse, in Gospel of John particularly, clearly Jesus never says it or perhaps forgets to tell about it.

    – The scene of breathing the Spirit to the disciples leaves a question: why has not Jesus waited Thomas to give that Spirit? Why is he in a kind of rush, so that he didn’t wait his group to be completed?

    Also after the Pentecost, isn’t it weird that throughout the Book of Acts nobody arouses any jot of imagination to even slightly consider Jesus’ resurrection as the expected victory over all human’s sins?
    Nobody accredits Jesus’ resurrection to be something, even anything.

  5. θ says:

    A shocking unbelief of disciples after resurrection occurs because of “intangible” impact of Jesus’ resurrection on their soul, let alone on the universe or on Judea. Worse, Jesus also didn’t tell them that he has succeeded to (allegedly) purge their sins completely. Hence, there’s no gratitude.

  6. Anonymous says:

    The main reason why thousands of lay people get attracted to the church is because Peter promises that he and disciples shall willingly share the pouring Spirit of miracles upon them. They know that previously Jesus chose to not pour out the powerful Spirit so much generous like that. It is an opportunist way.
    Peter uses the Book of Joel to catch the laymen’s expectation.

    Thus, the disciples gain followers and churchgoers by a pragmatist pouring out of the Spirit, not by the Christology.

    In fact, Jesus gets very much troubled by a sudden unbelief of his own inner circles, yet somewhat he doesn’t try to convince them with a supposedly “good news” that he has purged their sins.
    Mk 16:14
    Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.

    As consequence, in the Book of Acts the disciples showed ignorance, they just don’t get it either, they never preach the reasons behind his coming, why he ought to die, what the importance of his death is for them, and why they should be grateful of that. Peter uses the promise of Spirit from the Book of Joel to attract the number of churchgoers.

  7. Anonymous says:

    This is how the Spirit fell down as previously an angel has promised on Cornelius: Along 10 lines of verses there’s no mention of “Son of God”, or blood atonement, or oneness between Jesus and God, or three persons, or unity of three. No Christology.
    Acts 10
    33 Immediately therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God. 34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: 35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. 36 The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: he is Lord of all: 37 That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; 38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him. 39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree: 40 Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly; 41 Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead. 42
    And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead. 43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. 44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Hence, toward the Gentiles Peter didn’t preach Christology at all to pour out the Spirit. Even he talks about working righteousness for acceptance of God. Compare with John 10:25-35 where the Jews react to stone Jesus for bringing up Christology.
    Acts 10
    34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: 35 But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

  9. Anonymous says:

    With Christology the followers of Jesus get divided all the time. They differed on his nature, then on his dualism, then on his Spirit whom he poured out, on his differing minds, on his baptismal formula, on his successors, on his canonical books, on his elects, et cetera.

  10. θ says:

    To leave no stone unturned, from all verses about being saved, eternal life, salvation, heavens in four Gospels Jesus never has any idea about Christology, he never teaches that he is “Lord and God” (it is Thomas who says that), he never teaches that three persons are “one” (John says that), he never teaches that he is the exact image of the Father (Paul says that). Even he never teaches that Christ is God (later Trinitarians say that).

  11. Anonymous says:

    The use of Numerical-identity argument that Christ is god can be contested by an unbeatable axiom that God is immortal whereas the Christ – the son of god – died.

    Moreover, the Numerical-identity poses a big problem and backlash on the Trinitarian argument since in the Bible they also find that:
    – Those who shall fall like princes and died like men are not just called gods, but clearly identified so, that is “ye are gods”, per Ps 82:6.

    – Heathen statue is not just named as “idol” but clearly identified as “god” and “goddess”.
    1Kgs 11:33
    Because that they have forsaken me, and have worshipped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Milcom the god of the children of Ammon,

    – Devil is identified as “god of the world”, per 2Cor 4:4.

    Hence, what is the Son of God?
    Apparently Jesus has been given a nickname in Hebrew (by Gabriel or angel who mentions that in Hebrew rather than Greek), that is “Beniel” (son of El). Sinc ethe days of Jacob it is a norm in the Bible that God may honor someone by giving him a new title, or a new name, by attaching the word “El”.

  12. Anonymous says:

    In the Bible, God is Jehovah, and Jehovah is God. Both numerical identities go true each other.
    Moreover, in 1Kgs 8:60 the Bible seals the strict Monotheism by dismissing any other numerical identity: the LORD is God, and that there is none else.

    Josh 22:34
    And the children of Reuben and the children of Gad called the altar Ed: for it shall be a witness between us that the LORD is God.
    1Kgs 8:60
    That all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is God, and that there is none else.
    1Kgs 20:28
    And there came a man of God, and spake unto the king of Israel, and said, Thus saith the LORD, Because the Syrians have said, The LORD is God of the hills, but he is not God of the valleys, therefore will I deliver all this great multitude into thine hand, and ye shall know that I am the LORD.

    Ps 33:12
    Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance.
    Ps 118:27
    God is the LORD, which hath shewed us light: bind the sacrifice with cords, even unto the horns of the altar.
    Ps 144:15
    Happy is that people, that is in such a case: yea, happy is that people, whose God is the LORD.

  13. θ says:

    Indeed, even nobody can find the phrase “the Father is God” or “God is the Father” throughout the Bible.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Here is the play of argument using
    God is the LORD (Ps 33:12, Ps 118:27, Ps 144:15). Trinitarians believe that God is not Jesus.
    1. God = Jehovah.
    2. God ≠ Jesus.
    Hence Jesus ≠ Jehovah.

  15. Anonymous says:

    On the pattern of divine statements, the Bible shows that there are many persons, entities, individuals that get identified or attributed with deification by using the phrase “are gods”, “made thee a god”.
    Ps 82:6
    I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
    Exod 7:1
    And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

    But for the Monotheistic pattern, the use of phrase “God is” shows consistency that the person is always Jehovah. Unitarians and the Jews ascribe to this belief. On other hand, the Trinitarians can’t ascribe to a belief “God is Jesus”, not even “God is the Father”.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Is the word of God a thing? Yes. All that God makes, shows and gives to Jesus – including names, words, sayings – is a “thing” made, created and formed by God. Hence, the word is not Jehovah.
    Jn 5:20
    For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.
    Jn 13:3
    Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God;

    When someone or something is attributed with a divine entitlement (by phrase “are Gods”, “was god”), it differs from the aseity statement “God is”.
    Jn 1:1
    In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was god.
    Compare with:
    Jn 10:34
    Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

    When asked by one of his disciples of how Jesus shows himself to the world, Jesus says he can’t manifest avataring himself, being embodied into the world again, descending spiritually unless the “word” of God to him is kept.
    This means, it is the words actually – things which God gives Jesus – that uphold everything. In Heb 1:3 clearly “upholding all things by the word of his power” refers to the words given by God to Jesus, not to Jesus own words.
    Heb 1:3
    Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

    The Trinitarians are totally wrong to believe that Jesus’ person is upholder of things. Worse, they are wrong to believe that Jesus can produce his own words to sustain the world.

    Even, Jesus couldn’t be able to make any presence among his adherents unless they gather by summoning in a name God gives him. Jesus receives names, words, sayings from God, and he can’t produce them.
    Jn 14
    22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.

    Moreover, when Jesus spoke of the words given to him by the Father, he acknowledges it as the Father’s creations, not his. God is the sole Creator of words and sole Maker of every tongues, including that of Jesus.
    Jesus can produce his own words, let alone to utter, say or convey anything.
    Lk 2:49
    And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?

  17. Anonymous says:

    Heb 1:3 is a nice gemstone of the Unitarians in proving that the “word” Jesus received from God is the actual sustainer or upholder of the world. Even Jesus denies his authorship of it, by clearly stating that the word is “not mine” (yet he received it), meaning that he isn’t its author.
    Jn 14
    24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me.25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.

  18. θ says:

    It is worthwhile to note that the preexisting Jesus never said anything at all previously till the days of his humanity, hence Jesus wasn’t upholder of the old world.
    Heb 1:2
    Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

  19. θ says:

    Jesus says he can’t afford to produce his own words, let alone to utter, say or convey anything.
    Jn 8:28
    Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
    Jn 12:50
    And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

  20. Anonymous says:

    Peter confirms that Jesus’ wonders and healings were possible onky because “God was with him” per Acts 10:38, rather than seizing a moment to announce Jesus’ divinity that he is God.
    Acts 10:38
    How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

  21. Anonymous says:

    In a subtle way of words Jesus infers that any act of exertion, imposition, and emphasis of Jesus’ own will or own glory is something unjust and unrighteous.
    The Trinitarians seek to emphasise Jesus’ equal glory with God’s who sends him. They make him unjust and in unrighteousness.
    Jn 5:30
    I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

    Jn 7:18
    He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.

  22. Anonymous says:

    Now, concerning the Jehovah “deeds” which Jesus does, is it done in Jesus’ name?
    The Trinitarians always argue with a bad theological equivocation, that simply because Jesus does what Jehovah does in the OT, hence “Jesus is Jehovah” (but not otherwise). But Jesus in Jn 10:25 clearly refutes that flawed argument: What Jesus does is done “in my Father’s name”. So, Jesus just proves thru the works that the “Father is Jehovah”.
    Jn 10:25
    Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me.

  23. Anonymous says:

    Now, the issue of equivocation of doers.
    The similarities between what Jesus does in the NT and what Jehovah does in the OT is interpreted by Jesus himself as his learning process, not equality of nature. A deity doesn’t need to learn.
    Jn 8:28
    Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
    Jn 5:19
    Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

  24. Anonymous says:

    Now, the role of Agency.
    Jesus acknowledges that he is just a passive vessel of Jehovah who does everything thru him.
    Jn 14:10
    Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

    Likewise, Peter teaches the early Christians that the “Word” within Jesus does nothing to produce miracles. In fact, God does the healings and powers.
    Acts 10:38
    How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

    Paul teaches the role of “passive Agency” by Jesus as well. God creates all things using a vessel of Jesus.
    Col 1
    Eph 3:9
    And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

  25. Anonymous says:

    Suppose that the “real Jesus” was the Word within the flesh, yet it doesn’t prove that the Word can’t die.
    What the Bible termed as “Gods” and the “Sons of God” (prophets, angels, kings) can die, including the Word.
    Ps 82
    6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
    Similarity:
    Jn 10
    34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

    Only Jehovah is immortal:
    1Tim 1:17
    Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

  26. Anonymous says:

    Life is given by Jehovah to the Son.
    Jn 6:57
    As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
    Jn 5:26
    For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

    Life is taken by Jehovah from the Son.
    Jn 10:15
    As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep.

    The Son dies, just as the “gods” and “sons of god” died.
    Rev 1:18
    I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen;
    Ps 82
    6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

  27. Anonymous says:

    By using the equivocation of the identity, since the “gods” shall die like men, so the Word (Jn 1:1) also dies.
    Since the children of the most High shall die like men, so the begotten Son of God (Jn 1:14) dies.

  28. Anonymous says:

    There’s one intriguing scene in John 10 where the Jews accuse Jesus of committing a blasphemy for using a given name “Son of God” (that is, “Ben-el” in Hebrew) for himself.
    Actually, the case is simply about a title that should not have been translated, it’s just a given calling, just like Jacob was given a new appellation “Isra-el” in Hebrew.

    Essentially, the Jews know that the concept of blasphemy doesn’t always refer to Jehovah (person) and the Name only. It is far more than that.
    The Jews know better that the Ark of tabernacle as wooden symbol of Jehovah’s presence, the mountains of Israel as earthy symbol of Jehovah, and the hosts of heaven (not necessarily the angels) or heavenly counsels – in other extent also the persons of Prophets such as Elijah and Abraham – become additional protected ones under the Ten Commandments.

    By claiming himself the “Son of God”, the Jews presume that Jesus being in form of man tempts to wrongly claim, rob, seize the equality with the hosts of heaven and high counsel. For the Jews, that’s blasphemy.
    Rev 13:6
    And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.

    Ps 107:11
    Because they rebelled against the words of God, and contemned the counsel of the most High:

    Ezek 35
    12 And thou shalt know that I am the LORD, and that I have heard all thy blasphemies which thou hast spoken against the mountains of Israel, saying, They are laid desolate, they are given us to consume.13 Thus with your mouth ye have boasted against me, and have multiplied your words against me: I have heard them.14 Thus saith the Lord GOD; When the whole earth rejoiceth, I will make thee desolate.

  29. θ says:

    In John 8 the Jews also consider themselves as children of the Father. They infer that Jesus too is the Father’s son, hence the Jewish accusation on Jesus of committing a blasphemy in John 10 must be more than just about a fatherhood and a sonship.
    Apparently the Jews accuse Jesus of speaking against heavens.
    Jn 8:41
    Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.

    Other Psalmist verses on speaking against the dwellers of heaven that is counted as sin or blasphemy:
    Ps 73:9
    They set their mouth against the heavens, and their tongue walketh through the earth.
    Ps 75:5
    Lift not up your horn on high: speak not with a stiff neck.
    Ps 83:3
    They have taken crafty counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones.

  30. Anonymous says:

    There are many strong reasons why the Jews were misled to believe that Jesus was angel or dweller of heaven:
    (i) The Jews know that the term “son of God” means angel:
    Dan 3:25
    He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.
    Gen 6:2
    That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
    Job 38:7
    When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

    (ii) Jesus promises to the Jewish leader that he will “fly up” to heaven someday, so he makes impression that he is an angel.
    Jn 3:13
    And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven.

    (iii) Jesus demands the Jews to eat his flesh and drink his blood.

  31. Anonymous says:

    There are many strong reasons why the Jews were directed to either guess or doubt at same time that Jesus was angel or dweller of heaven. Thus they accuse him of trying to speak against the heaven.

    Also, they were made confused a lot by Jesus’ refusal to claim openly as Christ and king, as well as by his “biological fact” that he was born of a woman. The Jews may not afford to accept a possibility of miracle that a woman can give birth to an angel.

    The reasons:
    (i) The Jews know that the term “son of God” means angel:
    Dan 3:25
    He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.
    Gen 6:2
    That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
    Job 38:7
    When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

    (ii) Jesus promises to the Jewish leader that he will “fly up” to heaven someday, so he makes impression that he is an angel.
    Jn 3:13
    And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven.

    (iii) Jesus demands the Jews to eat his flesh and drink his blood.

  32. θ says:

    By using equivocation tactics, actually the Mormons and JWs are more consistent than the Trinitarians on the nature of Jesus.
    First, Jesus is made more higher than angels ~ the Father is more greater than Jesus.
    Being “higher” than angels doesn’t mean being “different” than angels. It follows equivocation from Trinitarian arguments that a greater person of the Father doesn’t make Jesus different from him.

    Secondly. Michael the archangel rebukes Satan over the body of Prophet ~ Jehovah rebukes Satan over the body of Prophet.
    Michael does exactly what the Jehovah does. It follows equivocation from Trinitarian arguments that what Jesus does is exactly what the LORD does.

  33. Anonymous says:

    The Trinitarian argument that “Lord means Jehovah” could so nicely backfire on them when arguing with a content of John 10:33-34.
    Jesus and the Jews clearly concur that per Ps 82 the word “gods” doesn’t mean Jehovah, and if Jesus were to insist on being a “Son of Jehovah”, he should have used the title “Son of the Lord” rather than “Son of God”.
    Likewise, if Jesus were to insist on being Jehovah, he should have used the title “Lord” rather than “Son of God”.

    Now here is a simple Unitarian syllogism:
    1. Both Jesus and the Jews concur that Gods are not the Lord (Jehovah).
    2. Jesus says “I am the Son of God”
    3. Hence, Jesus is not Son of Jehovah, let alone as the Lord of David in Pss 110, not even the Lord of Shema.
    Both Jesus and the Jews believe that Jehovah is the Lord, more than just gods, or son of God.

  34. Anonymous says:

    In other words, as a wat of vindicating himself from accusation of blasphemy, Jesus carefully grouped himself with “gods” rather than with the Lord or the Father in John 10:33-36.
    Jn 10
    33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

  35. θ says:

    Besides firstly the context of John 10-33-36 is whether it is blasphemous or not to be “God”, not to be the Lord (Jehovah), also there’s second important clue there: The use of the language for “earthy gods” is not blasphemous. There’s a sin of speaking against the heavens (angels and God), but there is no sin of speaking against the earthy gods.

    Perhaps the Jews intend to prevent an angelic cultism, by arguing that it is blasphemous to speak against the heavens, to make a Jew equal to “angel”.

    First, Jesus clearly positioned himself with “gods”, that is as the Son of God, not with the Lord.
    Secondly, only the speaking against the heavens is blasphemous.

  36. Anonymous says:

    Yes, Paul hints that there’s an angelic cult around his time:
    Col 2:18
    Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

  37. madmanna says:

    “37
    If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
    38
    But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.”

    He is calling them to believe in his ontological indivisibility with the Father. This makes him equal with the Father being the Son in a unique sense.

    He has already claimed numerical identity with the Father in his greatness:

    “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.
    30
    I and my Father are one.”

  38. Anonymous says:

    Work is not ontology.
    Tell me, which work do the disciples perform that is not equal or even more greater than what Jesus does?

  39. Anonymous says:

    Being one in the works (Jn 10:29-30 ~ Jn 10:37-38) is not ontology.
    Being one in glory (Jn 17:5 ~ Jn 17:22) is not ontology either.

  40. Anonymous says:

    Likewise, the work of bearing record in 1Jn 5:7 is not ontology.

  41. Anonymous says:

    On other hands, the bias of Christ-centrism in Jn 8:58, Jn 19:37, Jn 20:28 may imply that Jesus is exactly the Father himself, something that the Trinitarans totally refuse.

  42. θ says:

    Concerning Jn 1:1, actual structure of passage is “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and God was the Word”. The specific “God was the Word” is clearly anti-Trinitarian. No one of the Trinitarians believes in absolute dictum that God is Jesus (or the Son, or the Word, or Christ). Hence, even since beginning of John’s Gospel the Trinitarians twist and betray the Bible to serve their theology.
    Both the Jews and Unitarians can accept two absolute dicta equally: God is Jehovah and Jehovah is God.
    Jn 1:1 can be interpreted correctly as Jehovah’s role as real Sustainer of the world thru the invisible words. God’s speeches have framed the world since sundry time whereas the Son just spoke his words at the later days. In the Tanach, God was the king and rock, as well as redeemer. This doesn’t mean there are some distinct persons (namely the King, the Rock, the Redeemer) beside Jehovah.
    1Sam 12:12
    And when ye saw that Nahash the king of the children of Ammon came against you, ye said unto me, Nay; but a king shall reign over us: when the LORD your God was your king.
    Ps 78:35
    And they remembered that God was their rock, and the high God their redeemer.

    John’s Gospel teaches that “God was the Word”, with the Word acts as a verb, meaning that God is the actual Sustainer of the world from sundry time, till now, even since moments when the Son has not yet spoken any word.
    Also, Heb 1:3 says “upholding all things by the word of his power” showing that actually the inaudible word from God – not of the Son who spoke his audible words just at later days – that keeps upholding the world intact.
    Heb 11:3
    Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

  43. Anonymous says:

    The phrase “God was the Word” makes a serious differing meaning theologically if compared with other possible phrases, such as “was God the Word” or “God the Word was” or “the Word was God”.

  44. Anonymous says:

    The Trinitarians set and co-opt the definition by insisting on a particular phrase for Jn 1:1 which solely favors their own Trinitarian theology, i.e. the Word was God.

  45. θ says:

    Now, about the Shema.
    The Trinitarians like to cite the Shema when trying to insist on the insertion of Jesus into the divine ontology. Indeed, the Shema consists of two words: the word “Lord” (Jehovah) and the word “God”. For the Unitarians it is so simple: Jehovah is God, God is Jehovah. It is a proof text for Unitarianism. By using “our” therein Jesus claims that Jehovah is his God too. But for the Trinitarians, somewhat the Shema points to two distinct persons: our God is the Father, the Lord is Jesus. They do not hesitate to abuse their Trinity with a binitarian creed.
    Mk 12:29
    And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

    A problem the Trinitarians have not expected of the Shema is a fact that a famous double title “Lord God” belongs to the Father only.
    Lk 1:32
    He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
    Jude 1:4
    For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
    Rev 21:22
    And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

  46. Anonymous says:

    Moreover, the argument of Shema having two distinct persons somewhat shrinks more smaller to be “Jesus only” in Thomas’ exclamation Jn 20:28, hence a binitarian creed is once again abused by the Trinitarians with another heresy of Jesus cultism.
    Jn 20:28
    And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

  47. Anonymous says:

    From the context of Mk 12, we can read how shortly at the following verses Mk 12:32-34 Jesus and scribe both concur with Monotheism that the Shema is about “one God”. They do not have any conception of a “compound unity” in God.
    Mk 12:32
    And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:
    Mk 12:34
    And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question.

  48. Anonymous says:

    Likewise, beside the double title of “Lord God” belongs to the Father only (Lk 1:32, Jude 1:4, Rev 21:22), the Trinitarians have troubled a lot by a fact of the Biblical differentiation between Jesus and the dual title “Lord God”.
    It means, Jesus is neither the Lord, nor God, of the Shema.
    Isa 61:1
    The Spirit of the *Lord GOD* is upon *me*; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
    Acts 3:22
    For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A *prophet* shall the *Lord your God* raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.

  49. Anonymous says:

    In a nutshell, the Unitarians have the Biblical proof texts of the Father alone being the compound unity “Lord God”, whereas Thomas’ exclamation in Jn 20:28 perfectly ruins all Trinitarian lame argument of the Shema having two distinct persons the Father and the Son.

  50. Anonymous says:

    On the Jewish accusation of making himself equal with God in John 5, actually they heard not ontological claim from Jesus but simply his assertion of “working” what God works.
    Nevertheless, Jesus then answers their contention by using – once more time – the same working or action explanation, not ontological argument.
    More specifically, Jesus also presents them with a new explanation of his role as the Agent of miracles, by even confessing he is just a passive vessel without exertion of personal will nor own capability.
    Jn 5
    16 And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day. 17 But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.

  51. Anonymous says:

    Another hint of the Agency role of Jesus is the giving of all things into his hand. If his hand were making all things, he must have owned them, and they all must have belonged to him. Now, Jesus says that he receives all things from God. It means he didn’t make them at the first place.

  52. Anonymous says:

    Now the question is, why does God use the vessel to create the world? The answer for this is the fact God has a plan to replace the “current word” made thru the Agent with something else new and better. The current world is imperfect, temporary bound to destruction.

  53. Anonymous says:

    The phrase “in God of truth” (as Creator of the new heavens and new earth) is reference to the Father whom the true worshiper shall worship in truth.
    Isa 65
    16 That he who blesseth himself in the earth shall bless himself in the God of truth; and he that sweareth in the earth shall swear by the God of truth; because the former troubles are forgotten, and because they are hid from mine eyes.17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
    Jn 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.

    The phrase “he that sat upon the throne” refers to the Father who makes all things new.
    Rev 21
    1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

    In 2Pet 2:12 the disciples specifically longed for a day when the heaven melted and dissolved away, that’s the Father’s coming on the great white throne. They haven’t longed for a day when Jesus just comes to reign 1,000 years still on this same earth.
    2Pet 3
    12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

  54. Anonymous says:

    How to illustrate the Agency role easier and better? It can be described so easily thru the role of a man Adam on the creation of Eve his wife, especially at time when Adam just falls asleep. It means that Adam didn’t actively or consciously get involved in God’s creation of Eve from one of Adam’s own rib.
    Gen 2
    21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

  55. Anonymous says:

    It is important to note that there’s only one person who sits on the Great White Throne, he is the Father who creates the new heavens and new earth. The Trinitarian’s claim that one person on the last throne is Jesus is utterly flawed.
    Unitarian’s claim that the Father being he who sits on the Great White Throne is perfectly supported by a simple Biblical facts: The believers become the “sons” of the Father, whereas at same time they become “wife” (bride) of the Lamb.
    (i) Believers are sons for the Father.
    Rev 21:7
    He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

    (ii) Believers are wife for the Lamb.
    Rev 21:9
    And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife.

    Moreover, it is worthwhile to delicately discern (per Biblical setting of Israel kingdom) that sitting on the throne just represents the higher status of King (royal rank), not as a judge (Sanhedrin) that is not royal member. King Solomon also gets involved to judge certain high profile cases which Sanhedrin can’t.
    Nevertheless, despite all judgment is given to him, it doesn’t mean Jesus shall be the “sole Judge” in the Judgment Days The disciples shall also be the judges over twelve tribes of Israel, even over the angels.

  56. θ says:

    The Father shall remain to be the ultimate Judge of each man’s works in Afterlife.
    1Pet 1:17
    And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man’s work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s