The Doctrine of the Trinity From Answering Islam

I especially liked this ending portion of the article…

There were various sects such as the Nestorians, Monophysites and others in the vicinity of Arabia who had confusing beliefs about God, Jesus and Mary but none of them represented the Trinity as consisting of these three. You can see why Muslims think our beliefs are based on the Egyptian Father-Mother-Son family of Osiris, Isis and Horus. What is most probable is that Muhammad was totally unaware of the actual Triune God of the Christian faith and simplistically confused it with pagan beliefs in a Father-Mother-Son triad. If God was indeed the author of the Qur’an it is hard to see how he could make such a mistake and not even remotely represent the Christian doctrine, held to by all the major Christian churches of the Roman Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox traditions, as Father, Son and Holy Spirit in one eternal Supreme Being.

The third passage which canvasses the supposed Christian belief in three separate deities is this one:

And when Allah will say: O Jesus, son of Mary! Did you say to mankind “Take me and my mother as two gods besides Allah”? He will say, Glory to you! I would not have said what I had no right to say. If I had said it, you would have known it. You know what is in my mind though I do not know what is in yours. You are the Knower of the Unseen. Surah 5.116

Once again the other two deities are said to be Jesus and Mary. The veneration of Mary has been a major article of Roman Catholic belief and the Ethiopian Church, in particular, has historically revered her as the mother of God. It seems, however, that their excesses and confusion have only resulted in the Qur’an compounding the confusion! No Christian Church, no matter how much it reveres or glorifies Mary as, for example, the Queen of Heaven, has ever confused the Trinity or made it out to be what the Qur’an represents it to be.

When Muslims challenge the doctrine of the Trinity and will not allow that it is an expression of divine unity in a different form to the unitarian concept of the Qur’an it is important to raise these texts as evidence, firstly, that the Qur’an misrepresents the doctrine completely and, secondly, that it is the source of the erroneous Muslim conviction that we believe in three separate gods.

It is also important to know that the true Christian doctrine was known in Arabia prior to Muhammad’s time. Edward Glasser, an explorer in Yemen, discovered an inscription there in 1888 in a narrative about the revolt against the Ethiopian rule in the country in pre-Islamic times. The inscription dates to 542 AD – twenty eight years before Muhammad’s birth – and it reads in Arabic (without vowels which were not written in the Arabic of the time): Rhmn w mshh w rh qds – “(In the power of) the Compassionate, and the Messiah, and the Holy Spirit”. Thus the true nature of the Christian Trinity was known in the Arabian Peninsula many years before the Qur’an ever came to be written and the book’s total misrepresentation of the doctrine can only be ascribed to Muhammad’s personal ignorance of Christian theology.

emphasis mine

All three are monotheistic; the similarities end there.

Bubba Redneck on January 21, 2008 at 3:49 PM

Explain the Trinity, will ya?

Never mind. I’ve been trying to get someone to explain it since I was 14 and nobody has managed to do it yet.

All Gods are imaginary. Arguing that believing in only One True God is somehow more logical and correct than believing in multiple Gods is moronic. But it is one of the basic arguments of Islam against all unbelievers. God has no partners, no matter what all the other religions may call them.

Don’t ever tell a Muslim they “worship” Muhammed. They get very pissed off. Even though the very definition of being a Muslim is the belief that there is only one God and Muhammed was his Messenger (PBUH), they will never admit that Muhammed was anything more that God’s last Prophet.

But make sure you don’t dis him because they’ll kill you.

Robert Spencer on January 21, 2008 at 4:40 PM

Thanks.
Once again I believe I am only scratching the surface. Someone could write a PhD thesis on that!

Or to put it another way, Islam dives downn a very deep rabbit hole, Alice.

As far as I know it is pagan, pre-Islamic. I’ve seen Islamic apologists attribute it to pagan, Hindu, AND Judeo-Christian influences. But its exact origins I do not know.

It is widely accepted in some areas of the Muslim world today because all too often it is justified on Islamic grounds, despite its lack of attestation in the Qur’an and Sunnah. In 2003, the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. In a sadly typical consequence of this early last year, a Jordanian man who murdered his sister because he thought she had a lover was given a three-month sentence, which was suspended for time served, allowing him to walk free. The Yemen Times just a few weeks ago published an article insisting that violence against women is necessary for the stability of the family and the society, and invoking Islam to support this view.

The seductive wife wasn’t “honor killed” in today’s passage. Why not? and is the practice supported elsewhere in the koran?

jdpaz on January 21, 2008 at 11:57 AM

jdpaz,

No, she wasn’t, and no, it isn’t.

Robert Spencer on January 21, 2008 at 1:51 PM

Mr. S, where does it come from? Short version, just point me in the right direction and I can look it up.
Thanks.

Mohammad’s former grade school teacher, Mrs. Abu Babu came up to him in a crowded mosque, in Medina, grabbed him by the ear, and yanked him to the front of the gathering. As she smacked him on the bottom with a thorny stick, she scolded the “prophet” thusly:

“You get an F for plagiarizing this material, you bold, brazen article! An F! Stealing another person’s work is against the rules, Mohammad! Or are you Mr. Special, who can pilfer another author’s writing, and get away with it, scot free! Well, not in my classroom, you don’t!”

Smack!

profitsbeard on January 20, 2008 at 8:39 PM

Profitsbeard, THAT is funny!!!!!!! The mental image of this has made my day!

No, she wasn’t, and no, it isn’t.

Question for you, Robert Spencer: Sura 12:25-28 shows Joseph innocent this fleshly desire, and the woman obviously guilty for the sin, so does the koran ever state why Joseph was imprisoned, and by whom?

The text seems to be suggesting that the ruler’s wife exonerated herself by showing the other women how handsome and hence irresistible Joseph was. They’re all apparently going to seduce him now, so that he prays to go to prison (v. 33) and the men, presumably their husbands, seeing all this, decide to imprison him (v. 35). Then later the ruler’s wife admits she was trying to seduce him (v. 51) and he is released (v. 54).

venividivici on January 20, 2008 at 2:14 PM

I wasn’t talking about radical Muslims and what their goals are, I was talking about the logic associated in believing in something when people ‘constantly assert things they cannot prove or be disproved’ and how Islam and Christianity are similar in this regard. It just strikes me as funny that a Christian (assumingly) would make the same complaints against Islam that atheists make against Islam and Christianity (and every other religion)

Christians, Muslims, and Jews all agree there is only one God. So none of them can really think that they can be worshipping different gods, because that would require there to exist more than one god to be worshipped. The only meaningful question is which form of worship is the appropriate form. Christians and Jews believe that God is rational and unchanging, and wants the Jews and all people to be saved. Muslims believe God’s inerrant revealed word can be revised at a later date, and wants Jews and other infidels to be killed. If you think those are two descriptions of a single God, ok, but most people conclude that at least one of them is completely wrong.

pedestrian on January 20, 2008 at 8:33 PM

Sorry, I’ve read your post three times now and if you had a point, you seemed to have lost it before you finished writing it.

You also don’t seem to know what Christians, Jews, or Muslims believe.

Next time you’re bored try Google.

emailnuevo on January 20, 2008 at 8:49 PM

Amend: I remember a lesson from a Muslim scholar who emphasized the parallels between Satan and Allah, so that idea’s floating around too. But it’s unfair (and inaccurate) to say that just because a religion is monotheistic, it believes or must believe it shares God with all monotheistic religions. Quite the opposite, actually.

Christians, Muslims, and Jews all agree there is only one God. So none of them can really think that they can be worshipping different gods, because that would require there to exist more than one god to be worshipped.

Wrong. Speaking for myself and the Christians with whom I’ve come into contact, we believe we are worshiping the one and only God of the Old and New Testaments, God of Jacob, etc. We also believe that Muslims believe in a higher power, but this “Allah” fellow doesn’t exist.

“You get an F for plagiarizing this material, you bold, brazen article! An F! Stealing another person’s work is against the rules, Mohammad! Or are you Mr. Special, who can pilfer another author’s writing, and get away with it, scot free! Well, not in my classroom, you don’t!”

Smack!

(She was assassinated that very night by one of the Messenger’s loyal henchmen.)

The dumb Christians tell people they don’t think Muslims worship the same god.

Christians, Muslims, and Jews all agree there is only one God. So none of them can really think that they can be worshipping different gods, because that would require there to exist more than one god to be worshipped. The only meaningful question is which form of worship is the appropriate form. Christians and Jews believe that God is rational and unchanging, and wants the Jews and all people to be saved. Muslims believe God’s inerrant revealed word can be revised at a later date, and wants Jews and other infidels to be killed. If you think those are two descriptions of a single God, ok, but most people conclude that at least one of them is completely wrong.

Replace “Muslim” with “Christian” and maybe you can begin to understand. Your lament is similar to that of many atheists (which shouldn’t come as surprising considering you don’t believe in the Muslim God and neither do they). If they (the Muslims) answered “it’s faith” what would you say then? In religion there is always this “constant assertion of things” people “cannot possibly prove,” Islam is no different than the others.

Nonfactor on January 20, 2008 at 2:04 PM

It debatable whether there is a difference between the “Muslim God” and the “Christian God”. Many Christians believe that Muslims do not worship the same God as they do. Some claim that “Allah” is actually the “Moon God”. That’s why many Christians go out of their way to use the term “Allah” instead of “God” whenever they discuss Islam and Muslims. The dumb Christians tell people they don’t think Muslims worship the same god. The smart ones don’t go any further than using the term “Allah”. Whenever you see a Christian use the term “Allah” you can bet they don’t for a second believe that Muslims and Christians are talking about the same being.

As to your point and your last sentence? There is no comparison between Christians and Muslims. They are not at all the same.

A Christian will answer with “it’s faith” and is driven by a desire to save you. He has your best interests at heart and wants to spread his love of Jesus Christ to all who will listen because he wants to make things better, he doesn’t want you to burn in Hell. He wants to save you by opening your heart and mind to the greatest love and eternal life through Jesus Christ. He means well.

A Muslim will answer with “it’s faith” and is driven by rules and laws that are beyond his own thinking. He can’t save you. If Allah wills it, you are already doomed and there is nothing that can save you. A Muslims only desire, from his duty as a Muslim, is to stop you from contaminating the world with your presence. You are an insult to Islam by your mere disbelief in it.

ConstantSorrow on January 20, 2008 at 4:30 PM

If it turned out that even a small part of the Qur’an could be shown to be pre-Arabic, that would have a major impact on how Islam was perceived outside the Arab world and would greatly reduce how authoritative it would seem to potential recruits. That would make life a whole lot better for people in border regions such as Thailand and Indonesia.

Question for you, Robert Spencer: Sura 12:25-28 shows Joseph innocent this fleshly desire, and the woman obviously guilty for the sin, so does the koran ever state why Joseph was imprisoned, and by whom?

pedestrian on January 20, 2008 at 2:38 PM

The Syriac textual analysis method may not affect the extremist element, but it may serve as part of a broader strategy to moderate and mobilize peaceful and/or intellectual Muslims to work against violence perpetrated in the name of their faith. Unfortunately, it’s not likely to be successful if it is instigated by kuffar.

The Qur’anic tale of Joseph is an abbreviated version of the story in Genesis 37-50, with some notable differences from the Biblical account.

This happens a lot in the Qur’an. Borrowings from Judaism, Christianity, and even Zoroastrianism that are only half understood, then mangled and thrown together in a mish-mash to serve Muhammad’s needs. I think it’s ibn Warraq in Why I am not a Muslim who ventures that Muhammad really wanted to be accepted by the Jews of Mecca as a Jewish prophet. When they rejected him, he created his own religion in an “I’ll show you” moment.

Great series, Robert. I’m looking forward to future installments.
–Anthony (Los Angeles)

Excellent book!

;-)

?????????

Wrong thread perhaps?

;-)