The Triune God Disproved: A Challenge For The Christians
62
Introduction
The following are sound proofs that clearly disprove the Biblical Trinity. Extensive references have been used from the Bible itself for disproving the trinity. Arguments in support of Trinity have also been mentioned accompanied with their refutations (again using references from the Bible). It is highly recommended that you read the article in its entirety before posting
any comments to avoid rash judgements. I would like to thank you in advance for taking time out of your schedule to read the article and remember; your comments, recommendations, requests, and thoughts would be highly appreciated.
|
Revelation, Rationality Knowledge and Truth
Price: $16.94
List Price: $40.00 |
|
The Bible Library Ultra Edition 6.0
Price: $6.75
List Price: $19.95 |
|
Murder in the Name of Allah (Anselm)
Price:
|
|
Handmark PDA Bible
Price: $1.87
List Price: $29.99 |
The Arguments
5 of the most commom passages presented by the Chrisitians in support of the concept of Trinity are as follows (note they are taken from the New Testament):
1) “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one.” (1 John 5:7)
2) “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost…” (Matthew 28:19)
3) “I and my Father are one.” (John 10:30)
4) “In the beginning was Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1)
5) “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed in the world, received up into glory.” (1 Timothy 3:16)
Furthermore it is mentioned in relation to each member of the Trinity in the Athanasian Creed that “none is afore, or after other, none is greater, or less than other”.
Refutations - Argument #1
At first glance, the above quotations prove to be sound proof of the existence of Trinity however, when examined carefully, one would inevitably reach the conclusion that these verses do not support Trinity at all.
The first argument is:
“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one.” (1 John 5:7)
In this verse it can not be seen anywhere that Jesus Christ is God or can be associated with God or being an equal to God. On the other hand, the verse that comes just before this in the New testament explains clearly who Jesus Christ is. The verse is as follows:
“This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.” (1 John 5:6)
This verse clearly indiciates that Jesus Christ originated from water, blood, and spirit. These are commom factors found in all human beings. When these factors are taken collectively, namely water, blood, and spirit, the result is a human. Water and blood are essential and basic characteristics for a human and the spirit or the soul is what makes it ‘living’. Hence, Jesus is not the Father, Word, or Holy Ghost as it may be interpolated from (1 John 5:7) but indeed he is water, blood, and spirit, i.e. a human.
Argument # 2
The next argument presented in support of the Trinity is:
“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost…” (Matthew 28:19).
This verse also cannot be related in terms of supporting the Trinity for one main reason; history is evident to the fact that all prophets conveyed their message in similar manner. All prophets preached to the people about the Father (Spiritual Father, i.e. God), their prophethood (claiming that they have been send by God and that they are His messenger thus becoming in the spiritual sense “Son”), and lastly all prophets also discussed about the Holy Ghost (otherwise known as angel Gibrael). These three aspects were fundamental and consistent with all prophets or messengers of God and without mentioning these points one could not successfully convey the message of God. It was for this reason that Jesus demonstrated how to baptize people to his deciples. Therefore, Jesus Christ can not be credited with any distinction in such matters for all prophets preached in a similar manner.
Argument # 3
The next verse in support of the Trinity is:
“I and my Father are one.” (John 10:30)
Surely one can say here that this is clear proof that Jesus and ‘Father’ are one because it is clearly said here. However, as amazing as it may seem, expressions such as this have been given in the Bible about other human beings. For instance, we read:
“One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.” (Ephesians 4:6)
According to this verse everyone is given the status of God because it is said that God is in us all. Does “in you all” not qualify to be “one” with God? Indeed, it does. Therefore, if (John 10:30) is to be taken into consideration than so should (Ephesians 4:6). Consequently, Jesus would not have a distinction in being one with God, we all must share similar status. Therefore, it can be concluded that Jesus is not God. In actuality, the above references apply to humble servants of God, including Jesus.
Argument # 4
The next verse as stated already claiming to be in support of Trinity is:
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1)
It has already been discussed thoroughly that Jesus was made
of water, blood, and Spirit (Soul) therefore, Jesus was not Word or God. REFER to refutation for Argument # 1.
Argument # 5
The last reference in support of the Trinity that will be discussed is:
“And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto Gentiles, believed in the world, received up into glory.” (1 Timothy 3:16)
This is indeed sound proof that Jesus could after all be God or considered a partner of God IF it were not said by Paul. This verse supports the Trinity to such an extent that it can almost be considered too good to be true for a person believing Jesus to be a partner of God. This is because it IS too good to be true. Why? Simply because it is stated by Paul who has admmited himself that he commits a lie on certain occasions. For this reason, this argument is invalid, again, this argument is invalid because Paul is not a reliable person. Proof of him admitting to commit a lie sometimes is:
“For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?” (Romans 3:7)
Jesus Died a Natural Death - Explained Through Bible (Part 1)
Jesus was Not Equal to God
Disproving The Trinity: Jesus Himself Claims The Father To Be The Supreme
Disproving The Trinity 1. “… to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but is shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.” (Matthew 20:23).
Notice that no credit is given to the Holy Ghost as well thus further proving that the Father or God is the supreme and holds power and control over the remaining members of the Trinity namely Jesus and Holy Ghost.
Disproving The Trinity 2. “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.” (Mark 13:32)
If the Son is considered equal to the Father then why is it that the Son is not aware of ‘that hour’? Indeed, the Father is the supreme.
Disproving The Trinity 3. “I can of mine own self do nothing…” (John 5:30)
Disproving The Trinity 4.“I do nothing of myself…” (John 8:28)
Disproving The Trinity 5.“for my Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28)
Disproving The Trinity 6.“Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greather than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.” (John 13:16)
Jesus Died a Natural Death - Explained Through Bible (Part 2)
Conclusion
I would like to thank everyone in advance for your patience and taking time out of your schedule to read my article. I would also like to let you know that the majority of the research and information has been collected from the book "Synopsis of Religious Preaching: Christianity and Islam" written by A.U. Kaleem published in May 1998. All biblical references are from The Holy Bible, Authorised King James Version, published by Collins World, U.S.A. Ofcourse, I have put everything in my own words with the exception of the references. These are the proofs that disprove the concept of Trinity. And remember I am looking forward to your comments!
Other Hubs of Interest
- Worlds Most Expensive Face Care Products
A list of some of the worlds most expensive Skin Care products. You will be surprised at some of these prices! =D. Check it out now. - Did Jesus Die On The Cross For The Salvation Of Mankind?
The concept of atonement revolves directly around the 'notion' that as a result of Adam commiting sin, his progeny became sinful (through inheritance). Therefore, it is further believed that Jesus, being Son... - How To Write An Effective Essay - Introduction
Your guide to writing excellent introductions for your essays. It's plug and play. Check it out. - Make Millions On Runescape By Merchanting
Everything you need to know about runescape merchanting.
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
So you would believe if he never had the "dish cloth" on his head? Of course you would not. It is never that simple and it is never about that. Therefore, I suggest you refrain from such petty remarks for they do you no good. If you are going to argue, please use references from the Bible. Do not deviate from the topic and consider yourself off the hook. Please watch the video if you have not already. It was a question posed by a christian missionary therefore, I felt it was relevant to the topic at hand.
I would still like to extend my gratitude for taking some time to write your post. Thank you.
Each systematic approach to bible interpretation is modified by the personality, style, backround, and bias of the interpretor. You are flawed in your approach to scripture so you did not disprove anything. You proved that your are anti-christ.
To oscarwms; In order to avoid being bias I have done my research and have provided examples from the Bible. I have not used any other scriptures. I have presented only what is in the Bible and if one read's with an open mind then they will see clearly that the concept of Trinity is not supported by the Bible. I have simply provided refutations for the arugment's in support of Trinity. Whether one agrees with the refutations or denys them is completely up to them. My only humble request is that before making any judgements the reader reads the article in its entirety.
I do not see how providing arugments in support of Trinity and then to present refutation's for them is a 'flawed' approach. How else is one to prove a point?
Lastly, I would like to thank you for taking time to write your comment. It is highly appreciated.
wow, you are way off! hope you repent!
To bernie: please elaborate further,
I would like to thank you for your comment. It is highly appreciated.
Thanks oscar
Great work Grim Reaper
In response to "1Jo:5:7: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."
I would like to divert your attention to the following:
“This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.” (1 John 5:6)
This verse clearly indiciates that Jesus Christ originated from water, blood, and spirit. These are commom factors found in all human beings. When these factors are taken collectively, namely water, blood, and spirit, the result is a human. Water and blood are essential and basic characteristics for a human and the spirit or the soul is what makes it ‘living’. Hence, Jesus is not the Father, Word, or Holy Ghost as it may be interpolated from (1 John 5:7) but indeed he is water, blood, and spirit, i.e. a human.
Furthermore it is mentioned in relation to each member of the Trinity in the Athanasian Creed that “none is afore, or after other, none is greater, or less than other”.
With this in mind I would like to divert your attention to the following:
“But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.” (Mark 13:32) and
“for my Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28)
These verses clearly indicate that the Father is supreme hence contradicting with the Athanasian Creed.
See, I believe the Trinity is a pagan myth, but not for the reasons you stated in your hub. Jesus Christ and the Father are both the Godhead, two separate entities with the exact same mind set. The Holy Spirit is what many call the source of their power, and the spirit that binds all of God's children together.
I thank you for reading my hub and taking some time to write a comment =D Thank you very much.
Joh 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
Who else but God could do such a task? You seem to have missed this very important verse of scripture that refutes all that you wrote.
Joh 2:20 Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
Joh 2:21 But he spake of the temple of his body.
Joh 2:22 When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.
One more imprtant matter. Jesus spoke of the Holy Ghost as being "ANOTHER" comforter. This means the task of the Holy Ghost is the same task as Jesus. How many miracles were done by Jesus? How many times did Jesus give the disciples power to cast out unclean spirits and to heal diseases?
Who else could do these things, excpet God Himself?
Your whole hub is flawed. Study to show youself approved. Until you come to the knowledge of who Jesus really is, you will never understand.
Who do you say that Jesus is? Jesus asked Peter this same question about men. They said He was one of the prophets, but when he asked peter who he thought he was, Peter said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God." Notice that Peter didn't say A SON, but THE Son.
I did come back to edit this. I did not watch the video because of my connection.
Jesus was not God he was a prophet of God. Jesus himself disclaims being equal to God as we read:
“I can of mine own self do nothing…” (John 5:30)
“I do nothing of myself…” (John 8:28)
“for my Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28)
If he was God he would not make such claims. Furthermore, God has no need for supplication yet we see on several occasions Jesus Christ supplicating to God. Jesus was habitual in his prayers. See references Luke 5:16, 9:28, 11:1-2; Matthew 21:22. Only God has the power to accept his prayers. It is obvious that Jesus did not have the power to grant his own prayers otherwise he would never have supplicated to begin with.
In terms of Jesus being refferred to as Son of God, it is true that he has been called Son of the Highest (Luke 1:32) and the Son of God (Luke 1:35). However it should be noted that the expression Son of God is used in metophorical sense in the Biblical idom. They do not at all refer to the status of Divinity (or partnership). Even the term 'god' has been used as a metaphor as we read:
"And the Lord said unto Moses, see I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet." (Exodus 7:1)
Relating back to the term Son of God; we read:
"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God..." (1 John 5:1)
"For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." (Romans 8:14)
The prophets have been also called the Son of God as we read:
"David says, "...the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have i begotten thee." (Psalms 2:7)
"...he (Solomon) shall be my son, and I will be his father..." (1 Chronicles 22:10)
"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe in his name: Which were born, not blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the willof man, but of God." (John 1:12-13)
I agree completely with SirDent. Concerning the verse about the water and the blood...the water refers to Jesus baptism and the blood refers to his death and the blood he shed. This info is from my Bible commentary book and also notes in my study Bible. Makes alot more sense to me. For all believers who are reading this, please let's pray for the Holy Spirit to open the eyes and the heart of Animosity Reborn that she too may experience a personal relationship with the Lord.
Mots impressive of all is the statement of Jesus himself as we read:
"The the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good words have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do you stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, for a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being man, makest thyself God." (John 10:31-33)
The question of Jesus Christ being God was directly posed to him here. The concept of Trinity and his Divinity were all questioned. Let us observe the response for we read:
"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemeth; because I said, I am the son of God?" (John 10:34-37)
Let us analyze now what a Christian Commentator has to say about the relevant issue. When Jesus was asked if he was Son of God he was unable to affirm as we read:
"And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou has said..." (Matthew 26:63-64)
Christian Commentator says the following:
"We should perhaps take the ambigous reply 'Thou hast said' as a refusal." (Peake's Commentary on the Holy Bible, p 722)
It is said that my whole hub is flawed and that I should do the research. Believe me when I say that I have done the research and it is evident from my responses (assuming you take a neutral point of view). I have presented examples from the Bible for the convenience of the reader so please do not call this approach flawed...
Also, you mentioned about Jesus' miracles. The following references also show miracles performed by other Prophet's which were greater:
Exodus 8:17; Joshua 3:17; 1 Kings 17:22, 17:13-16; 2 Kings 5:1-14, 6:17, 13:21; Ezekiel 37:10; Daniel 3:21-25; Luke 1:63; John 5:1, 9:7, The Acts 2:22
I would also like to mention here that for a detailed explanation on miracles please watch the video.
Thank you for your comments. They are highly appreciated.
Born Again 05, I am with you 100%. The truth is hidden from Animosity reborn because of un-belief. It also my prayer the Holy Spirit open her eyes to the truth. As for me and my house, we will serve the LORD JESUS CHRIST, GOD THE FATHER, AND THE HOLY SPIRIT!!! THE HOLY TRINITY!!!
To Born Again 05: For convenience sake I will paste the reference here:
“This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.” (1 John 5:6)
Honestly, I do not know how one can consider the mentioning of water and blood to relate with baptism and death in this context. It is important to keep the context in mind. Overall, I believe that the verse is self-explanatory but we shall leave that for the readers to decide. However, I still have respect for the commentators and the commentary that you possess.
Lastly, I would like to extend my gratitude that you took some time out of your schedule to read my post (assuming you have) and write a comment. It is highly appreciated.
“I can of mine own self do nothing…” (John 5:30)
The flesh can do nothing of its own. The power of God is not in the flesh but is in the spirit.
“I do nothing of myself…” (John 8:28)
Again, the flesh can do nothing spiritually speaking.
“for my Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28)
The father is not flesh, but is spirit.
You say you researched it out. I don't doubt that you read a lot of the Bible. My only question is have you actually tried Jesus? I mean by that question, Have you put Jesus to the test? Not tests of the flesh. When someone wants to learn math, they are tested in the area of math. if you truly want to know about Jesus, you will test Him in the spirit because He is spiritual and not fleshly like we are.
It is easy to say this is what it is or that is what it is, but when it comes right down to it, what do you really know or think you know?
Why did you not answer the scripture I posted earlier?
You also seem to ignore the fact that Jesus is called THE son of God and not A son of God.
"For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." (Romans 8:14)
The term the has been applied... I may have not said anything about the reference you posted earlier but you seemed to have ignored 20+ references that I have posted. Do you even read them? See what Jesus had to say about the matter and see again what the Christian Commentator has said. Also, How could Jesus have ressurcted himself if he has no power in flesh. Also, the concept of Trinity does not mention anything about Jesus having to be in Spirit to be considered equal to God, etc. There are no conditions applied to any of the members of the Trinity yet you seem to apply it to Jesus.
LOL I read them yes. No more though. You are avoiding the issues I mentioned. No more comments from me after this one.
Fair enough. But i will let you know this that you have already answered the part of the scriptures yourself. You mentioned that Jesus in flesh has no power therefore, he could not have performed such a miracle nor raise from the dead. Also dwelch60 and Born Again 05 seem to disagree aboutthe verse implying that Jesus was in flesh... there seems to be some disagreement between you and them.
Nonetheless, I feel that I have answered next to all your concerns but you have only answered say 3 of my references (and those too with disagreements from others).
Lastly, I thank you so much for your comments, you have atleast use biblical references to rebuttle. Thank you.
Jesus loved us so much that HE robed HIMSELF in a body of flesh for us. HE overcame sin in the flesh for us! So we would be without an excuse.
This is why we need Him as SAVIOR and LORD!
Demonstration of His POWER while in the flesh.
JESUS resurrected Lazarus! "I AM the RESURRECTION and the LIFE..." John 11
"...By FAITH we understand that the worlds were framed by the WORD of GOD, so that the things which are seen were not made of the things which are visible." Hebrews 11
"He was in the world, and the world was made through HIM, and the world did not know HIM. He came to HIS own, and HIS own did not receive HIM. BUT as many as received HIM. to them HE GAVE the right to become children of GOD, to those who BELIEVE in HIS NAME who were born, not of blood, nor of the flesh, mor of the will of man, but of GOD! And the WORD became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld HIS GLORY, the GLORY of the only BEGOTTEN of the FATHER, full of GRACE and TRUTH." JOHN 1
You must be or become a Believer in order to understand the FULLNESS of GOD.
Blessings
Very interesting.
Clearly i think you have no idea who Jesus was. Most, if not all of your arguments are very flawed. Your first one for example; you made a sweeping generalization based on one verse. Jesus was both fully human, and fully God.
I do not know anything about you or what you believe, but just from reading this hub i can tell that you are trying to prove that Jesus was not God. Who was he then? Answer me that.
I think to the average, easily swayed individual, this hub might be convincing, but to me, i honestly thought it was a shabby attempt.
You do have some very interesting ideas and that is what hubpages is all about; expressing yourself and your ideas. so nice work on that end of things.
Internpete: Thank you for the ecnouraging words (you are the first to do that) =P. You are right, I am saying that Jesus was not God. As for your question of who was he? It should be mentioned in this article, I believe Jesus to be a prophet of God.
Have become your fan =D.
I have two hubs, if you're really searching for Biblical proof that Jesus, God and the Spirit are one in the same (not three separate entities). I recommend you at least read "Who Do You Say That I AM?" for unrefutable proof. I also have a hub explaining the trinity called "God is One: The Trinity Explained", which goes into the meanings of God, Jesus and the word "One" in the original languages (this reveals so much!). There's just too much to share here in this comment. At least read, if anything, for more information with which to compare. God be with you. Amen.
Jesus is God, thats all there is to it. Wait and find out if its not so.
Bye
Hi there these hub should help you out.
http://hubpages.com/hub/I-am-Alpha-and-Omega
K guys will do. By the way Christians are waiting for the second advent of Jesus right? If so... then when? I hope anyone can help me out with this.
Thank you for all of your comments.
Regarding the second coming of Christ: 2 Peter 3:9 states the Lord is not slow about His promised return, but is long-suffering toward us, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Even the best scholars try to figure out when Jesus will return, though Jesus said we will not know the day nor the hour. This is directly associated with the Jewish wedding ceremony and the feast of the trumpets ("the day nor the hour"). Based on Daniel's prophecy, we are at the "toes" of the king's dream, meaning the ten kingdoms of the last days (some think this is the New World Order, but there are many "wonderings").
Jesus is to come to take His church (His bride, as in the Jewish wedding ceremony) away and then His wrath is to fall, as prophesied in Revelation. Some think He will come before the seven-year tribulation; my study shows it will be after 3.5 years of tribulation (just prior to His wrath of judgment upon the earth); and some don't believe in the rapture at all.
Don't let this keep you from Yeshua (Jesus) because He knows what we only know a portion of. 1 Cor 13:12 says we know only in part, but will know all when we see Him face to face. That's why we must be true to faith in Him and be ready for His return because He will return. All prophecies have come to pass thus far exactly as they were given. Hind sight is much easier to see!!
I have a hub also about the return of Christ and my study results called "In the Air-On the Earth" I invite you to read. Too much information to post here.
HOO and I disagree on some of our study results, but we are brother and sister in the Lord, nonetheless. Again, we all just do the best we can with a pure heart of love for others. That's why we try so hard :-)
God bless you, and I'm glad you have a heart for study! Keep on going :-)
The second advent of Elijah was fulfilled in the person of John the Baptist. The Jews believed that Elijah literally ascended to Heaven and took the references from the scriptures as literal instead of metaphorical. This was cleared by Jesus himself as he told the followers that John the Baptist was indeed the second advent of Elijah. It appears as if the Christians are making the same mistake as the Jews have in the past (taking the scriptures literally instead of metaphorically in terms of Jesus' ascend).
Firstly: You are making a clear mistake in your interpretation of Romans 3. Paul does not state that he lied, no he states that, if God would turn bad into good, he would better lie, because God would turn that lie into truth. If you would have read the whole chapter you would have noticed. There would be no reason to disqualify Paul as you did now.
Secondly: I understand that you can doubt the holy spirit as being an entity. The word for the holy spirit in the old testament means, besides spirit, also breath. I don't think you count your breath as an entity apart from you. I believe it is harder to defend that Jesus is not God, unless you want to defend there are multiple Gods:
Deuteronomy 4,39 and psalm 18,32 teach us that God is one. However, God says that he no man can see God and live in exodus 33,20 and 40,34-35. But in Genesis 17 and 18 God appears (in a body) to Abraham. Also in a body Jacob fights with God. So, if you are right there are multiple Gods. And it is even so that the bible helps us in this. The word used for God is the word Elohim. Elohim is plural, while consequently used in a singular sentence. There are multiple Gods in on God, whuch means that there still is one God. That God comes forth in the case of Melchisedek, without forefathers and without inheritance on the earth. Yet, he is called a priest-king. Abraham gave him a tithe, a tenth part of what he had robbed. That tenth was later on given to the levites, indirectly to God himself. From the prophets it gets clear that the messiah needs to be both priest and king, which means that Melchisedek has been that messiah all along.
From the use of the old testament the old theologians have discovered that Jesus had to be God. Unless you believe Mohammed would be the messiah and therefore: God? The proof I have showed you is not for hundred percent vast, I know that, there isn't enough space to do so. Just like you made an attempt to proof Jesus is not God, so did I do a very small attempt to proof that Jesus is God. I could have written much more comprehensively, but I think you'll have enough to study on this if you want to take it seriously. I did enjoy the hub itself by the way, even though I disagree strongly with you. God Bless
P.S. I do also strongly disagree with those who say to pray that your eyes will be opened and such as if you would be filled with some kind of 'evil spirit of disbelief.' I think you are smart enough to study for yourself and the truth will reveil itself, whether it is to me (if I am wrong) or to you.
You indicated that it is harder to defend that Jesus is not God unless I want to defend multiple Gods. It is true that I say Jesus is not God but it does not at all mean that I want to defend multiple Gods. Instead of defending mutliple Gods I say that Jesus was not God but a prophet of God, His messenger. I believe in one God. I believe Muhammad (pbuh) to be a the greatest prophet of God, the last law bearing prophet. Muhammad (pbuh) preached about one God and considered himself to be a prophet of God and clearly stated that God is One and He has no partner. So, to believe in Muhammad (pbuh) does not mean he is God. God also uses the term 'we', a plural, in the Quran but this does not mean that God is not one. Kings refer to themselves as 'we', this type of language is that of Kings. On the other hand, the Quran clearly indiciates that there is only one God (despite using the term 'we') and no other scripture makes this distinction. Lastly, what of the references I have posted under 'Jesus was not equal to God'? It is clear that Jesus himself considers the Father to be the supreme.
A king never uses this 'we' in a singular sentence. God does. From the bible there cannot be drawn another conclusion than the existence of multiple Gods, making the bible speak out against itself. Unless Jesus was, besides human, part of the Godhead too. If he is so, it fits like a puzzle, perfectly and no longer contradictionary as it seems to be. That about the bible, which I believe to be true. I must admit I haven't studied the Quran comprehensively, so I can't say anything making sense about it.
I just want to state that, with a closer look, the bible starts to make much more sense than you make up about it. God Bless
In contrast, Kings do refer to themselves as we so its incorrect to say that they never do. For example, this was common amongst the kings of India. They use the word 'hum' which directly translates to 'we' when commandng someone or what not. You should look into this. Again I would like you to shed some light on the words of Jesus himself such as
“I can of mine own self do nothing…” (John 5:30)
“I do nothing of myself…” (John 8:28)
“for my Father is greater than I.” (John 14:28)
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greather than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.” (John 13:16)
These verses prove that Jesus was not equal to God and hence the concept of Trinity which considers all entities to be equal is false. This makes perfect sense to me. Jesus is clearly saying that he can not do anything himself, that the Father is greater than him, and also why would there be need for Jesus to pray to God with such agony during the time of the crucifixion (the prayer I refer to is that of when Jesus prayed for God to take this cup away from him). Why was there need for Jesus to pray to the Father if he is equal to God?
and I would also like you to comment on:
“One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.” (Ephesians 4:6)
Whether Jesus is fully equal to God the Father is another of your good questions. I personally don't think there is any need that Jesus needs to be equal to his Father, he was obedient to his Father as the bible teaches us that we should be obedient to our father (Exodus 20:12). We see that Jesus commands God to send the spirit (we have seen this is Gods breath), and to receive the spirit Jesus blows (or breathes) at them. Jesus seems to be able to control Gods breath. There certainly is a ranking in the single Godhead. And in the ranking it is obvious that Jesus is not the Father. If there is a concept of the trinity that considers all entities (if possible to talk about entities, but I don't know a better description) to be equal I would disagree too. The breath is not equal to the breather, as we have seen with the question about the spirit.
To pay a little attention to the cup argument. I think it is a very sharp argument, yes, one very fine. This is how I think about it. When Jesus came to the earth he placed himself not only beneath the Father, but also beneath the humans that lived at the time. There is written that Jesus was obedient to his parents (Luke 2:50). He was even obedient until death (Philipians 2:8). And Jesus chooses to give his life voluntarily (John 10:18). But in his choice he is obedient to his Father, as we all are supposed to be. In that garden he choose to be obedient, even though he had the power not die. But still, I do not believe Jesus needs to be fully equal to God. He was man and also fully God. But how can a man be equal to God. It can't, so Jesus had to give up his high place he rightly owns as God (Philipians 2:5-7). I know some christians could disagree with me. You might disagree with me too, I might eventually be wrong. Please, don't take me on my words, but look it up in the bible, that would be useful to you and to me.
On Ephesians 4:6: I am always a huge fan of reading parts in the whole context. If you would read it without it seems to get some mystical intonation. But that is not what Paul was meaning with this verse. What Paul is doing is that he is giving the aim that should be followed: In the Spirit one in the God, which is one Father of all, he is above all, no one is higher than Him, but he is too through all, which means that he is working in all, and he is in you all, which means that he actually takes his place in the hearts of the men the follow Christ. Paul makes this last interpretation clear in verse 7. It does not mean that we all are Gods, it means rather that we all can't escape God, because wherever we go, God is there.
But, I must admit that I had never studied on this verse before, so, what I say might sound a little diffuse. I hope that you will give me your opinion on this. God Bless
This has turned out to be a rather interesting conversation and for which I am grateful. The reasone why I pointed out that Jesus needs to be equal to his Father or atleast the entities in the Trinity must be equal is because it is mentioned in relation to each member of the Trinity in the Athanasian Creed that “none is afore, or after other, none is greater, or less than other”. I agree with you that the entities are not equal.
Your response for the cup argument resembles the belief that I have about Jesus, to be a messenger of God, His prophet. He was obedient to God, obedient to parents, etc. You are right to say that some christians may disagree with you however I like your integrity and respect your beliefs.
I am very impressed with your reply on Ephesians 4:6:. I agree with your interpretation. The only difference I have is that I believe in one God and Jesus to be a prophet of God so I would say that God takes his place in the hearts of the men who follow Him (God) and not Jesus Christ. All and all, I am very impressed with your interpretation as it is similar to mine.
I think it is time that we also talk about the crucifixion of Jesus Christ and whether or not he died on the cross, you touched upon it a little already. I believe that Jesus Christ did not die on the cross, he survived the cross, and continued his life and continued to preach until his natural death. That should suffice for now, I would like to know if you want to continue with this.
I would also like you to response on the following:
"See now that I, I am He,And there is no god besides Me;..."
Deutronomy 32:39
and
"I am the LORD, and there is no other;Besides Me there is no God.." Isaiah 45:5
likewise, Isaiah 46:9, Mark 12:32, Mark 12:29, and Deuteronomy 6:4.
All these verses claim that there is one God. It would be very hard to say otherwise as they are pretty clear. Remember that there are also verses that clearly say there are several Gods, i am only pointing out a contradiction i nthe Bible. I would like to know your opinion on this and break down every verse if possible and prove its explanation. Thank You.
If you don't mind, I'll start with your latest reaction. I don't have really much time right now and this questions eems to be more easy to me as I have studied on that some more. Remember that I have already wrote some in my first reaction on this matter. You believe it is a contradiction. So did I in the very first beginning. But when I started to study on this subject I had to change my mind. Later on I discoverd that this matter is called the two nature dogma in christian theology. I often disagree with theology, in this matter I don't.
All these verses show us that there is one God. I also want to point at Mark 10:18, where Jesus says: Why do you call me good? Only God is good. It would obviously be hard to say that Jesus is God. He never gives himself credit for being God. He only gives himself credit for being Christ, which means: Messiah, which means Saviour. But he gives another account about himself. He says the following (Luke 24:44): And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
Studying the old testament I think the conclusion that God (singular) is plural is unavoidable. I have showed you this already. But the study of the things written about Jesus is much more comprehensive. You must realize that the name of Jesus can only be found on two occasions in the old testament. The fist obviously is the book of Joshua. Jesus is the Greek or maybe even latin version of Jesus Hebrew name: Yeshua, which is the same name as the English Joshua. The second time it concerns the highpriest Joshua. Now, on this occasion something interestings happens (Zachary 3). The chapter speaks about a rehabilitation of Joshua, the highpriest, who was wearing filthy clothing. This filth was not his own filth, but the filth of the nation. And God defens Joshua and rebukes satan, in the third person, which is very interesting. But this matter is a forview of things going to happen with Jesus, bearing the filth of all the world. We know this as Zachary writtes in the same chapter about the branch, which is also spoken of by Isiah. With Melchisedek there is a comparable situation, as a priest king.
That is the reason why the Jews wanted Pilate not to put the sign of the cross saying: King of the Jews. They knew the meaning of that in the sense of the prophecies.
That is also why they wanted the grave to be protected by roman soldiers. They knew the prophecies. (but I will come back on this when I react on the other issue)
Important is also that Jesus in fact does put himself in the place of God. Zachary prophecies that God will come on mount olive and the mount will break (zach 14:4). Jesus ascents into heaven (at least the bible says so) from mount olive, and when he does so he says: The same way as I've left I will come back.
All the times we see anything about that plural God I believe the God in the flesh is Jesus. I am not yet ready with a full proof of that. I might never get such a work done, but I do believe it is so. Jesus said: The Father (God) en I are one. Jesus also claimed that God was His natural Father. It is obvious God doesn't have sex with a woman. What comes forth out of God in this manner, Jesus was seed from God and his spirit was from God, that would make him God. Still there is one God, a plural God.
Of course you have read John 1 the whole chapter. The whole chapter gives some clear evidence of the things I've just said. In 3 minutes my lessons start, so on the other issue I will react in some hours. God bless.
Hmm, thank you for your response. Personally, it is hard for me to believe that God is always used in a plural sense. For instance,
"I am the LORD, and there is no other;Besides Me there is no God.." Isaiah 45:5
If God is in the plural sense then why would the word 'Me' be used and not 'Us'? If it was intended for 'God' to be used as a plural then it should also have been clarified disintinclty by using the word 'Us' instead of 'Me'. If the sentence was:
We are the LORD, and there is no other;Besides Us there is no God..
Then I would believe that yes God is plural even though it is not the term 'Gods'. Also, if this was the only indication to God being plural in the bible then I would consider it however, we see in the Bible that it has been clearly mentioned that there is more than one God (the term 'Gods' may even be used). Why be clear about the plurality of God on one occasion and then be foggy in another?
Jesus may have said that him and God are one but remember that he has also said that the Father is greater than him, that he can not do anything on his own, and he used to pray to God amongst other things. Also remember that if Jesus and God are one then it is important for them to be equal as inequality would mean the possibility of one dominating over another and Godhead being at risk (this is why the entities in the Trinity are supposedly equal). So, do you agree that all the entities in the Trinityare equal as it is mentioned “none is afore, or after other, none is greater, or less than other”? Meaning that God is equal to Jesus and Jesus is equal to the Holy Spirit and vice versa.
In the athasian creed there is something in which I clearly disagree with the theology. I could be wrong too, and theology right. But right now I am not certain of that.
Secondly, on the second part, I believe it is important to point out that Jesus was much more than a messenger: He was the message, the message that became flesh and blood (John 1). That's where the theology comes from that those who do not believe in Jesus (the message from God)and the salvation through him do not believe in God and thus reject God. You know what happens to those who reject God.
Now we come to the thing that is important. The crucifixion of Jesus. No one can survive this. You know how a crucified person dies? He drowns. When the Roman soldier put a spear in his flank water and blood came out separately. Jesus was already drowned. His body was wrecked after a Quartier, which could kill a person easily, only the strong where able to survive, and a crucifixion. Then he was placed in tomb for three days, with a large stone in front of it. The nights where freezing, the days where hot. He did not have had any food since the day before crucifixion. Then he would have managed after three days to get to the stone and pull that heavy stone away and then he even managed to overrule multiple Roman soldiers. Now are the Roman soldiers not known for their great strength, but they where not that week.
The apostles write later that he had another body which was much more beautiful and looked healthy. That was necessary, because Jesus would have been almost irrecognizable after such a crucifixion, and an account that 500 people would have seen him would have been useless. I think you are smart, and you think well about a lot of things. But in this occasion I just cannot figure out how you came to this idea. It makes no sense at all, unlike the other things you mentioned.
Now I will get to your latest comment. I can understand it is hard to believe that the sentence is singular while the word God is plural. In Isaiah 45:5 for example: I am the Lord and beside me there is no God. I think, but I am not sure, where they have translated the word with Lord it actually is Elohim, which means God. But I might be mistaken. Than the sentecen would be this: I am the Gods... A perfect example of how we must escape that narrow idea of one God being always singular. But, for me too is the book sometimes hard to understand in this things. But the meaning of it is, when discovered, one of amazing beauty. In my vision it makes the account of the bible and the trinity (or twinity) more believable. This perfect unity, I believe, cannot be made by men. Of course there are large cultural differences, differences in the language that is used, on many ways the bible stands far from us. Sometimes the meaning of things are hard to understand as the meaning of words for them and for us changed. It makes that is seems a little foggy, yes. Still the original meaning has lost nothing of it's intensity, it just needs a little (or a lot) study (and of course guidance by the holy spirit for my christian brothers that read this too). Still, the bible is unique in the way it all makes sense together, even though there are so many, so much different books.
With this said, it is logical, looking to the unity of the bible, that Jesus said he cannot do anything than what the Father does, that the Father is greater than him, and also in other verses, because Jesus had laid down his being equal to God (Phillipians 2:7). But he is exalted too and given the highest name, which is equal to the name of God (Phillipians 2:9). On earth Jesus was not equal to God at all. That is because he laid down his being like God. Now exalted, he is, and once again he is God. I believe this is what the bible says, but even more this is what I believe to be true.
Thanks for your reply, I sense that the deepest concern you have right now would regard my conclusion of my beliefs about the crucifixion. Firstly, i want to say that when Jesus' body was speared, water and blood gushed out and this, according to medical understanding, is a phenomenon of life, not that of death. If Jesus were already dead then water and blood would not have gushed out (the gushing of water and blood has little to do with one drowning). With this said, I urge you to watch the videos i have posted on this very article. They are a two part video which realte directly to this topic. In the video, a Christian missionary asks about the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. The video is pretty detailed but still if you have any doubts afterwards I would be happy to make an attempt to resolve them.
In the end you mentioned that on Earth Jesus was not equal to God. Can you also please elaborate fruther on this. If he was not equal to God does that mean that he did not have the powers of God? What I am trying to get at are the miracles that Jesus has performed. Here I would like to quote SirDent (his comments are amongst the first on this article) on the matter of miracles of Jesus:
He writes:
"Joh 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
Who else but God could do such a task? You seem to have missed this very important verse of scripture that refutes all that you wrote."
and
"How many miracles were done by Jesus? How many times did Jesus give the disciples power to cast out unclean spirits and to heal diseases?
Who else could do these things, excpet God Himself?..."
SirDent seems to believe that Jesus was able to perform miracles that only God can, hence Jesus was God on Earth. Do you agree with SirDent or do you believe that Jesus was not equal to God on Earth but he still had the powers of God... which would sort of make him equal to God... In short, what is your viewpoint on the miracles of Jesus and your viewpoint of SirDent.
Also, later I would like to come back to Jesus being son of God or not.
Just read your comment again and noticed that you touched slightly upon salvation. I would also like to discuss this topic afterwards as well. This acts as a reminder for me as well.
I don't really feel the need to take a side in this argument. One side or the other it seems in the bible God isn't really concerned about these things. Just this.
Romans 15:5 May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you a spirit of unity among yourselves as you follow Christ Jesus,
Your agreement seems to have no purpose after reading this verse. Have some unity brothers.
On the contrary, to follow Jesus Christ does not mean that Jesus Christ is God. The same verse makes perfect sense if one attributes Jesus Christ to be a prophet of God as well. Since this verse you posted is directly linked to Jesus Christ being a prophet or son of God means that their is purpose in the arguments.
Could you please do one topic at the time? It's quite busy like this to answer four questions at a time.
I think I have quite clearly given some evidence that proof Jesus being God. I haven't even near presented all the proof available, I couldn't by this time as I haven't researched all relevant information. At the same time I think it is clear that Jesus is Gods son too. He says so all the time. It might even be more easy than it seems. Jesus was God coming forth out of God too. This has a meaning which I need to use for the other question you have raised. When Jesus came to earth he left God, the verse in Phillipians which I have quoted already a view times, says he laid down his being like God. He became totally man. But, as you can see, he still did these miracles, and he said: If you don't believe me, believe the works that I do. He did those works and proofed that he could do the miracles. But he did those with the power the Father gave him through the spirit. Still, Jesus had to be God, because no human could be the messiah.
Just like the first Adam a last Adam was necessary. But because of an event which is called 'the fall' all men where born in sin. No man could be that messiah that bears the sin of mankind. Each person would have to bear its own sin, without having the opportunity to bear that of the other. The curse was on all humanity, and that curse was way to big for them to bear. God had to bear it. But to bear sin, sin has many meanings, one of the is the absence of God. Jesus, God, had to give up his godliness to be able to bear sin. Our sin. He had to lay it down too because he had to know the way we are bing tempted, so that the apostles could say that he is tempted just like us. So we know that Jesus was both fully God, which he had laid down for a while, and fully human. And, as a God and as a human he was bearing our sin. All the miracles you speak of have happened. Including the death and resurrection.
I think the case of the resurrection is clear. Over 500 people have seen him at once. His mother, his brothers and many of his closest friends met him and recognized him as Jesus. But the question: Did he really die? The man 'with the towel' as another hubber already called him, is really helpful in this case. He starts to speak about Jonah, but uses the argument completely inverted. He says: Jonah was alive in the whale. The fact is, only Jonah knew he was alive, just like also only Jesus knew he was alive. Jonah was in the belly of the whale, just like Jesus was in the belly of the earth. Jonah came out of the whale with another body. I need to explain this. Because of the acids in the belly of a whale his hair and skin would probably have lost all their colour. Jesus, when returned from the belly of the earth had an completely new body, so that even his mother didn't recognize him at once.In fact, Jonah was dead. So was Jesus.
This fact is clear in the events at the crucifixion. As I had already explained, it would be nonsense to believe that there would be even more left than an breathing body after the quartier, the crucifixion, the spear in his side, three long cold nights in the grave and the pulling away of the heavy stone, which was eventually sealed and protected by roman soldiers. All this is fairly non-logical. But, to come back to the spear, I never understood how water and blood could come out. It is not, as some claim, that the blood and the plasma seperate. When I found out that Jesus had in fact drowned there on the cross I could finally understood what happened there. A friend of mine is doctor. He says that this is the most likely account. According to this Jesus couldn't be alive any more.
For me this friend is a authority on this subject. More than this man, a theologian. It is nice to see is that he doesn't choose the obvious way. He has some very creative interpretations. But he seems to be biased, he starts with the presumption that Jesus did not die. And his conclusions always fit this presumption, of course. For me, the evidence that Jesus did die is so strong that I can't escape it.
Well, that is a whole lot. I'm sorry I cannot manage to write it shorter and more simple, so that I give you a lot of work reading it. I like you being so curious, and I can imagine you still have a lot of questions. Please ask God Bless
I would like to thank you for your post, I enjoyed reading it. You mentioned slightly that Jesus says all the time that he is God's son. In relation to this, I would like you to consider:
In terms of Jesus being refferred to as Son of God, it is true that he has been called Son of the Highest (Luke 1:32) and the Son of God (Luke 1:35). However it should be noted that the expression Son of God is used in metophorical sense in the Biblical idom. They do not at all refer to the status of Divinity (or partnership). Even the term 'god' has been used as a metaphor as we read:
"And the Lord said unto Moses, see I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet." (Exodus 7:1)
Relating back to the term Son of God; we read:
"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God..." (1 John 5:1)
"For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." (Romans 8:14)
The prophets have been also called the Son of God as we read:
"David says, "...the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have i begotten thee." (Psalms 2:7)
"...he (Solomon) shall be my son, and I will be his father..." (1 Chronicles 22:10)
In relation to the incident of Jonah, it is a common belief amongst most if not all Christian scholars that Jonah did not die but rather he was unconcious.
As for the crucifixion, it should be remembered that Jesus' crucifixion was extraordinary in the sense that it was MUCH shorter than average crucifixions thus improving Jesus' chance of survival. Remember that even Pilate was surprised to hear when he was told that Jesus had passed away. In regards to the video, you are entitled to your opinion of saying that he was biased but it should be noted that the most important thing is that he did not use any false information. Everything he talked about is indeed in the Bible and he did not change anything from it to suit his perspective.
In regards to Jesus' body, it was not a totally new body. He still had his wounds on the body meaning that the body was not replenished at all. To further prove this point, jesus himself asked his disciples to touch him on the wounds to see for themselves and he even asked for food and ate with them. If it was a totally new body, if Jesus had indeed risen from the dead, then what reason is there for eating food, what reason is there for walking about in the night time and avoiding the Jews? Why did he not go up to the Jews and announce that I have risen from the dead? Why did he have to hide himself?
In regards to the incident of the spear piercing through Jesus' body, I respect your friends opinion and will also consult with other doctors before speaking anymore on this.
I would also like you to elaborate further on the incident of "the fall" (I am not familiar of this term however, I do have a strong hunch that it is related to the incident of Adam and Eve and the atonement of Jesus Christ). Any of your statements regarding "the fall" will be dealt with once I have a clear understanding of the term.
Lastly, I would like to thank you once again as I really enjoyed reading your post.
___God and Son of God____
What you say is true. The word 'God' is used in many meanings. The reason I believe Jesus actually is God, and not in the way Exodus 7 means (this verse uses the word El, which is singular) is mostly found in the old testament. I see the old and the new testament as a perfect unity. And on the proof in the old testament your arguments have no influence. To understand this matter we need to distinguish the meaning of 'God' and the meaning of 'God,' with the 'Son of God' matter the same. The meaning of the word God must be examined in each situation.
When we look at the son of God case. There are two verses I would like to examine. I choose these two because they are easiest. First: Romans 8:14: in some verse, I can't really remember where, I will have to look it up, Jesus says something such as this: I am Gods son and you are Gods sons. I might be mistaking as well, Jesus could have said something such as this on another subject. I can't find the place where it stands so fast. There is a distinction between The Son of God and sons of God. That is because Jesus was a Son of God in the flesh. We can only be adopted by God as his sons (our daughters) in the spirit. The same is relevant in the 1 chronicles 22 situation. Before Solomon was even born God adopted him, but he remained a son of David in the flesh.
The second verse I want to examine is psalm 2:7. As you might know in the christian tradition this psalm is seen as a prophetic psalm, it is not about Solomon, but about Jesus. I believe it could be so. If you examine the psalm it cannot be about Solomon. It is because God quotes this psalm when Jesus is being baptised. Verse 6 is about priesthood. We can say what we want, but Solomon was not a priest in the order of Melchisedek. Solomon was by the women he married led astray. Jesus was tempted, but not led astray. God promised the ends of the world to Jesus in this psalm. When satan tempted Jesus, satan offered him all the world. There are so many similarities that it is quite obvious that the psalm could be about Jesus. There are many question on this matter that remain, I don't have the opportunity to give you all the answers as I don't have them all myself. I hope I have helped you with this matter a bit. Your questions are excellent, and as far as it is in my hands I will try to answer them all.
_____Jonah_____
So, I want to give a very short reaction on the Jonah thing too. I did not want to say that Jonah really died there. But as Jonah was a preview of the things going to happen to Christ Jonah was as if he was dead. He couldn't die and live again. Only Christ could. Jesus did, the evidence is clear as his believes are alive now, while they where dead when Jesus himself died too.
____Crucifixion_____
It is an common believe in philosophy that one needs to escape the obvious. The man in the video is indeed escaping the obvious, but he chose the wrong profession for that. If someone in an analytic scientific profession ignores the most obvious information he is biased. That is what this man did. In this case it disqualifies the things he said as these not obvious things speak directly against the obvious and direct evidence as presented in the bible. He made a choice in which facts he presented, and he made a choice that is not according to the rules of logic, but even against it. Why? Because if he followed the rules of logic he would come to the conclusion he is trying to escape. That is the point. I was very interested in his viewpoint though.
Jesus had a totally new body. Still, when the disciples had trouble believing it was him he could show them the scars. These scars are the scars of victory, which Jesus has in his glorified body. Jesus will be the only one with scars in his glorified body. He still had the scars because the scars became the symbol. Still, the body was new and much more beautiful than the body which he had before.
______The Fall____
Your assumption is right, the fall is the thing happened with Adam and Eve. It is simply the moment mankind fell in sin. From Adam and Eve each human is born in sin. That is the common believe of the bible.
I hope I have helped you with the explanation of this last word. I am very interested in your vision on the first and last Adam and the fall in general. Yes, I think it all is an interesting conversation.
God Bless,
Evert
Its a sad thing when Christians fight each other more than they fight for God. The argument seems to be more important here than the truth.
-----Son of God------
Let us examine the statement of Jesus himself in relationg to him being a Son of God as we read:
"The the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good words have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do you stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, for a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being man, makest thyself God." (John 10:31-33)
The question of Jesus Christ being God was directly posed to him here. The concept of Trinity and his Divinity were all questioned. Let us observe the response for we read:
"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemeth; because I said, I am the son of God?" (John 10:34-37)
Let us analyze now what a Christian Commentator has to say about the relevant issue. When Jesus was asked if he was Son of God he was unable to affirm as we read:
"And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou has said..." (Matthew 26:63-64)
Christian Commentator says the following:
"We should perhaps take the ambigous reply 'Thou hast said' as a refusal." (Peake's Commentary on the Holy Bible, p 722)
------Jonah-------
The prophecy regarding Jonah is as follows:
"An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign: and there shall be no sign be given to it, but the sign of the Prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Matthew 12:39-40)
--------Crucifixion---------
The 'obivious' truth you speak of in the Bible in regards to the the Sonship of Jesus Christ and the crucifixion are not so 'obvious' as you consider them to be. To begin with, the word 'Trinity' is a coined word which was seen in the scriptures 300 years after the event of the crucifixion. At no point duoes Jesus say that he is the Son of God distinclty and clearly. But there are numerous verses that clearly indicate as to one God, the supreme who is above Jesus and the Holy Spirit. If it were all so obvious then the man in the video could not have presented his opinion on the crucifixion so beautifully. You can not call that illogical. He expressed his opinion and for the convenience of the viewers he used references from the Bible to explain his opinion and he linked everything beautifully. That is not illogical.
Let us consider what happened to Jonah as Jesus says the sign will resemble that of Jonah. Jonah went into the belly of the fish ALIVE, stayed there ALIVE, and came out ALIVE. Likewise, Jesus went in ALIVE, stayed there ALIVE, and came out ALIVE. That is the only scenario that would make his sign come true because he related it to Jonah. If Jesus were to have died and then be rise from the dead.. there would be no comparison. Death is the complete opposite of life. AS already mentioned it is a common belief amongst christian scholars that Jonah did not die but was alive throughout the process. If you believe otherwise then I respect your belief.
------The Fall + Who I Am-------
My belief is that everyone is born pure, contrary do being born sinful. I believe that everyone will be judged acording to their own deeds and no one can be a substitute for another, i.e. no one can atone for another (including Jesus). I believe that Jesus did not volunteer himself to be crucified and I believe that he did not atone for anyone. Instead, I believe that Jesus was unconcious on the cross and was mistaked to be dead. He was then taken down from the cross and the body was given to his friends. The 'Ointment of Jesus' was applied to his wounds as it contained healing properties. Jesus recovered from his wounds and interacted with his disciples only during the night. It was common for all prophets to interact during night time only when they had to migrate (they migrated during night time and kept their migration a secret). Jesus migrated to find the lost sheep (tribes) of Israelites as he was a messenger send only for the sheep of Israelites. The tribes of Israelites had scattered and he migrated to find them. In accordance of the fulfillment of his promise, he found the Israelites had migrated to Kashmir. Jesus travelled to Kashmir and fulfilled his promise and died a natural death in Kashmir. He was known in Kashmir by the name of Yus Asaf. His tomb has been found in Sirinagar, Kashmir. The stories people tell about Yus Asaf in Kashmir resemble that of the personality of Jesus Christ.
Perhaps I have told much more than needed here but I figured you should know a little bit about my beliefs as well. I try to tell you about my beliefs little by little where I deem it appropriate. I do this because my beliefs are considerably different from not only you, the Christians, but EVERY religion out there with the exception of mine. When I say every religion, I include the beliefs of Muslims as well. Muslims are divided in 73 sects and the sect that I belong to is hated and despised by the other 72 sects ever since 1974. The people of my sect are persecuted, tourtured, and must endure extreme suffering in Pakistan. We are called non-muslims by them. On the contrary, we are muslims. The distinction between the sect I belong to and the other 72 sects in Islam shall be told to you some other time. I am an Ahmadi Muslim and the sect, Ahmaddiyyat, was founded in 1889 so just over 100 years have passed, so it is fairly new. For now this much shall suffice.
On my next post I would like to discuss my beliefs of "The Fall" and 'Atonement' in more detail. I was going to do it on this post but I got slightly carried away. I hope I did not cause any inconvenience to you.
If you (and anyone else) would like more information about my beliefs then please visit www.alislam.org and www.askislam.org
Thank You
Thank you for teaching me some about Islam. I didn't know there are so many sects that fight each other violently. Of course I know about Shi'ites an Sunnites, but not about all these others sects. In christianity there are some sects and a lot of different churches that make it hard to say what is christian or not. What is clear is that those who say: sola scriptura (which means 'only the bible') are protestant, what makes me a protestant. But that is a little bit outside the subject.
_____The Fall___________
I would like to start with the last subject you wrote about. You say: Jesus is a liar. I aim at the following sentence: "I believe that Jesus did not volunteer himself to be crucified and I believe that he did not atone for anyone." Jesus said himself in Jonh 10:18 that no one takes his life, but he gives it voluntarily. You say: He's a liar? There are different interpretations on many verses, we have found this out in this discussion too, but I cannot interpret this in the way you do. You could say the apostles are liars. But Jesus? For me this is a important issue. If Jesus has not died and did not resurrect I am still dead. I believe for a long time I am alive. It is an vital part of christianity (God, I hate that word), at least when I have understood this part of the bible well, so, I won't agree with you on this. I think this has mostly to do with your basic presumption, which I believe in the core is a presumption that is carried in the entire Islamic world, though many might deny that, which is that each human is good at the core or at least could be good by their own deeds. If this is so, there is no saviour necessary: we can make it on our own. We are our own little gods and the world revolves around us. I strongly disagree with that. It is a denial of the fall of men, the declining of all mankind. (I don't want to start another discussion, but I believe this fall of men is not only backed up by the bible, but also by science, and more specific genetics. With each mutation there is a loss of information. So, all creation started perfect and gets less perfect each generation)
________Jesus, son of God_______
I don't think it matters so much whether Jesus is son of God or not, even though I think it is very clear. What is more important is whether Jesus is God or not. I think this is a fact, just looking from the bible. Of course, there is this commentary that says it looks like a denial. But this conclusion doesn't seem to be backed up in the rest of the bible. That is what bothers me a bit. There are some 1000 commentaries, all differ on certain parts, which makes that everyone can find something in a commentary that fits his opinion. I use commentaries sometime, but I do not put my trust on them more than on the bible. I can't exept this explanation of this verse as many other verses show us that Jesus is God. I'd rather trust on them. I would like to go into this specific subject another time, but it will take too much time and too much space, you'd get bored reading it as the study I did on this subject already contains more than 15 pages. It is not for now but I will go deeper into that particular subject.
______Jonah______
Jonah did not die in the fish. That was not what I tried to proof. But Jonah was a preview of the things happened to Jesus. Jonah did not die literally, while Jesus did. Jonah was only dead to the world. But Jesus said: I have to die. He said this many times in the events that lead to his death. He said about this that no one could steal it from him, he gave it voluntarily. Jesus was a prophet in Islam. A prophet is someone that says the things of God (Allah if you like). Is Jesus a liar? The same question of course as I asked a bit earlier. It is not show disrespect, there is no disrespect from my side, I think you just have misunderstood this whole thing. Jesus died. There is no logical explanation at all, even those theories showing that Jesus was able to recover much faster from injuries cannot give any credibility to the theory. Jesus must be considdered at least 99% dead after crucifixion. That last 1% he would have lost inside the grave. He coldn't just wake up, walk out of the front door and just go. The grave was protected. It's bullshit.
___________________________________
But, once again I want to show my gratitude for this kind discussion. It is always nice to discuss something of this importance with someone without having to throw mud over to each other.
neocobra5 - I think you have mistaken the whole importance of the discussion as Anomisity Reborn is a muslim. It is not a struggle between two christians. I would be very glad if you have some ideas about these subjects and help us both and learn us something.
I NEVER said Jesus is a liar. I believe Jesus to be a prophet of God. I will now turn to why I believe that Jesus was not put on the cross voluntarily.
-------Jesus and Atonement-------
After claiming to be the Messiah, no doubt was Jesus' life itself jeapordized by the Jews who were determined to stop Jesus even if they had to kill him. Such circumstances forced Jesus to stop walking in public places where he may encounter Jews and thus he resorted to residing in a country located near the wilderness. After this location proved to fail in protecting Jesus, he with his disciples, moved to a hiding place known only to them. To make matters worst for Jesus, as if they were not bad enoughm it became aware to Jesus that he would be betrayed by Judas and that he would be arrested soon. Jesus turned to God seeking His help and in great agony Jesus prayed "Abba, Father, all things are possible unto Thee, take away this cup from me. Nevertheless not what I will but what Thou wilt." I deem it essential to note here that if Jesus knew that it was God's will for him to die on the cross then he would have never prayed "All things are possible unto Thee, take away this cup from me." Also, for Jesus to hide from Jews and move from place to place and pray to God seeking his help can hardly be considered 'voluntary'.
Here I would like to address again what Jesus had to say about his status.
"The the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good words have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do you stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, for a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being man, makest thyself God." (John 10:31-33)
The question of Jesus Christ being God was directly posed to him here. The concept of Trinity and his Divinity were all questioned. Let us observe the response for we read:
"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemeth; because I said, I am the son of God?" (John 10:34-37)
--------Jesus Survived Crucifixion--------
For Jesus to be put on the cross for an extremely short time due to the timing of the Sabbath, for him to be given to his friends after being taken down from the cross, for Jesus' friends to have applied ointment to his wounds containg healing properties, for Jesus' legs to be spared, and last but not least for Pilate to be surprised when hearing Jesus had already passed away prove that Jesus survived crucifixion. This is not bullshit, its facts that conicide with a realistic and a logical explanation as to what happened. After the healing proccess was complete Jesus got up and walked out.
----------------------------------------------------------
I would like to apologize for replying so late. I hope I did not cause any inconvenience. I have also thought about another topic for us to discuss but I need to do a little bit more research before I proceed with it.
I am glad you replied. As it took some time I got a little scared I said something on a wrong way which had hurt you, which never is my intention. But as English isn't my native language I might say things I do not intent to say. I'm glad this doesn't seem to be the problem her.
Ok, I'm getting back on the topic. It doesn't seem that we get together in this argument. I have ran out of arguments and I am not looking for a continuous repeating of arguments. But I am sure we can get into an agreement on one thing: Jesus did die. Maybe it was sooner, maybe it was later. But he did. But I surely know a living Jesus. Explain that... :P
I do believe in a living God. And it is hard to explain and certainly hard to defend. I do believe it is so. But it is hard to proof on a scientific way as there is no body to examine. For now there is no final answer to available. I think it's best to let go of this discussion for now. I am very curious for the other topic you want to discuss.
It is interesting that you mentioned Jesus' body as proof. As I believe that Jesus (to fulfill his promise to preach to the lost tribes of Israel) travelled to Kashmir where he lived to be around 120 years of age and died their. His tomb is located in Srinagar, Kashmir. He was known by the name Yus Asaf and the people living in Kashmir give the description of Yus Asaf which resembles that of Jesus. (More on this can be discussed later but i urge you to look into this). Lets get into the main topic i wanted to talk about.
I wanted to discuss with you on the following couple of verses of the Bible:
" And he confessed, and denied no; but confessed, I am not the christ. And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that Prophet? And he answered, No. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? [..] And they asked him, and said unto him, why baptized thou then, if thou be not that Christ, no Elias, neither that prophet? (Joh, 1:20-25)"
I specifically want to draw your attention to 'that prophet'. 3 great people are mentioned here: Christ, Elias, and 'that prophet'.
Jesus came as the Christ, John the Baptist as Elias, and my question to you is, so what about 'that prophet'?
In order to give you more insight into this examine the following:
"(God said to Moses) I will raise them up a Prophet from among their bretheren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. (Deutronomy 18:18)"
I believe that the 'prophet' mentioned here and in the verse above is no other than The Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) for the following reasons:
1. Only he claimed to be a prophet.
2. He was from the bretheren of the Israelites because he was from the children of Ishmael who was the brother of Isaac.
3. He was 'like unto Moses' because he was a law bearing prophet and was given the Holy Quran.
4. Every verse of the Holy Quran begins with 'In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful.' thus coninciding with '...and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him...' and with '... for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew it unto you..." (John 16: 7-15)
My question to you is that who is there that can be a substitute for the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in this matter? Remember the criteria that the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) fit:
1. He must be bretheren of Iraelites
2. He will be like Moses (law bearing prophet)
3. He will speak what God will tell him to speak
4. And ofcourse he must claim to be a prophet (messenger of God)
If you don't mind I will first start with my opinion about Muhammad, about God and about the Quran.
What I say comes from my little knowledge of the Quran, please correct me if I am false. If Muhammad is a prophet as an alike of Moses I believe God would be a straightforward hypocrite. Of course you could argue that they lived in different times, but as far as I am concerned Moses and Muhammad contradict each other. That seems a bit odd when a God would be all knowing, even though I am a bit careful when it comes to judging God in this matter.
The Muhammadian law is totally different from the law God gave to Moses. In my opinion the Muhammadian law is a perverted version of the original law mixed up with several influences from the many religions in the neighbourhood at that time. But it would be hard to proof this and you may forget it at once if you want to. But that is why I believe Muhammad did not speak what God told him to speak. Probably he was a brother of the Israelites, I don't exactly know the bloodlines, but it is very plausible, but he was certainly not a Israelite and not a son of the promise.
But could it be a prophet? Was there any need of a prophet to come? I think not. The verse in Deuteronomy 18:18 is in my opinion about Jesus. Jesus said: "I don't say anything of myself, but I say the things my Father says (I paraphrase it a bit)."
The Jews believed this prophet was probably Isaiah. That is very understandable. Isaiah was an influencing Israelian prophet, he spoke about a new law that would be written in the hearts of men, he spoke clearly what God told him to speak as his prophecies have been fulfilled and he did also claim to be a prophet. But it fits better to Jesus.
Jesus was from the tribe of Judah, so he was a Jew. He brought a new law, a law that was written in the hearts of men, where Isaiah prophesied about. He spoke what God told him to speak. He did not claim to be a prophet but he claimed to speak the truth, which was a rule for prophets, I'll have to look that verse up, but I have to eat right now and don't have time to to so.
I am interested in the place in the Quran where Muhammad would say the same as Moses did. Maybe you could explain some of that to me.
God Bless
To Dutch Hermit: Consider this verse: 1Jn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
1Jn 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
Which Prophet came after Prophet Jesus? the muslims believed to be Mohammed. And Mohammed pass the test of the above verse: "every spirit that confesseth that Jesus christ is come in the flesh is of God". Mohammed makes every muslim to believe in jesus as one of the mightiest prophet of God; as a messiah, as a miracle worker, as sinless messenger.
No muslim is a muslim if he didnt believe in jesus.
Mohammad is that prophet talking about in your scripture.
Mat God guides us to the straight path.
To Dutch: First of all, it is unfortunate that you have been misguided into believing something so ridiculous about the teachings of Muhammad (pbuh). Your knowledge is very limited about his teachings and I urge you to research. Secondly, you seemed to have missed the jist of my argument. You are focusing more on the fact that there should be similarities between the law of Moses and the law of the Holy Prophet (pbuh). Contrary to what you believe, the law, the Holy Quran, given to the Holy Prophet (pbuh) is complete and perfect. I have already proved to you that the prophecy of Moses has been fulfilled in the person of Muhammad (pbuh) and you have failed to provide me with another subsitute.
According to you, there is no need for another prophet to come but according to Jesus there was a need. Consider this verse:
"I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of Truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me..." (John 16: 12-14)
For further assurance, Jesus says:
"Nevertheless, I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you." (John 16:7)
Muhammad (pbuh) is that Comforter. Taking an expert from the first reference:
"for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: "
This is almost identical to what Moses had said as well.
For convenience sake I shall post it here again.
Every verse of the Holy Quran begins with 'In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful.' thus coninciding with '...and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him...' and with '... for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew it unto you..." (John 16: 7-15)
I shall conclude by saying that there are so mnay more hints in the Bible which lead us to the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Those I will share with you some other time, God willing.
I havent said much, but here it is
Ge:1:26: And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
God says "us" and "our", and calls humans "them",
God never mentions "Muhammad " because he was Jesus Christ, God in the flesh, "First and Last" was also there in the begining
I feel sorry for the people whom actually don’t read the bible for themselves, or are so naive to follow behind the foolishness you write. You say you have done so much research behind your articles, this would mean instead of reading just one bible, you’ve read every format of the bible. So what you are stating is that you have read every Christian format and that you can read Hebrew, and read and studied in Shabbat Divrei Torah? IF YOU DID YOUR RESEARCH YOU KNOW IT’S THE STUDY OF THE ORIGINAL TORAH IN JERUSELEM. One thing I can assure you is the closest scripture you can receive a good interpretation with is Kings James. Regardless of what, the bible does not say he lay on the cross and stayed unconscious for our sins. Jonah in the whale was not the ultimate son of God. In fact it’s not a true comparison which you already know or if you don’t you’re just an idiot, but if you want to use your fallacy we can, Jonah did not have his skin punctured. I’m not sure it you have ever seen flesh punctured and or seen someone stabbed but blood definitely will pour. The emphasis on the pouring is for ungrateful people like yourself to realize our purpose here and how things are now would not be so great if it weren’t for the bloodshed whether we look at your analogy and say it were a few drops or if we look at the truth the torah, and any version of the bible speaks and says with the pouring out at the wrist the sides and his ankles. Honestly how many people in our world now with bullet wounds in wrist ankles and sides live with no medical attention? Please don’t be so blinded that your soul may burn forever. And whatever you do don’t take other souls with you by feeding them false information. I WILL PRAY FOR YOUR SOUL
To mikki: First of all, please do not embarass yourself by comparing the event of Jesus' crucifixion to that of a modern day bullet wound. Jesus' crucifixion should be compared with other crucifxion's of his time. Once this is analyzed, it is obvious that Jesus survived crucifixion. A normal crucifixion lasts several days and it is a slow death where the one being crucified dies from hunger, thirst, etc. and people are free to do what they like with the person. Let us now analyze the differences between normal crucifixions and that of Jesus:
1.Jesus' crucifixion lasted NOT several days but it was a matter of hours (due to the timing of the Sabbath).
2.Jesus was given to his friends after being taken down from the cross and not to his enemies.
CONTRARY TO YOUR BELIEF THAT JESUS DID NOT HAVE ANY MEDICAL ATTENTION
3.Jesus' friends applied ointment to his wounds containg healing properties (the herbs contained in the ointment are still used by orientals today for their healing properties). The ointment is referred to as the Ointment of Jesus.
4. Jesus' legs were spared.
5. Last but not least for Pilate to be surprised when hearing Jesus had already passed away proved that Jesus survived crucifixion.
All these points when taken collectively prove that Jesus survived crucifixion. I would now like to divert your attention to the incident of water and blood gushing out when Jesus was speared. REGARDLESS of what you may interpret of this phenonmenon, the fact remains that the gushing out of blood and water speak of life and not that of death meaning that Jesus was alive at the time. If he was dead, water and blood would not have gushed out. This is not my opinon, this fact is based on medical understanding and all doctors would agree to this fact.
Lastly I would like to draw your attention to the fact that to compare Jesus' crucifixion (and the events that occured afterwards) to Jonah is not 'fallacy' as you seem to think because it is not what I have said, Jesus himself said that his sign will be like that of Jonah. So, to answer your comments of 'Jonah in the whale was not the ultimate son of God' and 'Jonah did not have his skin punctured' I ask you that was Jesus not aware of this when he likened his sign to Jonah? Therefore, to say such comments about Jonah becomes futile.
Here is the prophecy and how wonderfully it was fulfilled knowing that Jesus survived crucifixion just as Jonah lived after entering the belly of the whale!
The prophecy regarding Jonah is as follows:
"An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign: and there shall be no sign be given to it, but the sign of the Prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Matthew 12:39-40)
Your prayers for my soul are appreciated (no exageration).
Thank You.
Animosity: I am sorry for my late reaction.
I think we have just some different interpretation of some verses. The verses about the spirit and the comforter are interpreted to be about Muhammed. I believe they are about the spirit. That spirit has already come and filled all the believers, me included. With this Holy Spirit all the prophecies in the old and new testament have been fulfilled, except from that of the second coming of the Messiah in glory. The problem is, if the spirit had already come than it would be unlikely that later on that same spirit would come exclusively in Muhammed. And that Muhammed isn't the second coming of Christ in glory is clear I think.
Than there is the problem that Jesus was without sin. Muhammed clearly wasn't. Why would Muhammed be better than Jesus who was without sin? Those are my main problems with the Islamic concept, together with the Islamic God idea.
Over all I think it is interesting to think of Muhammed as a prophecied prophet in the bible. But it doesn't fit, I think, in the overall concept of the bible. And, with that in mind, I could imagine that Muhammed wasn't even speaking the words of God, even though he did speak in the name of God. I hope you can make the effort to try to proof that Muhammed did speak the words of God. God bless.
In order to write an adequate response I must first know that when you say "the second coming of the Messiah in glory", are you referring to the Comforter (whom I believe to be the Holy Prophet Muhammad pbuh)? If not, then do you believe that the Comforter was the Holy Ghost and that the second of messiah is someone else other than then Comforter?
I believe that the Comforter can not be the Holy Ghost but I am confused as to whether or not our belief differs on this point as you have mentioned about the Messiah in glory. Please clarify this for me. Thank You.
I would like to draw attention to the fact that Muhammad (pbuh) was sinless. As i believe Jesus to be a prophet, I also believe that Muhammad (pbuh) is the greatest of all prophets putting him higher than Jesus as well. Also, not just Jesus but there are others in the Bible who are said to be sinless.
The Messiah is not the same as the comforter as the comforter is seen by the prophets as the spirit of God, which is believed to be the same as the Holy Spirit by christians. The second coming of the messiah is the second coming of the messiah, as it is said. If Jesus was that messiah, than it is the second coming of Jesus.
I would want to react shortly on the thing you mention that there are more people in the bible who are said to be sinless. That is not true. Some people are mentioned as being just, but just and sinless are not the same. Unless you can show me some place in the bible where it is said that someone is sinless?
God Bless
GRIM REAPER says:
4 months ago
I wouldnt believe what the fool with the dish cloth on his head has to say. He only believes the Koran, and the Koran is a bad copy of the Torah, and started after the Bible collection of books. Islam is younger than True Christianity (Not Catholic religion) and is a sect that started from copies made by sects trying to start their own religion and now its called Islam.