Try the Trinity.

[Faithfulservant]

The translation of Psalm 2:12 is probably mistaken. Please read my answer on Stack exchange.

I have read that's it means to submit. Who do you think the Son is referencing? Especially in Isaiah.

 

[talib-al-kalim]

However Christians do not consider themselves subject to what Muslims tell them they should believe. They do not regard the Quran as the inerrant word of God. They do not think Muslims have the right to lecture them. They have their own New Testament scriptures, which includes the Pauline and Johannine writings. Christians do not regard their Trinitarian belief as polytheism, and they do not feel obliged to have to keep explaining the subtlety of their belief to Muslims who ignore their explanations anyway.

Muslims who want to know about Christ have to read the New Testament anyway, because the Jesus of the Quran is a sketchy figure who says and does little. Below, in bold, is a complete list of the words spoken by Jesus in the Quran:

(...)

That’s all. The Quran is not an authority on Jesus. To learn about Jesus, it is necessary to turn to the New Testament, which includes the Pauline and Johannine writings, imo

Well, I know the Quran (and the Bible); your citations from the Quran are not complete but I agree with you that it is necessary to read the Gospel accounts to know the message that has come through Jesus (p.b.u.h), and it is also good to study the rest of the NT.

My approach is is first to try to understand the prophets from what had been said before. "Before" would also include oral traditions, even if they have been written later. So Jesus is before Paul and John although the Gospel accounts have been written down later, and Hillel (a.s.) is before Jesus, although the main source on him, the Mishneh Torah has been written down later. So, Jesus has first of all to be understood on the knowledge of the Tanach (OT), the Book of Enoch, the teachings of Hillel and other close antedecessors to grasp the intentional meaning of his teachings, which were directed from someone who knew this background to people who had - theoretically or indeed - this same background.

Likely, it is advisable at first to read and understand e.g. the (first) prophet Isaiah (a.s.) at first from the knowledge of the Torah and what may have been taught before him.

You read Paul and John and the other epistles who show how early followers of Jesus understood Jesus and how Jesus and his early followers understood Isaiah. Maybe you take them as prophets on their own; you take their words as an authorative interpretation of the predecessors and found your belief on them.

Alike, I read the Word of the prophet of the Bible also from the perspective of the Quran. @muhammad_isa and I take its words as an authorative interpretation of the predecessors and found our belief on them.

The view back should shape the selection of an interpretation (among the interpretations that can also be understood only on the base of the preceeding teachings).

You write

They do not think Muslims have the right to lecture them.

In fact, most Muslim have never read the Bible, and most Christians have never read the Quran. I understand this platform as a dialog platform where we do not share our confession but interchange for better understanding, and most people here have had at least a glance, if not a deep study of the main teachings of the other religion. Hardly anyone would really change his or her religion on this discussion, we should at least not expect this from each other, but anyone should be interested in the other position.

By the way, to come back to the original question: How would you explain to a Muslim that the trinity dogma is not polytheist similar to the ancient Arabic religion that was not like the Greek/Roman, but they worshipped "daughters" of Allah beside Him, as subordinate divine beings?

 

[RJM]

your citations from the Quran are not complete

Oh really? Please feel free to add to this list in bold of words spoken by Isa in the Quran:


And [make him] a messenger to the Children of Israel, [who will say], 'Indeed I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I design for you from clay [that which is] like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird by permission of Allah . And I cure the blind and the leper, and I give life to the dead - by permission of Allah . And I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your houses. Indeed in that is a sign for you, if you are believers. (3:49)

(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me. (3:50)

When Jesus found Unbelief on their part He said: “Who will be My helpers to (the work of) Allah?” (3:52)

“…and the Messiah said: O Children of Israel! Serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Surely whoever associates (others) with Allah, then Allah has forbidden to him the garden, and his abode is the fire; and there shall be no helpers for the unjust.”
(5:72)


[And remember] when the disciples said, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, can your Lord send down to us a table [spread with food] from the heaven? [Jesus] said," Fear Allah , if you should be believers."

They said, "We wish to eat from it and let our hearts be reassured and know that you have been truthful to us and be among its witnesses."

Said Jesus, the son of Mary, "O Allah , our Lord, send down to us a table [spread with food] from the heaven to be for us a festival for the first of us and the last of us and a sign from You. And provide for us, and You are the best of providers."

Allah said, "Indeed, I will sent it down to you, but whoever disbelieves afterwards from among you - then indeed will I punish him with a punishment by which I have not punished anyone among the worlds."

And [beware the Day] when Allah will say, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah ?'" He will say, "Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within myself, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen.

I said not to them except what You commanded me - to worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when You took me up, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness.

If You should punish them - indeed they are Your servants; but if You forgive them - indeed it is You who is the Exalted in Might, the Wise. (5:112-120)


He said, I am God's servant; He has given me the Book, and made me a prophet. He has made me blessed wherever I am, and has enjoined on me the Worship and Alms, so long as I live; and to be dutiful to my mother; and has not made me oppressive, impious. Peace is on me the day I was born, the day I shall die, and the day I shall be raised alive. (19:29)

When Jesus came with Clear Signs, he said: “Now have I come to you with Wisdom, and in order to make clear to you some of the (points) on which ye dispute: therefore fear Allah and obey me.” (43:63)

https://legacy.quran.com/

 

[talib-al-kalim]

I have read that's it means to submit. Who do you think the Son is referencing? Especially in Isaiah.

Copy-past from my answer on SE:
(begin quote)

Translations differ in understanding. To get the translations easier to understand, I briefy include the first word, too. In
נַשְּׁקוּ־בַ֡ר
The first word is נַשְּׁקוּ : Translators differ inside the same field of meanings:

• “do homage”
• “pay respect to”
• “kiss his feet”
• “kiss”

The second word, what the question is about, is בר :
We find two main streams:
I. Reading בַ֡ר , translated as “son”, which is originally an Aramaic word

• ✟ King James (and many later English translations): Kiss the Son
• ✟ Amplified Bible: Kiss (pay respect to) the Son
• ✟ New International Version: Kiss his son
• ✟ NASB 1977: Do homage to the Son
• ✡ Arnold Ehrlich: Huldiget dem Sohne
• ✡ Jacques Kohn: Rendez hommage au fils
• ✟ Young's Literal Translation: Kiss the Chosen One

Support for the translation “son” comes from the context in verse 7:

I will proclaim the LORD’s decree: He said to me, “You are my son; today I have become your father”

where the original Hebrew word בְּנִ֥י is used for “My son”.
This is also the argument for the other translation: The text has been written before the Babylonean exile, where this Aramaic word was not used in Hebrew, but only בְּנִ֥י.
II. Reading בֹּר , translated as “purity”

• ✡ JPS 1917: Do homage in purity
• ✡ JPS 1985: Pay homage in good faith
• ✡ Martin Buber: Rüstet euch mit Läuterung
• ✟ Martin Luther: küsst seine Füße mit Zittern
• ✡ Septuagint: δραξασθε παιδειας
• ✟ Brenton Septuagint Translation: Accept correction
• ✟ Douay-Rheims (also a Septuagint translation): Embrace discipline

The addressee of the homage is God, not the King. This also fits much better into the context of the surrounding verses:
Ps 2:10-12 (JPS 1917)

Now therefore, O ye kings, be wise; Be admonished, ye judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, And rejoice with trembling. Do homage in purity, lest He be angry, and ye perish in the way, When suddenly His wrath is kindled.

I have marked the translations by ✡ for a Jewish translation and ✟ for a Christian translation. The majority of Christian translations chose option I (בַ֡ר = son), and the majority of Jewish translations chose option II (בֹּר = purity).
A Christian motivation to use the translation “son” may be the background of the reference to Jesus (p.b.u.h) who is called “Son of God” as a Messianic title (althought he himself preferred the other Messianic title “Son of Man”).
Nevertheless, we find Jewish and Christian translations in both versions, so that it can be denied that the choice merely follows dogmatic criteria.
I tried to answer the question why some translators chose to translate “son” but I think that the translation “purity”, together with the effect that the reverence is due to God, and not to King David (a.s) makes much more sense.
(end quote)

There is no "Son" referenced in Ps 2:12. It is a misreading of the original Hebrew word בֹּר, meaining "purity".
There is indeed a "Son" referenced in the same Psalm, verse 7 (JPS 1985):

Let me tell of the decree:
the LORD said to me,
“You are My son,
I have fathered you this day.

The one to whom this vers refers in the view of the psalmist is King David (a.s.).
The psalmist even sais, He "fathered" יְלִדְתִּֽיךָ׃ him. No Jew, no Christian and no Muslim would say God (Glorified and Exalterd) had intrcourse with David's mother, or that David had/has a divine nature. At its best, he may be counted among the prophets of God.

In the look-back interpretation from after Jesus, it can be interpreted as applied to the Messiah to come, Jesus.
Just this (together with some more from the Tanach) is a key passage for the understanding what Son-of-God means:
It explains the name Son-of-God as a Messianic attribute. This is essential for the understanding of the saying that Jesus is the Son-of-God.

You do not teach quaternity, seing David as a god. Now, if it does not mean that David is devine, why should this mean that Jesus is divine?

 

[talib-al-kalim]

Oh really? Please feel free to add to this list in bold of words spoken by Isa in the Quran:


And [make him] a messenger to the Children of Israel, [who will say], 'Indeed I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I design for you from clay [that which is] like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird by permission of Allah . And I cure the blind and the leper, and I give life to the dead - by permission of Allah . And I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your houses. Indeed in that is a sign for you, if you are believers. (3:49)

(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me. (3:50)

When Jesus found Unbelief on their part He said: “Who will be My helpers to (the work of) Allah?” (3:52)

“…and the Messiah said: O Children of Israel! Serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Surely whoever associates (others) with Allah, then Allah has forbidden to him the garden, and his abode is the fire; and there shall be no helpers for the unjust.”
(5:72)


[And remember] when the disciples said, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, can your Lord send down to us a table [spread with food] from the heaven? [Jesus] said," Fear Allah , if you should be believers."

They said, "We wish to eat from it and let our hearts be reassured and know that you have been truthful to us and be among its witnesses."

Said Jesus, the son of Mary, "O Allah , our Lord, send down to us a table [spread with food] from the heaven to be for us a festival for the first of us and the last of us and a sign from You. And provide for us, and You are the best of providers."

Allah said, "Indeed, I will sent it down to you, but whoever disbelieves afterwards from among you - then indeed will I punish him with a punishment by which I have not punished anyone among the worlds."

And [beware the Day] when Allah will say, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah ?'" He will say, "Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within myself, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen.

I said not to them except what You commanded me - to worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when You took me up, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness.

If You should punish them - indeed they are Your servants; but if You forgive them - indeed it is You who is the Exalted in Might, the Wise. (5:112-120)


He said, I am God's servant; He has given me the Book, and made me a prophet. He has made me blessed wherever I am, and has enjoined on me the Worship and Alms, so long as I live; and to be dutiful to my mother; and has not made me oppressive, impious. Peace is on me the day I was born, the day I shall die, and the day I shall be raised alive. (19:29)

When Jesus came with Clear Signs, he said: “Now have I come to you with Wisdom, and in order to make clear to you some of the (points) on which ye dispute: therefore fear Allah and obey me.” (43:63)

https://legacy.quran.com/

Ah, sorry I didn't get you properly, I didn't notice you were only citing direct speech. There you may be complete or close to. There is more said on Jesus or going parallel with his Message.

 

[RJM]

Copy-past from my answer on SE:
(begin quote)

Translations differ in understanding. To get the translations easier to understand, I briefy include the first word, too. In
נַשְּׁקוּ־בַ֡ר
The first word is נַשְּׁקוּ : Translators differ inside the same field of meanings:

• “do homage”
• “pay respect to”
• “kiss his feet”
• “kiss”

The second word, what the question is about, is בר :
We find two main streams:
I. Reading בַ֡ר , translated as “son”, which is originally an Aramaic word

• ✟ King James (and many later English translations): Kiss the Son
• ✟ Amplified Bible: Kiss (pay respect to) the Son
• ✟ New International Version: Kiss his son
• ✟ NASB 1977: Do homage to the Son
• ✡ Arnold Ehrlich: Huldiget dem Sohne
• ✡ Jacques Kohn: Rendez hommage au fils
• ✟ Young's Literal Translation: Kiss the Chosen One

Support for the translation “son” comes from the context in verse 7:

where the original Hebrew word בְּנִ֥י is used for “My son”.
This is also the argument for the other translation: The text has been written before the Babylonean exile, where this Aramaic word was not used in Hebrew, but only בְּנִ֥י.
II. Reading בֹּר , translated as “purity”

• ✡ JPS 1917: Do homage in purity
• ✡ JPS 1985: Pay homage in good faith
• ✡ Martin Buber: Rüstet euch mit Läuterung
• ✟ Martin Luther: küsst seine Füße mit Zittern
• ✡ Septuagint: δραξασθε παιδειας
• ✟ Brenton Septuagint Translation: Accept correction
• ✟ Douay-Rheims (also a Septuagint translation): Embrace discipline

The addressee of the homage is God, not the King. This also fits much better into the context of the surrounding verses:
Ps 2:10-12 (JPS 1917)

I have marked the translations by ✡ for a Jewish translation and ✟ for a Christian translation. The majority of Christian translations chose option I (בַ֡ר = son), and the majority of Jewish translations chose option II (בֹּר = purity).
A Christian motivation to use the translation “son” may be the background of the reference to Jesus (p.b.u.h) who is called “Son of God” as a Messianic title (althought he himself preferred the other Messianic title “Son of Man”).
Nevertheless, we find Jewish and Christian translations in both versions, so that it can be denied that the choice merely follows dogmatic criteria.
I tried to answer the question why some translators chose to translate “son” but I think that the translation “purity”, together with the effect that the reverence is due to God, and not to King David (a.s) makes much more sense.
(end quote)

There is no "Son" referenced in Ps 2:12. It is a misreading of the original Hebrew word בֹּר, meaining "purity".
There is indeed a "Son" referenced in the same Psalm, verse 7 (JPS 1985):

The one to whom this vers refers in the view of the psalmist is King David (a.s.).
The psalmist even sais, He "fathered" יְלִדְתִּֽיךָ׃ him. No Jew, no Christian and no Muslim would say God (Glorified and Exalterd) had intrcourse with David's mother, or that David had/has a divine nature. At its best, he may be counted among the prophets of God.

In the look-back interpretation from after Jesus, it can be interpreted as applied to the Messiah to come, Jesus.
Just this (together with some more from the Tanach) is a key passage for the understanding what Son-of-God means:
It explains the name Son-of-God as a Messianic attribute. This is essential for the understanding of the saying that Jesus is the Son-of-God.

You do not teach quaternity, seing David as a god. Now, if it does not mean that David is devine, why should this mean that Jesus is divine?

Please feel free to add to the list of words spoken by Isa in the Quran, using whatever English translation suits you

By the way, to come back to the original question: How would you explain to a Muslim that the trinity dogma is not polytheist similar to the ancient Arabic religion that was not like the Greek/Roman, but they worshipped "daughters" of Allah beside Him, as subordinate divine beings?

I don't need to. If Muslims don't accept what I believe, that is their own concern and none of mine. The discussion is subtle, and Muslims do not accept any Trinitarian explanations anyway. They like to reduce and oversimplify the discussion. I'm not prepared to get into the same ole' circular and repetitious exercise. There have been hundreds of thousands of words on the subject of the Trinity on these forums over the years.

IMO God is found in quietness and humility, not in heated arguments about religion.

God responds to every sincere soul, regardless of time, place or religion.

God meets me where I am.

(edited -- repetition)

 

[RJM]

A, sorry I didn't get you properly, I didn't notice you were only citing direct speech. There you may be complete or close to. There is more said on Jesus or going parallel with his Message.

Ok. Thanks

 

[RJM]

@talib-al-kalim
Please accept my apology for the tone of my responses to you. You appear to be a reasonable person.

I only came into the discussion in response to a Muslim brother telling a Christian sister to 'better be silent than to say three' -- it has no place in interfaith discussion for an adherent of one religion to advise someone else not to express the tenets of their own faith.

Peace

 

[talib-al-kalim]

I don't need to. If Muslims don't accept what I believe, that is their own concern and none of mine. The discussion is subtle, and Muslims do not accept any Trinitarian explanations anyway. They like to reduce and oversimplify the discussion. I'm not prepared to get into the same ole' circular and repetitious exercise. There have been hundreds of thousands of words on the subject of the Trinity on these forums over the years.

Of course you don't need to find an explanation to a Muslim why trinitarian Christians understand themselves as monotheists. But wasn't this the original question?

IMO God is found in quietness and humility, not in heated arguments about religion.

I agree. I do not feel that I'm indulging in heated arguments

God responds to every sincere soul, regardless of time, place or religion.

God meets me where I am.

It's good you have faith in God.

 

[RJM]

Of course you don't need to find an explanation to a Muslim why trinitarian Christians understand themselves as monotheists. But wasn't this the original question?

Yes. I'm sorry I butted in

 

[RJM]

Of course you don't need to find an explanation to a Muslim why trinitarian Christians understand themselves as monotheists. But wasn't this the original question?

Father, Son and Spirit are human words to try to explain in symbols the interweaving relationship between Spirit and nature. Spirit is pure and eternal; nature is ever-changing and goes to death. There is no actual Father, or actual Son. God is not a person. People get too involved in the literal words.

Spirit uplifts the heart from nature red in tooth and claw. The touch of God goes beyond all words in an instant. There are infinite mysteries in the life and death and resurrection of the Christ, but only to someone who is open to them, imo.

‘Behold I stand at the door and knock’

 

[muhammad_isa]

I only came into the discussion in response to a Muslim brother telling a Christian sister to 'better be silent than to say three'

Well, I'm pleased you did .. pleased to see you.

I said:
"Yes, one can start talking about "parts" of God, and insisting on such a doctrine..
..but beware .. it's a serious matter replacing [or qualifying] the most important commandment of all.
It would be better to remain silent."

I wasn't really addressing any member of the forum..
My point was in reference to the initial debate at Nicea.
Origen, for example, made a lot of comments about how scripture could be interpreted.
..but he didn't enforce his views on others.

The first commandment is the foundation of faith in Judaism.
Jesus is not reported to have changed it, so enforcing an explicit
interpretation of the first commandment would obviously cause division.

 

[RJM]

most people here have had at least a glance, if not a deep study of the main teachings of the other religion. Hardly anyone would really change his or her religion on this discussion, we should at least not expect this from each other, but anyone should be interested in the other position.

This is true. You are a welcome member

 

[RJM]

Well, I'm pleased you did .. pleased to see you.

I said:
"Yes, one can start talking about "parts" of God, and insisting on such a doctrine..
..but beware .. it's a serious matter replacing [or qualifying] the most important commandment of all.
It would be better to remain silent."

I wasn't really addressing any member of the forum..
My point was in reference to the initial debate at Nicea.
Origen, for example, made a lot of comments about how scripture could be interpreted.
..but he didn't enforce his views on others.

The first commandment is the foundation of faith in Judaism.
Jesus is not reported to have changed it, so enforcing an explicit
interpretation of the first commandment would obviously cause division.

Thank you.

But I respond to what I perceive as a dismissive intention behind your posts, towards The Christ.

Where you and many other Muslims seem to need to talk about ‘Jesus’ in a limiting and actually dismissive way as a shadowy and rather sinister figure, the fact is that (most) New Testament Christians look upward toward Him as embodying all the living warmth and pain of humanity, but also as the holy and eternal Christ -- Wonderful Counsellor -- the very incarnation of Godhead: God with us

He is loved.

There appears to be no middle ground.

This is why I need to stay out of these discussions. I become too heated, and begin to lower the standard of the discussion. Better to leave it to wiser and cooler heads than mine, imo

(edited)

 

[Faithfulservant]

I also don't know why I get involved in these discussions. It feels like the same is being said over and over again. You refuse or simply cannot see why we believe what we believe. That's ok. Example being Isaiah speaking of the Son and who He will be and David speaking of the Son and because it's easier to refute one the other is not discussed. It really isn't a fair playing field. It drains me.

I understand though the struggle in understanding our beliefs. I read a book called Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus by Nabeel Qureshi which has given me much compassion for my Muslim brothers and sisters. He has gone to be with the Lord but I feel more kinship with you because of him.

I believe I will also depart this conversation because I don't feel good about it.

 

[Faithfulservant]

I also think the placement of this thread with putting the Trinity on trial in Abrahamic Religion forums is unfair since the Trinity is only a Christian belief. I've already had someone sic Rabbio on me when he's already declared me someone he doesn't want to converse with which hurt my feelings immensely and that only a Jewish Rabbi is able to translate Hebrew and OT scripture already sets this up to be a situation that I will feel ganged up on.

I always feel I need to stand up for my Lord and Savior when He is attacked but He reminds me that the battle is His. I feel that enough scripture has been shared to demonstrate and if that authority is in question I certainly should not allow my feelings and emotions to continue a conversation in vain that is of such importance to me.

So I will now go post on what's for dinner as that is a more safe place to post as I feel this is no longer a safe place for me.

I am a woman and we are as God created us . Led by our emotions. I cannot apologize for that.

God Bless you.

 

[RJM]

It drains me.

I quite understand

 

[moralorel]

There’s no love or humanity from this shadowy character – no magnetism or attraction, no enlightenment or wisdom -- no luminosity or peace or comfort. The nature of Christ is only found in the New Testament

I'm confused by this statement. Jesus kept quoting Himself from the book of Isaiah. So if He was in the Old Testament, wouldn't His nature be there as well?

 

[moralorel]

Here is what Emperor Constantine had to say about the Council of Nicaea... ""... it appeared an unworthy thing that in the celebration of this most holy feast we should follow the practice of the Jews, who have impiously defiled their hands with enormous sin, and are, therefore, deservedly afflicted with blindness of soul ... Let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd; for we have received from our Saviour a different way."

It wasn't about the Trinity, it was about antisemitism. It was a reason to get rid of scriptural customs, insert pagan customs, and to have a reason to execute anyone who still followed "Jewish" customs.

 

[Thomas]

Come on, Thomas, isn't that just splitting hairs?

Not so much splitting hairs as separating for clarity and insight.

I am well aware that Christians are monotheists, and believe in One God.
..but in speaking about a "triune God", one cannot suggest that the concept of "three" does not arise.

Not as 'three gods', however.

..so back to the same sort of concept as in council of Nicea .. the nature of the Son of God and his precise relationship to God the Father.

Yes, which goes some way to address the misapprehensions.

When Allah SWT says that "He has no son", He refers to the concept of "sharing in divinity".

But we do not believe in sharing divinity.

The concept of a Son, as in the OT, is one of closeness to God, and not absolute Divinity.

Yes, we know that.

..so only-begotten-Son, as in unique-Son, led to the belief that Jesus is God, per Gospel of John.

No.