Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
5
debates
40.0%
won
Topic
#5962
Islam Vs anything3
Status
Voting
The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.
Voting will end in:
00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Two weeks
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- Six months
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
0
1382
rating
441
debates
45.69%
won
Description
Detail rules of the debate.
1. I am pro Islam and want to debate with any other religion or atheism.
2. I have not decided topic yet so if my opponent agrees to my rules then we can discuss resolution in private messages.
3 No moderators are allowed to vote on this debate especially named Barney, if Barney voted on this debate then it's automatic loose for my opponent.
3 Islam is not presumed to be false and the Quran as well unless we are talking about these topics.
4 Burden of proof is always shared.
5 No insult from both side, personally or to believe or disbelieve.
6 No last round new arguments although you can discuss previous one or give conclusion.
7 No voting bombs are allowed and no voter is allowed to override this debate specific rules and no moderators of this website are allowed to vote on this debate.
8 All rounds must be read to vote otherwise do not vote. If you are lazy to read 5 rounds 30000 word debate then refrain to vote.
9 All resources must be considered to vote and must be considered the part of arguments.
10 my opponent can add more rules if he or she wants but must discuss it in private message to add before accepting debate. We can as more rules during the debate if both agreed.
11 Forfeit will cause the loss of conduct point.
12 Hope to have fair debate and fair voting and looking forward a good debate from my opponent.
13 Atheism must not be considered ture by default has to prove everything to be true.
14 My tools to debate would be science and philosophy and would be based on rational basis.
15 thanks a lot and hope good and fair debate.
Round 1
Pro
#1
Framework of the Debate
First round
1. Resolution
2. Opening Argument
Second-fourth rounds:
1. Arguments
2. Rebuttals
Final Round:
1. Conclusion
2. No New Arguments
I thank my opponent for participating in this debate and hope it will be a constructive and enlightening discussion.
Let's start:
Resolution:
Divine truth is preserved, while human doctrines evolve:
The Bible, shaped by oral traditions, anonymous authors, and political influence, has undergone changes over time. Its contradictions, theological developments, and the enforced doctrine of the Trinity reveal its human origins, contrasting with the preserved and consistent nature of true divine revelation of pure monotheism."
Short version of resolution:
""The Trinity is a man-made doctrine—evolved, irrational, and not divinely inspired."
First Argument: The Bible is Not Preserved
Claim:
A divinely inspired scripture would remain perfectly preserved. However, the Bible has undergone textual corruption, lost its originals, and contains contradictions—demonstrating that it is a human-compiled document, not a protected revelation.
Evidence 1: 200,000 to 500,000+ Textual Variants
Fact: There are over 200,000 to 500,000 textual differences in New Testament manuscripts.
Example 1: The Johannine Comma (1 John 5:7-8)
A later addition to support the Trinity: “There are three that bear record in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost.”
Scholarly Consensus: Absent in all early Greek manuscripts (e.g., Codex Sinaiticus). Erasmus included it due to external pressure.
Example 2: Mark 16:9-20
The extended ending, mentioning miracles like handling snakes and speaking in tongues, does not exist in the earliest manuscripts.
Impact: If God revealed the Bible, why allow fabrications to enter His Word?
---
Evidence 2: Lost Original Texts
Fact: No original manuscripts of any biblical book exist today.
Example:
The earliest complete New Testament (Codex Sinaiticus, c. 350 CE) was written 300+ years after Jesus.
The Gospel of Mark’s earliest copies appear in fragmented form, dating to the 2nd–3rd century.
Impact: Without originals, there is no way to verify what was truly inspired. This means Christian theology is built on unreliable copies.
---
Evidence 3: Contradictions Expose Human Tampering
Example 1: Jesus’ Resurrection
Who went to the tomb?
Mary alone (John 20:1) vs. multiple women (Matthew 28:1).
Where did Jesus appear after resurrection?
Jerusalem (Luke 24:33) vs. Galilee (Matthew 28:16).
Example 2: Jesus’ Last Words
“Father, forgive them” (Luke 23:34) vs. “My God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34).
Impact: Inconsistent accounts of major events suggest that human editors altered the text to fit theological perspectives.
Sources:
Credible Sources for200,000 to 500,000+ approx Textual Variants in the New Testament
1. Wiki page:
2. Bart D. Ehrman (New Testament Scholar)
Source: "Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why" (2005).
Quote: "There are more differences among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament."
3. Institute for New Testament Textual Research (INTF)
Statement: "The New Testament is preserved in about 5,800 Greek manuscripts, with hundreds of thousands of textual variants."
4. Encyclopaedia Britannica
Entry: "Biblical Literature - New Testament Textual Criticism"
More links
1. Daniel B. Wallace (Evangelical Scholar)
Source: The Number of Textual Variants: An Evangelical Miscalculation (2013)
Relevant Quote: "In the Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics... there is a comment about the number of textual variants among New Testament manuscripts: 'Some have estimated there are about 200,000 of them.'"
Link: Daniel B. Wallace's Article
---
2. Greg Koukl (Christian Apologist)
Source: Textual Variants: It’s the Nature, Not the Number, That Matters (2014)
Relevant Quote: "Most scholars put the number of variants for the New Testament at around 400,000."
Link: Stand to Reason Article
---
3. Christian Publishing House
Source: Major Textual Variants in the New Testament: Another Look (2023)
Relevant Quote: "It’s estimated there are between 200,000 and 400,000 textual variants in the New Testament manuscripts."
Link: Christian Publishing House Article
---
4. Ryan Leasure (Christian Author)
Source: The Number of New Testament Textual Variants Doesn’t Matter (Approximately 2019)
Relevant Quote: "In sum, 99.75% of all textual variants don’t affect our reading of the text."
Link: Ryan Leasure's Article
---
5. Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts (CSNTM)
Source: Manuscripts 101: What is a textual variant? (2023)
Relevant Quote: "There are thousands of differences among the manuscripts."
Link: CSNTM Article
---
Note: Estimates of textual variants range from 200,000 to over 500,000, depending on counting methods and manuscript inclusions.
Source for evidence 2
This is a well-established fact, and even Christian scholars and institutions acknowledge it. Here are credible Christian sources confirming that no original manuscripts (autographs) of any biblical book exist today:
---
1. Daniel B. Wallace (Evangelical Scholar & Textual Critic)
Source: The Basics of New Testament Textual Criticism (2017)
Relevant Quote:
"We do not have any of the original documents of the New Testament. What we possess are copies of copies, sometimes centuries removed from the originals."
2. The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies
Quote: "No autographs (originals) of the biblical texts exist. All we have are later copies, often with significant variations."
Source: John Rogerson & Judith Lieu (Oxford University Press, 2006)
---
3. The Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts (CSNTM)
Quote: “All of the earliest copies of the New Testament are fragmentary or incomplete, and we do not have the originals.”
Source: CSNTM Official Website
---
4. Bart D. Ehrman (New Testament Scholar, Former Christian)
Quote: "The originals of the books of the New Testament have all been lost. What we have are later copies—thousands of them, in fact, copied by hand."
Source: Misquoting Jesus (HarperCollins, 2005)
More sources for contradictions:
1. The Number of Animals on Noah's Ark
Genesis 6:19-20 instructs Noah to bring two of every living creature into the ark.
Genesis 7:2-3, however, commands taking seven pairs of clean animals and birds.
This discrepancy suggests differing source traditions within the text.
2. The Death of Judas Iscariot
Matthew 27:5 records Judas hanging himself.
Acts 1:18 describes him falling headlong, resulting in his body bursting open.
These conflicting accounts raise questions about the consistency of the narrative.
3. The Timing of Jesus' Crucifixion
Mark 15:25 states Jesus was crucified at the third hour (9 a.m.).
John 19:14-16 indicates it was about the sixth hour (noon) when Jesus was handed over for crucifixion.
This timing discrepancy highlights variations in the Gospel accounts.
4. The Genealogy of Jesus
Matthew 1:16 lists Jacob as Joseph's father.
Luke 3:23 names Heli as Joseph's father.
These differing genealogies suggest distinct sources or theological emphases.
5. Seeing God
Exodus 33:20 asserts that no one can see God and live.
Genesis 32:30 describes Jacob claiming to have seen God face to face.
This contradiction raises questions about the nature of divine encounters in the text.
These examples illustrate the complex and multifaceted nature of biblical texts, reflecting diverse traditions and editorial influences over time.
Argument 2:
Bible’s reliance on oral traditions and anonymous authorship undermines its claim to divine inspiration, while reinforcing its human origins:
---
1. Decades of Oral Transmission
Timeline:
Jesus’ ministry: ~27–30 CE.
Gospels of Matthew/Luke: ~80–90 CE.
Gospel of John: ~90–110 CE.
Problems with Oral Tradition:
Memory Distortion: Human memory degrades over time. Details shift with retelling (e.g., exaggerations, omissions).
Agenda-Driven Editing: Stories adapted to address later theological disputes (e.g., Gentile inclusion, Roman persecution).
Example:
Mark 6:5: “He [Jesus] could do no mighty work there [Nazareth].”
Matthew 13:58: Changes this to “He did not do many mighty works there,” softening the implication of Jesus’ limitations.
Scholarly Source:
Bart Ehrman: “The stories about Jesus were altered in the process of retelling. … It’s what happens with oral traditions everywhere” (Jesus Before the Gospels, 2016).
---
2. Anonymous Authorship
Facts:
No Original Titles: The Gospels were untitled initially. Names like “According to Matthew” were added later (2nd century CE).
Early Church Testimony:
Papias (130 CE): Claims Mark recorded Peter’s sermons—secondhand, not eyewitness.
Irenaeus (180 CE): First to assign authorship to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, based on tradition, not evidence.
Why It Matters:
If the authors were eyewitnesses (as claimed), they would have named themselves.
Anonymous works lack accountability, making them prone to myth-building.
---
3. Theological Evolution in the Text
Example 1: Jesus’ Divinity
Mark (65–75 CE):
Jesus is a human Messiah; no virgin birth; dies crying, “My God, why have you forsaken me?” (15:34).
Matthew/Luke (80–90 CE):
John (90–110 CE):
Jesus is pre-existent divine Logos (1:1); says, “I and the Father are one” (10:30).
Example 2: Resurrection Accounts
Mark 16:1-8: Ends abruptly with an empty tomb; no post-resurrection appearances.
Matthew 28:9-10: Jesus appears to women.
Luke 24:13-43: Jesus walks with disciples, eats fish.
John 20:11-29: Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene, then to Thomas.
Impact: The resurrection story grows more elaborate over time, suggesting legendary development.
---
4. Contradictions Expose Human Tampering
Example 1: Sermon on the Mount vs. Plain
Matthew 5-7: Jesus delivers the Sermon on a mountain (symbolizing Moses/Sinai).
Luke 6:17-49: Same sermon, but on a “level place” (plain).
Example 2: Genealogy of Jesus
Matthew 1:1-17: Traces Jesus’ lineage through Joseph to King David (28 generations).
Luke 3:23-38: Traces through a different line (43 generations).
Example 3: Jesus’ Last Words
Mark 15:34: “My God, why have you forsaken me?” (despair).
Luke 23:46: “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit” (peace).
John 19:30: “It is finished” (triumph).
Impact: These contradictions reflect competing oral traditions later written into the text.
---
5. Impact on the Trinity
Key Trinitarian Verses Are Suspect:
1 John 5:7-8 (Trinitarian formula): A proven 16th-century forgery.
Matthew 28:19 (“Father, Son, Holy Spirit”): Absent from early texts like the Didache (50–70 CE), which uses baptism “in the name of the Lord Jesus.”
Council of Nicaea (325 CE):
The Trinity was formalized using non-biblical terms (homoousios) borrowed from Greek philosophy.
---
6. Contrast with the Quran
Oral + Written Preservation:
The Quran was memorized verbatim and written during Muhammad’s lifetime (ﷺ).
Zero Variants: Oldest manuscripts (e.g., Sana’a Codex, c. 675 CE) match modern Quran.
Explicit Authorship:
Quranic verses begin with “Say [O Muhammad]” (e.g., 112:1), affirming its divine source.
---
Preempting Counterarguments
1. “The Holy Spirit inspired the authors!”
Rebuttal: Why allow errors like 500,000 variants? Why borrow pagan terms like homoousios?
2. “Core doctrines remain intact!”
Rebuttal: The Trinity depends on forged verses (1 John 5:7-8) and late theology (John’s Gospel).
3. “The authors were apostles!”
Rebuttal: Scholarly consensus rejects apostolic authorship. Even Paul, the earliest writer, never met Jesus.
---
Final Argument
“The Bible’s oral origins, anonymous authorship, and evolving theology prove it is a human product. The Trinity, built on these shaky foundations, is a later invention—not divine truth. Islam’s Quran, preserved perfectly, restores the pure monotheism taught by all prophets, including Jesus (ﷺ).”
Jesus 3 years missionary work turned into new testament:
1. Jesus Did Not Preach the "Bible"
Oral Teachings: Jesus preached in Aramaic, and his teachings were passed down orally for decades before being written. The "Bible" (New Testament) did not exist during his lifetime.
Short Ministry: Even if his ministry lasted 3 years, he taught in parables and sayings, not lengthy texts. The Gospels (written 40–70 years later) are summaries of these teachings, not verbatim records.
---
......
Argument:
How Jesus became god for Christian:
Here’s a step-by-step breakdown of how Jesus (ﷺ)—a human prophet in his original teachings—was transformed into a divine figure in Christianity, despite his humanity and prophetic mission:
---
1. Jesus’ Original Role: Prophet and Messiah
Historical Jesus:
Preached monotheism (Mark 12:29: “The Lord our God is one Lord”).
Identified as a prophet (Matthew 13:57, Luke 13:33) and Messiah (anointed king, not God).
Prayed to God (Matthew 26:39), fasted (Matthew 4:2), and faced human limitations (Mark 13:32: “The Son does not know the hour”).
Islamic View:
Quran 5:75: “The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger... He used to eat food.”
Quran 3:59: “Indeed, the example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam... He said, ‘Be,’ and it was.”
---
2. Early Followers: Jesus as Exalted Human
Jewish-Christian Ebionites (1st–2nd century):
Viewed Jesus as the human Messiah, born naturally to Mary and Joseph.
Rejected his divinity and virgin birth.
Paul’s Letters (50–60 CE):
Elevated Jesus’ status but never called him “God” (e.g., Philippians 2:9–11: “God exalted him”).
Introduced terms like “Lord” (Greek: Kyrios)—a title also used for human rulers.
---
**3. Hellenistic Influence: Merging Jewish and Greek Ideas
Logos Theology (John’s Gospel, 90–110 CE):
Portrayed Jesus as the Logos (Word), borrowing from Greek philosophy (Philo of Alexandria).
John 1:1: “The Word was God”—a theological leap absent in earlier Gospels.
Gentile Audiences:
Non-Jewish converts (Romans, Greeks) were accustomed to divine-human hybrids (e.g., Hercules, demigods).
Jesus’ resurrection was framed similarly to pagan “dying-and-rising” gods (e.g., Osiris, Dionysus).
---
**4. Textual Corruption: Adding Divine Titles
John 20:28:
Thomas calls Jesus “My Lord and my God!”—a late addition to John’s Gospel, inconsistent with Jesus’ earlier rejections of worship (Matthew 4:10: “Worship the Lord your God”).
Titus 2:13:
“The glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ”—likely altered to equate Jesus with God. Early manuscripts lack clarity.
1 John 5:7–8 (Comma Johanneum):
A forged verse added in the 16th century to support the Trinity: “Father, Word, and Holy Spirit are one.”
---
**5. Political Enforcement: Councils and Creeds
Council of Nicaea (325 CE):
Emperor Constantine enforced the term homoousios (“same substance”) to declare Jesus divine.
Dissenting bishops (Arians) were exiled; writings burned.
Council of Constantinople (381 CE):
Formalized the Holy Spirit as the third “person” of the Trinity.
Pagan parallels: Triads like Osiris-Isis-Horus (Egypt) influenced the doctrine.
---
**6. Theological Contradictions
Subordination vs. Equality:
Jesus prays to God (Luke 22:42) yet is called “equal” to Him (John 10:30).
Mark 10:18: “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.”
Human Limitations:
Jesus grows in wisdom (Luke 2:52), sleeps (Mark 4:38), and dies—traits incompatible with divine omnipotence.
---
7. Islamic Rejection of Deification
Quran 4:171:
“Do not say ‘Three’; desist! It is better for you. Allah is but One God. Exalted is He above having a son.”
Quran 5:116–117:
Allah asks Jesus on Judgment Day: “Did you say to the people, ‘Take me and my mother as gods besides Allah?’” Jesus replies: “I said not except what You commanded me: ‘Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.’”
---
Conclusion
Jesus (ﷺ) was a prophet sent to renew monotheism, but his message was corrupted through:
1. Hellenistic syncretism (mixing Jewish and pagan ideas).
2. Textual additions (forged verses like 1 John 5:7).
3. Political councils (Nicaea, Constantinople).
4. Cultural reinterpretation (Gentile audiences expecting divine heroes).
The Quran restores Jesus’ true status: a human prophet, not God. The Trinity is a man-made doctrine, crafted through centuries of theological evolution and political coercion—not divine revelation.
Now we are going to see trinity under philosophical and logical lense.
................
Here’s a breakdown of the Trinity’s philosophical and logical absurdities.
---
1. Logical Contradictions
A. The Law of Non-Contradiction
Trinity Claim: Three distinct persons (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) are one God.
Logical Violation:
If A (Father) ≠ B (Son) ≠ C (Spirit), they cannot simultaneously be one being (A = B = C).
This violates the foundational logical principle: A thing cannot be both itself and its opposite (A ≠ non-A).
B. Subordination vs. Co-Equality
Biblical Subordination:
Jesus says, “The Father is greater than I” (John 14:28).
Jesus prays to the Father (Luke 22:42).
Trinity’s Claim: All three persons are co-equal and co-eternal.
Contradiction: If Jesus is subordinate, he cannot be co-equal.
---
2. Philosophical Paradoxes
A. The Problem of Divine Simplicity
Classical Theism: God is simple (non-composite, indivisible).
Trinity: God is composed of three “persons.”
Paradox: A simple being cannot have parts. The Trinity introduces complexity, making God a composite being—contradicting divine simplicity.
B. Identity and Distinction
Trinity: Each person is “fully God,” yet distinct.
Logical Absurdity:
If the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Spirit is God, but they are distinct, then three Gods exist (tritheism).
Analogy: Claiming three CEOs are “one CEO” while acting independently.
C. The "Mystery" Dodge
Christian Defense: The Trinity is a “mystery beyond human logic.”
Rebuttal:
If a doctrine defies basic logic (e.g., 3=1), it is irrational, not mysterious.
Thomas Paine: “To believe in three Gods is paganism; to call them one is nonsense.”
....
Contradictions in the Hypostatic Union
A. Fully God, Fully Human (100% + 100% = ?)
The Hypostatic Union claims Jesus is fully God and fully human at the same time.
Logical issue:
God is infinite → Jesus is finite.
God is all-knowing → Jesus did not know (Mark 13:32).
God cannot die → Jesus died.
God is unchanging → Jesus was born, grew, suffered, and died.
Contradiction: A being cannot be both infinite and finite, mortal and immortal, omniscient and ignorant at the same time.
.....
Two Wills Problem
Jesus has two wills (divine and human) according to the Hypostatic Union.
But wills belong to persons, not natures.
Contradiction: If Jesus has two wills, he must be two persons, not one.
---
Contradictions in Eternal Begetting
A. Self-Existence vs. Begetting
The Trinity says:
The Son is eternally begotten of the Father.
But God is self-existent (not caused by another).
Contradiction:
If the Son is begotten, He has a source (the Father) and is not self-existent.
If He is self-existent, He cannot be begotten.
A thing cannot be both caused and uncaused.
B. Begetting Without Beginning
Begetting means a beginning of existence.
But the Son is said to be eternally begotten.
Contradiction: How can the Son be begotten (which implies a beginning) yet eternal (which means no beginning)?
3. Historical Context of Absurdity
A. Borrowed Pagan Concepts
Triads in Paganism:
Egyptian: Osiris-Isis-Horus.
Hindu: Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva.
Greek: Zeus-Poseidon-Hades.
Trinity’s Parallel: A politically expedient fusion of monotheism and pagan triadic worship.
B. Contradictory Councils
Council of Nicaea (325 CE): Declared Jesus “same substance” (homoousios) as the Father.
Council of Constantinople (381 CE): Added the Holy Spirit as co-equal.
Result: A doctrine built on political compromise, not divine revelation.
---
Contradictions in the Trinity’s Hierarchy
A. Functional vs. Ontological Hierarchy
Some Christians say the Father has authority over the Son and Spirit.
But all three are supposedly equal in power and status.
Contradiction:
If the Father has authority, the Son is subordinate.
If the Son is subordinate, then He is not co-equal.
B. Authority in Heaven
Jesus said:
“To sit at my right or left is not for me to grant.” (Mark 10:40)
“The Father alone has set the times and dates.” (Acts 1:7)
Contradiction: If Jesus is God, why does He lack authority?
......
Contradictions in Atonement
A. Can God Die?
The Trinity claims Jesus is God.
Jesus died on the cross.
Contradiction:
If God can die, He is not eternal.
If God cannot die, then Jesus (who died) is not fully God.
B. Does God Need Sacrifice?
God is all-powerful and all-merciful.
Yet, the Trinity says God needed to sacrifice Himself to forgive sins.
Contradiction:
If God is all-powerful, He does not need sacrifice.
If He needed sacrifice, He is not all-powerful.
.....
Contradictions in Biblical Interpretation
A. The Trinity is Not Explicit in the Bible
The word “Trinity” is not in the Bible.
Key verses (like 1 John 5:7) were forgeries.
Contradiction: If the Trinity is the core belief, why is it missing from scripture?
B. The Holy Spirit’s Role
The Holy Spirit is called “He” in some verses and “It” in others.
The Holy Spirit is sometimes depicted as separate from God.
Contradiction: Is the Holy Spirit God, or just God’s power?
........
4. Islamic Tawhid: Logical Monotheism
A. Quranic Clarity
Quran 112:1–4:
“Say: He is Allah, the One. Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born. Nor is there to Him any equivalent.”
No Paradox: Allah is One, indivisible, and beyond human attributes (e.g., fatherhood, sonship).
B. Jesus in Islam
Quran 5:75:
“The Messiah, son of Mary, was not but a messenger... He used to eat food.”
Logical Consistency: A human prophet, born miraculously but mortal and subordinate to Allah.
---
5. Preempting Christian Counterarguments
1. “The Trinity is a mystery!”
Rebuttal: If 3=1 is a “mystery,” why not 4=1 or 5=1? Truth must align with reason.
2. “Analogies like water-ice-steam explain it!”
Rebuttal: These are modalism (one substance, different modes), condemned as heresy. The Trinity claims three distinct persons, not modes.
3. “The Bible implies the Trinity!”
Rebuttal: The term “Trinity” is absent in scripture. Key verses (e.g., 1 John 5:7) are proven forgeries.
---
Conclusion
The Trinity is logically absurd and philosophically incoherent:
1. It violates the law of non-contradiction (3≠1).
2. It borrows from pagan triads and political councils.
3. It relies on textual forgeries (1 John 5:7) to retroactively justify itself.
Islam’s Tawhid resolves these contradictions with uncompromising monotheism:
Quran 2:255: “Allah—there is no deity except Him, the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of existence.”
The Trinity is not divine—it is a man-made paradox crafted to deify a prophet and appease pagan converts. Truth needs no contradictions.
1. The original revelation to Jesus (عليه السلام) was in Aramaic, not Greek.
2. His disciples, being Aramaic speakers, likely transmitted it in Aramaic, not Greek a foreign language.
3. The fact that the Gospels were written in Greek suggests the writers were not direct disciples.
4. The Gospel writers were educated Greek-speaking individuals who received the message orally from others.
5. Because of this indirect transmission, the Gospels remained anonymous for decades.
6. The earliest Gospel was written 30+ years after Jesus, far from the original events.
7. Even if Jesus could have revealed the entire New Testament in 3 years, it would have been impossible for his disciples to fully comprehend, memorize, and orally transmit it without errors, especially in an era without recording technology.
8. The divinization of Jesus was an evolving phenomenon; early Christians like Arians, Ebionites, and Nazarenes rejected it and were persecuted.
9. John, the last Gospel writer, introduced Logos for Jesus—a concept foreign to the earlier Gospels.
10. The term homoousios (same essence) used in the Trinity doctrine is absent from the Bible and originates from pagan philosophy.
11. The Bible contains over 500,000 textual variations, making divine preservation impossible.
12. Trinity is completely absent from the Bible—there is no single verse where Jesus explicitly teaches it.
13. All Abrahamic religions teach pure monotheism—one God—while the Trinity resembles pagan polytheistic beliefs, like those of Hindus, Greeks, and Egyptians.
14. The Bible has been altered multiple times, with major modifications at the Councils of Nicaea (325 CE), Constantinople (381 CE), and later by King James (1611 CE).The Bible has undergone multiple changes over time, with significant theological decisions made at the Councils of Nicaea (325 CE) and Constantinople (381 CE), which shaped Christian doctrine. Additionally, the King James Version (1611 CE) was a widely influential English translation based on earlier manuscripts, reflecting textual variations that had developed over centuries. While these events did not directly rewrite the Bible, they influenced its interpretation, canonization, and transmission.
15. The most rational view is Jesus as a prophet, not God.
16. The Holy Spirit was an afterthought, gradually inserted into the Trinity doctrine centuries later least defined and seems to play an insignificant role.
17. God cannot have a son, and if the Son is co-eternal, it contradicts the idea of fatherhood, since a father must exist before his son.
18. God is beyond creation—He does not beget nor is He begotten (Quran 112:3).
19. Hypostatic union is absurd—if Jesus is fully divine and fully human, it contradicts logic. How can someone be eternal and mortal, divine and human, dead and alive at the same time? Saying he is 100% of both means both natures fully influence each other. But these are physical natures, not just hypothetical or intangible concepts, so the claim is inherently contradictory.
20. Jesus’ physical body is created, yet it is 100% part of him. This means God is 100% created, because calling Jesus 100% divine and 100% human makes his humanity inseparable from his divinity. Therefore, God becomes a created being, which is impossible.
21. Jesus, being 100% mortal, was ignorant of the Hour (Mark 13:32). This means he was either 100% ignorant or 100% lying. If he was ignorant, he cannot be God. If he was lying, he cannot be morally perfect. How can someone “humble” themselves by lying?
22. Jesus is bound by space and time, as seen in John 16:7, where the Holy Spirit cannot descend while Jesus is still on Earth, proves that the Trinity is not one entity, because the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit cannot exist in the same place simultaneously.
23. If Jesus is 100% human, then the Father and Holy Spirit must also be 100% human, because they are claimed to be one in their entirety.
24. The Trinity appears divided—if all three members share the same divine essence, then any change in one should affect all. But Jesus being 100% human did not change the Father or the Holy Spirit. This proves they are divided and not truly one being.
25. The Trinity is a contradiction at the essence level. For example, if the Holy Spirit could not come to Earth while Jesus was present, then they are separate beings. If Jesus changed by becoming 100% human, then the Father and Holy Spirit should have changed too, since they are all "one." No Christian can deny that Jesus went through change, yet the Father and Holy Spirit remained unchanged.
26. The Trinity claims the three persons share the same divine essence but are distinct. However, saying "the Father is not the Son, and the Son is not the Holy Spirit" means there is some point of unity (one essence) and some point of distinction (separate persons). This creates a logical paradox—if each member is fully God, then each is a separate God. If combined, they form a fourth God—the Godhead—which makes the Trinity a Quartinity, not a Trinity.
I could continue exposing more logical flaws in the Trinity, but let's save the next round for deep analysis of biblical verses, where we will further dismantle the doctrine using scriptural evidence.
Con
#2
2/23/2025, 3:12:46 PM
Ok, I will prove that the holy Spirit is the ONE Father God in the scriptures as well as reconciling it with the Quran, Allah as one.
2/24/2025, 1:06:15 AM
Well, it's my debate I can decide the framework and resolution. It's upto you to decide how you can respond
I have stated what I am to address. The opposing side according to the message, did not object . So the opposing side will have to agree or reject the Quran.
The holy spirit is God. Who is God? The Father. This is all according to biblical scriptures. Not according to logic or what you think. It doesn't work by what you think. It is what it is according to what is written. We find what is written about God. We don't find what we think.
So we find written in the book of first Corinthians chapter eight and at verse six.
"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."
But there is what? One God the Father.
So what is that one God?
According to John 4:24 it says God is a Spirit.
What is the Father?
According to John 17:11 says Holy Father.
So Father God is Holy spirit.
Out of the mouth of two or three witnesses let every word be established. Those are the three. We got a witness out of 1 Corinthians 8, John 4 and John 17.
That was a short work and made plain.
Now let's reconcile this to the Quran. This means the Quran teaches the same.
Surat Al-'Ikhlāş (The Sincerity) - سورة الإخلاص
Say, "He is Allah , [who is] One
Right here it ties back to the scripture that said there is one God.
Now if the opposing side agrees with this passage in the Quran, the opposing side just agreed with the bible.
Who is this one Allah who is one according to the Quran?
Surah Al-Isra - 17:85
"They ask you ˹O Prophet˺ about the spirit. Say, “Its nature is known only to my Lord, and you ˹O humanity˺ have been given but little knowledge.”
Jesus which was a prophet raised up spoke of the spirit so people knew of the spirit but only so much was revealed and secret things God or Allah kept for himself, revealeth his secrets to his servants the prophets.
According to Surah Sad Ayat 72 , Allah is that spirit to breathe. When you breathe into a man as taught in the scriptures, is giving the breath of life . The spirit is life. Quran teaches He is the ever-LIVING LORD.
Surah Sad Ayat 38:72
"After I have created him and breathed into him of My spirit, fall you down, prostrating yourselves to him.”
Now the scriptures refer to God as being holy and describe him as just.
Let's look at Surah Fussilat 41:46
مَّنْ عَمِلَ صَـٰلِحًۭا فَلِنَفْسِهِۦ ۖ وَمَنْ أَسَآءَ فَعَلَيْهَا ۗ وَمَا رَبُّكَ بِظَلَّـٰمٍۢ لِّلْعَبِيدِ ٤٦
"Whoever does good, it is to their own benefit. And whoever does evil, it is to their own loss. Your Lord is never unjust to ˹His˺ creation."
Why?
Surah Al-Hashr
"He is Allah—there is no god except Him: the King, the Most Holy, the All-Perfect, the Source of Serenity, the Watcher ˹of all˺, the Almighty, the Supreme in Might,1 the Majestic. Glorified is Allah far above what they associate with Him ˹in worship˺!"
So there you have it. Both the bible and Quran, talking about that one God , no god but him, that spirit that breathed into man, the holy, the most holy spirit that one God is he Allah.
I yield.
Round 2
Pro
#3
First of all I thank my opponent for responding, though we end up on debating on different resolutions.
Lets see what conversation we had in private messages, we could not agree on same resolution.
We ended up debating on two different resolutions.
Conversation between Mall and tigerlord.
2/21/2025, 11:39:39 PM
I say trinity ha contradictions and is illogical. If you want this then good if not then concede.
2/22/2025, 8:59:06 PM
I will present resolution and full framework of the debate. And ask structure of debate and further rules as well. I hope everything will be clear in first round.
2/24/2025, 1:12:46 AM
Ok, I will prove that the holy Spirit is the ONE Father God in the scriptures as well as reconciling it with the Quran, Allah as one.
2/24/2025, 11:06:15 AM
Well, it's my debate I can decide the framework and resolution. It's upto you to decide how you can respond
2/25/2025, 4:12:36 AM
Can we agree on what I said to debate on or do you already with what I'm taking onus to prove ?
2/25/2025, 6:12:20 AM
Bro that is why in rules I said choose resolution before taking debate and in comment section. I want to debate on trinity.
Conclusion:
well my opponent has taken the debate in haste, and when we tried to have common resolution, we could not come up on one.
So it seems both want to debate on two different resolution, for that I asked my opponent to concede and he did.
By saying:
I yield.
Probably we cannot debate further on because of having two different resolutions, but on the other hand I still want to respond to the response from my opponent in first round because what interpretation he did on bible verses and Quranic verses are wrong. In fact as far as Quran is concerned they are absolutely wrong.
Lets dive into rebuttals:
My opponent stated:
“I have stated what I am to address. The opposing side according to the message, did not object . So the opposing side will have to agree or reject the Quran”
Rebuttal:
I put the condition that as this is my debate so I am going to decide the resolution and framework, but as far as your response is concerned you can decide whatever you want. And it turn out you have chosen the resolution you want which is against the rules. Where I stated we can debate on same resolution. And as we can see above I said if you do not want to debate about resolution I want the concede and probably you conceded at the end because of that.
Thanks for honesty and collaboration here.
But I want to respond for wrong interpretation of Quranic verses you mentioned any way for the sake of readers.
My opponent stated:
“The holy spirit is God. Who is God? The Father. This is all according to biblical scriptures. Not according to logic or what you think. It doesn't work by what you think. It is what it is according to what is written. We find what is written about God. We don't find what we think”
Rebuttal:
- My opponent probably want to say that, Father is holy spirit or holy spirit is father.
- We already know this is the believe of most of christian, they say father and holy spirit are one but distinct.
- If he means holy spirit and father are same and not distinct then its something new and if he also removes Jesus out of picture being the 3rd person of godhood then its something new and we can look into it.
- When my opponent say this is all according to biblical scripture not according to logic or what you think then he is not quite right about even his own stance. Because after all whatever he is saying is also his own interpretation.
- All forms of explanation about believes of christian are interpretation of bible and among them what my opponent has presented is one too.
-
Lets see what else he has to say
My opponent stated with reference:
So we find written in the book of first Corinthians chapter eight and at verse six.
"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”
But there is what? One God the Father.
So what is that one God?
According to John 4:24 it says God is a Spirit.
What is the Father?
According to John 17:11 says Holy Father.
So Father God is Holy spirit.
Out of the mouth of two or three witnesses let every word be established. Those are the three. We got a witness out of 1 Corinthians 8, John 4 and John 17.
That was a short work and made plain.
"
Rebuttal:
- I am not sure whether my opponent is excluding Jesus Christ.
- John 4:24 states that God is one spirit, not the Holy Spirit, and the Father is one but not necessarily the same as the Holy Spirit.
- John 17:11 says "Holy Father," but using the word holy with Father does not make Him the Holy Spirit. The word holy signifies a high and exalted status, not an identity as the Holy Spirit. In fact, we need to examine the original Greek words for accuracy.
- John 17:11 also indicates that God is the Father of someone, which suggests that the Son would also be God or a demigod if He has a human element.
- If the Bible is the criterion for deciding this matter, then what about the many other verses interpreted to support the Trinity, where each person is distinct yet considered God? How can my opponent's interpretation be considered correct over others?
- I have reviewed my opponent’s interpretation of the Quran and found it to be unjust, distorting its true meaning and understanding. His interpretation is foreign, unfounded, strange, baseless, distorted, alienated, and misguided.
Let me explain:
Why this argument is flawed because it engages in circular reasoning and equivocation (shifting definitions of words to suit the argument). Here’s why:
1. False equivocation on "Spirit" and "Holy Spirit"
- The argument states: "God is a Spirit" (John 4:24), so the Father is the Holy Spirit."
- Problem: Saying "God is a spirit" means God is of a spiritual nature, not that He is the specific entity known as the "Holy Spirit" in Christian theology.
- This is like saying: "Humans have a body, therefore, every human is the same body." That doesn't follow.
2. Selective Quoting and Ignoring the Trinity Doctrine
- 1 Corinthians 8:6 says "One God, the Father", but Trinitarians interpret this within the context of the Trinity. The verse doesn’t deny the Son and the Holy Spirit as divine.
- If this verse disproves the Trinity, then why does Matthew 28:19 (which commands baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) exist?
3. Ignoring Counter Verses
- If the Father is the Holy Spirit, then why does John 14:16 say:"I will pray to the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever."
- If the Father and the Holy Spirit were the same, Jesus wouldn’t say "another Comforter."
Conclusion
This is a weak and self-referential argument that assumes its own conclusion. It plays with word definitions, ignores key counterarguments, and doesn’t prove what it claims.
Lets see the verses in Greek and their analysis:
1. 1 Corinthians 8:6
"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."
Greek Word Analysis:
- εἷς θεὸς ὁ πατήρ (heis Theos ho Patēr) = "One God, the Father"
- θεός (Theos) – God
- πατήρ (Patēr) – Father
-
- εἷς κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός (heis Kyrios Iēsous Christos) = "One Lord Jesus Christ"
- κύριος (Kyrios) – Lord
- Ἰησοῦς Χριστός (Iēsous Christos) – Jesus Christ
✦ Problem with my Opponent’s Argument:
- This verse clearly distinguishes between God the Father and Jesus Christ.
- It does NOT say "the Holy Spirit is the Father."
2. John 4:24
"God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."
Greek Word Analysis:
- πνεῦμα ὁ θεός (pneuma ho Theos) = "God is spirit"
- πνεῦμα (pneuma) – spirit, breath, wind
- θεός (Theos) – God
✦ Problem with my Opponent’s Argument:
- This verse says "God is spirit" (πνεῦμα), not "God is the Holy Spirit."
- The word πνεῦμα (spirit) is used generally to describe God’s nature (non-physical) and does not mean God is the Holy Spirit as a person.
3. John 17:11
"And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are."
Greek Word Analysis:
- πάτερ ἅγιε (Patēr Hagie) = "Holy Father"
- πάτερ (Patēr) – Father
- ἅγιε (Hagie) – Holy
✦ Problem with my Opponent’s Argument:
- "Holy Father" (πάτερ ἅγιε) does NOT mean "Holy Spirit."
- The word "holy" (ἅγιε) is an adjective describing the Father's purity, not His identity as the Holy Spirit.
- This phrase is nowhere used to say "Father = Holy Spirit."
Holy spirit is separate person in bible and my opponent cannot deny some part of bible and agree on some.
While I have proven how bible got corrupted and how it was compiled.
On the other hand I am going to discuss the trinity and bible and everything related to God according to christian in great depth and will discuss everything about it including the case of my opponent when I am analyzing the verses of bible. Right now I am going to discuss the part of Quran my opponent has presented and misunderstood everything about it.
My opponent stated:
Now let's reconcile this to the Quran. This means the Quran teaches the same.
Surat Al-'Ikhlāş (The Sincerity) - سورة الإخلاص
Say, "He is Allah , [who is] One
Right here it ties back to the scripture that said there is one God.
Now if the opposing side agrees with this passage in the Quran, the opposing side just agreed with the bible.
Rebuttal:
Yes, it is 100% correct that Allah is one, and the verse states the truth. However, agreeing with the Bible is not part of it because this is not what the present Bible says. Lets take the original Bible, which was revealed to Prophet Jesus, out of the discussion, it is because the original Bible does not exist and is not present among us.
My opponent stated:
Surah Al-Isra - 17:85
"They ask you ˹O Prophet˺ about the spirit. Say, “Its nature is known only to my Lord, and you ˹O humanity˺ have been given but little knowledge.”
Jesus which was a prophet raised up spoke of the spirit so people knew of the spirit but only so much was revealed and secret things God or Allah kept for himself, revealeth his secrets to his servants the prophets.
According to Surah Sad Ayat 72 , Allah is that spirit to breathe. When you breathe into a man as taught in the scriptures, is giving the breath of life . The spirit is life. Quran teaches He is the ever-LIVING LORD.
Surah Sad Ayat 38:72
"After I have created him and breathed into him of My spirit, fall you down, prostrating yourselves to him.”
Now the scriptures refer to God as being holy and describe him as just.
Let's look at Surah Fussilat 41:46
مَّنْ عَمِلَ صَـٰلِحًۭا فَلِنَفْسِهِۦ ۖ وَمَنْ أَسَآءَ فَعَلَيْهَا ۗ وَمَا رَبُّكَ بِظَلَّـٰمٍۢ لِّلْعَبِيدِ ٤٦
"Whoever does good, it is to their own benefit. And whoever does evil, it is to their own loss. Your Lord is never unjust to ˹His˺ creation."
Why?
Surah Al-Hashr
"He is Allah—there is no god except Him: the King, the Most Holy, the All-Perfect, the Source of Serenity, the Watcher ˹of all˺, the Almighty, the Supreme in Might,1 the Majestic. Glorified is Allah far above what they associate with Him ˹in worship˺!"
So there you have it. Both the bible and Quran, talking about that one God , no god but him, that spirit that breathed into man, the holy, the most holy spirit that one God is he Allah.
I yield.
Rebuttal:
Surah Al-Isra (17:85) – Arabic & English Translation
Arabic:
وَيَسْـَٔلُونَكَ عَنِ ٱلرُّوحِ ۖ قُلِ ٱلرُّوحُ مِنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّى وَمَآ أُوتِيتُم مِّنَ ٱلْعِلْمِ إِلَّا قَلِيلًۭا
🔹 Highlighted Word: ٱلرُّوحِ (Ar-Rūḥ) – The Soul / Spirit
English Translation (Sahih International):
"And they ask you, [O Muhammad], about the soul (Ar-Rūḥ). Say, 'The soul is of the affair of my Lord, and you [mankind] have not been given of knowledge except a little.'”
Reference:
📖 Surah Al-Isra (17:85)
Lets see what Islam says about it and what is background.
Surah Al-Isra (17:85) refers to the soul (روح) of human beings, not the "Spirit of God."
Hadith Related to This Verse:
The following hadith explains the context of this verse when the Quraysh asked Prophet Muhammad ﷺ about the human soul:
Sahih al-Bukhari 125
Narrated Abdullah ibn Mas'ud (RA):
While I was walking with the Prophet ﷺ in a field, and he was resting on a palm leaf stalk, some Jews passed by. Some of them said to the others: "Ask him (the Prophet) about the soul." Some of them said: "What urges you to ask him about it?" Others said: "(Don't) lest he gives you a reply which you dislike." But they asked him, and the Prophet ﷺ kept silent and did not give them an answer. Then, he received revelation:
“And they ask you concerning the soul. Say: ‘The soul is of the affair of my Lord, and you have not been given knowledge except a little.’” (Qur'an 17:85)
Sunan at-Tirmidhi 3144 (Hasan)
Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas (RA):
The Jews of Madinah asked the Prophet ﷺ about the soul, so Allah revealed the verse:
"And they ask you concerning the soul. Say: ‘The soul is of the affair of my Lord, and you have not been given knowledge except a little.’" (Qur'an 17:85)
Conclusion:
- The Jews asked about human souls (روح الإنسان), not the Holy Spirit.
- Allah revealed Qur'an 17:85, emphasizing that humans have very limited knowledge about the nature of the soul.
- This verse does not support the claim that the "Spirit" mentioned here refers to God Himself or the Holy Spirit.
……………..
Difference Between Rūḥ, Rūḥ al-Qudus, Rūḥ al-Amīn, Rūḥ (as an Angel), and Rūḥ as Divine Assistance
1. Rūḥ (as Soul) – Referring to the Human Soul
This usage refers to the soul that Allah places in human beings.
- Surah Al-Hijr (15:29)
فَإِذَا سَوَّيْتُهُۥ وَنَفَخْتُ فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِى فَقَعُوا۟ لَهُۥ سَـٰجِدِينَ
"So when I have proportioned him and breathed into him of My Spirit, then fall down to him in prostration." - Surah As-Sajdah (32:9)
ثُمَّ سَوَّىٰهُ وَنَفَخَ فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِهِۦ ۖ وَجَعَلَ لَكُمُ ٱلسَّمْعَ وَٱلْأَبْصَـٰرَ وَٱلْأَفْـِٔدَةَ ۚ قَلِيلًۭا مَّا تَشْكُرُونَ
"Then He proportioned him and breathed into him from His Spirit and made for you hearing and vision and hearts; little are you grateful." - Surah Sad (38:72)
فَإِذَا سَوَّيْتُهُۥ وَنَفَخْتُ فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِى فَقَعُوا۟ لَهُۥ سَـٰجِدِينَ
"So when I have proportioned him and breathed into him of My Spirit, then fall down to him in prostration."
2. Rūḥ al-Qudus (The Holy Spirit) – Referring to Angel Jibreel (AS)
This term is specifically used for Jibreel (AS), who brings revelation from Allah.
- Surah Al-Baqarah (2:87)
وَلَقَدْ ءَاتَيْنَا مُوسَى ٱلْكِتَـٰبَ وَقَفَّيْنَا مِنۢ بَعْدِهِۦ بِٱلرُّسُلِ وَءَاتَيْنَا عِيسَى ٱبْنَ مَرْيَمَ ٱلْبَيِّنَـٰتِ وَأَيَّدْنَـٰهُ بِرُوحِ ٱلْقُدُسِ
"And We certainly gave Moses the Scripture and followed up after him with messengers. And We gave Jesus, the son of Mary, clear proofs and supported him with the Holy Spirit." - Surah Al-Baqarah (2:253)
وَءَاتَيْنَا عِيسَى ٱبْنَ مَرْيَمَ ٱلْبَيِّنَـٰتِ وَأَيَّدْنَـٰهُ بِرُوحِ ٱلْقُدُسِ
"And We gave Jesus, the son of Mary, clear proofs and supported him with the Holy Spirit." - Surah Al-Ma’idah (5:110)
إِذْ أَيَّدتُّكَ بِرُوحِ ٱلْقُدُسِ
"When I supported you with the Holy Spirit."
3. Rūḥ al-Amīn (The Trustworthy Spirit) – Referring to Jibreel (AS)
Another name for Jibreel (AS), emphasizing his trustworthiness in delivering revelation.
- Surah Ash-Shu'ara (26:193-194)
نَزَلَ بِهِ ٱلرُّوحُ ٱلْأَمِينُ عَلَىٰ قَلْبِكَ لِتَكُونَ مِنَ ٱلْمُنذِرِينَ
"The Trustworthy Spirit has brought it down upon your heart so that you may be among the warners."
4. Rūḥ (as an Angel) – Referring to Jibreel (AS) or a High-Ranking Angel
Used to describe Jibreel (AS) or an honored angel among the angels.
- Surah An-Naba (78:38)
يَوْمَ يَقُومُ ٱلرُّوحُ وَٱلْمَلَـٰٓئِكَةُ صَفًّۭا لَّا يَتَكَلَّمُونَ إِلَّا مَنْ أَذِنَ لَهُ ٱلرَّحْمَـٰنُ وَقَالَ صَوَابًۭا
"The Day when the Spirit and the angels will stand in rows, none will speak except one whom the Most Merciful permits, and he will say what is correct." - Surah Al-Qadr (97:4)
تَنَزَّلُ ٱلْمَلَـٰٓئِكَةُ وَٱلرُّوحُ فِيهَا بِإِذْنِ رَبِّهِم مِّن كُلِّ أَمْرٍۢ
"The angels and the Spirit descend therein by permission of their Lord for every matter."
5. Rūḥ (as Divine Assistance, Revelation, or Strengthening from Allah)
In this context, Rūḥ refers to divine guidance, assistance, or revelation rather than a specific being.
- Surah Al-Ghafir (40:15)
يُلْقِى ٱلرُّوحَ مِنْ أَمْرِهِۦ عَلَىٰ مَن يَشَآءُ مِنْ عِبَادِهِۦ لِيُنذِرَ يَوْمَ ٱلتَّلَاقِ
"He sends down the Spirit by His command upon whomever He wills of His servants to warn of the Day of Meeting." - Surah An-Nahl (16:2)
يُنَزِّلُ ٱلْمَلَـٰٓئِكَةَ بِٱلرُّوحِ مِنْ أَمْرِهِۦ عَلَىٰ مَن يَشَآءُ مِنْ عِبَادِهِۦ أَنْ أَنْذِرُوٓا۟ أَنَّهُۥ لَآ إِلَـٰهَ إِلَّآ أَنَا۠ فَٱتَّقُونِ
"He sends down the angels with the Spirit by His command upon whomever He wills of His servants, telling them, 'Warn that there is no deity except Me, so fear Me.'" - Surah Al-Mujādilah (58:22)
أُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ كَتَبَ فِى قُلُوبِهِمُ ٱلْإِيمَـٰنَ وَأَيَّدَهُم بِرُوحٍۢ مِّنْهُ
"Those are the ones in whose hearts He has inscribed faith and whom He has supported with a Spirit from Him."
Conclusion
- Rūḥ (روح): The human soul given by Allah.
- Rūḥ al-Qudus (روح القدس): A title for Jibreel (AS).
- Rūḥ al-Amīn (روح الأمين): Another title for Jibreel (AS), emphasizing his trustworthiness.
- Rūḥ (روح) as an Angel: A reference to Jibreel (AS) or a high-ranking angel.
- Rūḥ as Divine Assistance: Refers to revelation, divine guidance, or spiritual strengthening from Allah.
This structured breakdown clarifies how Rūḥ is used in different contexts in the Quran.
In the next round I will analyze the verses of the Bible which shows incompatibility with trinity and there seems to be some kind of human intervention into its passage or misinterpretation by Christian. And some verses which might not be from God at all.
I could do it in this round but it was Ramdhan and my health was not well so I would do it in the next round.
My opponent did not want to debate on the topic and agreed to yield this debate but I wanted to present the case for the information of readers.
Islam is best.
Con
#4
"Probably we cannot debate further on because of having two different resolutions, but on the other hand I still want to respond to the response from my opponent in first round because what interpretation he did on bible verses and Quranic verses are wrong. In fact as far as Quran is concerned they are absolutely wrong."
You either want to debate and engage with the person you are communicating with or just make a forum topic.
"I put the condition that as this is my debate so I am going to decide the resolution and framework, but as far as your response is concerned you can decide whatever you want."
Case and point. The opposing side really wishes to be in a debate alone. Might as well just went to the forum with this. When you don't want to engage, it's a tactic that makes it easier to not face refutation. But I'll lay it all out for the public anyway.
"But I want to respond for wrong interpretation of Quranic verses you mentioned any way for the sake of readers."
Let me explain your religion to you. First of all, there is no wrong interpretation with reading something as written. In my explanations I don't add to or remove any part of the text. I leave it as written, post as written, explain as written.
Allah breathed his spirit just as we read in Genesis.
"We find what is written about God. We don't find what we think”
I'm glad you're quoting because it is about what is written. Is the opposite side going to stick by what is written?
Now if the opposing side believes we find what we think, the opposing side will have to prove our thoughts existed in whatsoever things were written before time written for our learning as well as from before the beginning of the foundation of the world, let alone everything.
"My opponent probably want to say that, Father is holy spirit or holy spirit is father."
WRONG!
It's what these texts say and teach. So now I want to see if you call any of these texts from these books a lie.
"Because after all whatever he is saying is also his own interpretation."
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Folks this already is showing that this individual cannot receive communication and communicate back very well or does so quite poorly. I cannot give you my interpretation of words given as they are. The opposing side resorts to saying " my interpretation"....."my interpretation"......"my interpretation ". This is a knee jerk reaction.
I can read something and the opposing side will say what I read was my interpretation. You add your interpretation when your explanation does not say anything of what you read .
Word of God says prove all things. The opposing side has yet to disprove anything of mine to prove it false .
"If the Bible is the criterion for deciding this matter, then what about the many other verses interpreted to support the Trinity, where each person is distinct yet considered God? How can my opponent's interpretation be considered correct over others?"
Very simple. Since you've been quoting me , look over my explanations and see if they match the scripture I quoted. Compare that with the words "where each person is distinct yet considered God" that I guess is in the explanations of others and find it written in scripture.
See this is how you know you have the truth which I guess you didn't know how to verify before. Scripture says hereby we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error so try the spirit.
Scripture say we having the same SPIRIT of faith according to as it is WRITTEN. So when you deal with the trinitarians that don't believe according to scripture that the spirit of God is the Father who is holy, condemn them with the scriptures I gave you.
You'll find the video, Christian apologist concedes. You'll learn how to reprove these folks with false doctrine. See the scripture speaks about rightly handling the word of God, rightly dividing the word of truth. You been dealing with folks that rip or twist through the scripture to their own destruction.
"I have reviewed my opponent’s interpretation of the Quran and found it to be unjust, distorting its true meaning and understanding. His interpretation is foreign, unfounded, strange, baseless, distorted, alienated, and misguided."
Your review is poor and you've used much character space without proving me wrong.
You have gotten no scripture to refute what I said let alone the Quran.
I believe next round I'm going to go straight to your so called witnesses.
"Saying "God is a spirit" means God is of a spiritual nature, not that He is the specific entity known as the "Holy Spirit" in Christian theology.
This is like saying: "Humans have a body, therefore, every human is the same body." That doesn't follow"
The opposing side is not using scripture to prove this. This is a biblical exchange. You can't prove anything about God of the scriptures without going to the scripture. Don't go to your understanding. Scripture say lean not unto your own understanding. Scripture basically say all scripture was given by God, not by the opposing side so the opposing side's opinion is inadmissible and has no merit.
"If this verse disproves the Trinity, then why does Matthew 28:19 (which commands baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) exist?"
Ok let me teach you. This is just a class . No debate. You basically have to learn this scripture.
First off , baptism is what saves you. We read this in Mark 16:16 , he that believes and is BAPTIZED shall be saved.
Out of the mouth of two or three witnesses, let every word be established.
Another witness, we read in 1 Peter 3:21, unto the like figure, BAPTISM doeth now save us.
So you are baptized in the name of the Father who saves with his Son and you shall receive the gift of the HOLY Spirit/Ghost according to Acts 2:38
Baptism is in the name of the Father and of the son and of the holy Spirit.
If you notice, I never said three persons or distinct personalities. I don't read that in there. Now you're being taught the truth.
"I will pray to the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you forever."
If the Father and the Holy Spirit were the same, Jesus wouldn’t say "another Comforter."
If you trying to say "another Comforter" means another spirit, get me Bible for two spirits of God, two spirits in the God head. Job said SPIRIT of God.
Jesus in the flesh is not the same as in the spirit. The flesh is not the same as the spirit.
CJB
"and I will ask the Father, and he will give you another comforting Counselor like me, the Spirit of Truth, to be with you forever."
So the people weren't comfortless with Jesus who was in the flesh.
In verse 18 of the same chapter it says "I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you"
So they were in comfort and will not be without unless you wish to call the messenger of Allah a liar.
See because the messenger is going away. So being that he's going away , what happens to the comfort?
Jesus conveys to these folks will not be without comfort because another comforter will be there. Not another spirit that is holy aside from the Father who is holy who is God which is a spirit.
Also from verse 16 , pay attention to the language:
16 "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever"
Make note of the underlined part.
Now verse 17 "Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you."
What happened to the "Comforter"?
Now onto verse 23 "Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him."
Where is the spirit of truth and the Comforter? Jesus didn't mentioned them. Since we're focused on what Jesus said, ain't that right?..
You don't believe in the three persons Trinity doctrine, right....so I shouldn't see you trying to argue and defend for it in the scripture.
"Yes, it is 100% correct that Allah is one, and the verse states the truth.
However, agreeing with the Bible is not part of it because this is not what the present Bible says. Lets take the original Bible, which was revealed to Prophet Jesus, out of the discussion, it is because the original Bible does not exist and is not present among us."
Let's take the opposing side back to scripture, let's get the book of Deuteronomy 6 and 4.
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD"
Now Surat Al-'Ikhlāş says what?
"Surat Al-'Ikhlāş (The Sincerity) - سورة الإخلاص
Say, "He is Allah , [who is] One"
Now what did the book of scripture say:
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD"
And what did the Quran say :
"He is Allah , [who is] One"
And what did the book of scripture say:
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD"
And what did the Quran say :
"He is Allah , [who is] One"
And what did the book of scripture say:
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD"
And what did the Quran say :
"He is Allah , [who is] One"
And what did the book of scripture say:
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD"
And what did the Quran say :
"He is Allah , [who is] One"
And what did the book of scripture say:
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD"
And what did the Quran say :
"He is Allah , [who is] One"
And what did the book of scripture say:
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD"
And what did the Quran say :
"He is Allah , [who is] One"
The scripture say , say Amen to God.
Yes , say Amen to the truth.
Aaaaaamen.
Round 3
Pro
#5
I thank my opponent for responding.
Let's begin this round and analyze the whole debate so far before going into depth.
- I am the instigator of the debate, I wanted to debate about the trinity or bible with Christian.
- I asked my opponent to talk about the Bible, why because the whole Christianity is based on bible which is holy scripture of the Christian, its credibility is vital to prove.
- But my opponent wanted to debate about Father= Holy Spirit. Imposed resolution.
Point of importance:
- This is the kind of debate he does with Christian apologist, which he has mentioned in the second round.
- I am Muslim and I have no concern if the bible says Father=Holy Spirit because I do not believe Holy Spirit is God, but I believe he is a leader of angels known as Jabrael in Islamic text and also called ruh ul Qudus.
- As far as bible is concerned I have already posed the resolution that, it's not the same bible which was revealed to Prophet Jesus, and it's been corrupted and compiled by the people who are not closely related to Jesus in non-native language and as diverse as having 500000 variation are too much.
- While claiming something which is not true in any capacity and relating it to Islam and the Quran is an absurd. Which is kind of concerning to me. And I have dealt with it already, but I am going to talk about it more, as some parts were leftover from the first round.
So,
- I would say, my opponent has not accepted my resolution and is imposing his on me, which is against rules.
- We must discuss and come up on the same terms, especially resolution. My opponent rejected my resolution, while I will prove it's relevant to his resolution as well, like he has to prove the bible is true before using it to prove his resolution.
- Avoiding my resolution is against conduct, and he did forfeit by saying he yielded.
- My rule where I mentioned forfeit is against conduct, is for forfeiting a round, but forfeiting whole debate cost the debate, it should be obvious.
- My rule said we can add more rules by mutual agreement, but my opponent is solely imposing his framework and resolution on me, which is against rules. So he must address my resolution.
- I have responded to both resolutions, so I have been practicing good conduct.
- My opponent has broken all the rules from 8 to 15.
My opponent’s arguments so far:
Father is a Holy Spirit.
This stance gives rise to a few questions I will ask them first, and I want my opponent to clear them first.
Questions:
- My opponent must state whether he believes in trinity, the way most Christian believe? Father=Jesus=Holy Spirit and they are same but distinct?
- Does he believe only Father is god and Holy Spirit is god, and they are one but distinct?
- Does he believe Father and Holy Spirit are the two names of one god?(kind of modalism). Which seems likely because he refers Quranic sura e ikhlas for proving his stance, though he ignored other verses of same sura and talks about only one Allah.
- If he thinks Father is a Holy Spirit, and it is mentioned in bible, then explain about the substance of both, whether they are one substance and are they physical or how he can define their existence?
- Does my opponent reject trinity? Does he consider Jesus a Prophet?
- Does my opponent think the bible is word to word correct and not being corrupted?
- Does my opponent think the bible has been preserved perfectly? And how can he rely on such a text which has 500000 variations?
- How can he rely on the scripture which was not written in Aramaic, which was the language of Jesus (PBUH)? While The Bible is written in Greek, which was the language of gentiles.
- Does my opponent think the bible which was written decades after Jesus and with anonymous authors is credible to even discuss who is father or Holy Spirit?
- When my opponent relies on scripture which has so many variations and is ambiguous and written hundreds of years after Jesus and we do not know the exact way of its transmission and how it was converted from Aramaic to Greek, can be used for his arguments to prove anything?
My opponent:
My opponent has mentioned little from our private chat, while I have mentioned little more, but what he has mentioned I am going to discuss, which is given below.
Here,
2/23/2025, 3:12:46 PM
Ok, I will prove that the holy Spirit is the ONE Father God in the scriptures as well as reconciling it with the Quran, Allah as one.
2/24/2025, 1:06:15 AM
Well, it's my debate, I can decide the framework and resolution. It's up to you to decide how you can respond
I have stated what I am to address. The opposing side, according to the message, did not object. So the opposing side will have to agree or reject the Quran.
My response:
I had given up on my opponent here, as he did not discuss with me about resolution before taking the debate, he blindly took the debate, with the mind to debate on his resolution. He never wanted to debate on my resolution because he probably had no answers about my claims.
I have given him the option to respond the way he wants because he was not listening to me at all. He is imposing his resolution on me. That is why I said that, but it does not mean I have agreed with him. As I am the instigator of the debate, my opponent should respect my wishes as well to debate the way I am comfortable with also the resolution my opponent presented, I have no concern with it at all. It's not relevant to me if he thinks Father is a Holy Spirit, or he is not a Holy Spirit according to the bible. I reject any of the ideas altogether. I am framed to debate the way he wants, and also I was not even 1% interested in this topic. This is bad, very bad to impose the resolution on the person who instigated the debate which he wanted but turned out to be framed into some other debate which he never wanted.
I have given my resolution and I wanted to debate on that, while I gave my opponent a chance to respond the way he wanted, so he ignored my resolution and presented his and continued talking about it. It is against the shared burden of proof rule. It's against the conduct because he conceded on my resolution.
Important,
I have accepted the way he wanted to respond, but his response was not appropriate, as instigator and opener of the debate, I presented the resolution, my opponent has to respond to my resolution, he is not supposed to present the resolution, if he wanted to be strict about his resolution then he should have talked about it in private before taking the debate as mentioned in rule number 10.
Rebuttals of the arguments of my opponent:
My opponent:
So we find it written in the book of first Corinthians chapter eight and at verse six.
"But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."
But there is what? One God the Father.
So what is that one God?
Rebuttal:
What is this verse about? I would say it's man made verse, why? Let's analyze!! As my opponent has mentioned it, he himself does not understand this verse. And how the corruption occurred in the bible.
In the Old Testament, the Word of God is consistently portrayed as the divine command through which creation occurs—God speaks, and reality unfolds (Genesis 1:3). This aligns with the Quranic concept of "Kun fa ya kun" (Be, and it is), where Allah’s Word is the active force behind creation. However, in the New Testament, particularly in John 1:1-14, the Word (Logos) is redefined as Jesus Christ, stating that "the Word became flesh." This theological shift transforms the abstract creative force into a person, making Jesus the embodiment of divine action rather than merely a spoken command. Islam maintains that Jesus was created by the Word of Allah (Quran 3:45-47), reinforcing that he is a result of divine speech, not the speech itself. Thus, while Christianity personifies the Word as Jesus, Islam preserves the distinction between the Word as divine command and Jesus as a created being, emphasizing that creation happens through the Word, not as the Word.
Quran Quran 3:45-47 creation of Jesus
Sahih International 3:45
[And mention] when the angels said, "O Mary, indeed Allah gives you good tidings of a word from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary - distinguished in this world and the Hereafter and among those brought near [to Allah ].
Sahih International 3:46
He will speak to the people in the cradle and in maturity, and will be of the righteous."
Sahih International 3:47
She said, "My Lord, how will I have a child when no man has touched me?" [The angel] said, "Such is Allah ; He creates what He wills. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, 'Be,' and it is.
Sahih International 4:171
O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul رُوحٌۭ[created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, "Three"; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs.
Point to ponder:
The word soul رُوحٌۭ is used for Jesus here as well. Would my opponent consider him Holy Spirit or Father as well? You can see the word create is used in Quran for Jesus (PBUH).
Quran 3:59 creation of Adam:
Sahih International 3:59
Indeed, the example of Jesus to Allah is like that of Adam. He created Him from dust; then He said to him, "Be," and he was.
Conclusion:
So Jesus being the word of Allah does not mean he is God, it is consistent in the Old Testament and Quran. We can see Allah created everything with his word, and the verse mentioned above by my opponent is trying to show this same phenomenon in a very twisted way that Jesus is the divine instrument through whom everything was created while the truth is that Jesus himself was created. So this verse does not suggest that Father is one, but it also includes Jesus as part of Father while I would consider it corruption as it is not present in the Old Testament and in Quran. So Christians probably fabricated this verse to prove Logos is God as well. We can see the word of God is command, which creates not a distinct person.
My Opponent:
According to John 4:24 it says God is a Spirit.
Rebuttal:
In the Bible, John 4:23-24 says, "But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
Connotation:
Where do these verses say God is a Holy Spirit? In fact, these verses saying a person should worship God in spirit means they also possess spirit, so does that mean everything is Holy Spirit?
My opponent mentioned Quranic verses as well where it's mentioned that Allah brethren the spirit into Adam, and we can see spirit is used for Jesus in above verses as well. So are they holy spirits as well? So everything is Holy Spirit? Wherever the word spirit would be used would be Holy Spirit? If they are holy? For example, Adam was holy and Jesus was holy too. So they are all people who are holy, and they all possess spirit, would it make them Holy Spirit?
These verses emphasize on worshiping God with physical body as well as spirit.
Here are some Bible verses where "spirit" is used for different individuals or contexts:
- Job 32:8 – "But it is the spirit in a person, the breath of the Almighty, that gives them understanding."
- Here, "spirit" refers to the inner essence of a person, given by God for wisdom.
- Numbers 11:17 – "I will take some of the Spirit that is on you and put it on them."
- This verse speaks of God distributing His Spirit among leaders to guide them.
- 1 Samuel 16:13 – "So Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the presence of his brothers, and from that day on the Spirit of the Lord came powerfully upon David."
- The Spirit of God is given to David, empowering him for leadership.
- Luke 1:17 – "And he will go before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah."
- This verse refers to John the Baptist carrying the prophetic spirit of Elijah.
- Romans 8:15 – "The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship."
- The Spirit here refers to the transformative power of God in believers.
- Genesis 41:38 – "So Pharaoh asked them, ‘Can we find anyone like this man, one in whom is the spirit of God?’"
- Pharaoh recognizes Joseph as having the Spirit of God, indicating divine wisdom.
- Ezekiel 11:5 – "Then the Spirit of the Lord came upon me, and he told me to say: ‘This is what the Lord says…’"
- The Spirit of the Lord empowers Ezekiel to prophesy.
- Matthew 3:16 – "As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment, heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him."
- The Spirit of God visibly comes upon Jesus at His baptism.
- Luke 4:1 – "Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, left the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness."
- Jesus is guided by the Holy Spirit.
- Acts 2:4 – "All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them."
- The disciples receive the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.
- Romans 8:9 – "You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh, but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you."
- Paul speaks of believers being led by the Spirit of God.
- 1 Corinthians 2:12 – "What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us."
- The Spirit of God grants understanding.
- 2 Timothy 1:7 – "For the Spirit God gave us does not make us timid, but gives us power, love, and self-discipline."
- The Spirit of God strengthens believers.
Now let's see the verses where holy or Holy Spirit is used:
Here are some Bible verses where "holy" is used in connection with individuals who were mentioned earlier in relation to the Spirit:
- Joseph – Genesis 41:38
- Pharaoh recognized Joseph as having the Spirit of God, and though "holy" is not explicitly used, his wisdom and righteousness were acknowledged.
- David – Psalm 51:11
- "Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me."
- David pleads for God’s Holy Spirit, showing his dependence on divine guidance.
- Ezekiel – Ezekiel 36:27
- "And I will put my Spirit within you and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules."
- John the Baptist – Luke 1:15
- "For he will be great before the Lord. He must not drink wine or strong drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even before he is born."
- John the Baptist was uniquely filled with the Holy Spirit from birth.
- Disciples – Acts 2:4
- "All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them."
- The disciples received the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.
- Believers – Romans 15:16
- "To be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles. He gave me the priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit."
- Paul speaks of believers being sanctified by the Holy Spirit.
Here are some Bible verses where the word "holy" is used specifically for people:
- Exodus 19:6 – "You shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation."
- God calls the Israelites a holy nation, set apart for His purpose.
- Leviticus 11:44 – "Be holy, for I am holy."
- A direct command for people to be holy, reflecting God's nature.
- Deuteronomy 7:6 – "For you are a holy people to the Lord your God."
- The Israelites are described as holy, chosen by God.
- Isaiah 62:12 – "And they shall call them The Holy People, The Redeemed of the Lord."
- God's people are explicitly called holy.
- Romans 12:1 – "Present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God."
- Believers are urged to be holy in their devotion.
- 1 Peter 2:9 – "But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation."
- Christians are described as a holy people.
These verses show that "Holy Spirit" is often used in connection with the Spirit of God, particularly when referring to divine empowerment, sanctification, and guidance.
Conclusion:
- Holy is used for people, and Holy Spirit is called spirit of God, not God himself.
- From the verses, we can conclude the spirit of God is not God himself, but a separate and distinct entity.
- Holy Spirit is often used in connection with spirit of God not God himself when referring to divine empowerment, sanctification, and guidance. Just like in Quran RUH is used in different context, it seems Christians were influence by gentiles because in their language bible was written.
- All above verses shows holy spirit is something which from God not God himself. It shows its distinct and it shows kind of created thing.
- TBH its very much like quranic verses where ruh has many meaning and nothing is God and from bible verses we can conclude easily that as well.
- It also shows how Christian interpretation was influence by Greeks, and also it was wrong interpretation which Quran corrected perfectly.
My opponent’s full case from Quran:
Now let's reconcile this to the Quran. This means the Quran teaches the same.
Say, "He is Allah , [who is] One
Right here it ties back to the scripture that said there is one God.
Who is this one Allah who is one according to the Quran?
Surah Al-Isra - 17:85…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Now the scriptures refer to God as being holy and describe him as just.
Let's look at Surah Fussilat 41:46
So there you have it. Both the bible and Quran, talking about that one God, no god but him, that spirit that breathed into man, the holy, the most Holy Spirit that one God is he Allah.
I yield.
Rebuttal:
Surat Al-'Ikhlāş (The Sincerity) - سورة الإخلاص
1 Say, "He is Allah, [who is] One,
2 Allah, the Eternal Refuge.
3 He neither begets nor is born,
4 Nor is there to Him any equivalent."
If you see the full Chapter, he says there is none equivalent to him, so Father ≠ Holy Spirit.
So, from above verses it seems it reconcile with Quran.
Rūḥ (روح): The human soul given by Allah.
Rūḥ al-Qudus (روح القدس): A title for Jibreel (AS).
Rūḥ al-Amīn (روح الأمين): Another title for Jibreel (AS), emphasizing his trustworthiness.
Rūḥ (روح) as an Angel: A reference to Jibreel (AS) or a high-ranking angel.
Rūḥ as Divine Assistance: Refers to revelation, divine guidance, or spiritual strengthening from Allah.
But Christian has deviated from truth and have been influenced by Romans.
Argument:
My opponent quoted the verse Surah Al-Isra - 17:85
If we see verse “Its nature is known only to my Lord” anybody can see the verse itself says its nature only Allah knows but not saying spirit is God.
In fact, as I have already discussed in a previous round, this verse refers to Soul not angel jibrael.
In Islam, Allah is one and only with no associates and his ha many names, but there is no name as RUH. Even a little child know in Islam about it. It's not even remotely connected to Islam.
Argument:
My opponent mentioned Jesus as prophet, now it's clear that he consider Jesus as prophet so he does not believe in trinity.
But he's saying Holy Spirit is God is not true as well. God is God and only God, none is like him and he is alone. His substance being infinite is impossible to understand. We can give example for him, but we cannot give exact information about him.
My opponent is mixing two verses, and then giving explanation that it suggest Father is Holy Spirit. Then he must explain the verses I have mentioned above.
Allah talked about how he created Adam and breathe into him his soul, which means the soul which belongs to him, not like breathe himself.
It's good my opponent talked about one God, and also gave a verse in which Allah said “Glorified is Allah far above what they associate with Him ˹in worship˺!”
But this is what my opponent is exactly doing.
Now i am going to further analyze the verse of Bible and show how inconsistent and illogical they are, which are going to oppose rationally and logic.
John 16:7 (NIV)
"But very truly, I tell you, it is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you."
Explanation:
Do you believe the advocate is Holy Spirit? Here Jesus is God who is not present everywhere but is limited to space and saying unless I go away so that advocate can come.
How absurd, a God who can go away from a place? Means will be absent from that place.
A God who can come somewhere? It's against omnipresence (it's different in Islam), and it's against the God being out of constraint of time and space.
Also, if the Holy Spirit would be Father, then how could Jesus send him? It seems Jesus would be ordering him. Also, how could father has this kind of role to go and come? It shows clear distinction.
They are distinct persons, bound to time and space, and dependent on each other. One cannot be at the same place as the other; one leaves, then the other comes. Jesus said he cannot come unless I go. It clearly shows dependence.
It's literal, and it's not interpretation unless you give weird interpretation you cannot get away with this.
1. John 14:16-17 (NIV)
"And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to help you and be with you forever— the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you."
Explanation:
This verse is very clear that Father will give you another advocate. It seems Jesus considered himself advocate and Holy Spirit another.
He lives with you, is there anybody who can think of God living within us? While the verse is clear and shows distinction, in fact it even shows both Jesus and Holy Spirit are not Gods. It clearly shows he is angel Jibrael. Because only a prophet can see him, the angel of delivering revelation. As we know, angel do not face death, until the day of judgment, and he is the leader of angels and indeed he is there somewhere performing his duties assigned to him by Allah. It's literal and clear that Jesus is saying he will ask father he will give you another advocate but not himself. Also, he will help you and will be with you forever, and it could not be father as Father is ever helping humanity for eternity, it's not like he will start doing it at some point when Jesus will ask Father too. There is Future tense used a lot, will be wil be like that.
2. John 14:26 (NIV)
"But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you."
Explanation:
This verse now used clear name Holy Spirit, it's very clear verse which says father will send Holy Spirit. If father and Holy Spirit are the same, then how can he send himself?
Also, Jesus saying Father will send Holy Spirit in my name but not even not in the name of Father. My opponent’s case has been dissolved here.
This verse closed the case of my opponent and defeated him completely. I have read the verse and there is no interpretation here, no explanation, but it's clear verse. And it's what my opponent has asked me as evidence.
3. John 15:26 (NIV)
"When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father—he will testify about me."
4. John 16:13 (NIV)
"But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come."
Explanation:
My opponent can argue about the 3rd verse above that see Holy Spirit goes out from the father, he is father, but the verse tries to prove trinity which seems corruption and addition to prove trinity which I have talked in my first round one. But still it deviate toward trinity not Modalism which is the stance of my opponent. Spirit here again is distinct because he goes out from father.
In fact this verse shows the three heads of trinity are dividable, and they got divided on many occasions, otherwise what it means goes out from father.
Like above, we can see Jesus and Spirit cannot be together, one must leave for the other to come.
This is literal, and clear from the verses.
Next verse says, he will not talk on his own but what he hears. Obviously what he hears from Father, so this also shows he gets dictation from Father or God. Which also proves Islamic interpretation Holy Spirit is angel Jibrael whom work is only convey the messages of Allah.
Also going out from father, what it even means? A lot of words seems being added here to make some case, but it makes them absurd.
🔹 1. Matthew 28:19
"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."
Explanation:
This clearly shows distinction and separate entities. But we cannot consider them three Gods, because it's not clear here at all. And this could be forged verse. The bible being in the language of gentiles, anything is possible.
2. 2 Corinthians 13:14
"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all."
Explanation:
We can see in a lot of verses Lord is used for Jesus and God for father and here fellow for Holy Spirit.
This shows distinction, but not prove all of them to be Gods at all. Using lord for one and God for one is for a purpose. Now you can interpret whatever you want, but that cannot prove it correct.
🔹 3. John 1:1-3
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
Explanation:
As we can see from above that, how Allah create things with his word kun, it obviously shows some addition to emphasize on proving Jesus as God otherwise It's related to word of God, which is always a command to create something. But for Allah, it's not necessary to always command with a word. His will is even enough to create something. But mostly he command something to come into existence and called word of Allah or God. And Jesus was created as well with the command of Allah.
Irony is Allah create Jesus with one separate command just like he created Adam, and then for all human being to come was a result of that command, that is why the word is not emphasized for humanity.
But for the birth of Jesus it was deviation from normal cycle which was created from Adam. So Allah issued a new command or new word or order to created Jesus and show this miraculous birth.
Now analyze the verse literally, in the beginning, which shows a starting point also the word “was” is used which shows past tense, what about present and future? Is he still the word of God? In the second verse we can see it says he was with God in the beginning but not anymore? It shows separation and division. And how things are made with Word Quran explains best. Which is kun fa ya kon. Discussed already in above arguments.
🔹 6. 1 John 5:7 (KJV only — disputed)
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."
Note: This verse appears in the King James Version, but is absent in most modern translations because it was not in the earliest Greek manuscripts.
1 Kings 22:20–22 (NIV)
"I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouths of all his prophets," the spirit said. "You will succeed in enticing him," said the Lord. "Go and do it."
Explanation:
What explanation my opponent has for both verses? Lying spirit? You can see a new kind of spirit here.
🔹 2. Holy Spirit “Drives” Jesus into the Wilderness
Mark 1:12 (KJV)
"And immediately the Spirit driveth him into the wilderness."
Matthew 4:1 (NIV)
"Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil."
Explanation:
Why would Spirit lead someone toward devil?
🔹 11. The Spirit Teaches What It Hears
John 16:13 (NIV)
"He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears..."
🔹 13. God “Anoints” Jesus (But How Can God Anoint God?)
Acts 10:38 (NIV)
"God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power..."
Argument:
Can my oppoennt explain me about how holy spirit become oil of Jesus? And how can he be Father?
🔹 14. Jesus Worships God
Hebrews 5:7 (NIV)
"During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions... to the one who could save him from death..."
🔹 15. Holy Spirit Is Poured Out Like a Liquid
Acts 2:17 (NIV)
"I will pour out my Spirit on all people..."
His spirit, not him. My opponent said Father his spirit, while this verse says spirit belongs to him but is not him. He did not say I will pour myself on people, which would be very absurd. When God says my spirit it means it belongs to him just like everything which exist belongs to him.
🔹 16. The Holy Spirit Can Be “Taken Away”
Psalm 51:11 (KJV)
"Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me."
🔹 17. People Are “Full” of the Holy Spirit
Acts 6:5 (NIV)
"...a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit."
Can anyone say a man full of faith and God? It's absurd.
🔹 18. Holy Spirit “Descends Like a Dove”
Matthew 3:16 (NIV)
"The Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him."
Here spirit is descending like a dove, could he be God himself? But the verse again says spirit of God, not God himself.
🔹 19. Jesus Was Strengthened by an Angel
Luke 22:43 (NIV)
"An angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him."
Here they got it right, actually Holy Spirit is a angel.
My opponent has limited the debate to only Father and Holy Spirit, otherwise I would have discussed more verses in detail about trinity.
againt run short of characters.
will continue in next round.
Con
#6
"I asked my opponent to talk about the Bible, why because the whole Christianity is based on bible which is holy scripture of the Christian, its credibility is vital to prove."
This is incorrect. This is a lie perhaps the opposing side was told. Christianity is not based on the bible.
You can learn more going to website address:
Title of the video, very recent video, was Christianity invented by God?
It was failed to be proven that Christianity is out of the scriptures. Christianity is based on man whom invented the sect using corrupted or water down tenets of the scripture, sometimes writing off any iota of scripture completely depending on who you talk to.
Christianity is an adulterated view of the Bible and that's why you can't find one scripture that says God or Jesus establishing a thing called Christianity.
You don't even find where Jesus said be Christian. It was men in the scripture that starting using the term themselves.
So much the opposing side as demonstrated not speaking on what is known.
"I am Muslim and I have no concern if the bible says Father=Holy Spirit because I do not believe Holy Spirit is God, but I believe he is a leader of angels known as Jabrael in Islamic text and also called ruh ul Qudus."
I've proven to the opposing side about Allah being spoken of in the Quran equivalent to the scripture saying the spirit of God is Holy.
I proved this with the Quran. Allah breathed his SPIRIT which he is Allah, the Most Holy, the All-Perfect.
As Jesus said God is perfect. You reject scripture you reject the Quran.
"As far as bible is concerned I have already posed the resolution that, it's not the same bible which was revealed to Prophet Jesus, and it's been corrupted and compiled by the people who are not closely related to Jesus in non-native language and as diverse as having 500000 variation are too much."
"You reject scripture you reject the Quran."
"I would say, my opponent has not accepted my resolution and is imposing his on me, which is against rules."
The opposing side is directly being uncooperative. This is why I posted the messages. I specifically communicated and asked about the parameters and used those messages as witnesses to assert the callous attitude of the opposing side.
I continued to ask the opposing side what the debate is and the opposing side literally continued to communicate a careless attitude of "do whatever you want".
Now I ask the audience, is that fair?
I'm not speaking on this anymore.
Clearly the opposing side's position is against the scripture. My position is that both my position and the position of the Quran can be reconciled which the opposing side would be arguing against no doubt .
So what is the resolution?
Audience, I say again :
Clearly the opposing side's position is against the scripture. My position is that both my position and the position of the Quran can be reconciled which the opposing side would be arguing against no doubt .
"We must discuss and come up on the same terms, especially resolution. My opponent rejected my resolution, while I will prove it's relevant to his resolution as well, like he has to prove the bible is true before using it to prove his resolution.
Avoiding my resolution is against conduct, and he did forfeit by saying he yielded.
Avoiding my resolution is against conduct, and he did forfeit by saying he yielded.
My rule where I mentioned forfeit is against conduct, is for forfeiting a round, but forfeiting whole debate cost the debate, it should be obvious.My rule said we can add more rules by mutual agreement, but my opponent is solely imposing his framework and resolution on me, which is against rules. So he must address my resolution.
I have responded to both resolutions, so I have been practicing good conduct.
My opponent has broken all the rules from 8 to 15."
I have responded to both resolutions, so I have been practicing good conduct.
My opponent has broken all the rules from 8 to 15."
This is all to be disregarded. As I say audience, the opposing side's lack of integrity has been exposed. The opposing side has been exposed to be dishonest and crafty with the fallacious tricks not agreeing to a goalpost so the opposing side can cry "goalpost moving".
The opposing side would not agree to a goalpost and basically said "do what you want". So what do you expect folks?
You can't refute me so you pull underhanded despicable tricks like this.
"Questions:
My opponent must state whether he believes in trinity, the way most Christian believe? Father=Jesus=Holy Spirit and they are same but distinct?"
I know nothing about what MOST CHRISTIANS believe. I know and understand what the scripture teaches. This is the issue of what the opposing side has to get straight. It's about what scripture teaches because that it is objective leaving out the subjective.
So I believe just what the scripture says and teaches as we can verify it with the scriptures themselves.
I've explained this in the first round. Must I repeat it again?
"Does he believe only Father is god and Holy Spirit is god, and they are one but distinct?"
I've explained this in the first round. Must I repeat it again?
"Does he believe Father and Holy Spirit are the two names of one god?(kind of modalism). Which seems likely because he refers Quranic sura e ikhlas for proving his stance, though he ignored other verses of same sura and talks about only one Allah."
Two names, two titles, identifiers, words, whatever. Fruitless contention over that .
"If he thinks Father is a Holy Spirit, and it is mentioned in bible, then explain about the substance of both, whether they are one substance and are they physical or how he can define their existence?"
I guess I'll say it again . God is a spirit who is the Father who is holy. It's one spirit of God. Allah is the one that breathed his spirit.
Scripture says he's the invisible which any that is invisible is not physical but by will can manifest the physical. If you want scripture for that , I'll get it.
"Does my opponent reject trinity? Does he consider Jesus a Prophet?"
Depends on the meaning of "Trinity ". Scripture say by your words you are justified and condemned. Scripture say let God be true and every man a liar. Quran say he is all perfect.
So it needs to be accepted that I'm not giving my opinion. I shouldn't be asked for what I consider or think.
According to the scriptures AND QURAN , Jesus in the flesh was a prophet and messenger.
Back on this thing called the Trinity, if it means Father God is not the holy Spirit, I reject that scripture teaches that as clearly the scripture does not teach it. So the scripture rejects it and I'm telling you it rejects it. So to say it's in agreement with it would be error.
"Does my opponent think the bible is word to word correct and not being corrupted?
Does my opponent think the bible has been preserved perfectly?"
Irrelevant. It's about what the scripture teaches, not what I think.
"And how can he rely on such a text which has 500000 variations?"
Irrelevant. It's about what the scripture teaches, not what I can rely on.
This is strictly, what DOES THE SCRIPTURE TEACH?
WHAT DOES THE SCRIPTURE TEACH?
WHAT DOES THE SCRIPTURE TEACH?
WHAT DOES THE SCRIPTURE TEACH?
"How can he rely on the scripture which was not written in Aramaic, which was the language of Jesus (PBUH)? While The Bible is written in Greek, which was the language of gentiles.
Does my opponent think the bible which was written decades after Jesus and with anonymous authors is credible to even discuss who is father or Holy Spirit?"
Irrelevant.
This is strictly, what DOES THE SCRIPTURE TEACH?
WHAT DOES THE SCRIPTURE TEACH?
WHAT DOES THE SCRIPTURE TEACH?
WHAT DOES THE SCRIPTURE TEACH?
This is strictly, what DOES THE SCRIPTURE TEACH?
WHAT DOES THE SCRIPTURE TEACH?
WHAT DOES THE SCRIPTURE TEACH?
WHAT DOES THE SCRIPTURE TEACH?
"When my opponent relies on scripture which has so many variations and is ambiguous and written hundreds of years after Jesus and we do not know the exact way of its transmission and how it was converted from Aramaic to Greek, can be used for his arguments to prove anything?"
The opposing side has not disproven anything I've demonstrated from the scripture. The opposing side has just been asking questions but has not disproven anything. You ask questions to get an understanding because you have been given falsehood for so long.
"by my opponent is trying to show this same phenomenon in a very twisted way that Jesus is the divine instrument through whom everything was created while the truth is that Jesus himself was created. So this verse does not suggest that Father is one, but it also includes Jesus as part of Father while I would consider it corruption as it is not present in the Old Testament and in Quran. So Christians probably fabricated this verse to prove Logos is God as well. We can see the word of God is command, which creates not a distinct person. "
Folks if you go back, read, I've said nothing of this what the opposing side is talking about here.
"Where do these verses say God is a Holy Spirit? In fact, these verses saying a person should worship God in spirit means they also possess spirit, so does that mean everything is Holy Spirit?"
You know the scripture say ole fool and slow of heart. I laid out line upon line everything in the first round. Where did I say John 4 said God is a holy Spirit? That's what I like to know.
You have to be this slow to still not get it. Scripture say LINE UPON LINE, HERE A LITTLE, THERE A LITTLE.
Scripture say thou fool.
You're not always going to get everything in one verse or passage my ignorant one. Also where did it say "possess spirit"?
See the opposing side can't even stick to the opposing side's own rules of criticism. You're trying to impose on me adding to what is written and you actually are doing it yourself.
"So are they holy spirits as well? So everything is Holy Spirit? Wherever the word spirit would be used would be Holy Spirit? If they are holy? For example, Adam was holy and Jesus was holy too. So they are all people who are holy, and they all possess spirit, would it make them Holy Spirit?"
Just amazing how lost you are. You're asking all these questions and my explanation of these verses is in round one. Do you think if you actually read my explanation, question that, you'll learn your answers?
You're asking these questions like no explanation was given.
"Holy is used for people, and Holy Spirit is called spirit of God, not God himself."
This is incorrect. Folks we just read God IS A SPIRIT in John, so what is the opposing side talking about?
So when you're talking about the spirit in the context of God you're talking about God. When you say the spirit(God)is holy, you're saying God is holy.
This shows the opposing side has no concept of what line upon line is.
Also you'll be in further contradiction rejecting God as holy for the scripture said in Leviticus 19 , "be ye holy: for I am the LORD your God am holy.
Just concede .
"From the verses, we can conclude the spirit of God is not God himself, but a separate and distinct entity."
The scriptures say lean not unto your own understanding. The opposing side's issue is as well as others, they go by their own logic and rationale and when you do that you add your own ideas to the scripture instead of leaving the texts as is without adding to and taking away.
The opposing side said "spirit of God is not God".
The scripture say, John 4, GOD IS A SPIRIT.
The opposing side said "spirit of God is not God".
The scripture say, John 4, GOD IS A SPIRIT.
The opposing side said "spirit of God is not God".
The scripture say, John 4, GOD IS A SPIRIT.
The opposing side said "spirit of God is not God".
The scripture say, John 4, GOD IS A SPIRIT.
The opposing side said "spirit of God is not God".
The scripture say, John 4, GOD IS A SPIRIT.
So it is a straight up lie that the spirit of God is not God when the Scripture just said he is that. THAT GOD IS THAT.
Folks of the audience, the opposing side does not know what the opposing side is talking about.
"My opponent has limited the debate to only Father and Holy Spirit, otherwise I would have discussed more verses in detail about trinity.
againt run short of characters.
will continue in next round."
You don't have to make these super long essay responses. I'm not going over a chapter novel here.
So it has been demonstrated that the opposing side does not have the correct foundation for what God is and who he is so everything else is wrong.
Scripture say or teach if the head be sick, what about the body , the members would not be of the same? Something of those lines.
The opposing side does not have the correct foundation for what God is and who he is according to the scripture and is rejecting what the scripture actually says and applying subjective interpretation.
The opposing side has to reject what the scripture actually says so that it does not reconcile with the Quran in risk of rejecting both writings.
So the debate if ever this was one, is pretty much over.
Round 4
Pro
#7
- My opponent is asking we must use scripture in their original form without its interpretation, and he is claiming he is not doing it.
“The Holy Spirit is God. Who is God? The Father. This is all according to biblical scriptures. Not according to logic or what you think. It doesn't work by what you think. It is what it is according to what is written. We find what is written about God. We don't find what we think. “ - On the other hand, who can interpret the scripture according to scripture?
- Can my opponent interpret or someone else?
Let's see,
John 4:19-26
My opponent has quoted a verse from the chapter, so let's see the context and analyze.
19 “Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet. 20 Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”
21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”
25 The woman said, “I know that Messiah” (called Christ) “is coming. When he comes, he will explain everything to us.”
26 Then Jesus declared, “I, the one speaking to you—I am he.”
Argument:
There are 8 verses taken from John 4 which will give us a strong and undeniable precedent which my Opponent cannot refute in any case because that is from scripture.
I will discuss in points about the concept just to let you understand easily, otherwise precedent has already been established by highlighting the portions of verses.
- Jesus replied, you will worship the Father from verse 21, which my opponent considered the God from 1 Corinthians 8:6. We know who father is already, I believe what bible call Father is God according to Bible, and Quran as well. We consider Father Allah, and we consider him only one God. My opponent and I agree on this, so there is no doubt about it. We consider father a term used in bible to show God is creator of everything and brought forward life with his word but, father word is no more used in Quran, and it was abandoned to use any more because people could take different meaning from it.
- In the verse 22 Jesus said we worship the God which we know and claimed Samaritans do not know, and called him father in verse 21, 23 and called him God in 24.
- So the precedent is who know, who is God, what is God, and how is God? My opponent or Jesus according to scripture? Yes, obviously Jesus is called Prophet in 19 and messiah in 25, and he knows and can explain or interpret verses to teach or let us know who real God is according to 22 and 25. This is for every Prophet, all prophet know and understand God very well, because they are guided by God or Allah himself. Not some ordinary man, we can only take the interpretation from God himself which he conveys to his prophets. This is proven by Bible from this argument. From the verse 22 we can easily understand it and I even do not need to interpret and explain about it at all because it's clear and obvious from the verse, Jesus know who the true God is, and he can explain himself which he did in next verses. Let's see,
Verse 24:
Key terms:
πνεῦμα (pneuma) spirit
ἐν πνεύματι (en pneumati) in spirit
explanation:
God is spirit (pneuma), and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit (en pneumati)
Here, the word pneuma and pneumati both are used in spiritual term.
Precedent:
What Jesus taught us about God.
- God’s nature is spirit – not tied to physical places (like Mount Gerizim or Jerusalem).
- Worship should be spiritual and truthful, not just external or traditional.
So God is spirit and Human also has spirit in them. I will discuss these terms in later part of the round, just for now,
I will conclude everything so far, so we can continue with our argument.
Conclusion:
- Criteria of truth by my Opponent: Only that is acceptable which is written in Scripture.
- Scripture says Jesus know who God is, (he knows the true nature of God) by saying this “we worship what we do know”.
- Scripture says, Father is God. (by 23, 24,25).
- verses 25 and 26 proves, Jesus is messiah, and he can only explain everything related to God.
- Not some random person from 21st century.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Now If we Go to the main argument of my opponent which was interpretation of John 17:11 and let's see what he has to assert there:
……………………………………………………………………………………………………….
John 17:11
And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
Simple translation:
I am leaving the world, but they are staying in it. I am coming to You. Holy Father, protect them by Your name so they may be united, just as We are.
Argument:
We can see from this verse Holy Father is the name of God. And Spirit is his nature from previous Argument. This is what I Have asked in my last argument from my opponent. What is the nature of Father and Holy Spirit.
The thing is that this verse never said Father is Holy Spirit nor any other verse.
My opponent has to present a verse which Says Father is Holy Spirit, and my opponent has failed to do so. Otherwise, his criteria for something to be true about God is that, it should be from scripture and written as it is, not what he says or someone else says. Not something which is interpretation of someone for the scripture.
Argument:
If we take the argument of my opponent which is John 4:24 says God is spirit.
John 17:11 says Father is holy father.
And if we combine it literally still it should come out God is holy Father spirit. Not Holy Spirit.
For that he has to remove “Father” from “Holy Father” from John 17:11
This settles the matter:
My opponent has not only interpreted but changed the scripture and omitted a word from it to assert his case, let alone proving.
Conclusion:
- Corinthians 8:6 says God is Father
- John 4:24 it says God is a Spirit
- John 17:11 says God is Holy Father.
………….
- None says God is Holy Spirit
- None says Father is Holy Spirit
- But it says Holy Father, so why change the word holy Father into Holy Spirit? It would be big corruption and wrong interpretation if someone does.
- If you combine all verses still, it becomes God is holy father spirit or God is spirit holy father.
This assertion of my opponent “So Father God is Holy Spirit” is totally baseless and wrong.
I have proven it.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Now I am going to go on the third part of my argument. Which is Word “Spirit” is used differently in the Bible for different person, which does not make one person another.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Spirit word used in Bible:
Root word:
πνέω (pneō) = to blow, breathe
Nominative (base form)
πνεῦμα (pneuma) "spirit", "breath", or "wind"
implication:
John 4:24
Greek: Πνεῦμα ὁ Θεός, καὶ τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας αὐτὸν ἐν πνεύματι καὶ ἀληθείᾳ δεῖ προσκυνεῖν.
Translation (ESV):“God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”
Matthew 26:41
✅ 1. Human spirit
Greek: τὸ μὲν πνεῦμα πρόθυμον, ἡ δὲ σὰρξ ἀσθενής
Translation: “The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.”
- πνεῦμα = nominative form (subject of the sentence)
- Refers to the human spirit — not God
✅ 2. Unclean (demonic) spirits
📖 Luke 4:33
Greek: πνεῦμα δαιμονίου ἀκαθάρτου
Translation: “A man which had a spirit of an unclean demon.”
- πνεῦμα = subject = unclean spirit
- Clearly not God — refers to a demonic being
✅ 3. The spirit returning to a dead person
📖 Luke 8:55
Greek: καὶ ἐπέστρεψεν τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτῆς
Translation: “And her spirit returned.”
- τὸ πνεῦμα = her spirit (subject)
- Refers to a human spirit
Now I am giving the total use of this word pneuma in whole bible used for spirit.
Use of Spirit
Meaning
Example Verse
Greek Text
Approx. Mentions
Holy Spirit
Spirit of God
Matthew 3:16
Πνεῦμα Θεοῦ (Pneuma Theou)
~90 times
Human spirit
Inner human self
Matthew 26:41
τὸ πνεῦμα (to pneuma)
~50 times
Evil spirit
Demonic beings
Luke 4:33
πνεῦμα δαιμονίου ἀκαθάρτου
~40 times
Jesus’s spirit
His spirit at death
Luke 23:46
τὸ πνεῦμά μου (to pneuma mou)
~2–3 times
Child’s spirit
Life/soul returning
Luke 8:55
τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτῆς (to pneuma autēs)
1 time
Meaning
Example Verse
Greek Text
Approx. Mentions
Holy Spirit
Spirit of God
Matthew 3:16
Πνεῦμα Θεοῦ (Pneuma Theou)
~90 times
Human spirit
Inner human self
Matthew 26:41
τὸ πνεῦμα (to pneuma)
~50 times
Evil spirit
Demonic beings
Luke 4:33
πνεῦμα δαιμονίου ἀκαθάρτου
~40 times
Jesus’s spirit
His spirit at death
Luke 23:46
τὸ πνεῦμά μου (to pneuma mou)
~2–3 times
Child’s spirit
Life/soul returning
Luke 8:55
τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτῆς (to pneuma autēs)
1 time
conclusion:
My opponent cannot say that only Father is spirit, but spirit word is used in different context for all beings and also holy word which I have discussed in previous round also used for even whole Israeli nation and many more.
So asserting it like only Father is spirit is totally wrong and spirit of Father is different from spirit of holy ghost and spirit of other human being and even demonic spirit.
There are other words used for spirit as well, let me give a list of them too.
Use
Greek Word
Greek Form (in verse)
English Phrase (from verse)
Approx. Mentions
Soul / Life
ψυχή (psyche)
ψυχὴν (psychēn)
"Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul" (Matt 10:28)
~100+ times
Mind
νοῦς (nous)
νοῒ
(noi)
"Be transformed by the renewing of your mind" (Rom 12:2)
~20 times
Heart
καρδία
(kardia)
Καρδία
(kardia)
"Blessed are the pure in heart" (Matt 5:8)
~150 times
Consciencek
συνείδησις (syneidēsis)
συνειδήσεως (syneidēseōs)
"Their conscience also bearing witness" (Rom 2:15)
~30 times
Life (eternal)
ζωή (zoē)
ζωὴν (zōēn)
"Whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" (John 3:16)
~130 times
Greek Word
Greek Form (in verse)
English Phrase (from verse)
Approx. Mentions
Soul / Life
ψυχή (psyche)
ψυχὴν (psychēn)
"Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul" (Matt 10:28)
~100+ times
Mind
νοῦς (nous)
νοῒ
(noi)
"Be transformed by the renewing of your mind" (Rom 12:2)
~20 times
Heart
καρδία
(kardia)
Καρδία
(kardia)
"Blessed are the pure in heart" (Matt 5:8)
~150 times
Consciencek
συνείδησις (syneidēsis)
συνειδήσεως (syneidēseōs)
"Their conscience also bearing witness" (Rom 2:15)
~30 times
Life (eternal)
ζωή (zoē)
ζωὴν (zōēn)
"Whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" (John 3:16)
~130 times
רוּחַ → ruaḥ (pronounced roo-akh)
✅ Summary:
- Hebrew: רוּחַ
- Transliteration: ruaḥ
- Meaning: wind, breath, spirit
Used for:
- Spirit of God (e.g., Genesis 1:2)
- Human spirit
- Breath or wind
🌬️ Versus Using רוּחַ (ruaḥ) in Different Contexts
Use
Verse
Hebrew Text (with ruaḥ)
English Translation (Sahih International or ESV)
Human Spirit
Proverbs 20:27
נֵר יְהוָה נִשְׁמַת אָדָם חֹפֵשׂ כָּל־חַדְרֵי־בָטֶן
"The spirit of man is the lamp of the Lord, searching all the innermost parts of his being."
Human Spirit
Ecclesiastes 12:7
וְיָשֹׁב הֶעָפָר עַל־הָאָרֶץ... וְהָרוּחַ תָּשׁוּב אֶל־הָאֱלֹהִים
"And the dust returns to the earth... and the spirit returns to God who gave it."
Wind
Genesis 8:1
וַיַּעֲבֵר אֱלֹהִים רוּחַ עַל־הָאָרֶץ
"And God made a wind pass over the earth, and the waters subsided."
Breath
Job 12:10
אֲשֶׁר בְּיָדוֹ נֶפֶשׁ כָּל־חָי וְרוּחַ כָּל־בְּשַׂר־אִישׁ
"In His hand is the life of every living thing and the breath of all mankind."
Verse
Hebrew Text (with ruaḥ)
English Translation (Sahih International or ESV)
Human Spirit
Proverbs 20:27
נֵר יְהוָה נִשְׁמַת אָדָם חֹפֵשׂ כָּל־חַדְרֵי־בָטֶן
"The spirit of man is the lamp of the Lord, searching all the innermost parts of his being."
Human Spirit
Ecclesiastes 12:7
וְיָשֹׁב הֶעָפָר עַל־הָאָרֶץ... וְהָרוּחַ תָּשׁוּב אֶל־הָאֱלֹהִים
"And the dust returns to the earth... and the spirit returns to God who gave it."
Wind
Genesis 8:1
וַיַּעֲבֵר אֱלֹהִים רוּחַ עַל־הָאָרֶץ
"And God made a wind pass over the earth, and the waters subsided."
Breath
Job 12:10
אֲשֶׁר בְּיָדוֹ נֶפֶשׁ כָּל־חָי וְרוּחַ כָּל־בְּשַׂר־אִישׁ
"In His hand is the life of every living thing and the breath of all mankind."
The last one I gave separately because it's mentioned in Quran as well. The same word is used in Quran for angel jibrael and human. For Jibrael it's used as ruah al Qudus and for human only rouh. Because Angels are wholly spirit and humans are partially spirit.
We can see different words are used for soul and other spiritual being. And I have given full detail in my previous rounds about the usage in Quran and now bible use also come into light. So a lot of similarities are there, and we can see a lot of common usage are in both book, Quran and Bible.
I think mentioning them again would take a lot of space, as this should be the last round of presenting arguments. And case has already been established, and my opponent has not refuted them.
It clearly shows It's used for God, Soul, Angels, Demons, Inner self, Breath, Divine command, and so on which we have seen throughout the debate from Bible and Quran.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Now I am going to talk about the 2nd criteria which my opponent has presented.
Out of the mouth of two or three witnesses, let every word be established. Those are the three. We got a witness out of 1 Corinthians 8, John 4 and John 17.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Argument:
If that is the criteria to establish a fact or a precedent. Then I have presented plenty for all of my arguments, not just two or three.
On the other hand, the conclusion extracted by my opponent from the verses is totally wrong, so the fact is not established.
His premise is totally wrong to even begin with, because we can see from various verses of Bible that Holy Spirit is use distinctively and represent a different person then Father.
I would say even from the Bible I can conclude he is angel jibrael.
Let's dive into this argument, while I have presented many verses before which clearly shows Holy Spirit is a distinct person and even from the verse (1 Corinthians 8:6) of my opponent it's clear.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Let's dive into this argument, Holy Spirit is a distinct person and not Father God. He is god or not is not the scope of this debate. While Muslim stance is he is leader of angels.
—-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew 3:16–1716 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment, heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him, I am well pleased.”
Argument:
Here we can see Spirit of God descending from heaven while the voice came from heaven which shows Holy Spirit is distinct from Father as he left the heaven and came to Jesus to alight him while God spoken from the heaven.
So it clearly proves that, God and Holy Spirit are two different persons.
This is rebuttal to the argument which was presented by my opponent in the last round.
“The opposing side said, "spirit of God is not God".”
While my statement was
"From the verses, we can conclude the spirit of God is not God himself, but a separate and distinct entity."
I do not think anyone can object what I said, and my opponent is putting words in my mouth and changing totally what I said, I am not being dishonest during the whole debate by my opponent is.
John 14:26 New International Version (NIV)
26 But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
Argument:
This verse has been mentioned before in previous rounds, this is a very clear example of how Holy Spirit is different from Father, because father cannot send himself somewhere. A clear example of showing who Holy Spirit is, also we can see both Jesus and Holy Spirit seems subordinates of Father God. Which clearly proves Jesus is mighty Prophet and Holy Spirit is leader of angels.
This is Islamic explanation, which is the best explanation for real things out there and best understanding of scripture that is why Quran is final message and preserved as well. And Islam is final religion and preserved and guidance to Humanity for eternity.
John 15:26
26 “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father—he will testify about me.
Argument:
This clearly shows that, Holy Spirit is out of Father but not himself. While here, bible probably being corrupted. The emphasis seems here unrealistic and not divine. Like Christian missionary trying to show that Holy Spirit is processed from Father. Still it disproves the assertions of my opponent and Holy Spirit procession from Father is out of the scope of this debate because my opponent dropped my resolution, so talking further about it would be wastage.
Luke 3:22 New International Version
22 and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you, I am well pleased.”
Argument:
We can see Holy Spirit took dove form and a physical form. This is big question to Christian that even Holy Spirit took bodily form, not only Jesus who took human form. While in Islam, we can see that angels are those who have wings. This verse more proves Holy Spirit being angel, not God or part of trinity.
While the voice came from heaven, is separate and is from Father or God or Allah.
Romans 8:11 New International Version
11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of[a] his Spirit who lives in you.
Argument:
Here we can see the Spirit of him, not him. Because if you say Father is spirit then, his existence is Spirit, not that he is someone else or something else and have or possess spirit.
This would be an absurd analogy if you conclude that God is spirit and have spirit. This thing is related to created being who has physical body and also spirit is part of them, which we have discussed in detail above.
While Islamically his spirit means it belong to Allah because he is owner of everything which exist. This is explanation of Soul or Ruh which my opponent mentioned from Holy Quran as well.
So I would say again spirit of him, not himself. Because if it would be him, then the verse should not say spirit of him but himself because he is spirit. Raising from Dead was done by Jesus, even Moses, when he throws the meat of cow on the dead.
All those great prophets and whomever else who raise dead, all done that with the power and permission of Allah and on his behalf, not themselves.
It was shown by their hands but by them.
Matthew 28:19 New International Version
Therefore, go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Argument:
Clear example of three different persons. In fact, first Father is mentioned then Son then Holy Spirit.
This kind of shows distinction and hierarchy. Islam says human are the most superior creature in the whole universe. So even the Leader of angels is no superior to a Prophet, that is why mentioned thirdly.
This is the explanation of the verse mentioned by my opponent in previous round where Allah asked angels to bow down to Adam, while my opponent has interpreted it really in alien ways.
John 16:7 New International Version
7 But very truly I tell you, it is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.
Argument:
This is the best example of how the Holy Spirit and Jesus both are not and cannot be Gods. Because God is not bound by time and space or conditions.
1 Peter 1:2 New International Version
2 who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood:
Argument:
This is a very clear example of how they are distinct and separate. My opponent and no one else can deny from this verse that they are separate persons.
—-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now I am going to Quranic part and Islamic part of the debate.
—-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Precedent:
Surah 75 Al-Qiyamah, Ayat 16-19
لَا تُحَرِّكۡ بِهٖ لِسَانَكَ لِتَعۡجَلَ بِهٖؕ ﴿75:16﴾ اِنَّ عَلَيۡنَا جَمۡعَهٗ وَقُرۡاٰنَهٗۚ ۖ ﴿75:17﴾ فَاِذَا قَرَاۡنٰهُ فَاتَّبِعۡ قُرۡاٰنَهٗۚ ﴿75:18﴾ ثُمَّ اِنَّ عَلَيۡنَا بَيَانَهٗؕ ﴿75:19﴾
(75:16) (O Prophet),11 do not stir your tongue hastily (to commit the Revelation to memory). (75:17) Surely it is for Us to have you commit it to memory and to recite it. (75:18) And so when We recite it,12 follow its recitation attentively; (75:19) then it will be for Us to explain it.13
Summary:
- Verse 17: Allah promises that He will make the Prophet ﷺ memorize the Qur’an ("جمعه").
- Verse 19: Allah says He will explain it ("بيانه"), i.e., give the Prophet ﷺ understanding of it.
Lets see other verses
1. Surah An-Nahl (16:44)
"With clear proofs and written ordinances. And We revealed to you the message that you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them and that they might give thought."
Arabic:
"وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الذِّكْرَ لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ"✅ Allah says He revealed the Dhikr (Qur’an) to the Prophet ﷺ so that he may explain it (litubayyina) to the people.
"وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الذِّكْرَ لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ"✅ Allah says He revealed the Dhikr (Qur’an) to the Prophet ﷺ so that he may explain it (litubayyina) to the people.
2. Surah Al-Jumu’ah (62:2)
"It is He who has sent among the unlettered a Messenger from themselves reciting to them His verses, purifying them and teaching them the Book and wisdom—although they were before in clear error."
Arabic:
"هُوَ الَّذِي بَعَثَ فِي الْأُمِّيِّينَ رَسُولًا مِّنْهُمْ يَتْلُو عَلَيْهِمْ آيَاتِهِ وَيُزَكِّيهِمْ وَيُعَلِّمُهُمُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ..."✅ The Prophet ﷺ teaches them the Book (Qur’an) and wisdom, not just recites it. This includes explanation and understanding.
"هُوَ الَّذِي بَعَثَ فِي الْأُمِّيِّينَ رَسُولًا مِّنْهُمْ يَتْلُو عَلَيْهِمْ آيَاتِهِ وَيُزَكِّيهِمْ وَيُعَلِّمُهُمُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ..."✅ The Prophet ﷺ teaches them the Book (Qur’an) and wisdom, not just recites it. This includes explanation and understanding.
3. Surah Al-Baqarah (2:151)
"Just as We have sent among you a Messenger from yourselves reciting to you Our verses and purifying you and teaching you the Book and wisdom and teaching you that which you did not know."
✅ Again, the Prophet ﷺ is not only a reciter but also a teacher of the Qur’an and knowledge unknown before.
4. Surah Al-Ahzab (33:34)
"And remember what is recited in your houses of the verses of Allah and wisdom. Indeed, Allah is ever Subtle and Aware."
✅ Refers to the Prophet ﷺ teaching both the Qur’an and wisdom (al-Hikmah), interpreted by many scholars to mean his Sunnah and explanation.
Summary:
These verses prove:
- Allah gave the Qur’an to the Prophet ﷺ with the task of clarifying it.
- The Prophet ﷺ had the role of teacher and explainer, not just reciter.
- This makes the Sunnah and Hadith essential, as they are part of that explanation.
Just like Bible only Jesus can tell how and who is God, same goes for Quran, only prophet can explain the verses of scripture.
I have given the hadith which are saying of Prophet Muhammad saw, to give interpretation of those verses to which my opponent tried to give his own meanings. Quran is not Bible.
Quran has been received, delivered, interpreted and explain by Prophet Muhammad saw himself with the guidance of Allah.
I have already given the full explanation and rebuttal to the claims of my opponent in previous round about his Quranic stance about this issue.
Conclusion:
- My opponent failed to prove anything, but just asserted.
- He did not meet even his criteria of using just scripture to get conclude facts and make assertions, but completely relied on his false interpretation.
- His view of Father and Holy Spirit are same person is totally out of the blue, neither Christian nor Muslim believe on this point of view.
- He is altering the text and omitting the words from the text of scripture to assert his point of view.
- My opponent broke almost all rules.
- He ignored my resolution, while I dealt with both his and mine.
- I shared the burden of proof while he even did not begin to respond to my resolution, so no burden is shared.
- My opponent was non-cooperative.
- My opponent had bad behavior and bad conduct.
- My opponent wasted a lot of my time, because he never replied to my arguments related to my resolution and even his resolution, he left many arguments untouched.
- I responded all arguments by rebutting them, and proven that how his arguments were flawed.
- I demonstrated that not only Father is spiritual being but all Humans have spirit in them and angles are spiritual and even demons are unclean spirits, so if spirit and holy word used for father does not make him Holy Spirit. In fact, holy and spirit word is used with many people, and it does not make them Holy Spirit.
- In the bible, Father and Holy Spirit are mentioned distinctively, I have proven it throughout the debate and in this round I went to great depth to explain it.
- Interpretation done by opponent about Quran is totally alien, and it's against Quran and Hadith.
- I have proven how spirit is used differently in Quran for different meaning and even that resemblance also found in bible.
- My opponent just twist verses and try to give them their own meaning.
- Everybody know that word spirit is used for human soul as well, so my opponent took verses from Quran which were talking about Human soul, I have responded them in great detail and proven that the interpretation of my opponent is totally wrong. Especially about Quran because Quran was revealed just in time whenever it was needed, I have given the scenario of the verses talking about soul. Interpreting it like bible is totally baseless and wrong.
- From every round, we can see how my opponent become emotional and got frustrated about the facts and figure I gave, which is not the spirit of debate. See, I have used the word spirit even for this debate.
- TBH I really do not want to debate about this topic, it was imposed topic on me but as the debate has started, and I did not want to go it wasted, so I went with his topic. But it was regrettable to impose his resolution on me.
- I will always add Resolution in my rules onward and people can exploit it and ruin the debate which I wanted. It is like Mall wanted to do debate with me, but I did not want because I did not like the topic, yet I end up debating him on the same topic because he can abuse the rules. But is it not cheating?
Well, I hope my opponent would not do that again, and respect the wishes of others. Now I ask voters to vote to me if they find my arguments compelling.
Looking forward to my opponent’s response then will conclude the debate in final round.
Thanks everybody to participate and even thank my opponent though it was such a drag.
Aslam o alykum
See ya later.
Con
#8
The opposite side makes sure all 30,000 characters are used.
I'll respond to anything new I haven't addressed.
"Can my opponent interpret or someone else?"
Nevermind interpretation. Scripture says of no private interpretation. So what is the approach to scripture?
Scripture say we having the same spirit of faith according to as it written . We can believe that the text says what it says because we read it . Therefore we can speak what we believe.
"What is the nature of Father and Holy Spirit."
The one spirit God the Father.
"The thing is that this verse never said Father is Holy Spirit nor any other verse.
My opponent has to present a verse which Says Father is Holy Spirit, and my opponent has failed to do so. Otherwise, his criteria for something to be true about God is that, it should be from scripture and written as it is, not what he says or someone else says. Not something which is interpretation of someone for the scripture."
I'm just going to say it because I believe I explained this. The opposing side is slow. Just slow.
The scriptures say LINE UPON LINE. Line upon line doesn't mean one verse.
Maybe I'm just not clear .
It didn't say line upon line of a verse. Scripture say ole fool and SLOW of heart.
The opposing side is being very slow to understand.
Scripture say ole FOOL AND SLOW of heart to believe ALL ALL ALL ALLL what the prophets have said.
The prophets are not giving the words of God in one verse . As the scripture say, thou fool. The prophets are not giving words in one chapter.
The prophets are not giving words in one book.
Line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little. So this falsehood of everything having to be in one verse of scripture by the opposing side is not scriptural.
This is the condition of the opposing side. To the opposing side, it seems right that way. The scripture say there is a way that seems right unto man but the end there of is destruction.
I'm teaching here. When you decide to violate the scripture and don't go line upon line, you lack knowledge and the scripture say my people are DESTROYED for a lack of knowledge.
"My opponent has not only interpreted but changed the scripture and omitted a word from it to assert his case, let alone proving.
Conclusion:
- Corinthians 8:6 says God is Father
- John 4:24 it says God is a Spirit
- John 17:11 says God is Holy Father."
Audience, put this line upon line.
God who is the Father is Holy and Spirit.
There's no reinterpreting there.
God who is the Father(1 Cor 8:6) is Holy (John 17:11) and Spirit(John 4:24).
Now you have to be as the scripture says a dumb dog if we can't witness how plain this is. I've added no words nor taken any away.
I've just combined them. Combining these lines is line upon line. This is why the opposing side is lost and was abled to be deceived by trinitarians.
I'm trying to reach and teach the opposing side but these folks are stiff necked as the scripture say. Stiff necked, hard headed and hardened heart.
"
- None says God is Holy Spirit
- None says Father is Holy Spirit
- But it says Holy Father, so why change the word holy Father into Holy Spirit? It would be big corruption and wrong interpretation if someone does.
- If you combine all verses still, it becomes God is holy father spirit or God is spirit holy father.
This assertion of my opponent “So Father God is Holy Spirit” is totally baseless and wrong.
I have proven it."
The opposing side has proven nothing but call the Bible a lie and being a dumb dog.
"Now I am going to go on the third part of my argument. Which is Word “Spirit” is used differently in the Bible for different person, which does not make one person another."
Just bring Bible book chapter and verse to prove your point. Scripture says prove all things.
"My opponent cannot say that only Father is spirit, but spirit word is used in different context for all beings and also holy word which I have discussed in previous round also used for even whole Israeli nation and many more.
So asserting it like only Father is spirit is totally wrong and spirit of Father is different from spirit of holy ghost and spirit of other human being and even demonic spirit.
There are other words used for spirit as well, let me give a list of them too."
The Father is the ONLY SPIRIT IN THE GOD HEAD.
Let me show you.
Let's go to the book of John chapter 14:11
In verse 11 it says "Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me."
Just a cloud of witnesses in John .
So the Father is where?
In him.
Let's get another witness .
Let's get the book of Colossians 2 and 9
"For in Him dwells all the fullness of the GODHEAD".
So we already know the Father is one but being that ALL THE FULLNESS is in him, there's not another in the GODHEAD besides for the scripture say there is NO GOD BESIDE ME. Also we know the holy Spirit is God.
So it's ridiculous and false to try to argue there's another spirit that is God but not the Father .
Don't let me go to 1 John 5:7.
"Let's dive into this argument, while I have presented many verses before which clearly shows Holy Spirit is a distinct person and even from the verse (1 Corinthians 8:6) of my opponent it's clear."
I'm sorry that you have been deceived by the trinitarians. Now you touting their talking points you don't even believe in.
"Here we can see Spirit of God descending from heaven while the voice came from heaven which shows Holy Spirit is distinct from Father as he left the heaven and came to Jesus to alight him while God spoken from the heaven.
So it clearly proves that, God and Holy Spirit are two different persons.
This is rebuttal to the argument which was presented by my opponent in the last round."
The opposing side is not giving scripture that says or lined up scriptures that say what is being said here "Holy Spirit is distinct from Father".
The opposing side says "which shows/so clearly proves". The opposing side didn't say "which reads" because we can't read it. The opposing side is telling you want is shown according to personal interpretation.
Give me scripture that reads "Holy Spirit is distinct from Father". I got Bible that says "one".
"From the verses, we can conclude the spirit of God is not God himself, but a separate and distinct entity."
I do not think anyone can object what I said, and my opponent is putting words in my mouth and changing totally what I said, I am not being dishonest during the whole debate by my opponent is."
Dishonest or ignorant. One of the two or both. The scriptures teaches there is ONE GOD, ONE GOD just as the Quran and the opposing side can't accept the agreement and reconciliation between the scripture and Quran.
"This verse has been mentioned before in previous rounds, this is a very clear example of how Holy Spirit is different from Father, because father cannot send himself somewhere. A clear example of showing who Holy Spirit is, also we can see both Jesus and Holy Spirit seems subordinates of Father God. Which clearly proves Jesus is mighty Prophet and Holy Spirit is leader of angels.
This is Islamic explanation, which is the best explanation for real things out there and best understanding of scripture that is why Quran is final message and preserved as well. And Islam is final religion and preserved and guidance to Humanity for eternity."
The opposing side is lying on scripture. The opposing side is arguing two Gods in the GODHEAD.
Scripture says hear o Israel the Lord our God is ONE Lord. The opposing side is arguing two Gods. Deuteronomy 6 it says one , the opposing side is arguing two by saying separate and distinct entity. We didn't read in that book " separate and distinct".
The opposing side is adding words to the book. I'm not misrepresenting at all .
There is none else the book says. He stretched forth the heavens ALONE.
I got Bible saying one and alone. The opposing side is giving trinitarian rhetoric that the opposing side doesn't even believe in.
Why are you trying to force falsehood?
"This clearly shows that"
Please note audience, every instance the opposing side says "This clearly shows that", be alert that no passage is being given of what we can actually read but what is being assumed.
"A clear example of showing who Holy Spirit is, also we can see both Jesus and Holy Spirit seems subordinates of Father God"
Where can we read this in scripture?
The opposing side says "seems". If the scripture really says what you claim, there is no "seems". The opposing side is making up doctrine as the opposing side goes along.
Just making up stuff. Trinitarians taught the opposing side how to make up stuff.
"This clearly shows that, Holy Spirit is out of Father but not himself. While here, bible probably being corrupted. The emphasis seems here unrealistic and not divine. Like Christian missionary trying to show that Holy Spirit is processed from Father. Still it disproves the assertions of my opponent and Holy Spirit procession from Father is out of the scope of this debate because my opponent dropped my resolution, so talking further about it would be wastage. "
Give me Bible for two Gods or shut up. If the Father who is the spirit of God is not the Holy Spirit who is God, you got two Gods. You either give Bible for two Gods or your mouth has been stopped according to Titus 1.
"This verse more proves Holy Spirit being angel, not God or part of trinity. "
The opposing side is making up a lot falsehood. I'm just going to continue to ask for scripture to prove these aren't lies. Give Scripture that says the holy Spirit is an angel.
I got Bible that says you lied to the holy Spirit, you lied to God.
Give us Bible that the holy Spirit is an angel .
"Here we can see the Spirit of him, not him. Because if you say Father is spirit then, his existence is Spirit, not that he is someone else or something else and have or possess spirit.
This would be an absurd analogy if you conclude that God is spirit and have spirit. This thing is related to created being who has physical body and also spirit is part of them, which we have discussed in detail above.
While Islamically his spirit means it belong to Allah because he is owner of everything which exist. This is explanation of Soul or Ruh which my opponent mentioned from Holy Quran as well.
So I would say again spirit of him, not himself. Because if it would be him, then the verse should not say spirit of him but himself because he is spirit. "
Let's go back to the book of John. The opposing side is completely lost. I'm trying to help the opposing side but the opposite side just lacks understanding.
We're going to read. Not just see but actually read so you don't get my opinion but what the book says.
In the book of Saint John chapter 4 and we start at verse
"23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."
So worship the Father for the Father seeketh such to worship HIM. So the Father is Him . Him who ?
God. Next verse says God and they that WORSHIP HIM. Is this talking about another God besides the Father or is Him that same God?
The opposing side better not lie and say there's two because 1 Corinthians 8 condemns the opposing side where it said there is ONE GOD. That one God is the Father which is Him which is the Spirit of Him, God the Father.
The " separation " falsehood is condemned all throughout the scripture.
The opposing side has been taught a lie from the trinitarians and the effort to set the opposing side free in truth, I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily. So that the word of the Lord grew mightily and prevailed.
"Clear example of three different persons"
We see the pattern here. The opposing side continues to say anything but "we read" because we can't read it so how do we verify what is truly being stated without subjective interpretation?
We can't unless we read it just like how it is pushed that everything must be read in one verse. It doesn't have to be read in one verse. As long as it's read whether scattered in several verses or one, whatever.
"In fact, first Father is mentioned then Son then Holy Spirit.
This kind of shows distinction and hierarchy."
This is the problem with the opposing side.
"This kind of shows distinction and hierarchy"
If I didn't read "distinction and hierarchy" any where in a verse, where did it come from? Out of the mind which is subjective to the individual reader.
All my explanations are just regurgitating passages exactly as written. This is how we can verify my interpretation versus an objective read. The opposing side doesn't realize this and falsely accuses me of adding personal interpretation.
They accuse you of the things they do themselves.
We can't read "third person" or "three persons" anywhere in scripture but somehow the opposing side can impose it on the biblical text.
I had a trinitarian admit what he was saying was not in the text. You can find this video of the conversation on J. Talks to the people YouTube channel. Direct message for details.
"This is the best example of how the Holy Spirit and Jesus both are not and cannot be Gods. Because God is not bound by time and space or conditions."
This is where the opposing side hangs the opposing case. Is God spirit and is God holy?
If you say no, you are in error according to 1 John 5 and 7. If you say yes, you just condemned your own self.
I urge the opposing side to just stay off this subject and yield.
"This is a very clear example of how they are distinct and separate. My opponent and no one else can deny from this verse that they are separate persons."
Even the opposing side would not deny the words "distinct and separate" and "they are separate persons" isn't in scripture any where.
The trinitarians deceived the opposing side bad.
"My opponent failed to prove anything, but just asserted."
No it's the opposite. It is the opposing side that has just asserted and hasn't debunk anything I've explained.
The rest of what you had to say was just ramble and prattle not proving anything against me.
I suggest the opposing side to just yield from this point on .
The opposing side is to forfeit the next round and forfeit the debate.
Round 5
Pro
#9
Conclusion:
- I have already rebutted all the presumptions of my opponent, and my opponent has failed to do so. He totally ignored tons of my arguments and kept repeating his rebutted assumptions.
- My opponent is not mainstream Christianity, in fact he opposes it. He is more of modalism. (1) This is not an argument, but I am letting my opponent know what his ideology is called, and he failed to explain it and substantiate it.
- He considered Father the God one deity and probably called the Holy Spirit his manifestation and Jesus a prophet. While My claim was Father the only God, Holy Spirit a leader of angels according to Islam and Jesus A prophet. I have proven it from my Islamic perspective. Which I was supposed to do because it's Islam vs. anything. I was not supposed to debate within Christianity which my opponent forced me to do, thus against my will and purpose of the debate.
- Let's get to the gist of all the arguments and their rebuttals.
- I presented the case that, Bible revelation, its delivery (only three years of Jesus missionary) then its transmission, later its perseverance and understanding all seems very ambiguous, full of flaws and issues. Political influence of pagan like Romans and also everything carried forward by gentiles shows the absurdity of the whole procedure.
- I have proven that a book which is not in the native language of the prophet to whom the book was revealed and preserved by the gentiles who are not the followers of Jesus. How could this be credible to assert anything, let alone prove it to be true?
- But my opponent dropped this argument and resolution, and he assumed that I am some Christian, he remained saying that I am influenced by the Christians. While I already said that, I am Muslim and this debate is Islam vs. anything. Here, anything is filled as Christian. But my opponent rejected that, saying the “Christian” word is against the Bible. While people who followed Jesus (PBUH) were called Christian according to the Bible. It is irrelevant to debate, so I did not put any effort into it. Otherwise, I could have presented three verses for that.
- My opponent dropped all my arguments from the first round, and many more from the rest of the debate.
- He remained focused on his resolution and left my already established resolution, thus breaking almost all rules of the debate. While I even tackled his resolution.
- My Opponent presented his case that Father and Holy Spirit are the same one God, which is modalism. He probably is saying that the Holy Spirit is the manifestation of Father God. And the verses he presented I have already proven does not indicate it. Let me represent it again.
- One verse says God is Father. One verse says God is spirit, but the third verse says Holy Father. The word is complete Holy Father, how can someone change it into the Holy Spirit? If that was a fact, it would have been that way and would have not needed to be interpreted.
- Well, my opponent has emphasized on another criteria of his, which is line upon line. I think even applying that one, it still does not prove the assertion of my opponent.
- In fact, line upon line proves my arguments. On the other hand, if one verse clearly proves they are 3 different persons, then it's illogical to say we can find truth from 3 different statements while it's impossible from one verse. It's totally absurd.
- I have proven throughout the debate that my opponent is implying the wrong analogy and his assumptions are totally wrong.
- I have rebutted all assumptions of my Opponent.
- He has insulted me multiple times and asked me to forfeit my debate. I do not know why, like a child who may feel upset if he loses in competition and wants to grow up to lose intentionally.
- My opponent has broken almost all rules set by me, he has insulted me multiple times and shown that he is frustrated and sentimental about the debate and lacks the logical perspective of the debate.
- He is desperate to win and very much annoyed, which I do not know why, because I am not saying anything wrong to him.
- On the other hand, he totally bent the debate into what I never wanted to indulge, yet I remained calm and even accepted his resolution and tackled it in good manner.
- Still, I want to thank my opponent for participating in this debate.
—----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some rebuttal for 4th round:
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
Opponent:
Scripture say we having the same spirit of faith according to as it written . We can believe that the text says what it says because we read it . Therefore we can speak what we believe.
Rebuttal:
You are reading it wrong, the verse says Holy Father not Holy Spirit. You cannot prove it yet indeed you can believe it. It is not necessary what you believe is true as well.
Opponent:
The one spirit God the Father.
Rebuttal:
Yes, but not the Holy Spirit.
Opponent:
Line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little. So this falsehood of everything having to be in one verse of scripture by the opposing side is not scriptural.
This is the condition of the opposing side. To the opposing side, it seems right that way. The scripture say there is a way that seems right unto man but the end there of is destruction.
I'm teaching here. When you decide to violate the scripture and don't go line upon line, you lack knowledge and the scripture say my people are DESTROYED for a lack of knowledge.
Rebuttal:
This is an absurd criteria, normally a single sentence is enough to tell you what it has to tell, sometimes many sentences cannot get you a clear idea of the topic like a complex educational topic. So it does not matter at all, if the verse is clear and gives the whole prospect then denying it is childish. We can wholly grasp the idea from the verses I have mentioned in the previous round. An idea to be false needs to be proven objectively, not generally. My opponent should rebut the argument and find flaws in them, while saying we need a lot of verses to understand the idea is absurd. Why not mention what is the problem with the verses, instead saying that the idea or concept or precedent is not clear?
So if a verse is clear and give the complete picture of the concept, then why not take it? And the verses I have mentioned has already proven to be correct by me. So all the trinitrian Christain and muslim are going toward destruction? Although I am going to make a distinction between them. Christain believe they are 3 but gods while we Muslim say they are 3 but only one is God who is Father. Other two are creations, one is a mighty Prophet and the other is the leader of angels. I have proven it from quranic verses already in previous rounds.
Opponent”
God who is the Father(1 Cor 8:6) is Holy (John 17:11) and Spirit(John 4:24).
Rebuttal:
Jhon 17:11 does not say Holy but it says holy father. Why omit Father here? If you do that then the verse is incomplete. This verse intends to say Holy Father not just Holy. Whole bible does not want to say Father is the Holy Spirit then why are you trying to say? If the bible can say Holy Father then it could say Holy spirit as well. Why does it need your implication? To be honest it's childish to play word games here. The Holy word is used to show sacrality of a person in religion. So holy is used with spirit and holy is used with father as well. It does not imply that two persons are the same.
Opponent:
Now you have to be as the scripture says a dumb dog if we can't witness how plain this is. I've added no words nor taken any away.
I've just combined them. Combining these lines is line upon line. This is why the opposing side is lost and was abled to be deceived by trinitarians.
I'm trying to reach and teach the opposing side but these folks are stiff necked as the scripture say. Stiff necked, hard headed and hardened heart.
Rebuttal:
I do not know where my opponent is going here. Insulting and becoming emotional is very bad in debates. Just like I said my stance is not of trinitrian but Islamic. We say Father is only God and the Holy Spirit is actually a leader of angels and Jesus (PBUH) a mighty prophet.
Opponent:
The opposing side has proven nothing but call the Bible a lie and being a dumb dog.
Rebuttal:
How bad it is to say a person is a dog. Frustration can be seen here.
Opponent:
Just bring Bible book chapter and verse to prove your point. Scripture says prove all things.
Rebuttal:
I guess I have done it already in great depth.
Opponent:
John 14:11 reads: "Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
Rebuttal:
This verse is talking about Jesus, not the Holy spirit. More likely added some words as corruption.
Otherwise it's even in Islam we say Allah is in your heart or inside you. It's like his spiritual presence in a pious and righteous person.
And the miracles are done by All prophets, even those which Jesus has done, if not all but some. So a big person who has a 500k variant can do that, it's not a big deal. But still it could not prove his point because it's for Jesus. Which my opponent also believes is the Prophet. So according to him, he should know that the bible is corrupted and unreliable.
Opponent:
Let's get the book of Colossians 2 and 9
"For in Him dwells all the fullness of the GODHEAD".
So we already know the Father is one but being that ALL THE FULLNESS is in him, there's not another in the GODHEAD besides for the scripture say there is NO GOD BESIDE ME. Also we know the holy Spirit is God.
So it's ridiculous and false to try to argue there's another spirit that is God but not the Father .
Don't let me go to 1 John 5:7.
Rebuttal:
See the full verse:
2 I want you to know how hard I am contending for you and for those at Laodicea, and for all who have not met me personally. 2 My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. 4 I tell you this so that no one may deceive you by fine-sounding arguments. 5 For though I am absent from you in body, I am present with you in spirit and delight to see how disciplined you are and how firm your faith in Christ is.
Explanation:
We can see these verses are for Jesus not the holy spirit. Which my opponent has accepted to be a Prophet.
1 John 5:7, found in some versions of the Bible, particularly the King James Version, refers to the Trinity: the Father, the Word (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit, stating they are one. However, this verse is not universally accepted as authentic, with many scholars believing it was added later to the text.
Now suddenly my opponent has started supporting trinity? Suddenly he is talking about godhead? I have asked these questions multiple times whether he believes in trinity or not, which he completely rejected. How can he justify it? And how can he even relate it to even quran?
I do not know what my opponent is thinking. He seems very confused and desperate.
Opponent:
I'm sorry that you have been deceived by the trinitarians. Now you touting their talking points you don't even believe in.
Rebuttal:
Again a false claim, I am muslim and I do not believe in trinity, I have shown separation and distinction between 3 persons which christian take as Gods and I have clearly mentioned Islamic points of view about them that they are not. How can he accuse me of trinitrian. I used bible verses to show distinction and separation only not considered them Gods at all. But my opponent cannot understand it at all.
Opponent:
The opposing side is not giving scripture that says or lined up scriptures that say what is being said here "Holy Spirit is distinct from Father".
The opposing side says "which shows/so clearly proves". The opposing side didn't say "which reads" because we can't read it. The opposing side is telling you want is shown according to personal interpretation.
Give me scripture that reads "Holy Spirit is distinct from Father". I got Bible that says "one".
Rebuttal:
This was not and is not my criteria to judge anything, I said prophets can interpret scripture and let us understand true meaning. And I have proven that even my opponent does not fulfill the criteria as well because he is omitting the word to mix another to prove his case. Verse said holy father and the verse is complete. Why take spirit from another verse to change holy father into holy spirit? When the bible says one, that shows one mission and on one page not being one.
I have presented verses in previous rounds where a woman called Jesus a prophet and Jesus remained silent and later even affirmed his claim by saying I am that messiah. Jesus claimed he knew God and he said God is spirit and I have proven how God is spirit and How angels are spirit and how even humans have spirit and even demons are bad spirit. Anyone who is spirit or possess spirit does not make them part of God. There is a whole spiritual realm even within us. My opponent is trying to make the whole realm into God. While there are even bad demons in it so we cannot do that.
And he already mentioned the verse of the Quran where Allah said God has given very less information about that realm. Arbitrary assertions and claims are totally out of the scope of mery humans and we can only claim something is claimed by God himself or the prophet himself. If Father and holy spirit are one and God wanted to convey to us then he should have used the word holy spirit in the verse instead of holy father.
So we can see from many verses of the bible which shows Father is God and Jesus is Prophet and messiah and Holy spirit is angel. Because he descended on earth at the time of baptizing in the form of a dove with wings which is a clear sign of an angel. My interpretation aligns with our prophet and Jesus as well. Indeed trinitrian take the Greek pagan concept and hindu concept of god which is subdivided into 3.
Opponent:
Dishonest or ignorant. One of the two or both. The scriptures teaches there is ONE GOD, ONE GOD just as the Quran and the opposing side can't accept the agreement and reconciliation between the scripture and Quran.
Rebuttal:
Yes one God, this is what I am saying, that is why Quran says:
Say, "He is Allah, [who is] One."
Allah-us-Samad (The Self-Sufficient Master, Whom all creatures need, He neither eats nor drinks).
He begets not, nor was He begotten.
And there is none co-equal or comparable unto Him."
You see there is none co-equal or comparable and he is a self-sufficient master. This chapter of the Quran I have already presented in the previous round but my opponent has a habit of overlooking all the arguments which oppose him. What trinitiran say is that, three persons of trinity are co-equal members of the Godhead and this is what u saying in 4th round which we have discussed before. Now you are quoting the verses which are variations not found in all versions of the bible only KJV and other verses which are corrupted to show trinity. While indeed I have used my own criteria to use logic and reason to show that they are not gods. And the Quran is clear on it. This shows how my opponent has totally ignored many many of my previous arguments. He is desperate to prove himself asking me to forfeit and slandering and swearing against me so that I may lose composure and make a mistake to swear back and it gives him chances to win a conduct point.
Opponent:
Now I am going to put some key points from my opponent as he is repeating again and again.
The opposing side is lying on scripture. The opposing side is arguing two Gods in the GODHEAD.
I got Bible saying one and alone. The opposing side is giving trinitarian rhetoric that the opposing side doesn't even believe in.
Why are you trying to force falsehood?
Please note audience, every instance the opposing side says "This clearly shows that", be alert that no passage is being given of what we can actually read but what is being assumed.
The opposing side says "seems". If the scripture really says what you claim, there is no "seems". The opposing side is making up doctrine as the opposing side goes along.
Just making up stuff. Trinitarians taught the opposing side how to make up stuff.
Give me Bible for two Gods or shut up. If the Father who is the spirit of God is not the Holy Spirit who is God, you got two Gods. You either give Bible for two Gods or your mouth has been stopped according to Titus 1.
Rebuttal:
So now my opponent believes in Godhood now? Did he not say that Father and Holy Spirit are one God or two names of the same God? He is a kind of modalist, who excludes Jesus but includes the Holy Spirit but twists and changes his ideology whenever he wants. He is so confused, and does not know what he is talking about. I have asked these questions many times before but he never replied to them and remained ambiguous. Now its final round he yet has no concise on his belief at all. I suggest to my opponent to refrain from his personal interpretation and study some good exegesis of the Bible and Quran. Consult some scholars and deep dive into scriptures.
I never said two gods at all. He has discussed the next section of my belief where I said the Holy Spirit is angel. Because I have already discussed it in a previous rebuttal. How is it possible for God to descend like a dove? A bird? Only angels look like that. And the voice came from heaven which was God himself.
I have presented verses where Jesus asked Father to send the Holy Spirit as advocate. This shows they are separate.
While both "distinct" and "separate" suggest a lack of sameness, "distinct" emphasizes clear differentiation or noticeable differences, while "separate" highlights a physical or conceptual division or lack of connection. Essentially, "distinct" focuses on the differences themselves, while "separate" focuses on the state of being apart
Synonym Chooser
How is the word separate different from other adjectives like it?
The words discrete and distinct are common synonyms of separate. While all three words mean "not being each and every one the same," separate often stresses lack of connection or a difference in identity between two things.
So I consider them separate. Because hypostatic union is nowhere found in the bible at all. When the bible talks about them being one. That means one in mission and side and unity of direction for faith and belief.
Opponent:
"In fact, first Father is mentioned then Son then Holy Spirit.
This kind of shows distinction and hierarchy."
This is the problem with the opposing side.
"This kind of shows distinction and hierarchy"
If I didn't read "distinction and hierarchy" any where in a verse, where did it come from? Out of the mind which is subjective to the individual reader.
All my explanations are just regurgitating passages exactly as written. This is how we can verify my interpretation versus an objective read. The opposing side doesn't realize this and falsely accuses me of adding personal interpretation.
Rebuttal:
I did not put these criteria at all, for me, I took the interpretation of many scholars and denominations.
Also, I already said who can interpret? I have already mentioned the Prophet themselves, who are guided by Allah or God.
Even a normal person trying to interpret it should make sense and should not be a heresy, alien or illogical idea.
There are many christian who believe that Jesus proceeds from the Father and the Holy Spirit from Jesus. Some argue that both Jesus and the Holy Spirit processed from Father.
They give fancy words to deceive people. But it simply means they come into being with the command of Allah or word of Allah which he used to create many things, even heaven and earth. There are things which are produced or reproduced but each other that also follow the command of Allah but they rely on the first direct command of Allah. So things which are created by the first Command of Allah can be said word of Allah but things which are reproduced like I have given the example of Adam and Jesus in previous rounds. Distinction and hierarchy is there. Because we can see that Jesus prayed to Father and the Holy spirit came when Jesus asked Father to send him. Which shows he listens to father as well.
What else shows it then?
Opponent:
No it's the opposite. It is the opposing side that has just asserted and hasn't debunk anything I've explained.
The rest of what you had to say was just ramble and prattle not proving anything against me.
I suggest the opposing side to just yield from this point on .
The opposing side is to forfeit the next round and forfeit the debate.
Rebuttal:
LOL :)
(1)
Modalistic Monarchianism, also known as Modalism or Oneness Christology, is a Christian theology upholding the unipersonal oneness of God while also affirming the divinity of Jesus. As a form of Monarchianism, it stands in contrast with Dynamic Monarchianism (Adoptionism), which limits the divinity of Jesus to a moment in time when God adopted or exalted him into the Divine Nature. The term modalism was first used by Trinitarian scholar Adolf von Harnack, referencing this belief.[citation needed]
Modalistic Monarchianism is also opposed to the theology of Trinitarianism (and Binitarianism as well). Followers of Modalistic Monarchianism consider themselves to be monotheistic in a strict sense—similar to Jews and Muslims—and they argue for no plurality of persons in the theology of God. They consider God's person to be absolutely one and assert that the person of God reveals himself to creation through different "modes" (or "manifestations"), such as the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost, without limiting his modes or manifestations.[1][2]
In this view, all the Godhead is understood to have dwelt in Jesus from the incarnation as a manifestation of the God of the Old Testament. The terms "Father" and "Son" are then used to describe the distinction between the transcendence of God and the incarnation (God in immanence).[3] Or to frame it another way, "Father" and "Son" are technical terms that distinguish between the deity of God alone (i.e. the Father) and the deity of God joined to the human nature in Jesus Christ (i.e. the Son). Lastly, since God is a spirit, it is held that the Holy Spirit should not be understood as a distinct person but rather should be understood as the one God who is a person in action in the world.
Modalistic Monarchianism is closely related to Sabellianism and Patripassianism, two ancient theologies condemned as heresy in the Great Church and successive state church of the Roman Empire.[4][5]
Link:
I thanks my opponent for participation and remain to the end.
I hope I have increased the knowledge of my opponent and the reads as well.
Please vote Pro,
thanks.
Con
#10
Going to say this first before anything.
Many of you individuals like the opposing side here is too sensitive too soft for debating.
Crying about calling you a dumb dog, I'm not going to grow scared and cower behind the things you say.
If I see a challenge I can refute you on ,I WILL TAKE IT and I dare you to block me.
You do it and it proves you're a coward like all the rest.
See the scripture says stand firm on the faith. You got to be firm on this thing my friend. Don't be moved by what people call you.
Scripture say I'm not moved by man. You read this book, you're going to learn from it.
But you do fit what the book says, a dumb dog.
I'm not criticizing, slandering, perhaps rude in speech but strong in knowledge.
Let's get the book because I'm on book order. I'm on Bible order.
2 Corinthians 11
"6 But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge"
So the knowledge is what it is on its own based on the book. Just because I say you fit things from the book, it's not rude nor slandering.
That's the same argument people will use by calling them sinners.
You are a dumb dog as the scripture says one that is ignorant and blind as you've demonstrated this entire debate.
Isaiah 56
"10 His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs"
Scripture says reason together and you simply cannot reason .
Quran says you're deaf and dumb because you cannot reason.
If you simply can't reason multiple verses together of scriptures to understand the points I HAVE PROVEN AGAINST you , you would be according to the Quran and Bible deaf, dumb dog.
Now if you don't concede, scripture say let you be ignorant.
So you'll still be a dumb dog.
Again, I'm not slandering you or making ad hominems.
Somebody making ad hominems is baseless. I'm saying things based on writings that were here before us.
But I do urge you to thicken your skin if you're going to debate .
Scripture says with preaching the Kingdom of God, in all confidence forbidding no man.
I'm going to have confidence on this. Don't try to forbid this thing.
Scripture says fearless in making known THE MYSTERY of the gospel.
Confident and no fear and this should be without controversy. Arguing over the GODHEAD, for great is the mystery of godliness.
God was manifest in the flesh . First Timothy 3:16.
But I am confident and have no fear in explaining the mystery. But because it is a mystery, you haven't been able to get what I'm saying this whole debate. Understand that at least.
So I'm not going to shun away, hold my tongue in saying what the scripture says and it does say dumb dog . Scripture says granted all boldness to speak his word.
I'm bold enough to speak Isaiah 56 about dumb dogs describing folks like you.
Now what you said was straight criticizing straight from your opinion.
You can say I'm low intellectual or whatever. That's your issue. This is not a matter of intellect or logic. This is what you've been trying to use as a basis for this topic.
So evidently being dumb according to the scripture, don't get stirred up at me, I'm just speaking from scripture, take it up with the scripture. You do not understand that this has nothing to do with logic or intellect and everything to do with what is written.
According to what is written, scripture says the wisdom of man is foolishness to God. It is nothing compared to ALLAH. So you should already know but perhaps you're ignorant that our intellects being low has nothing involved with this. So of course there's low intellect. Not only that , intellect is irrelevant to showing you how the Quran and Bible coincide on ONE GOD ONE GOD ONE GOD ONE GOD .
Not three persons, you couldn't read that and if you think you have so called high intellect, it doesn't mean we find the words "GOD is three persons" in the bible.
Intellect has nothing to do with what you can read. You did not read that God the Father was not holy and spirit.
Intellect was not used to demonstrate all the scripture, all the witnesses that teaches the one God , one Allah, is the Father, Creator that is most holy according to the Quran and the spirit of Allah breathed into man he created.
Instead of worrying about intellect, focus more on what's written in these texts my friend.
"This is not an argument, but I am letting my opponent know what his ideology is called, and he failed to explain it and substantiate it."
The opposing side is giving an opinion not speaking on what is known. Scripture say speak on what you know.
"He considered Father the God one deity and probably called the Holy Spirit his manifestation and Jesus a prophet. While My claim was Father the only God, Holy Spirit a leader of angels according to Islam and Jesus A prophet. I have proven it from my Islamic perspective. Which I was supposed to do because it's Islam vs. anything. I was not supposed to debate within Christianity which my opponent forced me to do, thus against my will and purpose of the debate."
The opposing side is giving an opinion not speaking on what is known. Case and point.
Scripture say if the gospel be hid, it is hidden to those (the opposing side) who are lost .
"he remained saying that I am influenced by the Christians. While I already said that, I am Muslim and this debate is Islam vs. anything. Here, anything is filled as Christian. But my opponent rejected that, saying the “Christian” word is against the Bible. "
Slow of heart.
I said the trinitarians. I didn't say christians.
The trinitarians have taught you a lie. That's not even saying you're christian. Is English your first language?
Notice the opposing side doesn't quote me and then makes a response. What I actually say versus subjective interpretation is going on here.
I didn't say the word "Christian". I say Christianity is not in scripture. There's a difference. If you're going to debate, you have to be better with words and following what people are saying.
"The word is complete Holy Father, how can someone change it into the Holy Spirit? If that was a fact, it would have been that way and would have not needed to be interpreted."
Slow of heart.
Folks I have explained this over and over. I can understand that when you're in a debate, you're not looking to really understand. Your defense wall is up and everything that is said to you is just dismissed and replaced with what you come to argue.
I try to actually read, quote and respond directly to exact words. I don't rephrase but actually take what the opposing side states at face value and demonstrate inconsistency, self refutation and negation.
Let's see what I can respond to without repeating myself. The opposing side is stating many things demonstrating how obtuse the opposing side is, no offense.
It just has to be made clear I've defended what I have defended well but the opposing side is making it appear I have not.
So there will be things I won't respond to. It's not that I'm not engaging as probably assumed. It's just that I've addressed such things over and over and over and over and over.
Scripture say after the second or third admonition, leave it alone I believe.
"He has insulted me multiple times and asked me to forfeit my debate. I do not know why, like a child who may feel upset if he loses in competition and wants to grow up to lose intentionally.
My opponent has broken almost all rules set by me, he has insulted me multiple times and shown that he is frustrated and sentimental about the debate and lacks the logical perspective of the debate.
He is desperate to win and very much annoyed, which I do not know why, because I am not saying anything wrong to him.
On the other hand, he totally bent the debate into what I never wanted to indulge, yet I remained calm and even accepted his resolution and tackled it in good manner.
Still, I want to thank my opponent for participating in this debate."
I have addressed all of this at the start.
The opposing side is interpreting a lot of demeanor through text. But I challenge the person to engage with me live. I'm sure, the interpretation would differ.
Digressing.
"This is an absurd criteria, normally a single sentence is enough to tell you what it has to tell, sometimes many sentences cannot get you a clear idea of the topic like a complex educational topic. So it does not matter at all, if the verse is clear and gives the whole prospect then denying it is childish. "
This is all opinion from the opposing side. The scripture said line upon line. So line upon line doesn't mean just one verse. If it does, I challenge you to READ IT. The opposing side didn't write the scripture that I know of .
So we're not going to take the criteria of the opposing side over the text that we have written concerning things of the text.
How are you going to prove something from the text but dismissing the rules from the same collection of texts?
That's disingenuous.
"We can wholly grasp the idea from the verses I have mentioned in the previous round. An idea to be false needs to be proven objectively, not generally. My opponent should rebut the argument and find flaws in them, while saying we need a lot of verses to understand the idea is absurd. Why not mention what is the problem with the verses, instead saying that the idea or concept or precedent is not clear?"
I don't want to continue to repeat myself. If you are too slow to understand what line upon line is, I can't help that. I said nothing about " a lot of verses ".
This is the constant problem with the opposing side. The opposing side can't seem to stick with what I actually exactly say word for word. Just like the scripture. You can't stick with the exact words it gives. You just borrow the trinitarian talking points and argue just like they do. You talk to them too much and they accidentally taught you their folly.
They taught you THEIR FOLLY. AMEN.
"So if a verse is clear and give the complete picture of the concept, then why not take it?"
Take it and don't add words to it like you have done son.
"And the verses I have mentioned has already proven to be correct by me. So all the trinitrian Christain and muslim are going toward destruction?"
They taught you THEIR FOLLY.
"Although I am going to make a distinction between them. Christain believe they are 3 but gods while we Muslim say they are 3 but only one is God who is Father. Other two are creations, one is a mighty Prophet and the other is the leader of angels. I have proven it from quranic verses already in previous rounds."
They taught you THEIR FOLLY.
"Again a false claim, I am muslim and I do not believe in trinity, I have shown separation and distinction between 3 persons which christian take as Gods and I have clearly mentioned Islamic points of view about them that they are not. How can he accuse me of trinitrian. I used bible verses to show distinction and separation only not considered them Gods at all. But my opponent cannot understand it at all. "
If you don't believe the trinitarians doctrine that you're hypocritically trying to argue, you should be able to accept the truth of the scripture that I have proven. But yet you reject it and accept the trinitarian interpretation of the scriptures. Something you don't believe as you say but persist to push the teaching.
If that ain't folly, I don't know what is.
"How is it possible for God to descend like a dove? A bird?"
We can have a separate debate on that. You just can't be so sensitive when you debate. Thicken the skin comrade.
"I did not put these criteria at all, for me, I took the interpretation of many scholars and denominations.
Also, I already said who can interpret? I have already mentioned the Prophet themselves, who are guided by Allah or God.
Even a normal person trying to interpret it should make sense and should not be a heresy, alien or illogical idea."
Stay out the Bible. Just be taught by a true man of God.
"LOL :)"
Mouth has been stopped.
No content
Looks like there is nothing here yet
lol
troller coaster
Another individual refuted for the debate art books.
Some guy suggested me to debate Mall, but I did not know that he is driller of brain. Tbh this debate was total loss of time. I could not believe someone could troll a debate like that.
I really wanted to debate Atheist. But it seems they are defensive toward me this time which was on DDO. Christianity has no substance. Although now I know more and more about it and can disprove it more and more.
One achievement I got in the debate was to control my behavior and bear the insult of other person. Empty utensils makes noise. though I was not empty that is why I should have not made noise.
I hope fishChaser is better debater.
you say
"Christianity is an adulterated view of the Bible" LOL
you kinda call it rape of bible lol
you have weak memory bro.
i am not whining.
but i do not want to debate about stupid topics which just waste time.
you see i dedicate my time to one debate at a time and it could take months.
I do not do like you who jerk around and do trolling all over the place.
you are a child.
you framed the whole debate, it looses the scope and also waste my time around stupid issues which get you no where.
that is why i do not want to debate with you again. because i do not want to debate with trolls who do not debate with me on my resolution.
you are the one who run like a coward from my resolution that bible is corrupt and has 500k variations.
I tackled both resolution.
you simply fck the brain with stupid fantasized arguments.
I am sorry i am not for that, even you call it cowardliness or whatever. I do not want drill of my brain for worthless debates. i will indeed block you because it do not want to fck around here any more.
i mostly wanted to debate with athiest here and chrsitanity has nothing left to debate with me your basses are hollow your fountain is fake and corrupted and weak. i am polite toward christains otherwise this religion is almost obsolete just like hinduism. their idols and polytheism in it and a lot more like even magic.
"I asked my opponent to talk about the Bible, why because the whole Christianity is based on bible which is holy scripture of the Christian, its credibility is vital to prove."
This is incorrect. This is a lie perhaps the opposing side was told. Christianity is not based on the bible.
You can learn more going to website address:
https://youtube.com/@j.talkstothepeopleradio6008
Title of the video, very recent video, was Christianity invented by God?
It was failed to be proven that Christianity is out of the scriptures. Christianity is based on man whom invented the sect using corrupted or water down tenets of the scripture, sometimes writing off any iota of scripture completely depending on who you talk to.
Christianity is an adulterated view of the Bible and that's why you can't find one scripture that says God or Jesus establishing a thing called Christianity.
You don't even find where Jesus said be Christian. It was men in the scripture that starting using the term themselves.
So much the opposing side as demonstrated not speaking on what is known.
Sorry to mention that this debate simply got too wordy: It is over 31,000 words, which fill in excess of 100 page of 8.5 x 11, Times New Roman 12 pt. font, single space, but for paragraph separation. It could have allowed 300,000 words in the 5 rounds had both participants taken their full allotted 30,000 words per round. Most publishers refuse to read that much in a single publishing submission, let alone publish it. Neither participant consumed as many words as needed to fill the Quran or the Bible, but both volumes contain much more enlightening information than this debate, which even has the participants arguing past each other rather than with each other, simply because they never agreed on the REsolution, but debated anyway. Certainly many debate voters will tire of what words did fill this debate at even 10% of the allotted total. Many have in the past. Any voter who wishes to consume that much for analysis, go ahead; make my day. I for one have other tasks of more pressing engagement. I am working on a solution to the problem of how to make the lint in my pockets a successful fire retardant.
Kidding, but, really, guys?
get the fck out of here
"My tools to debate would be science and philosophy and would be based on rational basis."
If logic caused me to worship a pedophile who admittedly received verses from Satan because he couldn't differentiate between angels and djinn than maybe logic isn't for me.
Also if logic caused me to be a fag and wear dresses like Muslim men or do bacha Nazi and fuck my cousin like a hillbilly than logic is a bad thing
I know you are low intellect guy, and live in fantasy but calling me dog is insane. Your case is destroyed. Do not get sentimental, kido. Have some respect. And do not do swearing and slandering. Refrain to debate with me again.
All you guys are saying is bible verses and Islamic language i do not understand or im probably dumb
Welcome back, well I do not mind. This debate is going no where, naturally I will start another. Anybody who wants to debate with me on Christanity I am here.
Would you be open to debating FishChaser?
Islam vs Christianity?
FishChaser made a couple of religious debates, I'm thinking he would agree to it
You are debating 7 other debates. Why you choose when you cannot actively participate.
You broke the rule of the debate, read the description. Did I not mention that must discuss everything before accepting debate?
Plz do not break rule to take the debate before discussing about it in private message.