Assalam alaikum
What do you suggest for a muslim to explain that trinity is wrong ?
[/quote]
Alaikom assalaam wr wb
Thank you for that question ...
First: It is not your duty to prove trinity as wrong , it is the burden on the shoulder of those (trinitarians) who claim it does exist ....... it is exactly as the matter of the existence of God, it is the believer who should provide proofs for his existence.
"the burden of proof lies on him who asserts"
Second: The only proof suggested for the trinity ,is quouting the bible ,that is certainly a book of beliefs not a book of science ,in order to check and verify its truth .... you will never find the triune god to be examined into a laboratory .... it is only a matter of faith ...
Third : as I wrote before ,it is absolutely wrong to use the bible either to support the trinity or to negate its existence ..... as the best you can do is to prove that the trinity does or doesn't exist in the bible ... Unicorns is mentioned in the bible ,but does it mean that they do exist(ed) ?
Fourth : It is again wrong to argue that trinity doesn't exist because it seems illogical , as some of the matters of the unseen (even in Islam) seems illogical ,inaccessible to the human minds (including the creator who has no beginning) etc...
Fifth: So what is the proper way to question the trinity ?
Trinity is a matter of the unseen isn't it? if so we have a great instrument to disprove it ...... let's read the following precious words written by christians themselves:
“the very nature of inspiration renders the bible infallible, inspiration involved infallibility from start to finish, if inspiration allows for possibility of errors ;then inspiration ceases to be inspiration.
Harold Lindsell, The Battle for the Bible
“Even if the errors are supposedly in ‘minor’ matters, any error opens the Bible to suspicion on other points which may not be so ‘minor.’ If inerrancy falls, other doctrines will fall too.†If we can’t trust Scripture in things like geography, chronology, and history, then how can we be sure we can trust it in its message of salvation and sanctification?
Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology, Victor Books, Wheaton, IL, 1987, electronic media.
Again. a belief in limited inerrancy demands the impossible__that a fallible exegete become an infallible discerner and interpreter of (the word of God)within the scripture .This opens the door for confusion and uncertainty ,undergirded by either subjectivism or personal bias.
Indeed can the holy spirit inspire error; can the spirit of truth inspire untruth.?
Handbook of Biblical Evidences By John Ankerberg, John Weldon
If the biblical record can be proved fallible in areas of fact that can be verified, then it is hardly to be trusted in areas where it cannot be tested. As a witness for God, the Bible would be discredited as untrustworthy. What solid truth it may contain would be left as a matter of mere conjecture, subject to the intuition or canons of likelihood of each individual. An attitude of sentimental attachment to traditional religion may incline one person to accept nearly all the substantive teachings of Scripture as probably true. But someone else with equal justification may pick and chose whatever teachings in the Bible happen to appeal to him and lay equal claim to legitimacy. One opinion is as good as another. All things are possible, but nothing is certain if indeed the Bible contains mistakes or errors of any kind (Gleason Archer ,Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties pp. 23-24).
"... But how do you know Jesus except as he is presented to you in the Bible? If the Bible is not God's Word and does not present a picture of Jesus Christ that can be trusted, how do you know it is the true Christ you are following? You may be worshipping a Christ of your own imagination." (Does Errancy Matter by James Boice, page 24)To apply such reasonable rule on the the matter under discussion (trinity) ... we can prove that the new testament is fallible in areas of fact that can be verified in order then it is hardly to be trusted in areas where it cannot be tested.
let's be specific,ok?
what is the specific area that can't be tested ? It is the trinity ..
what is the specific suggested area ,that is strongly related to the matter,wheret the bible can be verified?
it is the claim of Jesus being the Davidic Messiah ..... what does that mean?
If Jesus is believed by the writers of the new testament as the long awaited Davidic messiah king (will be proved to be false) ,and "assuming" it is believed by them to be God as well..... Isn't proving the first to be false strongly requires the second to be false too? If Jesus is not the so called Davidic messiah,that logically leads to him not being the so called incarnated God ,as well.....isn't it?
test the so called divine Jesus ,if he failed as the davidic messiah he would fail as God as well....
Jesus as being the Davidic messiah is not a matter of the unseen , it is easily to be verfied ,just one need to read what the old testament prophecized regarding the Davidic awaited messiah and what the writer of the new testament claimed that Jesus did.....
If you compare what Jesus is written to be done and what the so called is supposed to do ...you will find out that he can't be that predicted messiah ....
AGAIN the best to way to refute the trinity :
Is to test the so called divine Jesus (a matter of the unseen) ,if he failed as the davidic messiah( a matter can be verified) he would fail as God as well..
here is my detailed thread refuting the concept that Jesus was the predicted old testament Davidic king messiah..
http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,27.0.htmlAssalam alaikum
