15 proofs Christians commonly use
Praise be to God alone, and prayers and peace be upon the one after whom there is no prophet... O God, O Opener of doors, O Causer of causes, O Guide of the confused, I put my trust in You, O Lord of the worlds, and I entrust my affair to God, for God is All-Seeing of His servants.
Now then,
Christians have begun to spread their alleged evidence that they use to prove the divinity of Christ, peace be upon him, among Muslims through their pamphlets and booklets that are distributed to Muslims in many forums, especially book fairs!
These pamphlets and booklets do not contain any evidence that indicates, even remotely, the divinity of Christ, peace be upon him. On the contrary, the existence of an explicit text on the tongue of Christ, peace be upon him, in which he says, “I am God” or “Worship me” is completely impossible. Therefore
, they resorted to interpreting some texts attributed to Christ, peace be upon him, without any evidence or proof, in a way that agrees with what they want to promote among people. However, the matter is not as they imagine. Their interpretation of those texts is the greatest evidence that there is no explicit text attributed to Christ in which he acknowledges his alleged divinity!
This... I had responded to one of their missionary letters in a letter called "He said I am a servant of God!", showing the invalidity of what they cited from the Holy Quran and the Sunnah regarding the alleged divinity of Christ. In this letter, I complete the response to some missionary writings.
Perhaps the most prominent of these writings are: "What is the meaning of Christ, the Son of God? Presented by: A group of servants of the Gospel" and "Christ... Who is he? By: Dr. Adel Wahba" and "The Divinity of Christ... Who Hides the Sun? The Church of Saints Mark the Apostle and Pope Peter the Seal of the Martyrs" and "Show me whether Christ said I am God or worship me? by Youssef Riad".
I have limited the Christians' evidence for the alleged divinity of Christ through these writings and many others, and I have clarified their direction before criticizing and refuting them.
Christ, peace be upon him, spoke of servitude and approved it as a method and belief throughout his life. I have presented many scriptural texts in the letter “He said, ‘I am the servant of God!’” that clearly demonstrate this. Whoever wishes to do so may refer to them (see the introduction to the letter). How can someone who refused to be called righteous because righteousness belongs to God alone accept that he be a god with God?!
1 - (Emmanuel) which means God with us!
Christians cite what the writer of the Gospel of Matthew quoted in the first chapter of his Gospel from a previous prophecy that came in the Book of Isaiah. The writer of the Gospel of Matthew says: ((And all this took place that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel, which means God with us.)) (Matthew 1:18-23).
As for what came in the Book of Isaiah about the story of Emmanuel, it does not mean Christ, peace be upon him, as Christ was never called by this name, and was never called by it. The story in the Book of Isaiah speaks of a story that happened centuries before Christ, as God made the birth of this Emmanuel a sign of the end of evil from the children of Israel during the reign of King Ahaz, and the destruction of the Kingdom of Razin.
The writer of the Book of Isaiah says: “And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin king of Syria went up with Pekah the son of Remaliah king of Israel to fight against Jerusalem, but he was not able to fight against it. And it was told the house of David, ‘Syrians have encamped in Ephraim.’ And his heart and the hearts of his people trembled as the trees of the forest tremble before the wind. Then the Lord said, To Isaiah: “Go out to meet Ahaz, you and Shear-jashub your son, to the end of the conduit of the upper pool, to the highway of the fuller’s field, and say to him, ‘Take heed and be quiet. Do not be afraid, and do not let your heart be faint because of these two smoking firebrands, in the fierce anger of Rezin and Aram and the son of Remaliah. For Aram has plotted evil against you with Ephraim and the son of Remaliah, saying, “Let us go up against Judah and overthrow it, and let us conquer it for ourselves, and let us make king in the midst of it the son of Tabeel. Thus says the Lord God: It shall not stand, it shall not be, for the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin. Within threescore and five years Ephraim shall be broken, so that it shall not be a people.” And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is the son of Remaliah. If you do not believe, you will not be believed. Then the LORD said again to Ahaz, “Ask for a sign from the LORD your God. Ask deeply or raise it higher.” But Ahaz said, “I will not ask, nor will I put the LORD to the test.” Then he said, “Hear, O house of David! Is it a small thing for you to weary men, that you also weary my God? But the Lord himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call his name Immanuel. He shall eat butter and honey, when he knoweth to reject evil and choose good. For before the child knows how to reject evil and choose good, the land you fear will be forsaken of its two kings. The Lord will bring the king of Assyria upon you, and upon your people, and upon your father’s house, days such as have not come since the day that Ephraim separated from Judah. (Isaiah 7:1-23)
Here we notice that the heart of Ahaz, king of Judah, trembled because the states of Israel and Syria conspired against him and his state. The Lord God was with Ahaz. The Lord commanded Isaiah to go with his son Shear-jashub and reassure Ahaz, king of Judah. The Lord promised him that in no more than 65 years, the states of Israel and Syria would be defeated. God gave him a sign that victory was imminent, which was that one of their women would conceive a son and name him “Emmanuel.”
How can Christians claim that this prophecy applies to Christ and his virgin mother, when there were more than 700 years between him and Isaiah?!
The commentators say: “This prophecy (Emmanuel) is mentioned in (Isaiah 7:14) and was inspired around (740 BC)” (The Great Treasure in Interpreting the Bible - Dr. William Adey: Interpretation of the Gospel of Matthew, p. 9).
This text mentioned by the writer of the Gospel of Matthew, as well as the text in Isaiah, have been distorted from the original to become a prophecy about Christ and his virgin mother. The old translations of the Torah, such as the translation of Aequila, the translation of Theodosius, and the translation of Simixus, which dates back to the second century AD, put instead of the virgin: the young woman, which includes the virgin woman and others.
This distortion that occurred in the Arabic translation of Van Dyck, the Catholic translation, is shown in it, as they put in it the word “the girl” instead of the virgin, and it is known that the “girl” may be a virgin or married: “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: Behold, the girl will conceive and bear a son, and will call his name Immanuel.”
The biblical scholars comment in the Catholic translation saying: (The Hebrew word "alma" refers either to a young girl, or to a woman who had not been married for a long time. However, the Greek Septuagint translated this word as "virgin". It is a witness to the ancient Jewish interpretation that the Gospel would adopt, as Matthew (1/23) sees this phrase as a reference to the virginal conception of Christ) (Catholic translation p. 1540).
In other words, the writer of the Gospel of Matthew fabricated the prophecy and distorted the original Hebrew word "alma" to refer to Christ and his virgin mother!
The word "Emmanuel" which means "God is with us" does not require that the one named by it be a god, as God's being with us is not evidence of someone's divinity. For example, the presence of Jesus, peace be upon him, among us is evidence that God cares for us, takes care of our protection, and is keen on guiding us. That is why He sent Jesus, peace be upon him, to us. This is what is meant by God being with us, assuming the prophecy is true. He is with us by asking about us and not wanting us to disbelieve. That is why He sent the messengers as bearers of good tidings and warners, out of His mercy to the worlds. The messengers themselves are evidence of God's being with His servants, His encompassing of their affairs, and His planning for their good, as God said to Moses and Aaron, peace be upon them: {He said, "Do not fear. Indeed, I am with you both; I hear and I see."} (Taha: 46).
If Christians infer from the word “Emmanuel” that Christ is God because Emmanuel means “God with us,” they must also believe that “Tobit” is God as well!
To clarify what I mean, I will present what is stated in the introduction to the Book of “Tobit,” one of the Second Canonical Books: (Tobit is a Hebrew word consisting of two syllables (Tobit-Yah) and it means: God is good. This word appears in the Holy Bible as the name of more than one person) (The Holy Bible - Second Canonical Books, p. 17).
I think the matter is clear and there is no doubt about it, the word "Tobit" in its meaning (God is good) is stronger than "Emmanuel" which means (God is with us) to infer from it the divinity of "Tobit" whether he is the author of the book or those who were identified for us by the scholars of the Bible in their introduction to the book, and despite all this, none of the Jews said that the person called "Tobit" is the good God, meaning by that that he is the god!
2- And the Word was God!(this argument has been discussed in details in my discord pls see is jesus god thread
As for what is stated in the introduction to John: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made” (John 1:1-3), the investigators had many important pauses with him, including:
1- The scholar Deedat points out in his enjoyable book “Christ in Islam” that this text was plagiarized by the writer of the Gospel of John from Philo of Alexandria (d. 40 AD), and that with its philosophical constructions it is foreign to the environment of Christ, the simplicity of his sayings, and the commonness of his disciples, especially John, whom the Book of Acts describes as a commoner without knowledge, saying: “When they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated and uneducated men, they marveled” (Acts 4:13).
This was also acknowledged by biblical scholars in their comments on the text in the Catholic translation, as they say: (Christ is called “Logos.” This word may be translated as “speech,” but it seems that we are dealing with a word that was influenced by the ways of expression of wisdom literature and Hellenistic religion) (Catholic translation, p. 289).
The priest Ibrahim Saeed, former head of the Evangelical community in Egypt, says in his explanation of the Gospel of John: (In the beginning was the Word. The Word... How profound is this amazing description with which Christ is described here, as he is described as “the Word” and in Greek “Logos.” Providence prepared the minds of humans to understand this word “the Word” before John uttered it. The Jewish mentality had become accustomed to it from the writings of the Jew “Angelus,” who translated the Torah from Hebrew to Aramaic in the second century B.C. In his translation, he replaced the name of God with the word “Mamra,” which in Arabic corresponds to “the Word.” As for the Greek mentality, it was saturated with the word “Logos” from the writings of “Philo,” the Alexandrian philosopher.)
So how can a text quoted from the writings of philosophers prove the divinity of one of God’s prophets?!
Anyone who looks at the introduction to the Gospel of John will find that the matter does not go beyond God’s eternal knowledge of creation, as it is known that God alone is the Creator. Before He alone created, He determined in His knowledge what He would create forever. He determined that He would create such and such on such and such a day, and such and such on such and such a day. Everything in the time He appointed for it, but everything that He would bring into existence was known to Him. This is the meaning of “In the beginning was the Word,” that is, in God’s eternal knowledge the creation of Christ in the time appointed for Him. So He would be present in God’s knowledge in the beginning, not in His body, but by the estimation that He would come into existence through God’s word and His commands.
And His saying, “And the Word was with God,” means that Christ was with God in His eternal knowledge, not in body, but in thought, as the Holy Bible says, “And the original word is with Me” (Job 19:28), and as Christ says in the Gospel of John, “By the glory that I had with You” (John 17:5), that is, He was in Your eternal knowledge.
His saying: "And the Word was God" means: God is one, and His Messenger Christ, who was created with His Word and His commands, represents Him in conveying His message to the people. Thus, God and His Word are one in purpose, and we will explain this in detail later. If the Word is God in essence, as the Christians mean, then let them explain this logarithm to us if we put the name of God in place of "the Word": "In the beginning was God, and God was with God, and God was God, God was in the beginning with God"!!
2- As Deedat points out in his book "Christ in Islam", there is a tampering in the Greek translation, which is the original from which the Bible was translated into the languages of the world.
To understand the text in its true form, we return to the Greek original. The text in the Greek translation is translated as follows: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God". Here, the Greek text uses the word (hotheos) instead of the word (God), and in the English translation it is translated as (God) to indicate that divinity is real.
Then the text goes on to say: "And the Word was God." Here the Greek text uses the word (tontheos), and the English translation should have used the word (god) with a lowercase letter to indicate that the divinity is metaphorical, as it occurs in the text of the Book of Exodus: "I have made you a god to Pharaoh" (Exodus 7/1). The Greek text used the word (tontheos), and in the English text it was translated (god) with the addition of the indefinite article (a).
However, the English translation distorted the Greek text of the introduction to John, and used the word (God) which denotes real divinity instead of (god) which denotes spiritual or metaphorical divinity, and confusion occurred in the text. This is undoubtedly a type of distortion.
Even if the investigators overlooked all of that, there are ambiguous matters in the text that prevent Christians from using it as evidence of the divinity of Christ.
* First : What is the meaning of the word "beginning"? The Christians answer: Eternity.
But that does not apply to them, for the word was used to indicate meanings including:
- The time of the beginning of creation and formation as stated at the beginning of the Book of Genesis: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1/1).
- It is used to mean the time of revelation, as in the words of the writer of the Gospel of Matthew: "But from the beginning this was not done" (Matthew 19/8).
- It may be used to indicate a familiar period of time as in the words of Luke: "Just as they who were from the beginning delivered it to us" (Luke 1/2), that is, at the beginning of Christ's message.
And likewise "Brethren, I write to you no new commandment, but an old commandment which you have had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which you have heard from the beginning" (John (1) 2/7).
And likewise also "But there are some among you who do not believe. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him" (John 6/64).
And likewise, “You are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him” (John 8:44).
And likewise, “They said to him, ‘Who are you?’ And Jesus said to them, ‘What I have said to you from the beginning’” (John 8:25).
Accordingly, it is not permissible for Christians to say that what is meant by “beginning” here is eternity, except with a strong proof.
Sheikh Al-Ilmi believes in his unique book “Selasil Al-Munazarat” that the meaning here is the beginning of the revelation being sent down to the prophets, meaning that it was good news that the prophets knew, as in (Jeremiah 33/14).
* Secondly:: What is meant by the Word? Is it the Messiah? Or does the word have other meanings, which is correct. The word “the Word” has various meanings in the Bible, including the divine command by which creatures were made, as stated in the Book of Genesis: “And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light” (Genesis 1:3). From this, the Messiah was called the Word because he was created by God’s command without any immediate cause, or because he revealed the Word of God, or that he is the promised Word on the tongue of the prophets. As for the meaning that Christians want by the Word, which is the second person of the Trinity, it was not mentioned at all in the books of the prophets.
* Third : “And the Word was God.” If Christians think that Christ was called God, then this is a false statement as we have explained. Judges in the Torah were called what they think was called Christ: “God stands in the congregation of God; He judges in the midst of the gods. How long will you judge unrighteously and lift up the faces of the wicked?” (Psalm 82:1). The honorable are in David’s words: “I will praise you with all my heart; before the gods I will sing praises to you” (Psalm 138:1). God said to Moses about Aaron: “He shall be a mouth unto you, and you shall be his God” (see Exodus 4:16).
* Fourth : “And the Word was with God,” and being with God does not mean likeness or equality. It means that the Word was created by God, as in Eve’s saying: “I have acquired a man from the Lord” (Genesis 4:1). Cain is not equal to the Lord, nor like Him, even if he came to her from Him. It is stated in another place: “And the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord” (Genesis 19:24).
3- I and the Father are one(this argument has been discussed in details in my discord pls see is jesus god thread)
. Christ’s saying: “I and the Father are one” is the most important thing that those who claim the divinity of Christ are concerned with. They understood from it a true unity that Christ declared before the Jews, and they understood from it that it means divinity.
To understand the text, we return and read the context from the beginning. We see that Christ was walking in Solomon’s Portico on the Feast of the Dedication, and the Jews surrounded Him and said: “How long will you keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.” Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name bear witness about Me, but you do not believe, because you are not My sheep, as I said to you. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one can snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who gave them to Me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. I and the Father are one” (John 10:24-30).
The text from the beginning speaks of a metaphorical moral issue. Christ’s sheep, that is, his disciples, follow him, and he gives them eternal life, that is, heaven, and no one can snatch it from him (that is, remove it from his path and guidance) because it is God’s gift that he gave him, and no one can take it away from God who is greater than all. God and Christ want good for it, so unity is unity of purpose, not essence. Christ drew attention to this when he said that God’s will is greater than his will. But the Jews in Solomon’s porch had a flawed understanding of Christ’s words - very similar to the Christians’ understanding of them - so “the Jews also took up stones to stone him… For a good work we are not stoning you, but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.” Christ knew that they had misunderstood his words, and he was surprised at how they had understood this understanding, as they were Jews who knew the language of the Holy Books in figurative expression. So he answered them: “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, You are gods’?” What he meant was what was stated in the Psalms of David: “I said, You are gods, and all of you are sons of the Most High” (Psalm 82:6).
How then do you find such metaphors strange, when they are familiar in your book, which made the children of Israel gods in the figurative sense of the word?! Christ is more deserving of this unity than the rest of the children of Israel. “If He said, ‘They are gods,’ to whom the word of God came… Do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God.’ If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me…” (John 10:37). Thus Christ corrected the Jews, and then the Christians, for their wrong and literal understanding of His unity with the Father.
This method of expressing the unity of purpose and will is familiar in the texts, especially in John, for he says on the tongue of Christ: “That they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be one in us… that they may be one as we are one… I in them, and you in me” (John 17:20-23). So the indwelling in Christ and the disciples is a spiritual indwelling only, otherwise it would be necessary to deify the disciples. Just as Christ and the Father are one, so the disciples, Christ, and the Father are also one, that is, the unity of purpose and path, not the unity of beings, for no one says that the disciples are united with each other or that Christ is united in them. In another place he mentioned the same meaning, saying about the disciples: “Holy Father, keep them in your name which you have given me, that they may be one as we are” (John 17:11).
And likewise: “You know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you” (John 14:20). And similarly, He says: “One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all, and in you all” (Ephesians 4:6).
And similarly, Paul says: “For you are the temple of the living God, as God said, ‘I will live in them and walk among them, and will be their God, and they will be my people’” (Corinthians (2) 6:16-17). And similarly, Christ says to His disciples: “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, he this one bears much fruit” (John 15:5), meaning: He loves Me, obeys Me, and believes in Me, this one bears much fruit.
The correct meaning of His saying: “That you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him” (John 10:38) is that God is in Christ, that is, by His love, holiness, guidance, and direction, not by His holy self, which does not dwell in temples: “The Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands” (Acts 7:48).
This method of expressing the unity of purpose and will is repeated in many texts, including Paul’s saying, “I planted, Apollos watered… He who plants and he who waters are one, for we are God’s fellow workers” (1 Corinthians 3:6-9).
The same is stated in the Torah in describing spouses, “A man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24), and other examples of the unity of will and purpose.
Christians cite what the writer of the Gospel of Matthew quoted in the first chapter of his Gospel from a previous prophecy that came in the Book of Isaiah. The writer of the Gospel of Matthew says: ((And all this took place that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel, which means God with us.)) (Matthew 1:18-23).
As for what came in the Book of Isaiah about the story of Emmanuel, it does not mean Christ, peace be upon him, as Christ was never called by this name, and was never called by it. The story in the Book of Isaiah speaks of a story that happened centuries before Christ, as God made the birth of this Emmanuel a sign of the end of evil from the children of Israel during the reign of King Ahaz, and the destruction of the Kingdom of Razin.
The writer of the Book of Isaiah says: “And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin king of Syria went up with Pekah the son of Remaliah king of Israel to fight against Jerusalem, but he was not able to fight against it. And it was told the house of David, ‘Syrians have encamped in Ephraim.’ And his heart and the hearts of his people trembled as the trees of the forest tremble before the wind. Then the Lord said, To Isaiah: “Go out to meet Ahaz, you and Shear-jashub your son, to the end of the conduit of the upper pool, to the highway of the fuller’s field, and say to him, ‘Take heed and be quiet. Do not be afraid, and do not let your heart be faint because of these two smoking firebrands, in the fierce anger of Rezin and Aram and the son of Remaliah. For Aram has plotted evil against you with Ephraim and the son of Remaliah, saying, “Let us go up against Judah and overthrow it, and let us conquer it for ourselves, and let us make king in the midst of it the son of Tabeel. Thus says the Lord God: It shall not stand, it shall not be, for the head of Syria is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is Rezin. Within threescore and five years Ephraim shall be broken, so that it shall not be a people.” And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is the son of Remaliah. If you do not believe, you will not be believed. Then the LORD said again to Ahaz, “Ask for a sign from the LORD your God. Ask deeply or raise it higher.” But Ahaz said, “I will not ask, nor will I put the LORD to the test.” Then he said, “Hear, O house of David! Is it a small thing for you to weary men, that you also weary my God? But the Lord himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call his name Immanuel. He shall eat butter and honey, when he knoweth to reject evil and choose good. For before the child knows how to reject evil and choose good, the land you fear will be forsaken of its two kings. The Lord will bring the king of Assyria upon you, and upon your people, and upon your father’s house, days such as have not come since the day that Ephraim separated from Judah. (Isaiah 7:1-23)
Here we notice that the heart of Ahaz, king of Judah, trembled because the states of Israel and Syria conspired against him and his state. The Lord God was with Ahaz. The Lord commanded Isaiah to go with his son Shear-jashub and reassure Ahaz, king of Judah. The Lord promised him that in no more than 65 years, the states of Israel and Syria would be defeated. God gave him a sign that victory was imminent, which was that one of their women would conceive a son and name him “Emmanuel.”
How can Christians claim that this prophecy applies to Christ and his virgin mother, when there were more than 700 years between him and Isaiah?!
The commentators say: “This prophecy (Emmanuel) is mentioned in (Isaiah 7:14) and was inspired around (740 BC)” (The Great Treasure in Interpreting the Bible - Dr. William Adey: Interpretation of the Gospel of Matthew, p. 9).
This text mentioned by the writer of the Gospel of Matthew, as well as the text in Isaiah, have been distorted from the original to become a prophecy about Christ and his virgin mother. The old translations of the Torah, such as the translation of Aequila, the translation of Theodosius, and the translation of Simixus, which dates back to the second century AD, put instead of the virgin: the young woman, which includes the virgin woman and others.
This distortion that occurred in the Arabic translation of Van Dyck, the Catholic translation, is shown in it, as they put in it the word “the girl” instead of the virgin, and it is known that the “girl” may be a virgin or married: “Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: Behold, the girl will conceive and bear a son, and will call his name Immanuel.”
The biblical scholars comment in the Catholic translation saying: (The Hebrew word "alma" refers either to a young girl, or to a woman who had not been married for a long time. However, the Greek Septuagint translated this word as "virgin". It is a witness to the ancient Jewish interpretation that the Gospel would adopt, as Matthew (1/23) sees this phrase as a reference to the virginal conception of Christ) (Catholic translation p. 1540).
In other words, the writer of the Gospel of Matthew fabricated the prophecy and distorted the original Hebrew word "alma" to refer to Christ and his virgin mother!
The word "Emmanuel" which means "God is with us" does not require that the one named by it be a god, as God's being with us is not evidence of someone's divinity. For example, the presence of Jesus, peace be upon him, among us is evidence that God cares for us, takes care of our protection, and is keen on guiding us. That is why He sent Jesus, peace be upon him, to us. This is what is meant by God being with us, assuming the prophecy is true. He is with us by asking about us and not wanting us to disbelieve. That is why He sent the messengers as bearers of good tidings and warners, out of His mercy to the worlds. The messengers themselves are evidence of God's being with His servants, His encompassing of their affairs, and His planning for their good, as God said to Moses and Aaron, peace be upon them: {He said, "Do not fear. Indeed, I am with you both; I hear and I see."} (Taha: 46).
If Christians infer from the word “Emmanuel” that Christ is God because Emmanuel means “God with us,” they must also believe that “Tobit” is God as well!
To clarify what I mean, I will present what is stated in the introduction to the Book of “Tobit,” one of the Second Canonical Books: (Tobit is a Hebrew word consisting of two syllables (Tobit-Yah) and it means: God is good. This word appears in the Holy Bible as the name of more than one person) (The Holy Bible - Second Canonical Books, p. 17).
I think the matter is clear and there is no doubt about it, the word "Tobit" in its meaning (God is good) is stronger than "Emmanuel" which means (God is with us) to infer from it the divinity of "Tobit" whether he is the author of the book or those who were identified for us by the scholars of the Bible in their introduction to the book, and despite all this, none of the Jews said that the person called "Tobit" is the good God, meaning by that that he is the god!
2- And the Word was God!(this argument has been discussed in details in my discord pls see is jesus god thread
As for what is stated in the introduction to John: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made” (John 1:1-3), the investigators had many important pauses with him, including:
1- The scholar Deedat points out in his enjoyable book “Christ in Islam” that this text was plagiarized by the writer of the Gospel of John from Philo of Alexandria (d. 40 AD), and that with its philosophical constructions it is foreign to the environment of Christ, the simplicity of his sayings, and the commonness of his disciples, especially John, whom the Book of Acts describes as a commoner without knowledge, saying: “When they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated and uneducated men, they marveled” (Acts 4:13).
This was also acknowledged by biblical scholars in their comments on the text in the Catholic translation, as they say: (Christ is called “Logos.” This word may be translated as “speech,” but it seems that we are dealing with a word that was influenced by the ways of expression of wisdom literature and Hellenistic religion) (Catholic translation, p. 289).
The priest Ibrahim Saeed, former head of the Evangelical community in Egypt, says in his explanation of the Gospel of John: (In the beginning was the Word. The Word... How profound is this amazing description with which Christ is described here, as he is described as “the Word” and in Greek “Logos.” Providence prepared the minds of humans to understand this word “the Word” before John uttered it. The Jewish mentality had become accustomed to it from the writings of the Jew “Angelus,” who translated the Torah from Hebrew to Aramaic in the second century B.C. In his translation, he replaced the name of God with the word “Mamra,” which in Arabic corresponds to “the Word.” As for the Greek mentality, it was saturated with the word “Logos” from the writings of “Philo,” the Alexandrian philosopher.)
So how can a text quoted from the writings of philosophers prove the divinity of one of God’s prophets?!
Anyone who looks at the introduction to the Gospel of John will find that the matter does not go beyond God’s eternal knowledge of creation, as it is known that God alone is the Creator. Before He alone created, He determined in His knowledge what He would create forever. He determined that He would create such and such on such and such a day, and such and such on such and such a day. Everything in the time He appointed for it, but everything that He would bring into existence was known to Him. This is the meaning of “In the beginning was the Word,” that is, in God’s eternal knowledge the creation of Christ in the time appointed for Him. So He would be present in God’s knowledge in the beginning, not in His body, but by the estimation that He would come into existence through God’s word and His commands.
And His saying, “And the Word was with God,” means that Christ was with God in His eternal knowledge, not in body, but in thought, as the Holy Bible says, “And the original word is with Me” (Job 19:28), and as Christ says in the Gospel of John, “By the glory that I had with You” (John 17:5), that is, He was in Your eternal knowledge.
His saying: "And the Word was God" means: God is one, and His Messenger Christ, who was created with His Word and His commands, represents Him in conveying His message to the people. Thus, God and His Word are one in purpose, and we will explain this in detail later. If the Word is God in essence, as the Christians mean, then let them explain this logarithm to us if we put the name of God in place of "the Word": "In the beginning was God, and God was with God, and God was God, God was in the beginning with God"!!
2- As Deedat points out in his book "Christ in Islam", there is a tampering in the Greek translation, which is the original from which the Bible was translated into the languages of the world.
To understand the text in its true form, we return to the Greek original. The text in the Greek translation is translated as follows: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God". Here, the Greek text uses the word (hotheos) instead of the word (God), and in the English translation it is translated as (God) to indicate that divinity is real.
Then the text goes on to say: "And the Word was God." Here the Greek text uses the word (tontheos), and the English translation should have used the word (god) with a lowercase letter to indicate that the divinity is metaphorical, as it occurs in the text of the Book of Exodus: "I have made you a god to Pharaoh" (Exodus 7/1). The Greek text used the word (tontheos), and in the English text it was translated (god) with the addition of the indefinite article (a).
However, the English translation distorted the Greek text of the introduction to John, and used the word (God) which denotes real divinity instead of (god) which denotes spiritual or metaphorical divinity, and confusion occurred in the text. This is undoubtedly a type of distortion.
Even if the investigators overlooked all of that, there are ambiguous matters in the text that prevent Christians from using it as evidence of the divinity of Christ.
* First : What is the meaning of the word "beginning"? The Christians answer: Eternity.
But that does not apply to them, for the word was used to indicate meanings including:
- The time of the beginning of creation and formation as stated at the beginning of the Book of Genesis: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1/1).
- It is used to mean the time of revelation, as in the words of the writer of the Gospel of Matthew: "But from the beginning this was not done" (Matthew 19/8).
- It may be used to indicate a familiar period of time as in the words of Luke: "Just as they who were from the beginning delivered it to us" (Luke 1/2), that is, at the beginning of Christ's message.
And likewise "Brethren, I write to you no new commandment, but an old commandment which you have had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which you have heard from the beginning" (John (1) 2/7).
And likewise also "But there are some among you who do not believe. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him" (John 6/64).
And likewise, “You are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him” (John 8:44).
And likewise, “They said to him, ‘Who are you?’ And Jesus said to them, ‘What I have said to you from the beginning’” (John 8:25).
Accordingly, it is not permissible for Christians to say that what is meant by “beginning” here is eternity, except with a strong proof.
Sheikh Al-Ilmi believes in his unique book “Selasil Al-Munazarat” that the meaning here is the beginning of the revelation being sent down to the prophets, meaning that it was good news that the prophets knew, as in (Jeremiah 33/14).
* Secondly:: What is meant by the Word? Is it the Messiah? Or does the word have other meanings, which is correct. The word “the Word” has various meanings in the Bible, including the divine command by which creatures were made, as stated in the Book of Genesis: “And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light” (Genesis 1:3). From this, the Messiah was called the Word because he was created by God’s command without any immediate cause, or because he revealed the Word of God, or that he is the promised Word on the tongue of the prophets. As for the meaning that Christians want by the Word, which is the second person of the Trinity, it was not mentioned at all in the books of the prophets.
* Third : “And the Word was God.” If Christians think that Christ was called God, then this is a false statement as we have explained. Judges in the Torah were called what they think was called Christ: “God stands in the congregation of God; He judges in the midst of the gods. How long will you judge unrighteously and lift up the faces of the wicked?” (Psalm 82:1). The honorable are in David’s words: “I will praise you with all my heart; before the gods I will sing praises to you” (Psalm 138:1). God said to Moses about Aaron: “He shall be a mouth unto you, and you shall be his God” (see Exodus 4:16).
* Fourth : “And the Word was with God,” and being with God does not mean likeness or equality. It means that the Word was created by God, as in Eve’s saying: “I have acquired a man from the Lord” (Genesis 4:1). Cain is not equal to the Lord, nor like Him, even if he came to her from Him. It is stated in another place: “And the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord” (Genesis 19:24).
3- I and the Father are one(this argument has been discussed in details in my discord pls see is jesus god thread)
. Christ’s saying: “I and the Father are one” is the most important thing that those who claim the divinity of Christ are concerned with. They understood from it a true unity that Christ declared before the Jews, and they understood from it that it means divinity.
To understand the text, we return and read the context from the beginning. We see that Christ was walking in Solomon’s Portico on the Feast of the Dedication, and the Jews surrounded Him and said: “How long will you keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.” Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name bear witness about Me, but you do not believe, because you are not My sheep, as I said to you. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one can snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who gave them to Me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. I and the Father are one” (John 10:24-30).
The text from the beginning speaks of a metaphorical moral issue. Christ’s sheep, that is, his disciples, follow him, and he gives them eternal life, that is, heaven, and no one can snatch it from him (that is, remove it from his path and guidance) because it is God’s gift that he gave him, and no one can take it away from God who is greater than all. God and Christ want good for it, so unity is unity of purpose, not essence. Christ drew attention to this when he said that God’s will is greater than his will. But the Jews in Solomon’s porch had a flawed understanding of Christ’s words - very similar to the Christians’ understanding of them - so “the Jews also took up stones to stone him… For a good work we are not stoning you, but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.” Christ knew that they had misunderstood his words, and he was surprised at how they had understood this understanding, as they were Jews who knew the language of the Holy Books in figurative expression. So he answered them: “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, You are gods’?” What he meant was what was stated in the Psalms of David: “I said, You are gods, and all of you are sons of the Most High” (Psalm 82:6).
How then do you find such metaphors strange, when they are familiar in your book, which made the children of Israel gods in the figurative sense of the word?! Christ is more deserving of this unity than the rest of the children of Israel. “If He said, ‘They are gods,’ to whom the word of God came… Do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God.’ If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me…” (John 10:37). Thus Christ corrected the Jews, and then the Christians, for their wrong and literal understanding of His unity with the Father.
This method of expressing the unity of purpose and will is familiar in the texts, especially in John, for he says on the tongue of Christ: “That they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be one in us… that they may be one as we are one… I in them, and you in me” (John 17:20-23). So the indwelling in Christ and the disciples is a spiritual indwelling only, otherwise it would be necessary to deify the disciples. Just as Christ and the Father are one, so the disciples, Christ, and the Father are also one, that is, the unity of purpose and path, not the unity of beings, for no one says that the disciples are united with each other or that Christ is united in them. In another place he mentioned the same meaning, saying about the disciples: “Holy Father, keep them in your name which you have given me, that they may be one as we are” (John 17:11).
And likewise: “You know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you” (John 14:20). And similarly, He says: “One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all, and in you all” (Ephesians 4:6).
And similarly, Paul says: “For you are the temple of the living God, as God said, ‘I will live in them and walk among them, and will be their God, and they will be my people’” (Corinthians (2) 6:16-17). And similarly, Christ says to His disciples: “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, he this one bears much fruit” (John 15:5), meaning: He loves Me, obeys Me, and believes in Me, this one bears much fruit.
The correct meaning of His saying: “That you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him” (John 10:38) is that God is in Christ, that is, by His love, holiness, guidance, and direction, not by His holy self, which does not dwell in temples: “The Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands” (Acts 7:48).
This method of expressing the unity of purpose and will is repeated in many texts, including Paul’s saying, “I planted, Apollos watered… He who plants and he who waters are one, for we are God’s fellow workers” (1 Corinthians 3:6-9).
The same is stated in the Torah in describing spouses, “A man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24), and other examples of the unity of will and purpose.
4- He who has seen me has seen the Father.
One of the most important things that Christians use as evidence of the divinity of Christ is Christ’s saying: “He who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). To understand the text, we return to its context.
The context from the beginning tells us that Christ said to his disciples: “I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you.” By place he meant the kingdom. Thomas did not understand him and said: “Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?” He understood that he was talking about a real way and a real journey. Christ corrected him and explained that the journey was spiritual and not real and spatial: “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” (John 14:1-6), meaning that following His law and religion is the only way to God’s pleasure and Paradise, as in Peter’s saying: “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality, but in every nation he who fears Him and does righteousness is accepted with Him” (Acts 10:34).
Then Philip asked him to show them God, but Christ rebuked him and said to him: "Do you not know that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does the works..." (John 14/10). That is, how can you ask that, Philip, when you are a Jew who knows that God cannot be seen? The one who saw me saw the Father when he saw the works of God (miracles) that he performed through Christ.
This text is exactly like what is stated in Mark: "Then he took a little child and set him in the midst of them, and took him in his arms and said to them, 'Whoever receives one such little child in my name receives me, and whoever receives me receives not me but him who sent me'" (Mark 9/37). The text does not mean that the child whom Christ raised is Christ himself, nor that Christ is God himself, but it tells us that whoever does righteousness for this child does it out of obedience and love for Christ, and even obedience to God and compliance with His command.
The vision here is spiritual, that is, the vision of insight, not sight. There is strong evidence to justify this interpretation, which is that Jesus never claimed to be the Father, and no Christian says such a thing.
What confirms that the vision is spiritual is that he said: “Yet a little while, and the world will see me no more, but you will see me” (John 14:19). He is not talking about a real vision, as he is not talking about his ascension to heaven, for then the world and the disciples will not see him, but he is talking about a cognitive vision of faith that the disciples and believers see, and that the unbeliever in him is blind to.
And what is stated in Matthew bears witness to it: “No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son” (Matthew 11:27), for this is what is meant by the vision mentioned in the previous texts, and similar to it is his saying: “Then Jesus cried out and said, ‘He who believes in Me believes not in Me but in Him who sent Me. And he who sees Me sees Him who sent Me. … For I have not spoken of Myself, but the Father who sent Me has given Me a commandment, what I should say and what I should speak. And I know that His commandment is eternal life.
Therefore what I speak, I speak as the Father said to Me” (John 12:44-51). What is meant by all of this is the vision of knowledge, and His saying: “And he who sees Me sees Him who sent Me” cannot mean that he who saw the sending Father has seen the sent Son, unless the sender is the one who was sent, and this is impossible due to the difference between them, as Christ said: “My Father is greater than I” (John 14:28), and He said: “My Father who gave them to Me is greater than “All” (John 10:29).
And such a use which indicates the participation in the rule between Christ and God, which is expressed here by the vision, is familiar in the Old and New Testaments. In the Old Testament, when the children of Israel rejected Samuel, “And they said to him, ‘Behold, you are old, and your sons have not walked in your ways. Now appoint us a king who will judge us like all the peoples.’ And the thing displeased Samuel… Then the Lord said to Samuel, ‘Listen to the voice of the people in all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me’” (1 Samuel 8:4-7). For their refusal to obey Samuel is in fact a disobedience to God in reality, and so He said, “While he was still with you, was it not in your power? And when he was sold, was it not in your power? Why have you put this thing into your heart? You have not lied to men but to God? Was it not while he was still with you, and when he was sold, was it not in your power? Why have you put this thing into your heart? You have not lied to men but to God?” (Acts 5:4-5).
Likewise, whoever sees Christ is as if he sees God, and whoever accepts Christ is as if he accepts God Almighty. Luke says: “Whoever receives this child in my name receives me, and whoever receives me receives him who sent me” (Luke 9:48). Likewise, whoever sees the Father has seen me, because “the words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does the works…” (John 14:10).
And by his saying: “I am the way, the truth, and the life,” Christ means by it commitment to his teaching and religion that God revealed to him, for only that will enter heaven, the abode of eternity, as he said elsewhere: “No one will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father” (Matthew 7:21). Salvation is through good works and righteousness: “I tell you that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven… And whoever says, ‘You fool,’ will be in danger of hell fire” (Matthew 5:20-23).
The weakness of the argument of this evidence for the Christians is confirmed, “He who has seen me has seen the Father,” if we believe that seeing God is impossible in this world, as John said: “No one has ever seen God” (John 1:18), and as Paul said: “No one has seen him, nor can see him, to whom be honor and eternal power” (Timothy (1) 6:16), so the text becomes a vision of knowledge, and for this reason Christ said to the Jews in a text that clearly explains the matter: “You do not know me, nor do you know my Father. If you had known me, you would have known my Father” (John 8:19).
5- I am in the Father and the Father is in
the Christians. Christians believe that some texts indicate a divine indwelling in Christ, including: “That you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him” (John 10:38), and in another place “He who has seen me has seen the Father…the Father dwelling in me” (John 14:9-10), and His saying “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30).
These texts indicate - according to the Christians - that Christ is God, or that there is a true divine indwelling of God in him. Investigators have traced these texts and invalidated the Christians’ argument based on them. As for the words that came that indicated that God dwelled in Christ - according to what the Christians understood - their understanding of them is mistaken.
This is because what is meant by indwelling is a metaphorical indwelling, as it came regarding others without dispute, and we say the same regarding the issue of indwelling in Christ. This is what other texts have indicated, including what came in the Epistle of John: “Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. And we have known and believed the love that God has for us. And whoever abides in love abides in God, and God in him” (John (1) 4/15-16).
Likewise, God metaphorically dwells in all those who keep the commandments, and does not mean their divinity. In the Epistle of John: “And whoever keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, from the Spirit He has given us” (John (1) 3/24). What is meant is not the impersonation of the divine self by these righteous people, but rather the dwelling of God’s guidance and support upon them.
And likewise those who love each other for God: “If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us. By this we know that we abide in Him, and He in us” (John (1) 4/12-13).
And as in his saying about the disciples: “I am in them, and you are in me” (John 14/19), and likewise Paul says about the believers: “For you are the temple of the living God, as God has said, ‘I will live in them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people’” (Corinthians (2) 6/16-17). So dwelling in all of that is metaphorical.
These texts indicate a divine solution in all believers, and this solution is a metaphorical solution without dispute, that is, the solution of His guidance and success, and the same applies to the solution in Christ.
The Torah also mentions the solution of God - God forbid - in some of His creatures in reality, and Christians do not say that these things are divine, including what is stated in the Book of Exodus: “The place which You, O Lord, have made for Your dwelling” (Exodus 15:17), for He settled and dwelt on the Temple Mount, and no one worships that mountain. And in the Psalms: “Why do you, you fat mountains, watch over the mountain that God desires to dwell in? For the Lord dwells there forever” (Psalm 68:16).
6- Before Abraham was, I was.(this argument has been discussed in details in my discord pls see is jesus god thread)
Christians speak about Christ, the God who existed in eternity before creation, and they prove this with things, including what the writer of the Gospel of John mentioned on the tongue of Christ, that he said: “Abraham longed to see this day of mine; for he has seen me and rejoiced in me. Before Abraham was, I was” (John 8/56-58). They understood from this - falsely - that his existence before Abraham means that he is an eternal being.
The writer of the Gospel of John says about Christ: “Behold, he is coming with clouds, and every eye will see him, and they also who pierced him… I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End” (Revelation 1/7-8), meaning the First and the Last.
These texts are explicit in the opinion of Christians about the eternity and everlastingness of Christ, and therefore they are evidence of his divinity. The investigators disagree with the conclusion reached by Christians, because what is meant is not the real existence of Christ as a person, but rather the predestined and elective existence, that is, God’s choice and selection of him is ancient, as Paul said about himself and his followers: “Just as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy” (Ephesians 1:4), that is, he chose us according to his ancient destiny, and it does not benefit them that they existed then, and this selection is the glory that God granted to Christ, as in his saying: “And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world was” (John 17:5), and it is the glory that he gave to his disciples when he chose them and selected them for discipleship as God chose him for the message, “And I have given them the glory that you gave me” (John 17:22). Likewise, Abraham knew Christ before his creation, not in person, of course, because he had never seen him, “for he saw me and was glad.” The vision is metaphorical, and it is the vision of knowledge, otherwise Christians would have to mention evidence of Abraham seeing the Son. John’s statement on behalf of Christ that he said: “Before Abraham was, I was” (John 8:56-58) does not indicate his existence in eternity. The most that the text indicates, if taken at face value, is that Christ had an earthly existence that goes back to the time of Abraham, and the time of Abraham does not mean eternity. Then, if Christ was older than Abraham and all other creatures, then he had a moment of beginning in which he was created, as every creature has a beginning, which is what Paul mentioned: “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation” (Colossians 1:15). He is a creature, but he is the firstborn of creation, i.e. the first of them, and creation is incompatible with eternity.
Among those who shared with Christ in this alleged eternity was Melchizedek, the priest of Salem in the time of Abraham. Paul claims that he had no father or mother, and claims that he had no beginning or end, that is, he is eternal. He says: “This Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of God Most High… without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest forever” (Hebrews 7:1-3). So why do Christians not say that Melchizedek, who is like the Son of God, is divine, given the many similarities between them? Rather, he is superior to Christ, who Christians say was crucified and died, and has a mother and even a father according to what Matthew and Luke reported, while Melchizedek was exalted above all of that? Among them is Solomon when he said about himself: "I, wisdom, dwell in understanding, and find knowledge of measures... The Lord possessed me at the beginning of his way, before his works of old, from everlasting I was established, from the beginning, from the beginning of the earth, before there were no springs of abundant waters, before the mountains were settled I was brought forth, before the hills were brought forth..." (Proverbs 8/12-25). The claim of some Christians that he was talking about Christ is without evidence, for Solomon is the one described as wise in the Holy Bible, as in the Book of Chronicles: "Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel, who made heaven and earth, who has given to David the king a wise son, endowed with knowledge and understanding, who builds a house for the Lord and a house for his kingdom" (Chronicles (2) 2/12).
The phrase "anointed from everlasting" does not refer to Christ, for the word "Christ" is a title given to many other than Christ Jesus whom God anointed with His blessing from the prophets such as David and Isaiah (Psalm 45/7, Isaiah 61/1), so there is no reason to single out Christ with this title. Then wisdom was not originally applied to Christ, nor was it specific to Him, so there is absolutely no reason to indicate the divinity of Christ in this text. And
the Lord said to Jeremiah: (Before I formed you in the belly I knew you, and before you came out of the womb I sanctified you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations) (Jeremiah 1:5).Eternity here is the eternity of knowledge and thought, not existence and body.
As for the texts of the Book of Revelation which mention that Christ is the Alpha and the Omega, and that He is the First and the Last, they are not suitable for indicating such matters. As the scholar Deedat pointed out, everything in this book is merely a strange dream vision that John saw, and it cannot be relied upon. It is a mixed dream like all the dreams that people see. John saw animals with wings and eyes in front, and eyes in back, and animals with horns inside horns… (see Revelation 4/8). It is very similar to what someone who is overfed in food and drink sees in his sleep, and therefore it is not valid to use it as evidence.
Then at the end of this book, such expressions were issued by one of the angels, as appears from their context, and he said: "I am John, who saw and heard these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed me these things. And he said to me, 'See that you do not do it, for I am your fellow servant and of your brothers the prophets and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God.' And he said to me, 'Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near... And behold, I come quickly, and my reward is with me. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last'" (Revelation 22:8-13). There is nothing in the apparent text that indicates that the words were transferred from the angel to Christ or anyone else.
This book of Revelation has also been the subject of controversy among Christian scholars as to whether it is a revelation or a myth. The introduction to the Bible (the Catholic translation of the Jesuit order) states: “It seems that the criterion of attributing the author to the apostles was widely used, and gradually every author whose attribution to an apostle was not proven lost its prestige. The books whose authenticity remained in doubt, until the third century, were the same books whose authenticity was disputed in this or that part of the Church. The Epistle to the Hebrews and the Revelation (the Revelation of John the Theologian) were the most disputed. Their authenticity to the apostles was strongly denied for a long time. In the West, the authenticity of the Epistle to the Hebrews was denied, and in the East, the authenticity of the Revelation” (the Catholic translation, p. 10).
The Christians' argument based on the words of the writer of the Book of Revelation about Christ that he is (the beginning and the end) is a flawed argument, because this sentence did not appear in the oldest manuscripts, and therefore it was deleted from modern translations of the Bible.
7- God appeared in the flesh
The Vandyke translation, which is preferred by the Orthodox, states:
"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up in glory" (1 Timothy 3:16).
This text is one of the most important pieces of evidence that Christians use to prove the doctrine of the divine incarnation within the human body of Christ, peace be upon him!
Far from discussing the rational and transmitted evidence for the fall of this heresy taken from ancient pagan religions, it is sufficient for us to quote what is stated in the Catholic translation to know what appeared in the flesh!
The word "Allah" has been deleted from the text, which means that Arab Catholics did not see God in the flesh like the Orthodox!
Isn't this contradiction enough to invalidate the citation of this verse to prove the doctrine of the Incarnation?!
Where did the word "Allah" disappear to in the Catholic translation? And what appeared in the flesh in the Catholic translation - because the verb is in the passive voice "appeared" -? Doesn't the passive voice "appeared" refer to the mystery of piety after deleting the word "Allah", that is, the mystery of piety is what appeared in the flesh? Isn't this an accepted fact that does not need clarification?! If the piety of the Great and Most High appears in the heart and limbs of a person, does that person's status rise and become elevated among people? And if that person is a pious prophet, isn't that piety justified in spirit, preserved by the care of God and His angels, and believed in by nations, and raised in glory?!
And here, dear reader, is another disagreement that proves the extent of the contradiction and conflict in the Arabic translations and versions of the Holy Bible:
The previous image shows the extent of the contradiction and conflict between the English text and the Arabic text (the translation of the Book of Life “Arabic-English”). The English text says: “Christ who came to earth as a human being,” while the Arabic text, which is supposed to be a correct translation of the English text, says: “And by everyone’s admission, great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh”!
What malicious attempt and cunning trick are you playing on your simple subjects who know nothing about what you are doing?!
And here are other English editions that I have added that show the truth of the matter:
New International Reader's Version (NIRV):
"Jesus appeared in a body……."
New Living Translation (NLT):
"Christ appeared in the flesh……."
8- Who is the image of God
. Among the Christians' evidence of the divinity of Christ is what Paul said about him: "The glory of Christ, who is the image of God" (Corinthians 4:4), and in Philippians: "Christ Jesus also, who, being in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, and coming in the likeness of men" (Philippians 2:6-7). He also says about him: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation" (Colossians 1:15).
But these sayings were made by Paul, and we do not see them in any of Christ's disciples and apostles, and this is enough to cast a look of doubt and suspicion on them. Then the image is different from the self, and the image of God here means His representative in conveying His law, as Paul said in another place about the man: “For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man” (1 Corinthians 11:7), meaning that God delegated authority over woman to the man.
Just as Christ being in the image of God cannot be used as evidence of His divinity, Adam shared this image with God, as stated in the Book of Genesis about his creation: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness… So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him” (Genesis 1:26-27).
If the Christians insist on combining the image with the divinity of Christ, then there is something in the books that contradicts them, as it is stated in Isaiah: “Gather yourselves together, all you nations… that you may know and believe in Me… Before Me no God was formed, nor will there be after Me. I, even I, am the Lord, and besides Me there is no Savior” (Isaiah 43:9-11).
9- They fell down and worshipped Him.(this argument has been discussed in details in my discord pls see is Catalogue 9 thread)
The Gospels speak of some of Christ’s contemporaries’ worship of Him, and they see in their worship of Him evidence of His divinity and His worthiness of worship. The father of the bleeding girl fell down before Him: “While He yet spake these things to them, behold, a ruler came and worshipped him” (Matthew 9:18). The leper also fell down before Him: “Behold, a leper came and worshipped Him” (Matthew 8:2). The Magi fell down before Him in His childhood: “They fell down and worshipped Him, and opened their treasures” (Matthew 2:11). Peter, however, refused Cornelius’ worship of Him, and said to him: “Stand up, I also am a man” (Acts 10:25). He considered worship a type of worship that should only be done to God. Accordingly, Christians see in Christ’s acceptance of worship of Him evidence that He was God.
There is no doubt that prostration is a manifestation of worship, but it does not necessarily mean that all prostration is worship. Some prostration is for reverence and glorification only. Jacob, his wives and his sons prostrated to Esau, son of Isaac, when they met him: “And he passed on before them, and bowed himself to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother… And the two maids came near, they and their children, and bowed themselves; and Leah also came near with her children, and bowed themselves. And afterward Joseph and Rachel came near, and bowed themselves” (Genesis 33:3-7). Moses, peace be upon him, also prostrated himself, according to what is stated in the Holy Book, to his father-in-law when he came from Midian to visit him: “And Moses went out to meet his father-in-law, and bowed himself, and kissed him” (Exodus 18:7). Joseph’s brothers prostrated themselves out of reverence, not worship, to their brother Joseph: “Then Joseph’s brothers came and bowed themselves to him with their faces to the ground” (Genesis 42:6). This custom continued among the children of Israel: “After the death of Jehoiada, the leaders of the tribes came to him, and they bowed themselves to him with their faces to the ground” (Genesis 42:6). Judah, and they bowed down to the king (Al-Ayyam (2) 24/7).
So why did Christians consider bowing down to Jesus as worship and bowing down to others as not worship?!
Should we continue to give examples or is the foolishness of the minds still urgent!
Prostration of worship is only for God Almighty and this is what Christ himself said: (You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve) Luke 4:8. As for prostration of greeting, glorification and reverence, there are many examples in the Old and New Testaments, and we cannot be partisan to Jesus for a matter that was done with many others!
The disgraced priest "Zakaria Botros" mentioned in one of the episodes of his ugly program that Al-Saddī said in his interpretation: (I met the mother of Yahya, the mother of Jesus, and she said that what is in my womb (Yahya) bows down to what is in your womb (Jesus))). And he used this narration as evidence of the divinity of Christ.
As for what Al-Suddi mentioned in his narration in which it was stated that the mother of Yahya, peace be upon him, felt that what was in her womb was prostrating to what was in the womb of Mary, meaning the Messiah, upon them all be the most perfect prayers and the most complete peace, there are two matters in this:
First: Al-Suddi is not an authority and the scholars of hadith differed concerning him: some of them trusted him, some of them disbelieved him, and most of them are weak and disbelievers. A hadith like this should not be taken from him. However, we may take the linguistic interpretation from him as a reference only if his interpretation matches the interpretation of the trustworthy ones, but we do not make him an authority in the religion of Allah.
Sheikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said in “Tafsir Ayat Ashkalat” (1/167): “He mentioned at the beginning of his interpretation (i.e. Al-Suddi) that he took it from Abu Malik and from Abu Salih, from Ibn Abbas, and from Marra Al-Hamadani from Ibn Masoud, and from people from the companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, but he transmits it word for word, and mixes the narrations with each other. There may be mursal and musnad narrations in it, and he does not distinguish between them.”
The second: is that prostration is a prostration of reverence, respect and greeting, not worship and deification of the one to whom prostration is made. We have transmitted many texts from the Holy Book that clarify this matter, which no one denies except a squabbler! This type of prostration is in your law and is established among you, and the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, nullified it. On the authority of Abdullah bin Abi Awfa, he said: (When Muadh came from Ash-Sham, he prostrated to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, so he, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: What is this, O Muadh? He said: I came to Ash-Sham and I saw them prostrating to their bishops and patriarchs, so I wished in my heart that we would do that to you. So the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: Do not do that, for if I were to command anyone to prostrate to other than God, I would command a woman to prostrate to her husband) (Narrated by Ibn Majah in “The Book of Marriage” No. 1843).
So, listener, note that Muadh, may God be pleased with him, saw what the Christians in the Levant were doing to their bishops and patriarchs in terms of prostration and glorification, because this has been their law since time immemorial!
So why the partisanship for Jesus only?!
That is why Al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his commentary on Al-Suddi’s narration: “The meaning of prostration here is submission and surrender, like prostration when facing peace as was in the law of those before us, and as Allah commanded the angels to prostrate to Adam” (Stories of the Prophets, p. 493).
10- Your sins are forgiven.
Among the evidence that Christians use to prove the divinity of Christ is what the Gospels have reported about the forgiveness of the sins of the paralytic and the sinner at his hands. Forgiveness is one of the characteristics of divinity, and accordingly Christ is a God who forgives sins. He said to the sinner Mary Magdalene: “Your sins are forgiven you” (Luke 7:48), and He also said to the paralytic: “Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven you.” The Jews accused him of blasphemy and said: “They said to themselves, ‘This man blasphemes’” (Matthew 9:3).
But if we return to the story of the sinner and the paralytic, we will see clearly that Christ is not the one who forgave their sins. In the story of the woman, when people doubted Christ and how He said to her, “Your sins are forgiven,” while He was merely a human being, Christ removed the ambiguity and told the woman that it was her faith that saved her. It is worth noting that Christ did not claim that He was the one who forgave her sin, but rather He told that her sin had been forgiven, and the one who forgave it, of course, was God Almighty.
The whole story is as the writer of the Gospel of Luke reported: “But she anointed My feet with ointment. Therefore I say to you, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven, because she loved much. But he who is forgiven little loves little. Then He said to her, ‘Your sins are forgiven.’ And those who were reclining with Him began to say among themselves, ‘Who is this who even forgives sins?’ But He said to the woman, ‘Your faith has saved you; go in peace’” (Luke 7:46-50).
Likewise in the story of the paralytic, Christ did not claim that He was the one who forgives sins. He said to the paralytic: “Take heart, my son, your sins are forgiven you.” So He informed of the realization of forgiveness, and did not say that He was the one who forgives them. When the Jews made a mistake, and it occurred to them that he was blaspheming, Christ rebuked them for the evil in their thoughts, and corrected the matter for them, and explained to them that this forgiveness was not of His own doing, but rather of God’s authority, but God had permitted Him to do so, like all the miracles and wonders that He performed, and they understood what He meant and the ambiguity was removed from their hearts. “When the crowds saw it, they marveled, and glorified God, who had given such authority to men.” The whole story, as reported by the writer of the Gospel of Matthew, is as follows: “He said to the paralytic, ‘Son, be of good cheer; your sins are forgiven you.’ And behold, some of the scribes said among themselves, ‘This man blasphemes.’ But Jesus knew their thoughts and said, ‘Why do you think evil in your hearts? Which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven you,’ or to say, ‘Arise and walk?’ But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins,’ then he said to the paralytic, ‘Arise, take up your mat and go to your house.’ And he arose and went to his own house. And when he saw the crowds, they marveled and glorified God, who had given such authority to men” (Matthew 9:3-8).
Since Christ did not possess it of his own accord, he asked God to forgive the Jews. If he had possessed it, he would have forgiven them, and he did not ask God for it, as in Luke: “Then Jesus said, ‘Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing’” (Luke 23:34).
This authority was given to him as it was given to others according to what is stated in your Gospels: “He turned to his disciples and said, ‘All things have been delivered to me by my Father’” (Luke 10:22). Otherwise, he has no power or strength. He said in another place: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me” (Matthew 28:18). So it is not his personal authority, but rather it was given to him by God.
I now recall what the Zionist priest, Anis Shorsh, said in his debate with the scholar Deedat, that Christ said that out of humility!
There is no power or strength except with God!
The authority to forgive sins was also given to someone other than Christ. It was given to the disciples: “Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Again, I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven” (Matthew 18:18-20). But, as is obvious, it does not mean their divinity because it is not a personal right of theirs, but a divine gift given to them and to their teacher, Christ. This is what the Holy Book mentions, as they have become able to forgive the sins that relate to their personal rights, and even all the sins and transgressions according to what is stated in your book, and their forgiveness of personal sins, Jesus says about it: “If you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses” (Matthew 6/14-15), while John gives them an open certificate in the forgiveness of any sin and transgression, as he says: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (John 20/28), so they are like Christ, peace be upon him.
The Church inherited this glory and authority from Peter and the disciples, so the priests forgave sinners through confession or indulgences, and they relied in their approval on their inheritance of the authority that was given to Peter: “You are Peter... and I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven...” (Matthew 16:19). If Peter or the Pope forgave a person’s sins, his sin would be forgiven, without this requiring his divinity.
So it does not necessarily mean that Christ is considered God because of his approval of forgiving the sins of sinners, as the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “Whoever says ‘Glory be to God and praise be to Him’ a hundred times a day, his sins will be forgiven, even if they were like the foam of the sea” (Agreed upon). The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever stands in prayer on the Night of Decree out of faith and in the hope of reward, will have his previous sins forgiven” (Agreed upon). He also said: “Whoever stands in prayer during Ramadan out of faith and in the hope of reward, will have his previous sins forgiven” (Agreed upon). The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) also said: “When the Imam says ‘Ameen’, then say ‘Ameen’, for whoever’s ‘Ameen’ coincides with the ‘Ameen’ of the angels, will have his previous sins forgiven” (Agreed upon). The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) also said: “While a dog was circling a well, it was about to die of thirst, when a prostitute from among the prostitutes of the Children of Israel saw it. She took off her sandals and gave it some to drink, and she was forgiven because of it” (Agreed upon). The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “The martyr has six qualities with Allah: he is forgiven from the first drop of his blood, he is shown his seat in Paradise, he is spared the torment of the grave, he is safe from the greatest terror, he is adorned with the garment of faith, he is married to the houris, and he intercedes for seventy of his relatives.” (Narrated by Ibn Majah in the Book of Jihad, No. 2789).
It is not known from these authentic hadiths that Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is a god, rather it is known from them that Allah Almighty is the source of this forgiveness and that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is only a conveyor of the message from his Lord.
11- Allah is the Judge
The books speak of Christ and that He is the Judge of creation on the Day of Judgment. Paul says: “I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom” (Timothy (2) 4/1). They see in this evidence of His divinity because the Torah says: “God is the Judge” (Psalms 50/6). However, there are texts that prevent Christ from being the Judge: “For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him. He who believes in Him is not condemned, but he who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God” (John 3/17). Christ will not condemn anyone, which Christ confirmed by saying: “And if anyone hears My words and does not believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. He who rejects Me and does not receive My words has one who judges him (i.e. God and His law). The word that I have spoken, the same will judge him on the last day” (John 12/47-48).
And if Christians insist that judgment is one of the works of Christ, others share in it with Him, namely the twelve disciples, including the traitor Judas Iscariot: “Then Jesus said to them, ‘Truly I say to you, that in the regeneration when the Son of Man sits on the throne of his glory, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel’” (Matthew 19/28).
And in Luke, “that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22/30). What is even more amazing is that the saints and Paul will participate in the judgment of the angels and the entire world with Christ: (1 Corinthians 6:2-3) “Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If then the world is judged by you, are you not worthy of the lesser judgments? Do you not know that we will judge angels, much less the things of this life?” So the argument that Christ’s judgment of the world is evidence of his divinity is an extremely weak and fallen argument, and the Gospels themselves refute it.
12- He was in the world and the world was created by Him
. Some of the creative texts were attributed to Christ, so the Christians clung to them and saw them as indicative of His divinity. Among them is what Paul said about Christ: “For in Him all things were created, that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or principalities or powers—all things were created by Him and for Him” (Colossians 1:16-17). In another place he says: “God created all things through Jesus Christ” (Ephesians 3:9). Similar to this is what came in the introduction to John: “He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him” (John 1:10), and similar to this in (Hebrews 1:2).
The investigators do not accept that what is meant by these texts is that Christ created creatures in the creation of existence, but rather what is meant is the new creation, which is the creation of guidance that David spoke of when he called upon God: “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me” (Psalm 51:10). Likewise, Paul said about believers in Christ: “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation” (Corinthians (2) 5:17).
He said: “For in Christ neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creation” (Galatians 6:15). In another place he says: “Put on the new man, created according to God in righteousness” (Ephesians 4:24). He said about Christ: “The firstborn of all creation” (Colossians 1:15), meaning that he is the first of the believers. On this basis, James considered the disciples to be the firstborn of creation, saying: “Of his own will, he gave us birth by the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures” (James 1:18).
Therefore, the purpose of Christ’s creation of humanity is spiritual creation, as God made him a reviver of dead and hard hearts.
Paul’s statement: “For in Him were all things created, both in the heavens and on the earth” is an exaggeration that is well-known in the biblical and evangelical texts, including Moses’ statement to the children of Israel: “Behold, you are this day as the stars of heaven for multitude” (Deuteronomy 1:10). And similarly in his statement: “And the Midianites and the Amalekites and all the children of the East were lodged in the valley like locusts for multitude, and their camels were without number, like the sand which is by the seashore for multitude” (Judges 7:12). Christ cannot be the Creator of the heavens and the earth and everything in between in any other sense, since He Himself is a creation, even though the Christians claim that He was the first of the created, but in any case He is a creation, and the created is not the Creator. We challenge the most knowledgeable Christian scholars to prove how a creator God could create another god like Himself who is a creator and not a created one! Simply by creating another god, this god became a creation.
He who was unable to restore life to himself when he died is too incapable to be the Creator of the heavens and the earth: “This Jesus God raised up” (Acts 2:32)!
13- He who comes from above is above all.
The Gospels mention that Christ came from above or from heaven and “He who comes from above is above all” (John 3:31). They see the image of his divinity shining in his saying: “I am from above. You are of this world, but I am not of this world” (John 8:23). This indicates - according to the Christians - that he is a unique divine being.
The heavenly coming means the coming of gifts and the law, which is something that is the same with all the prophets, including John the Baptist. Christ asked the Jews: “Where was the baptism of John? From heaven? Or from men? And they reasoned among themselves, saying, ‘If we say, From heaven,’ they will say to us, ‘Why then did you not believe in him?’ But if we say, ‘From men,’ we are afraid of the people…” (Matthew 21:25-26).
The Gospels mention that everyone who comes and goes, if he believes that Jesus is the Christ, was born from above, and whoever was born from above can see the kingdom of God: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3). He also said: “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God” (John (1) 5:1).
He also said: “Everyone who does righteousness has been born of God” (John (1) 2:29).
Christ's saying, "I am not of this world" is not evidence of divinity at all. What he meant was that he was different from all other people in that he was above the material world, but rather he was above that wreckage that all other people chase after. He said something similar about his disciples as well, after he saw in them a love of the afterlife and aversion to the world, so he said, "If you were of the world, the world would love its own. But because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you" (John 15:19).
And in another place he said about them: “I have given them your word, and the world hates them, because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world” (17:14-15). So he said about his disciples what he said about himself, that they are all not of this world. If this were to be taken literally, and it entailed divinity, then it would be necessary for all the disciples to be gods. But his expression in all of this is a kind of metaphor, as one says: So-and-so is not of this world, meaning he does not live for the world and does not care about it, but his concern is always the pleasure of God and the afterlife, and this is the case with all the prophets.
In this regard, the Christians also claimed that Christ is God because he said: “No one has ascended to heaven except He who came down from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven” (John 3:13). To analyze this passage, we must first note that the Christians’ claim came from what Christ said, among other things: “the Son of Man who is in heaven.” This sentence was distorted by vandals and was not found in the oldest manuscripts currently in world museums. Therefore, this sentence was deleted from modern revised translations in various languages, such as the Catholic translation of the Jesuit order, where the text became: “No one has ascended to heaven except He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man.” If the Christians' reliance on these manuscripts, the oldest of which dates back to the third century AD, is directed to them regarding the authenticity of the biblical texts, then what does not prompt us to say that this entire text is foreign and distorted, especially since these manuscripts are the only guide for Christians in accepting or rejecting the texts? What if the distortion originally occurred in those manuscripts that they made their basis for revising the texts?! What prompted the Christians to delete the end of the text from modern translations is their reliance on those manuscripts. So who can guarantee that the entire text is correct if these manuscripts were not originally approved by Christ, peace be upon him?! And if the distortion occurred in these manuscripts that they made their basis, then how can they know that they were not distorted and distorted, and there are no older manuscripts or other evidence to prove the authenticity of those manuscripts?!
As for what Christ said, as they claimed: “No one has ascended to heaven except He who came down from heaven.” If we take the descent from heaven in its literal meaning, then there is no proof in it of the divinity of Christ, since the descent of a person or being from heaven to earth does not indicate his divinity, neither directly nor indirectly. Many of the heavenly beings descended from heaven, such as Gabriel, for example, who would descend from heaven to earth carrying God’s messages or carrying out an order from God Almighty. Also, on many occasions, some angels descended to earth wearing human clothing. Rather, they believe that God sent down the ram that redeemed the sacrificed son of Abraham from heaven (Genesis 22:11-13). The most that such a text can say, if taken literally, is that Christ existed in God’s knowledge like all of creation before he was born as a human being on earth. When the time came that God had determined for him to be created and for his term on earth to begin, God’s command came down and Christ was born. This is the interpretation of his statement: “Except he who descended from heaven.” As for his statement: “No one has ascended to heaven,” it is a statement from him that he will be taken up to heaven safely just as he came to earth safely, as in his statement: “I am with you a little while longer, and then I go to him who sent me” (John 7:33). Then he stated that the disciples will ascend and be with him, so they also descended from heaven according to the meaning we mentioned, because no one ascends to heaven except he who descended from heaven: “So that where I am, there you may be also” (John 14:1-4).
14- He ascended to heaven and
sat at the right hand of God. Christians claim that Christ ascended alive to heaven, and that he is alive there now, which indicates his divinity: “Then the Lord, after he had spoken to them, was received up into heaven, and sat at the right hand of God” (Mark 16:19).
And we say: The ascension was not unique to Christ so that you claim that He is God. Didn’t your Holy Book mention in the Second Book of Kings [2:11] that the prophet Elijah ascended to heaven alive and left Elisha behind him weeping and that he is still alive in it? : )) And while they - that is, Elijah and Elisha - were walking and talking, suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated them, and Elijah was thrown into heaven by a whirlwind.))
And didn’t your Holy Book mention in the Book of Genesis [5:24] that Enoch ascended alive to heaven and that he is alive in it? : “And Enoch walked with God and was not found, for God took him.” This is how it is in the Van Dyck translation and in the Book of Life translation: “God took him to Him.” So if the ascension to heaven was evidence of divinity, then Enoch and Elijah would have become gods. And no one has said this.
It is worth noting that the paragraph in which it is stated that Christ ascended to heaven came in the Gospel of Mark, and this paragraph from the Gospel of Mark and the one before it (the conclusion of the Gospel of Mark) did not appear in the oldest manuscripts:
(There is a question that has not been answered: How was the book (the Gospel of Mark) concluded? It is generally accepted that the conclusion as it is now (16/9-20) was added to alleviate the sudden pause at the end of the book in verse 8. But we will never know whether the original conclusion of the book was lost or whether Mark saw that the reference to the Galilean visionary tradition in the verse was not sufficient to conclude his narrative) (Catholic translation, p. 124).
I will quote here what some English translations say about the conclusion of the Gospel of Mark:
The most reliable early manu******s and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.
(new international version)
16:20 Verses 9-20 are bracketed in NU-**** as not original. They are lacking in Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, although nearly all other manuscripts of Mark contain them.
(New King James Version)
Some Christians may argue that this paragraph appears at the end of the Gospel of Luke (24:51), and we say that the Gospel of Mark is the source of the Gospel of Luke. If this paragraph is not found in the oldest manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark, then where did the writer of the Gospel of Luke get it from?!
Accordingly, the use of this text as evidence of Christ’s alleged ascension after his alleged crucifixion and sitting at the right hand of God is invalid, let alone the use of it as evidence of his alleged divinity!
15- Using the words “Lord” and “God” in reference to Christ
Christians cling to the terms that were used for Christ as divinity and lordship, and they see them as indicating the divinity of Christ, and at the beginning of it is that he was called Jesus, which is a Hebrew word meaning: Jehovah is salvation.
And among them is what they considered a prophecy about him in Isaiah: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even forever." (Isaiah 9:6).
And likewise in the words of David: "The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, Until I make your enemies your footstool. The Lord will send the scepter of your strength out of Zion. Rule in the midst of your enemies. Your people will willingly offer themselves in the day of your strength, In the beauty of holiness from the womb of the dawn To you is the dew of your youth, The Lord has sworn and will not repent. You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek." (Psalm 110:1-4), so David called him Lord.
And similar to it is the saying of Paul: “Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever” (Romans 9:5), and similar to it is the saying of Thomas to Christ: “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28), as Peter said to him: “Never mind, Lord” (Matthew 16:22), and he also said: “This is the Lord of all” (Acts 10:36), and it is stated in the Book of Revelation about Christ: “And he has on his robe and on his thigh a name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS” (Revelation 17:14), and other texts in which the word Lord or God was given to Christ, which indicated to them his divinity and lordship.
But these applications could not make Christ Lord and God, since many of them came in the context of naming, and calling a creature God does not make him so. Paul and Barnabas were called gods when they performed some miracles: “And when the multitudes saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying, ‘The gods have come down to us in the image of men’” (Acts 14:11). It was the custom of the Romans to call someone who did something beneficial to the people a god. The name does not really change anything, nor does it make a creature a god, nor a mortal servant a lord and a god.
Ishmael was called by his Hebrew name, which means “God hears,” as was Jehoiakim, meaning “God lifts up,” Joshua, “the Lord saves,” Tobiah, “God is good,” and others… Their names did not require their divinity.
The Book of Revelation says: “He who overcomes, I will put in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out. And I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God, and my new name” (Revelation 3:12). The Torah says: “And they shall put my name on the children of Israel” (Numbers 6:27). However, they are not gods.
Muslims do not accept the authenticity of many of those explicit phrases that the New Testament claims were issued by the disciples, as they were subject to deliberate distortion, as occurred in (John (1) 5:7-8). Distortion may also occur due to poor and inaccurate translation. The word “Lord,” which is often used in Arabic translations as a title for Christ, is in foreign translations meaning “master” or “teacher.” The equivalent in the English translation is “lord,” meaning “master,” and in French: “le mait,” meaning “teacher,” and so on in all other translations, such as German, Italian, and Spanish.
What the Arabic translation brought is not new, but rather it is consistent with the nature of the language spoken by Christ and his contemporaries. The word “Lord” is used for the teacher, and it signifies a kind of respect and appreciation, as the Samaritan woman said to Christ: “Lord, I perceive that you are a prophet” (John 4:19). Her words did not mean to describe Christ as a lord, otherwise it would contradict her saying that he was a prophet. In the Gospel of John, Christ was addressed by his disciples: “Lord,” and they meant: “Teacher.” Here is Mary Magdalene turning to him and saying: “Rabboni” (which means “Teacher”). And she told the disciples that she had seen the Lord (John 20:16-17).
Two of his disciples addressed him: “Lord” (which means, “Teacher”) (John 1:38). None of the disciples had in mind the technical meaning of the word “Lord” when they called Christ by it, for they meant: teacher and master. Therefore, they likened him to John the Baptist when they said to him: “Lord, teach us to pray, as John taught his disciples.” (Luke 11:1).
As for Thomas’s saying to Christ, “My Lord and my God,” it was not in the context of addressing Christ, but when he saw Christ alive, and he had thought that he was dead, he was surprised by that, so he said in astonishment, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). What confirms the correctness of this understanding is that Christ said in the same context that he would ascend to his God (see John 20:17). Accordingly, if divinity here is meant to refer to Christ, it is metaphorical and not real.
If Christ had understood that he meant his divinity, Christ, peace be upon him, would not have remained silent. He, peace be upon him, even refused to be called good, because when some of his disciples called him: “Good teacher...” he said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except one, that is, God” (Matthew 19:17). How could he accept to be called Lord and God in truth?
The use of the word Lord to mean: master is common in the Greek language. Stephen Neal says: “The original Greek word meaning: ‘Lord’ can be used as a polite form of address. The Philippian jailer addresses Paul and Wasila with the word: ‘Lord’ or ‘Master’. The Book of Acts says: “He brought them out and said: ‘Lords, what must I do to be saved?’ And they said: ‘Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household’” (Acts 16:30)… The word was a title of honor…”
Concerning the evidence of the psalm: “The Lord said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.” (Psalm 110/1), it does not mean the Messiah in any way, but rather the awaited Messiah, who was promised to the children of Israel, and he is Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace. Peter made a mistake when he understood that the text meant the Messiah, and said: “For David did not ascend into heaven, but he himself says, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’ So let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah. When they heard this, they were pricked to the heart” (Acts 2/29-37).
The evidence of Peter’s misunderstanding, as well as the Christians’ understanding, is that Christ denied that he was the promised Messiah through David, “While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, ‘What do you think about the Messiah (i.e., the one the Jews were waiting for), whose son is he?’ They said to him, ‘The Son of David.’ He said to them, ‘How is it that David in spirit calls him Lord, saying, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool”?’ But if David calls him Lord
, how is he his son? No one could answer him a word. And from that day on no one dared to ask him at all” (Matthew 22:41-46). Christ asked the Jews about the awaited Messiah whom David and other prophets had preached, “What do you think about the Messiah, whose son is he?” They answered him, “The Son of David.” He made a mistake and said, “If David calls him Lord, how is he his son?” And in Mark: “How do the scribes say that the Christ is the son of David? For David himself said by the Holy Spirit, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.” So David himself calls him Lord. But where then is he his son?” (Mark 12:37).
Luke also mentioned this, “And he said to them, ‘How do they say that the Christ is the son of David?’ For David himself says in the book of Psalms, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.” So if David calls him Lord, how is he his son?” (Luke 20:40-44).
And concerning the prophecy of the Prophet Isaiah: “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even forever” (Isaiah 9:6), none of these names were given to Christ. Where was he called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty, Father, or Prince of Peace? There is no text in the Holy Bible that mentions that he was called by these names. If they say that what is meant is that these are the attributes of this promised son, then they also do not apply to Christ in any way. They speak of a victorious, triumphant prophet who will rule over his people and will be the heir to the kingdom of David. All of this is impossible for Christ, impossible according to the evidence of reality and texts. Christ did not rule over his people for a single day, but was fleeing from the children of Israel, fearing their violence, just as he fled from his people when they wanted him to rule over them: “But when Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, he withdrew again to the mountain by himself” (John 6:15). He fled from them, because his kingdom was not a worldly, temporal kingdom, not on the throne of David, but rather a spiritual kingdom in the afterlife: “Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now my kingdom is not from hence” (John 18:36).
Isaiah also speaks of the Prince of Peace, and he does not apply to the one to whom the Gospels attributed that he said: “Do not think that I have come to send peace on earth. I have not come to send peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law, and a man’s enemies against those of his own household” (Matthew 10:34-36). Is he then called the Prince of Peace? Isaiah also speaks of an Almighty One, not of a limited human being who cannot do anything of himself, as he said of himself: “I can do nothing of myself; as I hear, I judge” (John 5:30). In another text he says to the Jews: “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father doing. For whatever he does, the Son also does likewise” (John 5:19).
The Holy Bible forbids that Christ be a king over the children of Israel, as God forbade the kingship to the descendants of Jehoiakim, one of the ancestors of Christ, who reigned over the kingdom of Judah and corrupted it, so God said about him: “Thus says the Lord concerning Jehoiakim king of Judah: He shall have no one to sit on the throne of David, and his body shall be cast out to the heat by day and to the cold by night; and I will punish him, his descendants, and his servants for their iniquity” (Jeremiah 36:30-31).
Christ is from the descendants of this corrupt king, as in the First Book of Chronicles: “The sons of Josiah: the firstborn: Johanan; the second: Jehoiakim; the third: Zedekiah; the fourth: Shallum. And the sons of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son, and Zedekiah his son” (Chronicles (1) 3:14-15), so Jehoiakim is one of the ancestors of Christ.
This is a name that the writer of the Gospel of Matthew omitted from his lineage of Christ, between Josiah and his grandson Jeconiah, saying: “And Amon begot Josiah. And Josiah begot Jeconiah and his brothers, when they were carried away captive to Babylon” (Matthew 1:10-11).
The reason for omitting the name of this grandfather of Christ from the lineage of Christ is not hidden from the astute reader.
Then, even if the generalization and translation are correct, then there is no indication of the divinity of Christ, as the use of the word Lord and God for creatures is known in the Holy Bible. Among what is mentioned in the books of the People of the Bible is the use of the word “Lord” and “God” for angels. It is stated in the Book of Judges, which tells of the appearance of the angel of the Lord to Manoah and his wife: “And the angel of the Lord appeared no more to Manoah and his wife. Then Manoah knew that he was the angel of the Lord. And Manoah said to his wife, We will surely die, for we have seen God” (Judges 13:21-22), meaning the angel of God. And
the angel of God appeared to Sarah and gave her the good news of Isaac, “And the angel of the Lord said to her… So she called the name of the Lord who spoke to her, You are El Roi” (Genesis 16:11-13), so she called the angel the Lord.
And similarly, the angel who accompanied the children of Israel on the journey of the Exodus was called the Lord: “And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them on the way, and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light.... And the angel of God, who went before the army of Israel, moved and went behind them. And the pillar of cloud moved from before them and stood behind them” (Exodus 13:21-14:19), so the angel was called Lord.
Among the things that came in the Torah are the use of these terms for the prophets. God said to Moses about Aaron: “He shall be a spokesman for you, and you shall be God to him” (see Exodus 4:16). And from this is God’s saying to Moses: “And the Lord said to Moses, ‘See, I have made you a God to Pharaoh, and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet’” (Exodus 7:1), meaning: he shall have authority over him. The prophets were called (God) metaphorically, that is, messengers of God, for: “When a man went to inquire of God, he would say, ‘Let us go to the seer.’ For formerly a prophet was called a seer” (Samuel (1) 9/9).
The word “God” was used to refer to judges, because they rule according to God’s law. In the Book of Exodus, “If a servant says… then his master shall bring him to God and bring him to the door…” (Exodus 20/5-6).
In the book that follows, it says: “But if the thief is not found, then the master of the house shall bring him to God to judge whether he has not laid his hand on his neighbor’s property… then he whose fault God judges shall make restitution to his neighbor” (Exodus 22/8-9). In the Book of Deuteronomy, “The two men between whom there is a dispute shall stand before the Lord, before the priests” (Deuteronomy 19/17).
And likewise: "God stands in the congregation of God; He judges in the midst of the gods. How long will you judge unrighteously, And lift up the faces of the wicked?" (Psalm 82:1), meaning the nobles and judges of the children of Israel.
Rather, this generality extends to include all the children of Israel, as in the words of David in his Psalms: "I said, 'You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High. But you will die like men'" (Psalm 82:6), and this is what Christ cited when he said: "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, You are gods?' If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken, do you say of him whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?" (John 10:34).
The books continue to use these terms even for demons and the false gods of the nations. Paul called Satan a god, and he called the belly a god, and he wanted the figurative meaning, so he said about Satan: “The god of this world has blinded the minds of unbelievers, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ should shine unto them” (Corinthians 4:5). He said about those who follow their lusts and desires: “Whose god is their belly, and their glory is in their shame…” (Philippians 3:19). Similar to this is what came in the Psalms: “For I know that the Lord is great, and our Lord is above all gods.”(Psalm 135:5), and the divinity of the belly and others is a metaphorical, unreal divinity.
This is the language of the Holy Bible in expression, and those who insist on understanding its words literally are mistaken, as are those who differentiate between similarities. When Christ heard such metaphors and figurative gods, he made it clear that there is one true God, who is Allah, and he said: “And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (John 17:3), which clearly means: I bear witness that there is no god but Allah, and that Jesus is the servant and messenger of Allah. This is what Muslims believe about him, peace and blessings be upon him. Such metaphors are mentioned in the Quran, as in the words of God Almighty on the tongue of Joseph, peace be upon him, to his companion in prison: {And he said to the one of them whom he thought would be saved, "Mention me to your Lord." But Satan made him forget to mention his Lord, and he remained in prison for several years.} Yusuf 42, so what he meant was the king.
16- Son of God:
Gospel texts speak about Christ and mention that he is the Son of God, and Christians see them as clear evidence of the divinity of Christ. Is this evidence correct? Did Christ call himself the Son of God?
The first thing that investigators draw attention to is that Christ - in the Gospels - did not call himself the Son of God except once in John 10/37, and in other cases the Gospels mention that his contemporaries and disciples used to say that he was the Son of God. However, investigators doubt that these words came from Christ or his disciples. Singer says in his book "The Dictionary of the Bible": "It is not certain that Jesus himself used that expression."
Charles Juniper says in his book "Christianity: Its Origins and Development": "Christ never claimed to be the awaited Messiah, nor did he say about himself that he was the Son of God, for this is a language that Christians later used to express Jesus." Juniper believes that the wrong concept reached the Gospel through the inaccurate understanding of the pagan converts, saying: "The concept of 'Son of God' originated from the world of Greek thought."
Some believe that Paul was the first to use the word, which was according to Christ's language (servant of God) and its Greek translation is servant, so he replaced it with the Greek word pais meaning child or servant in order to be close to the new converts from the pagans.
Then These texts that describe Christ as the Son of God are opposed by eighty-three texts that called Christ “the Son of Man.” If those that called Him the Son of God indicate His divinity, then these confirm His humanity, turning the others into a metaphorical meaning.
Among them is Matthew’s saying: “Jesus said to him, ‘Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has no place to lay His head. ’” (Matthew 8:20), and also His saying: “The Son of Man goes as it is written of Him.” (Mark 14:21). The Torah says: “God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent.” (Numbers 23:9), so Christ is not God.
The term sonship that was given to Christ was given to many others, and that did not necessitate their divinity.
Among them is Adam, of whom it was said: “Adam is the son of God” (Luke 3:38).
And Solomon, as it was mentioned in the Book of Chronicles, “He shall build me a house… I will be his father, and he shall be my son” (Chronicles (1) 17/12-13).
And similarly, he said to David, “You are my son, today I have begotten you” (Psalm 2/7).
And the angels were called sons of God, “as the angels are sons of God” (Luke 20/36).
The texts also called others sons of God, or mentioned that God is their father, yet Christians do not claim their divinity.
The disciples are the sons of God, as Christ said about them: “Say to them, ‘I ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God’” (John 20:17).
He also said to the disciples: “You therefore must be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect” (Matthew 5:48). Christ taught them to say: “Pray then like this: ‘Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be your name’” (Matthew 6:9). And His saying: “Your Father who is in heaven gives good things to those who ask Him” (Matthew 6:11). John was saying: “See what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called children of God” (John (1) 3:1).
Even the Jews, as in Christ’s saying to the Jews: “You do the works of your Father.” They said to Him: “We were not born of fornication. We have one Father, God” (John 8:41).
This term is also applied to the honorable and powerful without Christians or others understanding from it the true divinity: “For the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took for themselves wives of all which they chose.... For the sons of God went in unto the daughters of men, and they bare them children. These are the mighty men which of old were renown” (Genesis 6:2). It is possible that it includes all the people of Israel: “The number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered. And it shall be, instead of it being said to them, ‘You are not My people,’ it shall be said to them, ‘The sons of the living God’” (Hosea 1:10). And similarly: “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son” (Hosea 11:1).
And from this also is what is stated in the Book of Exodus: “Then you shall say to Pharaoh thus: ‘Says the Lord, Israel is My son, My firstborn. “I said to you, ‘Let my son go, that he may serve me,’ but you refused” (Exodus 4:22).
David addressed them, saying, “Ascribe to the Lord, you sons of God, ascribe to the Lord glory and strength” (Psalm 29:1).
And similarly, he said, “For who in heaven is equal to the Lord? Who is like the Lord among the sons of God? (Psalm 89:6).
And in the Book of Job: “There was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord” (Job 1:6). And the Gospel said about them: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God” (Matthew 5:9).
Therefore, Christians cannot make the texts related to Christ evidence of His divinity and then prevent the application of the true term to Adam, Solomon, Jacob, and everyone else. Their specificity of Christ in the true sense requires a proof that they do not possess. It also says: “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God” (John (1) 5:1).
And at the end of this same letter: ((We know that everyone who has been born of God does not sin, but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the evil one does not touch him)) [5:18]. And also in the third chapter of the same letter, John says: ((Everyone who has been born of God does not commit sin, for His seed remains in him. He cannot sin because he has been born of God, so The children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil... etc.)) The First Epistle of John: [3: 9-10].
And the saying of the Book: "Everyone who does righteousness is born of Him" (John (1) 2/29). And in the Epistle of Paul to the Romans [8: 14-16]: ((For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of slavery again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption, by whom we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are the sons of God.))
The intended meaning of sonship in all that was said about Christ and others is a metaphorical meaning of the beloved of God or the obedient of God. Therefore the centurion who saw the crucified one - according to the Christians - dying said:“Truly this man was the Son of God” (Mark 15:39).
When Luke told the same story, he replaced the phrase with its synonym, saying: “Truly this man was righteous” (Luke 23:47). John used the same term when he spoke about the children of God, saying: “But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in his name” (John 1:12). He also says: “He who hears the word of God is from God” (John 8:47).
Such a metaphorical use of sonship is familiar in the Holy Scriptures, which spoke about the sons of Satan and the sons of the world (the world)… (see John 8:44, Luke 16:8).
As for the real meaning of sonship, the demons spoke it, so Christ rebuked them, as in the Gospel of Luke: “Demons also came out of many, crying out and saying, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of God.’ But he rebuked them and did not allow them to speak, because they knew that he was the Christ” (Luke 4:41).
Christians see a distinction that is deserved for Christ in His sonship over all other sons, and they do not dispute the validity of the metaphorical use when the word sonship is used in reference to all other creatures.
However, the dispute lies in those descriptions given to Christ and which Christians establish as true, arguing with matters such as: that Christ was described as the firstborn or only son of God (see Hebrews 1:6, John 3:18) or that He was called the Son of God Most High (see Luke 1:32, 76), or that He is a son who is not born of this world like all other sons, but rather is born from heaven, or from above (see John 1:18).
But all of that is proven by the texts similar to other sons.
The birthright is described by Israel: “Israel is my firstborn son” (Exodus 4:22-23).
And so is Ephraim: “For I have become a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn” (Jeremiah 21:9).
And so did David, "He will call upon Me, 'You are my Father and my God, and the Rock of my salvation.' And I will make him my firstborn, high above the kings of the earth." (Psalm 89:26-27).
And if it is said about Christ that He is the Son of God Most High, so are all the children of Israel, "And you are all children of the Most High" (Psalm 82:6). And so are the disciples of Christ, they are also children of the Most High, "Love your enemies...and your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High" (Luke 6:35).
And our final prayer is that all praise is due to God, Lord of the Worlds.
References and Sources:
1- The Holy Quran.
2- Sunnah Books.
3- The Holy Bible - Al-Fandik Translation.
4- The Holy Bible - Translation of the Book of Life.
5- The Holy Bible - Catholic Translation of the Jesuit Order.
6- The Holy Bible - Second Canonical Books.
7- The New Testament - Translation of the Book of Life "Arabic - English".
8- Explanation of the Gospel of John - Priest/ Ibrahim Saeed.
9- The Great Treasure in the Interpretation of the Bible - Dr. William Addy.
10- The Guidance and Light Series - Dr. Munqidh Al-Saqqar.
11- Introduction to the Gospel of Barnabas - Dr. Ahmed Hegazy Al-Saqq.
12- Interpretation of Difficult Verses - Sheikh Al-Islam / Ibn Taymiyyah.
13- Stories of the Prophets - Al-Hafiz / Ibn Kathir.
14- Christ in Islam - The Scholar / Ahmed Deedat.
15- Then They Say This is from God - Engineer / Mahmoud Saad Mahran.
16- Christianity in the Balance website on the Internet:
One of the most important things that Christians use as evidence of the divinity of Christ is Christ’s saying: “He who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). To understand the text, we return to its context.
The context from the beginning tells us that Christ said to his disciples: “I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you.” By place he meant the kingdom. Thomas did not understand him and said: “Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?” He understood that he was talking about a real way and a real journey. Christ corrected him and explained that the journey was spiritual and not real and spatial: “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” (John 14:1-6), meaning that following His law and religion is the only way to God’s pleasure and Paradise, as in Peter’s saying: “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality, but in every nation he who fears Him and does righteousness is accepted with Him” (Acts 10:34).
Then Philip asked him to show them God, but Christ rebuked him and said to him: "Do you not know that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does the works..." (John 14/10). That is, how can you ask that, Philip, when you are a Jew who knows that God cannot be seen? The one who saw me saw the Father when he saw the works of God (miracles) that he performed through Christ.
This text is exactly like what is stated in Mark: "Then he took a little child and set him in the midst of them, and took him in his arms and said to them, 'Whoever receives one such little child in my name receives me, and whoever receives me receives not me but him who sent me'" (Mark 9/37). The text does not mean that the child whom Christ raised is Christ himself, nor that Christ is God himself, but it tells us that whoever does righteousness for this child does it out of obedience and love for Christ, and even obedience to God and compliance with His command.
The vision here is spiritual, that is, the vision of insight, not sight. There is strong evidence to justify this interpretation, which is that Jesus never claimed to be the Father, and no Christian says such a thing.
What confirms that the vision is spiritual is that he said: “Yet a little while, and the world will see me no more, but you will see me” (John 14:19). He is not talking about a real vision, as he is not talking about his ascension to heaven, for then the world and the disciples will not see him, but he is talking about a cognitive vision of faith that the disciples and believers see, and that the unbeliever in him is blind to.
And what is stated in Matthew bears witness to it: “No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son” (Matthew 11:27), for this is what is meant by the vision mentioned in the previous texts, and similar to it is his saying: “Then Jesus cried out and said, ‘He who believes in Me believes not in Me but in Him who sent Me. And he who sees Me sees Him who sent Me. … For I have not spoken of Myself, but the Father who sent Me has given Me a commandment, what I should say and what I should speak. And I know that His commandment is eternal life.
Therefore what I speak, I speak as the Father said to Me” (John 12:44-51). What is meant by all of this is the vision of knowledge, and His saying: “And he who sees Me sees Him who sent Me” cannot mean that he who saw the sending Father has seen the sent Son, unless the sender is the one who was sent, and this is impossible due to the difference between them, as Christ said: “My Father is greater than I” (John 14:28), and He said: “My Father who gave them to Me is greater than “All” (John 10:29).
And such a use which indicates the participation in the rule between Christ and God, which is expressed here by the vision, is familiar in the Old and New Testaments. In the Old Testament, when the children of Israel rejected Samuel, “And they said to him, ‘Behold, you are old, and your sons have not walked in your ways. Now appoint us a king who will judge us like all the peoples.’ And the thing displeased Samuel… Then the Lord said to Samuel, ‘Listen to the voice of the people in all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me’” (1 Samuel 8:4-7). For their refusal to obey Samuel is in fact a disobedience to God in reality, and so He said, “While he was still with you, was it not in your power? And when he was sold, was it not in your power? Why have you put this thing into your heart? You have not lied to men but to God? Was it not while he was still with you, and when he was sold, was it not in your power? Why have you put this thing into your heart? You have not lied to men but to God?” (Acts 5:4-5).
Likewise, whoever sees Christ is as if he sees God, and whoever accepts Christ is as if he accepts God Almighty. Luke says: “Whoever receives this child in my name receives me, and whoever receives me receives him who sent me” (Luke 9:48). Likewise, whoever sees the Father has seen me, because “the words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does the works…” (John 14:10).
And by his saying: “I am the way, the truth, and the life,” Christ means by it commitment to his teaching and religion that God revealed to him, for only that will enter heaven, the abode of eternity, as he said elsewhere: “No one will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father” (Matthew 7:21). Salvation is through good works and righteousness: “I tell you that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven… And whoever says, ‘You fool,’ will be in danger of hell fire” (Matthew 5:20-23).
The weakness of the argument of this evidence for the Christians is confirmed, “He who has seen me has seen the Father,” if we believe that seeing God is impossible in this world, as John said: “No one has ever seen God” (John 1:18), and as Paul said: “No one has seen him, nor can see him, to whom be honor and eternal power” (Timothy (1) 6:16), so the text becomes a vision of knowledge, and for this reason Christ said to the Jews in a text that clearly explains the matter: “You do not know me, nor do you know my Father. If you had known me, you would have known my Father” (John 8:19).
5- I am in the Father and the Father is in
the Christians. Christians believe that some texts indicate a divine indwelling in Christ, including: “That you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him” (John 10:38), and in another place “He who has seen me has seen the Father…the Father dwelling in me” (John 14:9-10), and His saying “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30).
These texts indicate - according to the Christians - that Christ is God, or that there is a true divine indwelling of God in him. Investigators have traced these texts and invalidated the Christians’ argument based on them. As for the words that came that indicated that God dwelled in Christ - according to what the Christians understood - their understanding of them is mistaken.
This is because what is meant by indwelling is a metaphorical indwelling, as it came regarding others without dispute, and we say the same regarding the issue of indwelling in Christ. This is what other texts have indicated, including what came in the Epistle of John: “Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. And we have known and believed the love that God has for us. And whoever abides in love abides in God, and God in him” (John (1) 4/15-16).
Likewise, God metaphorically dwells in all those who keep the commandments, and does not mean their divinity. In the Epistle of John: “And whoever keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He abides in us, from the Spirit He has given us” (John (1) 3/24). What is meant is not the impersonation of the divine self by these righteous people, but rather the dwelling of God’s guidance and support upon them.
And likewise those who love each other for God: “If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us. By this we know that we abide in Him, and He in us” (John (1) 4/12-13).
And as in his saying about the disciples: “I am in them, and you are in me” (John 14/19), and likewise Paul says about the believers: “For you are the temple of the living God, as God has said, ‘I will live in them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people’” (Corinthians (2) 6/16-17). So dwelling in all of that is metaphorical.
These texts indicate a divine solution in all believers, and this solution is a metaphorical solution without dispute, that is, the solution of His guidance and success, and the same applies to the solution in Christ.
The Torah also mentions the solution of God - God forbid - in some of His creatures in reality, and Christians do not say that these things are divine, including what is stated in the Book of Exodus: “The place which You, O Lord, have made for Your dwelling” (Exodus 15:17), for He settled and dwelt on the Temple Mount, and no one worships that mountain. And in the Psalms: “Why do you, you fat mountains, watch over the mountain that God desires to dwell in? For the Lord dwells there forever” (Psalm 68:16).
6- Before Abraham was, I was.(this argument has been discussed in details in my discord pls see is jesus god thread)
Christians speak about Christ, the God who existed in eternity before creation, and they prove this with things, including what the writer of the Gospel of John mentioned on the tongue of Christ, that he said: “Abraham longed to see this day of mine; for he has seen me and rejoiced in me. Before Abraham was, I was” (John 8/56-58). They understood from this - falsely - that his existence before Abraham means that he is an eternal being.
The writer of the Gospel of John says about Christ: “Behold, he is coming with clouds, and every eye will see him, and they also who pierced him… I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End” (Revelation 1/7-8), meaning the First and the Last.
These texts are explicit in the opinion of Christians about the eternity and everlastingness of Christ, and therefore they are evidence of his divinity. The investigators disagree with the conclusion reached by Christians, because what is meant is not the real existence of Christ as a person, but rather the predestined and elective existence, that is, God’s choice and selection of him is ancient, as Paul said about himself and his followers: “Just as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy” (Ephesians 1:4), that is, he chose us according to his ancient destiny, and it does not benefit them that they existed then, and this selection is the glory that God granted to Christ, as in his saying: “And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world was” (John 17:5), and it is the glory that he gave to his disciples when he chose them and selected them for discipleship as God chose him for the message, “And I have given them the glory that you gave me” (John 17:22). Likewise, Abraham knew Christ before his creation, not in person, of course, because he had never seen him, “for he saw me and was glad.” The vision is metaphorical, and it is the vision of knowledge, otherwise Christians would have to mention evidence of Abraham seeing the Son. John’s statement on behalf of Christ that he said: “Before Abraham was, I was” (John 8:56-58) does not indicate his existence in eternity. The most that the text indicates, if taken at face value, is that Christ had an earthly existence that goes back to the time of Abraham, and the time of Abraham does not mean eternity. Then, if Christ was older than Abraham and all other creatures, then he had a moment of beginning in which he was created, as every creature has a beginning, which is what Paul mentioned: “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation” (Colossians 1:15). He is a creature, but he is the firstborn of creation, i.e. the first of them, and creation is incompatible with eternity.
Among those who shared with Christ in this alleged eternity was Melchizedek, the priest of Salem in the time of Abraham. Paul claims that he had no father or mother, and claims that he had no beginning or end, that is, he is eternal. He says: “This Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of God Most High… without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest forever” (Hebrews 7:1-3). So why do Christians not say that Melchizedek, who is like the Son of God, is divine, given the many similarities between them? Rather, he is superior to Christ, who Christians say was crucified and died, and has a mother and even a father according to what Matthew and Luke reported, while Melchizedek was exalted above all of that? Among them is Solomon when he said about himself: "I, wisdom, dwell in understanding, and find knowledge of measures... The Lord possessed me at the beginning of his way, before his works of old, from everlasting I was established, from the beginning, from the beginning of the earth, before there were no springs of abundant waters, before the mountains were settled I was brought forth, before the hills were brought forth..." (Proverbs 8/12-25). The claim of some Christians that he was talking about Christ is without evidence, for Solomon is the one described as wise in the Holy Bible, as in the Book of Chronicles: "Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel, who made heaven and earth, who has given to David the king a wise son, endowed with knowledge and understanding, who builds a house for the Lord and a house for his kingdom" (Chronicles (2) 2/12).
The phrase "anointed from everlasting" does not refer to Christ, for the word "Christ" is a title given to many other than Christ Jesus whom God anointed with His blessing from the prophets such as David and Isaiah (Psalm 45/7, Isaiah 61/1), so there is no reason to single out Christ with this title. Then wisdom was not originally applied to Christ, nor was it specific to Him, so there is absolutely no reason to indicate the divinity of Christ in this text. And
the Lord said to Jeremiah: (Before I formed you in the belly I knew you, and before you came out of the womb I sanctified you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations) (Jeremiah 1:5).Eternity here is the eternity of knowledge and thought, not existence and body.
As for the texts of the Book of Revelation which mention that Christ is the Alpha and the Omega, and that He is the First and the Last, they are not suitable for indicating such matters. As the scholar Deedat pointed out, everything in this book is merely a strange dream vision that John saw, and it cannot be relied upon. It is a mixed dream like all the dreams that people see. John saw animals with wings and eyes in front, and eyes in back, and animals with horns inside horns… (see Revelation 4/8). It is very similar to what someone who is overfed in food and drink sees in his sleep, and therefore it is not valid to use it as evidence.
Then at the end of this book, such expressions were issued by one of the angels, as appears from their context, and he said: "I am John, who saw and heard these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed me these things. And he said to me, 'See that you do not do it, for I am your fellow servant and of your brothers the prophets and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God.' And he said to me, 'Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near... And behold, I come quickly, and my reward is with me. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last'" (Revelation 22:8-13). There is nothing in the apparent text that indicates that the words were transferred from the angel to Christ or anyone else.
This book of Revelation has also been the subject of controversy among Christian scholars as to whether it is a revelation or a myth. The introduction to the Bible (the Catholic translation of the Jesuit order) states: “It seems that the criterion of attributing the author to the apostles was widely used, and gradually every author whose attribution to an apostle was not proven lost its prestige. The books whose authenticity remained in doubt, until the third century, were the same books whose authenticity was disputed in this or that part of the Church. The Epistle to the Hebrews and the Revelation (the Revelation of John the Theologian) were the most disputed. Their authenticity to the apostles was strongly denied for a long time. In the West, the authenticity of the Epistle to the Hebrews was denied, and in the East, the authenticity of the Revelation” (the Catholic translation, p. 10).
The Christians' argument based on the words of the writer of the Book of Revelation about Christ that he is (the beginning and the end) is a flawed argument, because this sentence did not appear in the oldest manuscripts, and therefore it was deleted from modern translations of the Bible.
7- God appeared in the flesh
The Vandyke translation, which is preferred by the Orthodox, states:
"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up in glory" (1 Timothy 3:16).
This text is one of the most important pieces of evidence that Christians use to prove the doctrine of the divine incarnation within the human body of Christ, peace be upon him!
Far from discussing the rational and transmitted evidence for the fall of this heresy taken from ancient pagan religions, it is sufficient for us to quote what is stated in the Catholic translation to know what appeared in the flesh!
The word "Allah" has been deleted from the text, which means that Arab Catholics did not see God in the flesh like the Orthodox!
Isn't this contradiction enough to invalidate the citation of this verse to prove the doctrine of the Incarnation?!
Where did the word "Allah" disappear to in the Catholic translation? And what appeared in the flesh in the Catholic translation - because the verb is in the passive voice "appeared" -? Doesn't the passive voice "appeared" refer to the mystery of piety after deleting the word "Allah", that is, the mystery of piety is what appeared in the flesh? Isn't this an accepted fact that does not need clarification?! If the piety of the Great and Most High appears in the heart and limbs of a person, does that person's status rise and become elevated among people? And if that person is a pious prophet, isn't that piety justified in spirit, preserved by the care of God and His angels, and believed in by nations, and raised in glory?!
And here, dear reader, is another disagreement that proves the extent of the contradiction and conflict in the Arabic translations and versions of the Holy Bible:
The previous image shows the extent of the contradiction and conflict between the English text and the Arabic text (the translation of the Book of Life “Arabic-English”). The English text says: “Christ who came to earth as a human being,” while the Arabic text, which is supposed to be a correct translation of the English text, says: “And by everyone’s admission, great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh”!
What malicious attempt and cunning trick are you playing on your simple subjects who know nothing about what you are doing?!
And here are other English editions that I have added that show the truth of the matter:
New International Reader's Version (NIRV):
"Jesus appeared in a body……."
New Living Translation (NLT):
"Christ appeared in the flesh……."
8- Who is the image of God
. Among the Christians' evidence of the divinity of Christ is what Paul said about him: "The glory of Christ, who is the image of God" (Corinthians 4:4), and in Philippians: "Christ Jesus also, who, being in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, and coming in the likeness of men" (Philippians 2:6-7). He also says about him: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation" (Colossians 1:15).
But these sayings were made by Paul, and we do not see them in any of Christ's disciples and apostles, and this is enough to cast a look of doubt and suspicion on them. Then the image is different from the self, and the image of God here means His representative in conveying His law, as Paul said in another place about the man: “For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man” (1 Corinthians 11:7), meaning that God delegated authority over woman to the man.
Just as Christ being in the image of God cannot be used as evidence of His divinity, Adam shared this image with God, as stated in the Book of Genesis about his creation: “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness… So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him” (Genesis 1:26-27).
If the Christians insist on combining the image with the divinity of Christ, then there is something in the books that contradicts them, as it is stated in Isaiah: “Gather yourselves together, all you nations… that you may know and believe in Me… Before Me no God was formed, nor will there be after Me. I, even I, am the Lord, and besides Me there is no Savior” (Isaiah 43:9-11).
9- They fell down and worshipped Him.(this argument has been discussed in details in my discord pls see is Catalogue 9 thread)
The Gospels speak of some of Christ’s contemporaries’ worship of Him, and they see in their worship of Him evidence of His divinity and His worthiness of worship. The father of the bleeding girl fell down before Him: “While He yet spake these things to them, behold, a ruler came and worshipped him” (Matthew 9:18). The leper also fell down before Him: “Behold, a leper came and worshipped Him” (Matthew 8:2). The Magi fell down before Him in His childhood: “They fell down and worshipped Him, and opened their treasures” (Matthew 2:11). Peter, however, refused Cornelius’ worship of Him, and said to him: “Stand up, I also am a man” (Acts 10:25). He considered worship a type of worship that should only be done to God. Accordingly, Christians see in Christ’s acceptance of worship of Him evidence that He was God.
There is no doubt that prostration is a manifestation of worship, but it does not necessarily mean that all prostration is worship. Some prostration is for reverence and glorification only. Jacob, his wives and his sons prostrated to Esau, son of Isaac, when they met him: “And he passed on before them, and bowed himself to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother… And the two maids came near, they and their children, and bowed themselves; and Leah also came near with her children, and bowed themselves. And afterward Joseph and Rachel came near, and bowed themselves” (Genesis 33:3-7). Moses, peace be upon him, also prostrated himself, according to what is stated in the Holy Book, to his father-in-law when he came from Midian to visit him: “And Moses went out to meet his father-in-law, and bowed himself, and kissed him” (Exodus 18:7). Joseph’s brothers prostrated themselves out of reverence, not worship, to their brother Joseph: “Then Joseph’s brothers came and bowed themselves to him with their faces to the ground” (Genesis 42:6). This custom continued among the children of Israel: “After the death of Jehoiada, the leaders of the tribes came to him, and they bowed themselves to him with their faces to the ground” (Genesis 42:6). Judah, and they bowed down to the king (Al-Ayyam (2) 24/7).
So why did Christians consider bowing down to Jesus as worship and bowing down to others as not worship?!
Should we continue to give examples or is the foolishness of the minds still urgent!
Prostration of worship is only for God Almighty and this is what Christ himself said: (You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve) Luke 4:8. As for prostration of greeting, glorification and reverence, there are many examples in the Old and New Testaments, and we cannot be partisan to Jesus for a matter that was done with many others!
The disgraced priest "Zakaria Botros" mentioned in one of the episodes of his ugly program that Al-Saddī said in his interpretation: (I met the mother of Yahya, the mother of Jesus, and she said that what is in my womb (Yahya) bows down to what is in your womb (Jesus))). And he used this narration as evidence of the divinity of Christ.
As for what Al-Suddi mentioned in his narration in which it was stated that the mother of Yahya, peace be upon him, felt that what was in her womb was prostrating to what was in the womb of Mary, meaning the Messiah, upon them all be the most perfect prayers and the most complete peace, there are two matters in this:
First: Al-Suddi is not an authority and the scholars of hadith differed concerning him: some of them trusted him, some of them disbelieved him, and most of them are weak and disbelievers. A hadith like this should not be taken from him. However, we may take the linguistic interpretation from him as a reference only if his interpretation matches the interpretation of the trustworthy ones, but we do not make him an authority in the religion of Allah.
Sheikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said in “Tafsir Ayat Ashkalat” (1/167): “He mentioned at the beginning of his interpretation (i.e. Al-Suddi) that he took it from Abu Malik and from Abu Salih, from Ibn Abbas, and from Marra Al-Hamadani from Ibn Masoud, and from people from the companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, but he transmits it word for word, and mixes the narrations with each other. There may be mursal and musnad narrations in it, and he does not distinguish between them.”
The second: is that prostration is a prostration of reverence, respect and greeting, not worship and deification of the one to whom prostration is made. We have transmitted many texts from the Holy Book that clarify this matter, which no one denies except a squabbler! This type of prostration is in your law and is established among you, and the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, nullified it. On the authority of Abdullah bin Abi Awfa, he said: (When Muadh came from Ash-Sham, he prostrated to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, so he, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: What is this, O Muadh? He said: I came to Ash-Sham and I saw them prostrating to their bishops and patriarchs, so I wished in my heart that we would do that to you. So the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: Do not do that, for if I were to command anyone to prostrate to other than God, I would command a woman to prostrate to her husband) (Narrated by Ibn Majah in “The Book of Marriage” No. 1843).
So, listener, note that Muadh, may God be pleased with him, saw what the Christians in the Levant were doing to their bishops and patriarchs in terms of prostration and glorification, because this has been their law since time immemorial!
So why the partisanship for Jesus only?!
That is why Al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his commentary on Al-Suddi’s narration: “The meaning of prostration here is submission and surrender, like prostration when facing peace as was in the law of those before us, and as Allah commanded the angels to prostrate to Adam” (Stories of the Prophets, p. 493).
10- Your sins are forgiven.
Among the evidence that Christians use to prove the divinity of Christ is what the Gospels have reported about the forgiveness of the sins of the paralytic and the sinner at his hands. Forgiveness is one of the characteristics of divinity, and accordingly Christ is a God who forgives sins. He said to the sinner Mary Magdalene: “Your sins are forgiven you” (Luke 7:48), and He also said to the paralytic: “Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven you.” The Jews accused him of blasphemy and said: “They said to themselves, ‘This man blasphemes’” (Matthew 9:3).
But if we return to the story of the sinner and the paralytic, we will see clearly that Christ is not the one who forgave their sins. In the story of the woman, when people doubted Christ and how He said to her, “Your sins are forgiven,” while He was merely a human being, Christ removed the ambiguity and told the woman that it was her faith that saved her. It is worth noting that Christ did not claim that He was the one who forgave her sin, but rather He told that her sin had been forgiven, and the one who forgave it, of course, was God Almighty.
The whole story is as the writer of the Gospel of Luke reported: “But she anointed My feet with ointment. Therefore I say to you, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven, because she loved much. But he who is forgiven little loves little. Then He said to her, ‘Your sins are forgiven.’ And those who were reclining with Him began to say among themselves, ‘Who is this who even forgives sins?’ But He said to the woman, ‘Your faith has saved you; go in peace’” (Luke 7:46-50).
Likewise in the story of the paralytic, Christ did not claim that He was the one who forgives sins. He said to the paralytic: “Take heart, my son, your sins are forgiven you.” So He informed of the realization of forgiveness, and did not say that He was the one who forgives them. When the Jews made a mistake, and it occurred to them that he was blaspheming, Christ rebuked them for the evil in their thoughts, and corrected the matter for them, and explained to them that this forgiveness was not of His own doing, but rather of God’s authority, but God had permitted Him to do so, like all the miracles and wonders that He performed, and they understood what He meant and the ambiguity was removed from their hearts. “When the crowds saw it, they marveled, and glorified God, who had given such authority to men.” The whole story, as reported by the writer of the Gospel of Matthew, is as follows: “He said to the paralytic, ‘Son, be of good cheer; your sins are forgiven you.’ And behold, some of the scribes said among themselves, ‘This man blasphemes.’ But Jesus knew their thoughts and said, ‘Why do you think evil in your hearts? Which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven you,’ or to say, ‘Arise and walk?’ But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins,’ then he said to the paralytic, ‘Arise, take up your mat and go to your house.’ And he arose and went to his own house. And when he saw the crowds, they marveled and glorified God, who had given such authority to men” (Matthew 9:3-8).
Since Christ did not possess it of his own accord, he asked God to forgive the Jews. If he had possessed it, he would have forgiven them, and he did not ask God for it, as in Luke: “Then Jesus said, ‘Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing’” (Luke 23:34).
This authority was given to him as it was given to others according to what is stated in your Gospels: “He turned to his disciples and said, ‘All things have been delivered to me by my Father’” (Luke 10:22). Otherwise, he has no power or strength. He said in another place: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me” (Matthew 28:18). So it is not his personal authority, but rather it was given to him by God.
I now recall what the Zionist priest, Anis Shorsh, said in his debate with the scholar Deedat, that Christ said that out of humility!
There is no power or strength except with God!
The authority to forgive sins was also given to someone other than Christ. It was given to the disciples: “Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Again, I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven” (Matthew 18:18-20). But, as is obvious, it does not mean their divinity because it is not a personal right of theirs, but a divine gift given to them and to their teacher, Christ. This is what the Holy Book mentions, as they have become able to forgive the sins that relate to their personal rights, and even all the sins and transgressions according to what is stated in your book, and their forgiveness of personal sins, Jesus says about it: “If you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses” (Matthew 6/14-15), while John gives them an open certificate in the forgiveness of any sin and transgression, as he says: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (John 20/28), so they are like Christ, peace be upon him.
The Church inherited this glory and authority from Peter and the disciples, so the priests forgave sinners through confession or indulgences, and they relied in their approval on their inheritance of the authority that was given to Peter: “You are Peter... and I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven...” (Matthew 16:19). If Peter or the Pope forgave a person’s sins, his sin would be forgiven, without this requiring his divinity.
So it does not necessarily mean that Christ is considered God because of his approval of forgiving the sins of sinners, as the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “Whoever says ‘Glory be to God and praise be to Him’ a hundred times a day, his sins will be forgiven, even if they were like the foam of the sea” (Agreed upon). The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever stands in prayer on the Night of Decree out of faith and in the hope of reward, will have his previous sins forgiven” (Agreed upon). He also said: “Whoever stands in prayer during Ramadan out of faith and in the hope of reward, will have his previous sins forgiven” (Agreed upon). The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) also said: “When the Imam says ‘Ameen’, then say ‘Ameen’, for whoever’s ‘Ameen’ coincides with the ‘Ameen’ of the angels, will have his previous sins forgiven” (Agreed upon). The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) also said: “While a dog was circling a well, it was about to die of thirst, when a prostitute from among the prostitutes of the Children of Israel saw it. She took off her sandals and gave it some to drink, and she was forgiven because of it” (Agreed upon). The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “The martyr has six qualities with Allah: he is forgiven from the first drop of his blood, he is shown his seat in Paradise, he is spared the torment of the grave, he is safe from the greatest terror, he is adorned with the garment of faith, he is married to the houris, and he intercedes for seventy of his relatives.” (Narrated by Ibn Majah in the Book of Jihad, No. 2789).
It is not known from these authentic hadiths that Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is a god, rather it is known from them that Allah Almighty is the source of this forgiveness and that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is only a conveyor of the message from his Lord.
11- Allah is the Judge
The books speak of Christ and that He is the Judge of creation on the Day of Judgment. Paul says: “I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom” (Timothy (2) 4/1). They see in this evidence of His divinity because the Torah says: “God is the Judge” (Psalms 50/6). However, there are texts that prevent Christ from being the Judge: “For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him. He who believes in Him is not condemned, but he who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God” (John 3/17). Christ will not condemn anyone, which Christ confirmed by saying: “And if anyone hears My words and does not believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. He who rejects Me and does not receive My words has one who judges him (i.e. God and His law). The word that I have spoken, the same will judge him on the last day” (John 12/47-48).
And if Christians insist that judgment is one of the works of Christ, others share in it with Him, namely the twelve disciples, including the traitor Judas Iscariot: “Then Jesus said to them, ‘Truly I say to you, that in the regeneration when the Son of Man sits on the throne of his glory, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel’” (Matthew 19/28).
And in Luke, “that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22/30). What is even more amazing is that the saints and Paul will participate in the judgment of the angels and the entire world with Christ: (1 Corinthians 6:2-3) “Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If then the world is judged by you, are you not worthy of the lesser judgments? Do you not know that we will judge angels, much less the things of this life?” So the argument that Christ’s judgment of the world is evidence of his divinity is an extremely weak and fallen argument, and the Gospels themselves refute it.
12- He was in the world and the world was created by Him
. Some of the creative texts were attributed to Christ, so the Christians clung to them and saw them as indicative of His divinity. Among them is what Paul said about Christ: “For in Him all things were created, that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or principalities or powers—all things were created by Him and for Him” (Colossians 1:16-17). In another place he says: “God created all things through Jesus Christ” (Ephesians 3:9). Similar to this is what came in the introduction to John: “He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him” (John 1:10), and similar to this in (Hebrews 1:2).
The investigators do not accept that what is meant by these texts is that Christ created creatures in the creation of existence, but rather what is meant is the new creation, which is the creation of guidance that David spoke of when he called upon God: “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me” (Psalm 51:10). Likewise, Paul said about believers in Christ: “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation” (Corinthians (2) 5:17).
He said: “For in Christ neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creation” (Galatians 6:15). In another place he says: “Put on the new man, created according to God in righteousness” (Ephesians 4:24). He said about Christ: “The firstborn of all creation” (Colossians 1:15), meaning that he is the first of the believers. On this basis, James considered the disciples to be the firstborn of creation, saying: “Of his own will, he gave us birth by the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures” (James 1:18).
Therefore, the purpose of Christ’s creation of humanity is spiritual creation, as God made him a reviver of dead and hard hearts.
Paul’s statement: “For in Him were all things created, both in the heavens and on the earth” is an exaggeration that is well-known in the biblical and evangelical texts, including Moses’ statement to the children of Israel: “Behold, you are this day as the stars of heaven for multitude” (Deuteronomy 1:10). And similarly in his statement: “And the Midianites and the Amalekites and all the children of the East were lodged in the valley like locusts for multitude, and their camels were without number, like the sand which is by the seashore for multitude” (Judges 7:12). Christ cannot be the Creator of the heavens and the earth and everything in between in any other sense, since He Himself is a creation, even though the Christians claim that He was the first of the created, but in any case He is a creation, and the created is not the Creator. We challenge the most knowledgeable Christian scholars to prove how a creator God could create another god like Himself who is a creator and not a created one! Simply by creating another god, this god became a creation.
He who was unable to restore life to himself when he died is too incapable to be the Creator of the heavens and the earth: “This Jesus God raised up” (Acts 2:32)!
13- He who comes from above is above all.
The Gospels mention that Christ came from above or from heaven and “He who comes from above is above all” (John 3:31). They see the image of his divinity shining in his saying: “I am from above. You are of this world, but I am not of this world” (John 8:23). This indicates - according to the Christians - that he is a unique divine being.
The heavenly coming means the coming of gifts and the law, which is something that is the same with all the prophets, including John the Baptist. Christ asked the Jews: “Where was the baptism of John? From heaven? Or from men? And they reasoned among themselves, saying, ‘If we say, From heaven,’ they will say to us, ‘Why then did you not believe in him?’ But if we say, ‘From men,’ we are afraid of the people…” (Matthew 21:25-26).
The Gospels mention that everyone who comes and goes, if he believes that Jesus is the Christ, was born from above, and whoever was born from above can see the kingdom of God: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3). He also said: “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God” (John (1) 5:1).
He also said: “Everyone who does righteousness has been born of God” (John (1) 2:29).
Christ's saying, "I am not of this world" is not evidence of divinity at all. What he meant was that he was different from all other people in that he was above the material world, but rather he was above that wreckage that all other people chase after. He said something similar about his disciples as well, after he saw in them a love of the afterlife and aversion to the world, so he said, "If you were of the world, the world would love its own. But because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you" (John 15:19).
And in another place he said about them: “I have given them your word, and the world hates them, because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world” (17:14-15). So he said about his disciples what he said about himself, that they are all not of this world. If this were to be taken literally, and it entailed divinity, then it would be necessary for all the disciples to be gods. But his expression in all of this is a kind of metaphor, as one says: So-and-so is not of this world, meaning he does not live for the world and does not care about it, but his concern is always the pleasure of God and the afterlife, and this is the case with all the prophets.
In this regard, the Christians also claimed that Christ is God because he said: “No one has ascended to heaven except He who came down from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven” (John 3:13). To analyze this passage, we must first note that the Christians’ claim came from what Christ said, among other things: “the Son of Man who is in heaven.” This sentence was distorted by vandals and was not found in the oldest manuscripts currently in world museums. Therefore, this sentence was deleted from modern revised translations in various languages, such as the Catholic translation of the Jesuit order, where the text became: “No one has ascended to heaven except He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man.” If the Christians' reliance on these manuscripts, the oldest of which dates back to the third century AD, is directed to them regarding the authenticity of the biblical texts, then what does not prompt us to say that this entire text is foreign and distorted, especially since these manuscripts are the only guide for Christians in accepting or rejecting the texts? What if the distortion originally occurred in those manuscripts that they made their basis for revising the texts?! What prompted the Christians to delete the end of the text from modern translations is their reliance on those manuscripts. So who can guarantee that the entire text is correct if these manuscripts were not originally approved by Christ, peace be upon him?! And if the distortion occurred in these manuscripts that they made their basis, then how can they know that they were not distorted and distorted, and there are no older manuscripts or other evidence to prove the authenticity of those manuscripts?!
As for what Christ said, as they claimed: “No one has ascended to heaven except He who came down from heaven.” If we take the descent from heaven in its literal meaning, then there is no proof in it of the divinity of Christ, since the descent of a person or being from heaven to earth does not indicate his divinity, neither directly nor indirectly. Many of the heavenly beings descended from heaven, such as Gabriel, for example, who would descend from heaven to earth carrying God’s messages or carrying out an order from God Almighty. Also, on many occasions, some angels descended to earth wearing human clothing. Rather, they believe that God sent down the ram that redeemed the sacrificed son of Abraham from heaven (Genesis 22:11-13). The most that such a text can say, if taken literally, is that Christ existed in God’s knowledge like all of creation before he was born as a human being on earth. When the time came that God had determined for him to be created and for his term on earth to begin, God’s command came down and Christ was born. This is the interpretation of his statement: “Except he who descended from heaven.” As for his statement: “No one has ascended to heaven,” it is a statement from him that he will be taken up to heaven safely just as he came to earth safely, as in his statement: “I am with you a little while longer, and then I go to him who sent me” (John 7:33). Then he stated that the disciples will ascend and be with him, so they also descended from heaven according to the meaning we mentioned, because no one ascends to heaven except he who descended from heaven: “So that where I am, there you may be also” (John 14:1-4).
14- He ascended to heaven and
sat at the right hand of God. Christians claim that Christ ascended alive to heaven, and that he is alive there now, which indicates his divinity: “Then the Lord, after he had spoken to them, was received up into heaven, and sat at the right hand of God” (Mark 16:19).
And we say: The ascension was not unique to Christ so that you claim that He is God. Didn’t your Holy Book mention in the Second Book of Kings [2:11] that the prophet Elijah ascended to heaven alive and left Elisha behind him weeping and that he is still alive in it? : )) And while they - that is, Elijah and Elisha - were walking and talking, suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated them, and Elijah was thrown into heaven by a whirlwind.))
And didn’t your Holy Book mention in the Book of Genesis [5:24] that Enoch ascended alive to heaven and that he is alive in it? : “And Enoch walked with God and was not found, for God took him.” This is how it is in the Van Dyck translation and in the Book of Life translation: “God took him to Him.” So if the ascension to heaven was evidence of divinity, then Enoch and Elijah would have become gods. And no one has said this.
It is worth noting that the paragraph in which it is stated that Christ ascended to heaven came in the Gospel of Mark, and this paragraph from the Gospel of Mark and the one before it (the conclusion of the Gospel of Mark) did not appear in the oldest manuscripts:
(There is a question that has not been answered: How was the book (the Gospel of Mark) concluded? It is generally accepted that the conclusion as it is now (16/9-20) was added to alleviate the sudden pause at the end of the book in verse 8. But we will never know whether the original conclusion of the book was lost or whether Mark saw that the reference to the Galilean visionary tradition in the verse was not sufficient to conclude his narrative) (Catholic translation, p. 124).
I will quote here what some English translations say about the conclusion of the Gospel of Mark:
The most reliable early manu******s and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.
(new international version)
16:20 Verses 9-20 are bracketed in NU-**** as not original. They are lacking in Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, although nearly all other manuscripts of Mark contain them.
(New King James Version)
Some Christians may argue that this paragraph appears at the end of the Gospel of Luke (24:51), and we say that the Gospel of Mark is the source of the Gospel of Luke. If this paragraph is not found in the oldest manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark, then where did the writer of the Gospel of Luke get it from?!
Accordingly, the use of this text as evidence of Christ’s alleged ascension after his alleged crucifixion and sitting at the right hand of God is invalid, let alone the use of it as evidence of his alleged divinity!
15- Using the words “Lord” and “God” in reference to Christ
Christians cling to the terms that were used for Christ as divinity and lordship, and they see them as indicating the divinity of Christ, and at the beginning of it is that he was called Jesus, which is a Hebrew word meaning: Jehovah is salvation.
And among them is what they considered a prophecy about him in Isaiah: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even forever." (Isaiah 9:6).
And likewise in the words of David: "The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, Until I make your enemies your footstool. The Lord will send the scepter of your strength out of Zion. Rule in the midst of your enemies. Your people will willingly offer themselves in the day of your strength, In the beauty of holiness from the womb of the dawn To you is the dew of your youth, The Lord has sworn and will not repent. You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek." (Psalm 110:1-4), so David called him Lord.
And similar to it is the saying of Paul: “Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever” (Romans 9:5), and similar to it is the saying of Thomas to Christ: “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28), as Peter said to him: “Never mind, Lord” (Matthew 16:22), and he also said: “This is the Lord of all” (Acts 10:36), and it is stated in the Book of Revelation about Christ: “And he has on his robe and on his thigh a name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS” (Revelation 17:14), and other texts in which the word Lord or God was given to Christ, which indicated to them his divinity and lordship.
But these applications could not make Christ Lord and God, since many of them came in the context of naming, and calling a creature God does not make him so. Paul and Barnabas were called gods when they performed some miracles: “And when the multitudes saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying, ‘The gods have come down to us in the image of men’” (Acts 14:11). It was the custom of the Romans to call someone who did something beneficial to the people a god. The name does not really change anything, nor does it make a creature a god, nor a mortal servant a lord and a god.
Ishmael was called by his Hebrew name, which means “God hears,” as was Jehoiakim, meaning “God lifts up,” Joshua, “the Lord saves,” Tobiah, “God is good,” and others… Their names did not require their divinity.
The Book of Revelation says: “He who overcomes, I will put in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out. And I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God, and my new name” (Revelation 3:12). The Torah says: “And they shall put my name on the children of Israel” (Numbers 6:27). However, they are not gods.
Muslims do not accept the authenticity of many of those explicit phrases that the New Testament claims were issued by the disciples, as they were subject to deliberate distortion, as occurred in (John (1) 5:7-8). Distortion may also occur due to poor and inaccurate translation. The word “Lord,” which is often used in Arabic translations as a title for Christ, is in foreign translations meaning “master” or “teacher.” The equivalent in the English translation is “lord,” meaning “master,” and in French: “le mait,” meaning “teacher,” and so on in all other translations, such as German, Italian, and Spanish.
What the Arabic translation brought is not new, but rather it is consistent with the nature of the language spoken by Christ and his contemporaries. The word “Lord” is used for the teacher, and it signifies a kind of respect and appreciation, as the Samaritan woman said to Christ: “Lord, I perceive that you are a prophet” (John 4:19). Her words did not mean to describe Christ as a lord, otherwise it would contradict her saying that he was a prophet. In the Gospel of John, Christ was addressed by his disciples: “Lord,” and they meant: “Teacher.” Here is Mary Magdalene turning to him and saying: “Rabboni” (which means “Teacher”). And she told the disciples that she had seen the Lord (John 20:16-17).
Two of his disciples addressed him: “Lord” (which means, “Teacher”) (John 1:38). None of the disciples had in mind the technical meaning of the word “Lord” when they called Christ by it, for they meant: teacher and master. Therefore, they likened him to John the Baptist when they said to him: “Lord, teach us to pray, as John taught his disciples.” (Luke 11:1).
As for Thomas’s saying to Christ, “My Lord and my God,” it was not in the context of addressing Christ, but when he saw Christ alive, and he had thought that he was dead, he was surprised by that, so he said in astonishment, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). What confirms the correctness of this understanding is that Christ said in the same context that he would ascend to his God (see John 20:17). Accordingly, if divinity here is meant to refer to Christ, it is metaphorical and not real.
If Christ had understood that he meant his divinity, Christ, peace be upon him, would not have remained silent. He, peace be upon him, even refused to be called good, because when some of his disciples called him: “Good teacher...” he said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except one, that is, God” (Matthew 19:17). How could he accept to be called Lord and God in truth?
The use of the word Lord to mean: master is common in the Greek language. Stephen Neal says: “The original Greek word meaning: ‘Lord’ can be used as a polite form of address. The Philippian jailer addresses Paul and Wasila with the word: ‘Lord’ or ‘Master’. The Book of Acts says: “He brought them out and said: ‘Lords, what must I do to be saved?’ And they said: ‘Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household’” (Acts 16:30)… The word was a title of honor…”
Concerning the evidence of the psalm: “The Lord said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.” (Psalm 110/1), it does not mean the Messiah in any way, but rather the awaited Messiah, who was promised to the children of Israel, and he is Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace. Peter made a mistake when he understood that the text meant the Messiah, and said: “For David did not ascend into heaven, but he himself says, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’ So let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah. When they heard this, they were pricked to the heart” (Acts 2/29-37).
The evidence of Peter’s misunderstanding, as well as the Christians’ understanding, is that Christ denied that he was the promised Messiah through David, “While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, ‘What do you think about the Messiah (i.e., the one the Jews were waiting for), whose son is he?’ They said to him, ‘The Son of David.’ He said to them, ‘How is it that David in spirit calls him Lord, saying, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool”?’ But if David calls him Lord
, how is he his son? No one could answer him a word. And from that day on no one dared to ask him at all” (Matthew 22:41-46). Christ asked the Jews about the awaited Messiah whom David and other prophets had preached, “What do you think about the Messiah, whose son is he?” They answered him, “The Son of David.” He made a mistake and said, “If David calls him Lord, how is he his son?” And in Mark: “How do the scribes say that the Christ is the son of David? For David himself said by the Holy Spirit, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.” So David himself calls him Lord. But where then is he his son?” (Mark 12:37).
Luke also mentioned this, “And he said to them, ‘How do they say that the Christ is the son of David?’ For David himself says in the book of Psalms, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.” So if David calls him Lord, how is he his son?” (Luke 20:40-44).
And concerning the prophecy of the Prophet Isaiah: “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even forever” (Isaiah 9:6), none of these names were given to Christ. Where was he called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty, Father, or Prince of Peace? There is no text in the Holy Bible that mentions that he was called by these names. If they say that what is meant is that these are the attributes of this promised son, then they also do not apply to Christ in any way. They speak of a victorious, triumphant prophet who will rule over his people and will be the heir to the kingdom of David. All of this is impossible for Christ, impossible according to the evidence of reality and texts. Christ did not rule over his people for a single day, but was fleeing from the children of Israel, fearing their violence, just as he fled from his people when they wanted him to rule over them: “But when Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take him by force to make him king, he withdrew again to the mountain by himself” (John 6:15). He fled from them, because his kingdom was not a worldly, temporal kingdom, not on the throne of David, but rather a spiritual kingdom in the afterlife: “Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now my kingdom is not from hence” (John 18:36).
Isaiah also speaks of the Prince of Peace, and he does not apply to the one to whom the Gospels attributed that he said: “Do not think that I have come to send peace on earth. I have not come to send peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law, and a man’s enemies against those of his own household” (Matthew 10:34-36). Is he then called the Prince of Peace? Isaiah also speaks of an Almighty One, not of a limited human being who cannot do anything of himself, as he said of himself: “I can do nothing of myself; as I hear, I judge” (John 5:30). In another text he says to the Jews: “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father doing. For whatever he does, the Son also does likewise” (John 5:19).
The Holy Bible forbids that Christ be a king over the children of Israel, as God forbade the kingship to the descendants of Jehoiakim, one of the ancestors of Christ, who reigned over the kingdom of Judah and corrupted it, so God said about him: “Thus says the Lord concerning Jehoiakim king of Judah: He shall have no one to sit on the throne of David, and his body shall be cast out to the heat by day and to the cold by night; and I will punish him, his descendants, and his servants for their iniquity” (Jeremiah 36:30-31).
Christ is from the descendants of this corrupt king, as in the First Book of Chronicles: “The sons of Josiah: the firstborn: Johanan; the second: Jehoiakim; the third: Zedekiah; the fourth: Shallum. And the sons of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son, and Zedekiah his son” (Chronicles (1) 3:14-15), so Jehoiakim is one of the ancestors of Christ.
This is a name that the writer of the Gospel of Matthew omitted from his lineage of Christ, between Josiah and his grandson Jeconiah, saying: “And Amon begot Josiah. And Josiah begot Jeconiah and his brothers, when they were carried away captive to Babylon” (Matthew 1:10-11).
The reason for omitting the name of this grandfather of Christ from the lineage of Christ is not hidden from the astute reader.
Then, even if the generalization and translation are correct, then there is no indication of the divinity of Christ, as the use of the word Lord and God for creatures is known in the Holy Bible. Among what is mentioned in the books of the People of the Bible is the use of the word “Lord” and “God” for angels. It is stated in the Book of Judges, which tells of the appearance of the angel of the Lord to Manoah and his wife: “And the angel of the Lord appeared no more to Manoah and his wife. Then Manoah knew that he was the angel of the Lord. And Manoah said to his wife, We will surely die, for we have seen God” (Judges 13:21-22), meaning the angel of God. And
the angel of God appeared to Sarah and gave her the good news of Isaac, “And the angel of the Lord said to her… So she called the name of the Lord who spoke to her, You are El Roi” (Genesis 16:11-13), so she called the angel the Lord.
And similarly, the angel who accompanied the children of Israel on the journey of the Exodus was called the Lord: “And the Lord went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them on the way, and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light.... And the angel of God, who went before the army of Israel, moved and went behind them. And the pillar of cloud moved from before them and stood behind them” (Exodus 13:21-14:19), so the angel was called Lord.
Among the things that came in the Torah are the use of these terms for the prophets. God said to Moses about Aaron: “He shall be a spokesman for you, and you shall be God to him” (see Exodus 4:16). And from this is God’s saying to Moses: “And the Lord said to Moses, ‘See, I have made you a God to Pharaoh, and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet’” (Exodus 7:1), meaning: he shall have authority over him. The prophets were called (God) metaphorically, that is, messengers of God, for: “When a man went to inquire of God, he would say, ‘Let us go to the seer.’ For formerly a prophet was called a seer” (Samuel (1) 9/9).
The word “God” was used to refer to judges, because they rule according to God’s law. In the Book of Exodus, “If a servant says… then his master shall bring him to God and bring him to the door…” (Exodus 20/5-6).
In the book that follows, it says: “But if the thief is not found, then the master of the house shall bring him to God to judge whether he has not laid his hand on his neighbor’s property… then he whose fault God judges shall make restitution to his neighbor” (Exodus 22/8-9). In the Book of Deuteronomy, “The two men between whom there is a dispute shall stand before the Lord, before the priests” (Deuteronomy 19/17).
And likewise: "God stands in the congregation of God; He judges in the midst of the gods. How long will you judge unrighteously, And lift up the faces of the wicked?" (Psalm 82:1), meaning the nobles and judges of the children of Israel.
Rather, this generality extends to include all the children of Israel, as in the words of David in his Psalms: "I said, 'You are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High. But you will die like men'" (Psalm 82:6), and this is what Christ cited when he said: "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, You are gods?' If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken, do you say of him whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?" (John 10:34).
The books continue to use these terms even for demons and the false gods of the nations. Paul called Satan a god, and he called the belly a god, and he wanted the figurative meaning, so he said about Satan: “The god of this world has blinded the minds of unbelievers, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ should shine unto them” (Corinthians 4:5). He said about those who follow their lusts and desires: “Whose god is their belly, and their glory is in their shame…” (Philippians 3:19). Similar to this is what came in the Psalms: “For I know that the Lord is great, and our Lord is above all gods.”(Psalm 135:5), and the divinity of the belly and others is a metaphorical, unreal divinity.
This is the language of the Holy Bible in expression, and those who insist on understanding its words literally are mistaken, as are those who differentiate between similarities. When Christ heard such metaphors and figurative gods, he made it clear that there is one true God, who is Allah, and he said: “And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (John 17:3), which clearly means: I bear witness that there is no god but Allah, and that Jesus is the servant and messenger of Allah. This is what Muslims believe about him, peace and blessings be upon him. Such metaphors are mentioned in the Quran, as in the words of God Almighty on the tongue of Joseph, peace be upon him, to his companion in prison: {And he said to the one of them whom he thought would be saved, "Mention me to your Lord." But Satan made him forget to mention his Lord, and he remained in prison for several years.} Yusuf 42, so what he meant was the king.
16- Son of God:
Gospel texts speak about Christ and mention that he is the Son of God, and Christians see them as clear evidence of the divinity of Christ. Is this evidence correct? Did Christ call himself the Son of God?
The first thing that investigators draw attention to is that Christ - in the Gospels - did not call himself the Son of God except once in John 10/37, and in other cases the Gospels mention that his contemporaries and disciples used to say that he was the Son of God. However, investigators doubt that these words came from Christ or his disciples. Singer says in his book "The Dictionary of the Bible": "It is not certain that Jesus himself used that expression."
Charles Juniper says in his book "Christianity: Its Origins and Development": "Christ never claimed to be the awaited Messiah, nor did he say about himself that he was the Son of God, for this is a language that Christians later used to express Jesus." Juniper believes that the wrong concept reached the Gospel through the inaccurate understanding of the pagan converts, saying: "The concept of 'Son of God' originated from the world of Greek thought."
Some believe that Paul was the first to use the word, which was according to Christ's language (servant of God) and its Greek translation is servant, so he replaced it with the Greek word pais meaning child or servant in order to be close to the new converts from the pagans.
Then These texts that describe Christ as the Son of God are opposed by eighty-three texts that called Christ “the Son of Man.” If those that called Him the Son of God indicate His divinity, then these confirm His humanity, turning the others into a metaphorical meaning.
Among them is Matthew’s saying: “Jesus said to him, ‘Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has no place to lay His head. ’” (Matthew 8:20), and also His saying: “The Son of Man goes as it is written of Him.” (Mark 14:21). The Torah says: “God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent.” (Numbers 23:9), so Christ is not God.
The term sonship that was given to Christ was given to many others, and that did not necessitate their divinity.
Among them is Adam, of whom it was said: “Adam is the son of God” (Luke 3:38).
And Solomon, as it was mentioned in the Book of Chronicles, “He shall build me a house… I will be his father, and he shall be my son” (Chronicles (1) 17/12-13).
And similarly, he said to David, “You are my son, today I have begotten you” (Psalm 2/7).
And the angels were called sons of God, “as the angels are sons of God” (Luke 20/36).
The texts also called others sons of God, or mentioned that God is their father, yet Christians do not claim their divinity.
The disciples are the sons of God, as Christ said about them: “Say to them, ‘I ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God’” (John 20:17).
He also said to the disciples: “You therefore must be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect” (Matthew 5:48). Christ taught them to say: “Pray then like this: ‘Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be your name’” (Matthew 6:9). And His saying: “Your Father who is in heaven gives good things to those who ask Him” (Matthew 6:11). John was saying: “See what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called children of God” (John (1) 3:1).
Even the Jews, as in Christ’s saying to the Jews: “You do the works of your Father.” They said to Him: “We were not born of fornication. We have one Father, God” (John 8:41).
This term is also applied to the honorable and powerful without Christians or others understanding from it the true divinity: “For the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took for themselves wives of all which they chose.... For the sons of God went in unto the daughters of men, and they bare them children. These are the mighty men which of old were renown” (Genesis 6:2). It is possible that it includes all the people of Israel: “The number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered. And it shall be, instead of it being said to them, ‘You are not My people,’ it shall be said to them, ‘The sons of the living God’” (Hosea 1:10). And similarly: “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son” (Hosea 11:1).
And from this also is what is stated in the Book of Exodus: “Then you shall say to Pharaoh thus: ‘Says the Lord, Israel is My son, My firstborn. “I said to you, ‘Let my son go, that he may serve me,’ but you refused” (Exodus 4:22).
David addressed them, saying, “Ascribe to the Lord, you sons of God, ascribe to the Lord glory and strength” (Psalm 29:1).
And similarly, he said, “For who in heaven is equal to the Lord? Who is like the Lord among the sons of God? (Psalm 89:6).
And in the Book of Job: “There was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord” (Job 1:6). And the Gospel said about them: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God” (Matthew 5:9).
Therefore, Christians cannot make the texts related to Christ evidence of His divinity and then prevent the application of the true term to Adam, Solomon, Jacob, and everyone else. Their specificity of Christ in the true sense requires a proof that they do not possess. It also says: “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God” (John (1) 5:1).
And at the end of this same letter: ((We know that everyone who has been born of God does not sin, but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the evil one does not touch him)) [5:18]. And also in the third chapter of the same letter, John says: ((Everyone who has been born of God does not commit sin, for His seed remains in him. He cannot sin because he has been born of God, so The children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil... etc.)) The First Epistle of John: [3: 9-10].
And the saying of the Book: "Everyone who does righteousness is born of Him" (John (1) 2/29). And in the Epistle of Paul to the Romans [8: 14-16]: ((For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of slavery again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption, by whom we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are the sons of God.))
The intended meaning of sonship in all that was said about Christ and others is a metaphorical meaning of the beloved of God or the obedient of God. Therefore the centurion who saw the crucified one - according to the Christians - dying said:“Truly this man was the Son of God” (Mark 15:39).
When Luke told the same story, he replaced the phrase with its synonym, saying: “Truly this man was righteous” (Luke 23:47). John used the same term when he spoke about the children of God, saying: “But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in his name” (John 1:12). He also says: “He who hears the word of God is from God” (John 8:47).
Such a metaphorical use of sonship is familiar in the Holy Scriptures, which spoke about the sons of Satan and the sons of the world (the world)… (see John 8:44, Luke 16:8).
As for the real meaning of sonship, the demons spoke it, so Christ rebuked them, as in the Gospel of Luke: “Demons also came out of many, crying out and saying, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of God.’ But he rebuked them and did not allow them to speak, because they knew that he was the Christ” (Luke 4:41).
Christians see a distinction that is deserved for Christ in His sonship over all other sons, and they do not dispute the validity of the metaphorical use when the word sonship is used in reference to all other creatures.
However, the dispute lies in those descriptions given to Christ and which Christians establish as true, arguing with matters such as: that Christ was described as the firstborn or only son of God (see Hebrews 1:6, John 3:18) or that He was called the Son of God Most High (see Luke 1:32, 76), or that He is a son who is not born of this world like all other sons, but rather is born from heaven, or from above (see John 1:18).
But all of that is proven by the texts similar to other sons.
The birthright is described by Israel: “Israel is my firstborn son” (Exodus 4:22-23).
And so is Ephraim: “For I have become a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn” (Jeremiah 21:9).
And so did David, "He will call upon Me, 'You are my Father and my God, and the Rock of my salvation.' And I will make him my firstborn, high above the kings of the earth." (Psalm 89:26-27).
And if it is said about Christ that He is the Son of God Most High, so are all the children of Israel, "And you are all children of the Most High" (Psalm 82:6). And so are the disciples of Christ, they are also children of the Most High, "Love your enemies...and your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High" (Luke 6:35).
And our final prayer is that all praise is due to God, Lord of the Worlds.
References and Sources:
1- The Holy Quran.
2- Sunnah Books.
3- The Holy Bible - Al-Fandik Translation.
4- The Holy Bible - Translation of the Book of Life.
5- The Holy Bible - Catholic Translation of the Jesuit Order.
6- The Holy Bible - Second Canonical Books.
7- The New Testament - Translation of the Book of Life "Arabic - English".
8- Explanation of the Gospel of John - Priest/ Ibrahim Saeed.
9- The Great Treasure in the Interpretation of the Bible - Dr. William Addy.
10- The Guidance and Light Series - Dr. Munqidh Al-Saqqar.
11- Introduction to the Gospel of Barnabas - Dr. Ahmed Hegazy Al-Saqq.
12- Interpretation of Difficult Verses - Sheikh Al-Islam / Ibn Taymiyyah.
13- Stories of the Prophets - Al-Hafiz / Ibn Kathir.
14- Christ in Islam - The Scholar / Ahmed Deedat.
15- Then They Say This is from God - Engineer / Mahmoud Saad Mahran.
16- Christianity in the Balance website on the Internet:
.png)
Comments
Post a Comment