Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Interfaith Dialogue
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Interfaith Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: A website w/info about concept of trinity Post Reply Post New Topic
Page  of 6 Next >>
Author Message
mariyah
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 March 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283
Quote mariyah Replybullet Topic: A website w/info about concept of trinity
    Posted: 11 January 2007 at 7:57pm

Asalaamu alaikum

Please post your thoughts after reading some of this website. Seems the divinity of Jesus (pbuh) was not accepted by early Christians!

 

These are excerpts from this site:   http://barnabas.net/

 

Seems that not all Christians followed the doctrine as defined by the Nicene council!

 

"The Gospel of Barnabas was accepted as a Canonical Gospel in the Churches of Alexandria till 325 C.E.  In 325 C.E., the Nicene Council was held, where it was ordered that all original Gospels in Hebrew script should be destroyed. An Edict was issued that any one in possession of these Gospels will be put to death."

  Barnabas was a Jew born in Cyrus. His name was Joses,
and due to his devotion to the cause of Jesus, the other apostles had given him the surname of Barnabas; this term is variously translated as "Son of Consolation" or "Son of Exhortation".
    "He was a successful preacher with a magnetic personality. Any one tormented by the clash of creeds found solace and peace in his company. His eminence as a man who had been close to Jesus had made him a prominent member of the small
group of disciples in Jerusalem who had gathered together
after the disappearance of Jesus. They observed the Law of
the Prophets, which Jesus had come, "not to destroy but, to
fulfil" (Matthew 5:17). They continued to live as Jews and
practiced what Jesus had taught them. That Christianity could
ever be regarded as a new religion did not occur to any of
them."

"The question of the origin of Jesus, his nature and relation
to God, which later became so important, was not raised
among these early disciples. That Jesus was a man super-
naturally endowed by God was accepted without question.
Nothing in the words of Jesus or the events in his life led them
to modify this view. According to Aristides, one of the earliest
apologists, the worship of the early Christians was more purely monotheistic even than of the Jews.
    With the conversion of Paul a new period opened in
Christian Theology. Paul's theology was based on his personalexperience interpreted in the light of contemporary Greek thought. The theory of redemption was the child of his brain, a belief entirely unknown to the disciples of Jesus. Paul's theory involved the deification of Jesus."

Read this page to learn the origin of the concept of "trinity"

http://barnabas.net/lifebarnabas.htm

 

"Every good deed is charity whether you come to your brother's assistance or just greet him with a smile.
IP IP Logged
BMZ
 
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 03 April 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1852
Quote BMZ Replybullet Posted: 11 January 2007 at 9:49pm

Thanks for the link, Maryah.

BMZ

IP IP Logged
Mauri
 
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 27 August 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 143
Quote Mauri Replybullet Posted: 11 January 2007 at 9:53pm
Let me first affirm that I do not believe that God is one in three.  I agree with what the Quran teaches about that--it is blasphemy. 

I think you can find a lot of webpages that offer much better arguments against the Trinity, though.  That one has so many obvious errors that it makes one doubt the rest of what he says. 

They were devout and practicing Jews distinguished from their neighbours only by their faith in the message of Jesus.
Yes, they were devout and practicing Jews.  But, they were distinguished from the neighbors.   I thought everyone knew that the reason the Jews wanted to kill Jesus was because they thought he was breaking the law.  His disciples were also distinguished as not keeping the law the way they understood it--they picked corn and ate it as they walked through the field on a sabbath.  They didn't fast.  Jesus healed on the sabbath, several times.

However, they incurred the enmity of the vested interests among the Jewish higher echelon. The conflict between the Jews and the followers of Jesus was started by the Jews because they felt that the Christians would undermine their authority.
Yes.  Those who keep idols always fear losing them.  It happened with Moses and Muhammed, too.  Some people have idols that they love.....others have idols that they love to hate.  Abuse an idea (cut it off from understanding), and you have a dead idol.  Rather, trace the idea back to the root--find the good that it started with, help that grow, and you will benefit.  When you see how it grows, you will learn a lot that will help you in other areas.

The question of the origin of Jesus, his nature and relation
to God, which later became so important, was not raised
among these early disciples.
John the Baptist, when he saw Jesus, said, "Behold the Lamb". 
When Jesus was baptized God said, Behold, this is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased".
Jesus ask Peter who men said he was. 
Then, Jesus asked Peter who he thought he was, and Peter said, "Thou art the Christ, the son of the living God."

According to Aristides, one of the earliest
apologists, the worship of the early Christians was more purely monotheistic even than of the Jews.
When people fell down and worshipped him, Jesus never stopped them. 
Mat 2:11 And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshippedhim: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh.

Mat 8:2 And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.

Mat 9:18 While he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live.

Mat 14:33 Then they that were in the ship came and worshippedhim, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God.

Mat 15:25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.

Mat 18:26 The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all.

Mat 28:9 And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.

Mat 28:17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.

Mar 5:6 But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshippedhim,

Mar 15:19 And they smote him on the head with a reed, and did spit upon him, and bowing [their] knees worshipped him.

Luk 24:52 And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy:

Jhn 9:38 And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.

Should Jesus have stopped them?  Paul and Barnabas did when it happened to them. 

Either
1. Jesus was wrong and should have done as Paul and Silas....
2. Or, all of those verses are wrong
(and, if that many verses are wrong, why would anyone trust the verses he uses to support his argument?)
3. Or, Jesus is God
4. Or, there is something more to it that is not readily seen and understood and is worth pursuing.

I've only dealt with the part that you pasted.  I just wanted to point out that things are not always the way they seem.  (I'm already in a discussion about the trinity with bz.)

Oh, there is one thing on the website that is rather blatantly wrong, imo.  That is: 
Among the present-day Christians a large number of men
and women still believe in one God. They are not always vocal. Due to the crushing power of the Churches they cannot express themselves and there is not much communication between them.

That is nothing short of preposterous.  Every Christian believes that there is one God.....and freely says so in church and elsewhere.  There is, however, a small group of Christians who are referred to as "Jesus-only".  


Edited by Mauri
IP IP Logged
mariyah
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 March 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283
Quote mariyah Replybullet Posted: 12 January 2007 at 4:57pm

Asalaamu alaikum: Peace to you.

The online engish translation of the Gospel according to Barnabas can be found here http://barnabas.net/chapter_index.htm

I do not know of what faith you are, but many Christians are in actuality practicing multitheism by Islamic standards.

Islam prohibits  the elevation of anything  that is of the creation of the One God, Yahweh, Jehovah, Allah as he is known to the various adherents of the Abrahamic or Semitic religions. Therefore, deifying Jesus and stating that he is the "son of god" is simply shirk and is considered seeing him as an object of worship.

The Quran states:

 7:191 Do they indeed ascribe to Him as partners things that can create nothing, but are themselves created?

 10:18 They serve, besides Allah, things that hurt them not nor profit them, and they say: "These are our intercessors with Allah." Say: "Do ye indeed inform Allah of something He knows not, in the heavens or on earth?- Glory to Him! and far is He above the partners they ascribe (to Him)!

 16:3 He has created the heavens and the earth for just ends: Far is He above having the partners they ascribe to Him! - English

The old testament states in Exodus 20:2-5 according to the current writings:

I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.

You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above * or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth.

You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God,

As the website I quoted stated: "The Gospel of Barnabas was accepted as a Canonical Gospel in the Churches of Alexandria till 325 C.E.  In 325 C.E., the Nicene Council was held, where it was ordered that all original Gospels in Hebrew script should be destroyed. An Edict was issued that any one in possession of these Gospels will be put to death.'

So how do you know that the current data as pesented in these scriptures are valid? Your are actually reading the gospel according and as interpreted by the Nicene council and the pagan emperor Constantine.

Therefore, if you visit the link I provided on the opening cut and paste, you will see the further explanation for the positions taken on the website. It will explain how many  of the earliest teachings  may have been distorted by Paul due to his personal beliefs and values. He was a Roman citizen and possibly thought as Constantine did when he rewrote the scriptures and doctrine: modify the teachings so that it would be more acceptable to the palates of the pagan Romans and they would be more accepting of the "Christian values". In Constantine's era and after, Mary was the successor of the goddess Hestia, patroness of the home and hearth. And other "saints" were elevated as intercessors and patrons of such things such as Jude for the sick, and the attributes of the roman pagan deities were ascribed to these new saints so that the practice of monotheims continued in post Nicene council church until the rise of protestantism. It is still practiced in the current Catholic Church. The trinity concept possible evolved from Indo Pak region religious influences, I would have to cruise through my links for the info. I invite you to look up such sites as the one for the dead sea scrolls, Nag Hamadi library, etc, for the translations of both the regular and apocryphic scriptures on the documents that were found. The Barnabas website was started by Islamic scholars and is a work in progress, however, the views and theories presented have not to date been disproved. I invite you to explore it.

How do I know of some of these things? My primary age of education was in an american school taught by turkish scholars in the city called Ankara, where I was born. We spent large amounts of our growing up time Exploring the nooks and hideaways in a city called Instanbul, formerly known as Constantinople. There are many things that a continent bound person may not know or see. It is wonderful to open one's eyes to other possibilities and remove the blinders that block your vision to a narrow path.

 



Edited by Maryah
"Every good deed is charity whether you come to your brother's assistance or just greet him with a smile.
IP IP Logged
DavidC
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 September 2001
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2211
Quote DavidC Replybullet Posted: 12 January 2007 at 6:04pm
The Gospel of Barnabas is a forgery from the middle ages. 
http://www.latrobe.edu.au/arts/barnabas/marino.html

The Epistle of Barnabas is an authentic document. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/barnabas.html

There are ton of non-canonical Christian writings, all of which are easily accessible via internet. There is also a entire literature about early Christianities. Why rely on specious sources when you can just as easily google up the real thing?
David C.
IP IP Logged
Patty
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 September 2001
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2382
Quote Patty Replybullet Posted: 12 January 2007 at 7:40pm

Regarding the heretical Epistle of Barnabas:

There is a triple tradition of the Greek text of this document. Up to 1843 eight manuscripts of the Epistle of Barnabas were known to be in Western libraries. These manuscripts were all derived from a common source, and no one of them contained chapters i-v, 7a. Since then two complete manuscripts of the texts have been discovered that are independent of each other and of the preceding group of texts, namely: the famous Codex Sinaiticus of the Bible (fourth century), in which the Epistle of Barnabas and "The Pastor" follow the books of the New Testament, and the Jerusalem Codex (eleventh century), which includes the Didache. There is also an old Latin version of the first seventeen chapters which is, perhaps, of the end of the fourth century (St. Petersburg, Q., I, 39). This version is a very free one and can hardly serve for the restoration of the text. The same is true for the citations from the epistle in the writings of Clement of Alexandria, or Origen, and others. The text authority for the text is the Codex Sinaiticus.

Contents

The Epistle of Barnabas contains no clue to its author nor to those for whom it was intended. Its aim is to impart to its readers the perfect wisdom (gnosis), that is an exact knowledge of the economy of salvation. It is made up of two parts, the subject of each being announced in verses 6 and 7 of the first chapter. The first part (ch. i-v, 4) is hortatory; in the evil days that are now at hand in which the end of the world and the Judgment shall appear, the faithful, freed from the bonds of the Jewish ceremonial law, are to practise the virtues and to flee from sin. The second part (ch. v, 5-xvii) is more speculative, although it tends, owing to the nature of the argument, to establish the freedom of Christians in respect to the Mosaic regulations. The author wishes to make his readers comprehend the real nature of the Old Testament. He shows how the ordinances of the Law should be understood as referring allegorically to the Christian virtues and institutions, and he pauses to make plain by a series of symbolical explanations, that are often singular, how the Old Testament prefigures Christ, His Passion, His Church, etc. Before concluding (ch. xxi) the author repeats and enlarges the exhortations of the first part of the epistle by borrowing from another document (the Didache or its source) the description of the two ways, the way of light and that of darkness (xviii-xx).

Use of Allegory

The epistle is characterized by the use of exaggerated allegory. In this particular the writer goes far beyond St. Paul the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and St. Ignatius. Not content with regarding the history and institutions of the Jews as containing types of Christianity, he casts aside completely the transitory historical character of the old religion. According to many scholars he teaches that it was never intended that the precepts of the Law should be observed in their literal sense, that the Jews never had a covenant with God, that circumcision was the work of the Devil, etc.; thus he represents a unique point of view in the struggle against Judaism. It might be said more exactly that he condemns the exercise of worship by the Jews in its entirety because in his opinion, the Jews did not know how to rise to the spiritual and typical meaning which God had mainly had in view in giving them the Law. It is this purely material observance of the ceremonial ordinances, of which the literal fulfilment was not sufficient, that the author holds to be the work of the Devil, and, according to him, the Jews never received the divine covenant because they never understood its nature (ch. vii, 3, 11, ix, 7; x, 10; xiv).

Intent

The Epistle of Barnabas is not a polemic. The author takes no notice of paganism. Although he touches on different points that had relations to the doctrines of the Gnostics, still he has no knowledge of these latter. The perfectly composed manner in which he expounds the wisdom he desires to impart shows that another, heretical wisdom (gnosis) is not in his thoughts. Moreover, the way in which he speaks of the Old Testament would not be explicable if he had known the wrong use that a Basilides or a Marcion could make of it. Besides, there was nothing in the Judaizing theories to alarm his faith. He speaks of Judaism only in the abstract, and nothing in the letter excites the suspicion that the members of his flock had been exposed to the peril of falling again under the yoke of the Law. No clear situation is described in the letter. In short, it should be regarded rather as the peaceful speculations of a catechist and not as the cries of alarm of a pastor. Consequently, it cannot be admitted that the author may have wished to take part in the struggle against the Judaizers either at Jerusalem or at Rome.

Date

This abstract discussion of Judaism is the sign of an epoch when the Judaizing controversies were already a thing of the past in the main body of the Church. In settling the date of the letter reference is often made to verses 3-5 of chapter four, where the writer, it is believed, finds the fulfilment of the prophecy of Daniel (Dan. 7:7, sqq.) in the succession of the Roman Emperors of his time. Starting from this, some critics place the composition of the epistle in the reign of Vespasian, others in the reign of Domitian, and still others in the reign of Nerva. But there is nothing to prove that the author considers the prophecy to be already accomplished. Besides, he might have taken the words of the prophecy to mean a series of kingdoms instead of a line of kings. It is necessary, therefore, to fall back on verses 3-5 of chapter xvi. Reference is here made to the command given by Adrian in A.D. 130 for the reconstruction, in honour of Jupiter, of the Temple at Jerusalem, which had been destroyed by Titus. Adrian had also forbidden the Jews to practise circumcision. The writer of the letter makes allusion to this (ch. ix, 4). The epistle must, consequently, have been written in A.D. 130-131.

General Characteristics

In what befell Jerusalem and the Temple the author saw the refutation by events of the errors of the Jews, or rather of the Ebionites, for it is the latter that he has in mind whenever his language grows more definite (ch. iv, 4, 6; v, 5; xii, 10; xvi, 1). His flock are not in danger of falling into these errors. Therefore, he never attacks them directly. He simply takes advantage of the opportunity that occurrences offer him to give his opinions as to the position and nature of Judaism and its Law. Hence the epistle, in its general character, is more like a treatise or a homily than a letter. However, the epistolary form is not entirely fictitious. The author is not writing to Christians in general, but to a particular church in which he has exercised the office of a didaskalos and from which he finds himself separated (ch. i, 2, 4; xxi, 7, 9).

From a literary point of view the Epistle of Barnabas has no merit. The style is tedious, poor in expression, deficient in clearness, in elegance, and incorrectness. The author's logic is weak, and his matter is not under his control; from this fact arise the numerous digressions. These digressions, however, afford no reason for doubting the integrity of the letter, or for regarding as interpolations either entire chapters, or a consecutive number of verses or parts of verses in each chapter. One scholar, Wehofer, thought that he had discovered, in the arrangement of the epistle, an adherence to the laws of the Semitic strophe. But the phenomena noted are found in all authors who work out their thought without being able to subordinate the argument to the rules of literary style.

From the dogmatic point of view the chief importance of the epistle is in its relation to the history of the Canon of the Scriptures. It cites, in fact, the Gospel of St. Matthew as Scripture (ch. 4:14), and even recognizes as in the Canon of the Sacred Books (gegraptai), along with the collection of Jewish writings, a collection of Christian ones (ch. v, 2), the contents of which, however, cannot be determined. The author regards several apocryphal books as belonging to the Old Testament--probably IV Esdras (ch. xii, l) and without doubt Henoch (ch. iv, 3; xvi, 5). In his Christology, his soteriology and his doctrine concerning justification the author develops the ideas of Paul with originality. It has been wrongly said that he regards the pre-existent Christ as only a spirit in the image of God. Without explicitly asserting the consubstantiality and the true sonship, he evidently acknowledges the Divine nature of Christ from before the Creation. The eschatological descriptions are decidedly moderate. He is a millenarian, but in speaking of the Judgment to come he simply expresses a vague belief that the end is approaching.

Nationality of the Author and History of the Epistle

The extremely allegorical character of the exegesis leads to the supposition that the author of the letter was an Alexandrian. His way of constantly placing himself and his readers in opposition to the Jews makes it impossible to believe that either he or the larger part of his readers were of Jewish origin. Besides, he is not always familiar with the Mosaic rites (cf. ch. vii). The history of the epistle confirms its Alexandrine origin. Up to the fourth century only the Alexandrians were acquainted with it, and in their Church the epistle attained to the honour of being publicly read. The manner in which Clement of Alexandria and Origen refer to the letter gives confirmation to the belief that, about the year A.D. 200, even in Alexandria the Epistle of Barnabas was not regarded by everyone as an inspired writing.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02299a.htm

God's Peace and Understanding!

Patty

I don't know what the future holds....but I know who holds the future.
IP IP Logged
Patty
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 September 2001
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2382
Quote Patty Replybullet Posted: 12 January 2007 at 7:45pm

Hello Mauri,

Since you mentioned the "Jesus Only" believers above, may I safely assume you are a member of the Apostolic Church, aka "Oneness"?  Long ago I was engaged to an Apostolic....I will never forget the beliefs they follow.  But they are good, kind people.

God's Peace Always!

Patty

I don't know what the future holds....but I know who holds the future.
IP IP Logged
Patty
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 September 2001
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2382
Quote Patty Replybullet Posted: 12 January 2007 at 7:50pm

Dear Maryah,

Anyone can access the Vatican website to learn when, why, for what reasons, etc., some writings and documents were considered authentic and others were found not to be.  The explanations are quite indepth and do not serve to just "skim the surface to sway opinions".  They are very intellectual and extensively studied resources.  I would suggest anyone really wanting to know the reasons for decisions concerning any scriptures or Gospels go to the Vatican website and access the archives.

God's Peace.

Patty

I don't know what the future holds....but I know who holds the future.
IP IP Logged
Page  of 6 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com