The mysterious disappearance of Paul B. Williams’ web-sites

We don’t know why Paul Bilal Williams, a British convert to Islam, has deleted his blogs and disappeared.   His “bloggingtheology.wordpress.com” is gone; his You Tube page is gone; and his blog on Kant and philosophy is gone.

Maybe he is just tired and doesn’t want to deal with the internet anymore.    Maybe there was another tragedy in his life.   Maybe he is genuinely disillusioned with Islam.  Or maybe he just wants to change his apologetic material for Islam to a different web-site and domain.   Or maybe someone hacked into his web-site and destroyed it.  (That happened to another Muslim who goes by “The Grandverbalizer19”)   Maybe it is another reason that I cannot think of.

He was so sure of himself in Islam and his own judgment of the mistakes of the west in history, and the mistakes of conservative Bible believing Christianity; that it is hard to believe it would be anything but either fatique or disillusionment with Islam; or disillusionment with other Muslims, or someone hacking his site.

Maybe he is disillusioned with other Muslims (as he wrote about before being disillusioned with some other Muslims), but wants to hold on to Islam in a private kind of way.  Whatever it is, Christians should not gloat or swagger or boast or mock or call him names.  Jesus said “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”  (Matthew 5:44)   Proverbs 24:17 says, “Do not rejoice when your enemy falls, and do not let your heart be glad when he stumbles.” (Proverbs 24:17)  We are not personal enemies, only “doctrinal adversaries” in that we argue against one another’s doctrines.  (The Truth of Christianity and the Bible vs. his claim that Islam is true.)  

We should pray for Paul Bilal Williams and his soul.    Christians need to display humility and brokeness over other people’s struggles and mental suffering; and the sin and false doctrines and suffering in this world.  I wish Paul Williams the best – true peace (John 14:27; Romans 5:1; Matthew 11:28-30), true joy (Luke 2:10; John 15:11), salvation from sin (Matthew 1:21), and love from the God of the Bible (Romans 8:28-39; 1 John 4:8-19) –  and hope and pray that the true God of the Bible, the Triune God, will open his heart to see “the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ”.   2 Corinthians 4:6, Acts 16:14

Addendum: January 2, 2014 Paul Bilal Williams changed his website to  ( I had to get rid of this completely because there seems to be some Malware or scam on this when clicked on)  (see also in the combox comments below, where he let me know of his new site). His wordpress website disappeared a few days before Dec. 12, when I wrote this article, and then he got his new website up on Dec. 24 ( or 23).

It turns out this was the right guess as to what happened:

Or maybe he just wants to change his apologetic material for Islam to a different web-site and domain.

On his new website, ( I had to get rid of this url link, see above) he is reproducing basically the same material that he was cranking out at his bloggingtheology.wordpress.com blog. Most of it is using western liberal scholarship and some not so liberal scholarship to try to cast doubt upon the Bible where ever he can find a subtle scholarly writer whom he can leverage to his advantage to try to cause doubt on the truth and inerancy and historical liability of the Bible.

Later, in January of 2015, Paul Bilal Williams changed his web-site again!  See here.

Advertisements

About Ken Temple

I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I am a sinner who has been saved by the grace of God alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), through faith alone (Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:28; 4:1-16), in Christ alone (John 14:6). But a true faith does not stay alone, it should result in change, fruit, good works, and deeper levels of repentance and hatred of my own sins of selfishness and pride. I am not better than you! I still make mistakes and sin, but the Lord is working on me, conforming me to His character. (Romans 8:28-29; 2 Corinthians 3:16-18) When I do sin, I hate the sin as it is an affront to God, and seek His forgiveness in repentance. (Mark 1:15; 2 Corinthians 7:7-10; Colossians 3:5-16 ) Praise God for His love for sinners (Romans 5:8), shown by the voluntary coming of Christ and His freely laying down His life for us (John 10:18), becoming flesh/human (John 1:1-5; 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8), dying for sins of people from all nations, tribes, and cultures (Revelation 5:9), on the cross, in history, rising from the dead (Romans 10:9-10; Matthew 28, Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24; John 20-21; 1 Corinthians chapter 15). His resurrection from the dead proved that Jesus is the Messiah, the eternal Son of God, the word of God from eternity past; and that He was all the gospels say He was and that He is truth and the life and the way to salvation. (John 14:6)
This entry was posted in Christian Attitudes toward others, Evangelism, Islam, Paul Bilal Williams, Prayer. Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to The mysterious disappearance of Paul B. Williams’ web-sites

  1. Sam Shamoun says:

    I actually like Williams. He became my favorite Muslim polemicist. I pray that the risen Lord Jesus will convict him and draw him to himself.

  2. Ken Temple says:

    Yes. “My heart’s desire and prayer to God is for their [his] salvation.” Romans 10:1 – the apostle Paul’s burden and prayer for his fellow Jews.

  3. Nancy Arevalo says:

    Will he see this post? I hope he will let you know what happened to him. I am concerned about him, too.

  4. Ken Temple says:

    I don’t know if he has seen this or not. As far as I know, no one knows what happened yet.

    Keep praying for him and thanks for your comment and concern.

  5. Ijaz Ahmad says:

    Br. Ijaz here, lol he’s still very 100% Muslim, but if the speculation is keeping you guys busy feel free to continue I suppose heh.

  6. Ken Temple says:

    Salaam Ijaz !! Thanks for coming here and making a comment. I guess the question is, if he is still 100 % Muslim, and he is just tired or doesn’t want to deal with the internet anymore, he could still leave the information up in defense of Islam. The complete deletion does not make sense. Why not just let the information just be there, and close down comments and not make any more new blog posts?

    I wish you and Paul W. and other Muslims peace in the true Al Masih. المسیح
    John 14:27
    Matthew 11:28-30
    Romans 5:1
    Luke 2:1-14

    • Ijaz Ahmad says:

      wa ‘alaykum,

      Sure you’re not Muslim Ken? Your “what if” questions sound a lot like the ahlul ar-rayy from the madhab of Imam ‘Azam (‘alayhi rahma). :p

      To each his own way I suppose. His works do survive on through many other websites, so they aren’t necessarily gone.

      I wish you guidance from God, the creator of the Masih.

      Luke 1:35.

      wa Allaahu ‘alam.

  7. burhanuddin1 says:

    Ken Temple “The complete deletion does not make sense.” It’s a mystery.
    Why bother reasoning, as your whole perception of reality is based on blind faith and mysterious initiation?
    Sorry, stupid question, as consistency is irrelevant, too.

  8. Ken Temple says:

    Burhan u Deen (reason and religion) برهان و دین
    So my reasoning powers do show that true Christianity does honor reason and evidence برهان – part of your nick name, I reason. And faith in Al Masih is not blind faith – we have all the historical evidence on our side – that Al Masih was crucified and killed under the command of Pontius Pilate by the instigation of the Jewish leadership around 30 AD. Your book just blindly denies it – Surah 4:157 with nothing to back that up.

    The empty tomb, the resurrection appearances, the text of the Scritpure that the Qur’an confirms 600 years later ( Surah 5:46-47; 68; 10:95; 2:136; 29:46) show there is no other explanation but that God raised Jesus Al Masih from the dead.

    Your book accepts the virgin birth of Al Masih (Surah 3, Surah 19) – a miracle. That was all based on revelation in the text of Matthew chapters 1-2 and Luke chapters 1-2, then it got mixed up in the desert with Gnostic texts before it got garbled in the Qur’an.

    So, Burhan برهان – reason and evidence, is on the side of the Bible and Christianity.

    Thanks for your comment. Peace to you – John 14:27, Matthew 11:28-30

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Ken, burhan is a troll who goes by the name Artur Kurt. When he uses the name Artur Kurt he claims to be a deist so he can get Christians to debate him on Christian topics without having to defend his Islamic fairytales and garbage. So be forewarned of this troll.

  9. burhanuddin1 says:

    Yeah sure. And your god “died”. But he didn’t die. And he is a man. But he isn’t. And he has a god, but he doesn’t. Yes “reason and evidence, is on the side of the Bible and Christianity.”
    LOL.

    “Your book just blindly denies it – Surah 4:157 with nothing to back that up.” False.

    “we have all the historical evidence on our side – that Al Masih was crucified and killed …”
    That’s not what you believe. He was not killed and crucified, he is alive, isn’t he? It only appeared to some of she Jews, that they killed him, that they eliminated him. That’s what you believe. That is the truth, that’s what the Quran tells you. Wake up.

    If Jesus “died” on the cross or not is irrelevant. God raised him up to himself. All of creation is still in the state of Islam, as is humanity, who is called upon to accept this consciously. Wake up from your illusion of blind faith and mysterious initiation to the reality of Islam.

    Nothing has changed. You are still sinning and you do not repent.

  10. burhanuddin1 says:

    Shame on you, get a life.

  11. Sam Shamoun says:

    Here is the proof that this troll burhan is Artur Kurt. Go here and see what Kurt posted: http://badmanna.wordpress.com/2013/11/30/rebuttal-to-jehovahs-witnesses-on-john-2028-by-sam-shamoun/#comment-2090

    Click on his name and this is what you will find: http://en.gravatar.com/burhanuddin1

    Do you see the name burhanuddin1? Kurt and burhan are one and the same troll.

  12. Ken Temple says:

    Yes I see; and “Kurt” is also in his email address, which I noticed before.

    earlier, I wrote:
    “we have all the historical evidence on our side – that Al Masih was crucified and killed …”

    and Kurt responds with a complete lack of burhan (برهان = reason, evidence, argumentation, logic, proof) –
    That’s not what you believe. He was not killed and crucified, he is alive, isn’t he? It only appeared to some of she Jews, that they killed him, that they eliminated him. That’s what you believe. That is the truth, that’s what the Quran tells you. Wake up.

    Al Masih was truly crucified and truly died; and then on the 3rd day He rose from the dead.
    Historical evidence and reason برهان is on the side of the Bible and Christianity.

    “That’s what you believe” – wrong – if you are saying Christians already believe what the Qur’an teaches, then why all the accusations of “blind faith” ??

    It is much more “blind faith” to take one verse (Surah 4:157) and say that Allah decieved and tricked الله خیر المکارین – Allah is the best of tricksters/deceivers” (Surah 3:54-55; 8:30: 10:22) – that He tricked all of humanity for 600 + and 3/4 of humanity since around 632 AD and claim that Surah 4:157 agrees with history; but there is no way to prove or disprove it, since only that one verse 600 years later teaches it. That is blind faith, and against reason, against history, and no thinking intellectual could ever accept that, since it is such a clear unreasonable way of interpreting history.

  13. Ken Temple says:

    And Surah 3:52; 61:14; 5:111 show that the disciples of Jesus were true believers, trustworthy, helpers of God, and testified to the truth (Surah 3:53) and the Qur’an claims that the true believers became the uppermost/victorious/ superior/ above (فوق ) the unbelievers until the day of resurrection. (3:55, 61:14). This contradicts the Islamic claim that the apostle Paul and writers of the gospel of John and Luke and Matthew and Mark hijacked the proto-Islamic monotheists who, they claim, wrote some of what still survives in the gospels. Clement of Rome(96 AD), Ignatius(107 AD), Justin Martyr(150 AD), Tertullian(200 AD), Polycarp(150 AD), Irenaeus(180 AD), Cyprian(250), Origen (250), Clement of Alexandria(215 AD), Athanasius(about 300-373), Augustine(354-430 AD), etc. all testify of the same doctrines of the Deity of Christ, the eternal Sonship of Christ, the Trinity, throughout the 600 years leading up to Islam. So Islam is defeated by the Qur’an, history, and reason and logic. (برهان و منطق )

  14. Ken Temple says:

    Surah 61:14 – “. . . so We supported those who believed against their enemy, and they became dominant” . “dominant” = ظاهرین = the ones most manifest, or manifested ones, or clearly manifest , clearly shown.

    The little groups of the Ebionites and other Jewish monotheists were not manifest or dominant at all, and many times there doctrines contradicted Islam.

  15. Ken Temple says:

    Thanks for letting me know about your new blog! Very interesting indeed!

  16. Ken Temple says:

    you saved your material and transfered it; ok; now that makes sense.

    That was one of the options that I thought may be the case.

    “Or maybe he just wants to change his apologetic material for Islam to a different web-site and domain. “

  17. Ken Temple says:

    ok, I looked around and see you didn’t totally transfer everything. I wrongly assumed that; but I suppose you will be posting the same type of material by the categories/pages you have.

    So, it looks like you will have lots of com box debates / discussions, if you allow them, in the future.

  18. Sam Shamoun says:

    Ken, not only is Williams back but he is back doing what he does best, namely, perverting the Scriptures and misrepresenting the Christian position to his own shame and humiliation. Case in point: http://bloggingtheology.org/2013/12/23/and-theyre-the-same-dude/

    He is also back posting articles which only prove that Allah is a false god and Muhammad a false prophet. Check out, for instance, his post on the triumph of Paul: http://bloggingtheology.org/2013/12/24/the-triumph-of-paulism/

    Again, because he is ignorant of Islamic teaching, he just proved that his deity is either impotent or a liar, and here is why. According to Q. 3:55 and 61:14, Allah swore to Jesus that his true believers would be triumphant over the disbelievers from the time of Jesus’ ascension UNTIL the day of resurrection, a promise that he supposedly fulfilled. However, if Williams’ stance on Paul is true then this means that Jesus’ followers were actually defeated and their message was soon replaced by Paul’s, whose teaching continues to spread and triumph all over the world till this very day. Therefore, this either makes Paul more powerful than Allah or proves that Allah is a deceptive, capricious deity who cannot be trusted to do anything he says. Way to go Williams for once again helping us prove that your religion is false and that your god is a deceiver!

    The good thing about Williams’ return is that this now means I can finish off the series of rebuttals that I had started, but which I postpone, in order to continue with documenting that he is an inconsistent Christophobe who has no shame using arguments inconsistently in his tirade against the Holy Bible, even when those same arguments can be turned around against to prove that Muhammad was a false prophet (which he was).

    Merry Christmas!

  19. Ken Temple says:

    Indeed . . . I also mentioned that issue above. Merry Christmas to you also Sam! and all others who see this.

    According to Q. 3:55 and 61:14, Allah swore to Jesus that his true believers would be triumphant over the disbelievers from the time of Jesus’ ascension UNTIL the day of resurrection, a promise that he supposedly fulfilled. However, if Williams’ stance on Paul is true then this means that Jesus’ followers were actually defeated and their message was soon replaced by Paul’s, whose teaching continues to spread and triumph all over the world till this very day. Therefore, this either makes Paul more powerful than Allah or proves that Allah is a deceptive, capricious deity who cannot be trusted to do anything he says. Way to go Williams for once again helping us prove that your religion is false and that your god is a deceiver!

    I mentioned this same issue above, in different words:

    It is much more “blind faith” to take one verse (Surah 4:157) and say that Allah decieved and tricked الله خیر المکارین – Allah is the best of tricksters/deceivers” (Surah 3:54-55; 8:30: 10:22) – that He tricked all of humanity for 600 + and 3/4 of humanity since around 632 AD and claim that Surah 4:157 agrees with history; but there is no way to prove or disprove it, since only that one verse 600 years later teaches it. That is blind faith, and against reason, against history, and no thinking intellectual could ever accept that, since it is such a clear unreasonable way of interpreting history.

    And Surah 3:52; 61:14; 5:111 show that the disciples of Jesus were true believers, trustworthy, helpers of God, and testified to the truth (Surah 3:53) and the Qur’an claims that the true believers became the uppermost/victorious/ superior/ above (فوق ) the unbelievers until the day of resurrection. (3:55, 61:14). This contradicts the Islamic claim that the apostle Paul and writers of the gospel of John and Luke and Matthew and Mark hijacked the proto-Islamic monotheists who, they claim, wrote some of what still survives in the gospels. Clement of Rome(96 AD), Ignatius(107 AD), Justin Martyr(150 AD), Tertullian(200 AD), Polycarp(150 AD), Irenaeus(180 AD), Cyprian(250), Origen (250), Clement of Alexandria(215 AD), Athanasius(about 300-373), Augustine(354-430 AD), etc. all testify of the same doctrines of the Deity of Christ, the eternal Sonship of Christ, the Trinity, throughout the 600 years leading up to Islam. So Islam is defeated by the Qur’an, history, and reason and logic. (برهان و منطق )

    Merry Christmas to all who see this –
    Luke 2:1-14
    Hebrews 11:6
    John 14:27
    Romans 5:1
    Romans 3:23-26
    Colossians 1:15-20

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      And a Merry Christmas to you too! BTW, I am sure you know full well that your Salafi ikhwaan condemn and censure any Muhammadan from congratulating the kufaar on their holy days. This is why you are my favorite Muhammadan apologist since you sure how to know to get everyone to to turn against you! 😉

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Correction: “sure how to know…” = “sure know how to…”

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      BTW Ken, here are some quotes from Islam’s earliest and greatest commentators and historians concerning the status of the Apostle Islam.

      here is what renowned Muslim expositor al-Qurtubi wrote in reference to Q. 61:14:

      It was said that THIS VERSE was revealed about the apostles of Jesus, may peace and blessing be upon him. Ibn Ishaq stated that of the apostles and disciples that Jesus sent (to preach) there were Peter AND PAUL who went to Rome; Andrew and Matthew who went to the land of the cannibals; Thomas who went to Babel in the eastern lands; Philip who went to Africa… Allah supported them (the apostles) with evidence so that they prevailed (thahirin) meaning they became the party with the upper hand. Just as it is said, “An object appeared on the wall” meaning it is clearly visible (alu-wat) on the wall. Allah, who is glorified and exalted, knows the truth better and to Him is the return and retreat. (http://quran.al-islam.com/Page.aspx?pageid=221&BookID=14&Page=552; capital emphasis ours)

      Al-Qurtubi isn’t the only one to cite this tradition since it is also found in Ibn Hisham’s recension of Ibn Ishaq’s sirah:

      “Yazid b. Abu Habib al-Misri told me that he found a document in which was a memorandum (T. the names) of those the apostle sent to the countries and kings of the Arabs and non-Arabs and what he said to his companions when he sent them. I sent it to Muhammad b. Shihab al-Zuhri (T. with a trusty countryman of his) and he recognized it. It contained the statement that the apostle went out to his companions and said: ‘God has sent me (Muhammad) to all men, so take a message from me, God have mercy on you. Do not hang back from me as the disciples hung back from Jesus son of Mary. They asked how they hung back and he said, ‘He called them to a task similar to that which I have called you. Those who had to go a short journey were pleased and accepted. Those who had a long journey before them were displeased and refused to go, and Jesus complained of them to God. (T. From that very night) every one of them was able to speak the language of the people to whom he was sent.’ (T. Jesus said, ‘This is a thing that God has determined that you should do, so go.’

      “Those whom Jesus son of Mary sent, both disciples and those who came after them, in the land were: Peter the disciple AND PAUL WITH HIM, (PAUL BELONGED TO THE FOLLOWERS AND WAS NOT A DISCIPLE) to Rome. Andrew and Matthew to the land of the cannibals; Thomas to the land of Babel, which is in the land of the east; Philip to Carthage and Africa; John to Ephesus the city of the young men of the cave; James to Jerusalem which is Aelia the city of the sanctuary; Bartholomew to Arabia which is the land of Hijaz; Simon to the land of Berbers; Judah who was not one of the disciples was put in place of Judas” (The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, with introduction and notes by Alfred Guillaume [Oxford University Press, Karachi, Tenth impression 1995], p. 653; capital emphasis ours)

      It is also cited by one of Islam’s greatest expositors and historians al-Tabari:

      “Among the apostles, and the followers who came after them were the Apostle Peter AND PAUL who was a follower and not an apostle; they went to Rome. Andrew and Matthew were sent to the country whose people are man-eaters, a land of blacks, we think; Thomas was sent to Babylonia in the east, Philip to Qayrawan (and) Carthage, that is, North Africa. John went to Ephesus, the city of the youths of the cave, and James to Jerusalem, that is, Aelia. Bartholomew was sent to Arabia, namely, the Hijaz; Simeon to the land of the Berbers in Africa. Judas was not then an apostle, so his place was taken by Ariobus. He filled in for Judas Iscariot after the latter had perpetrated his deed.” (The History of Al-Tabari: The Ancient Kingdoms, translated by Moshe Perlmann [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany 1987], Volume IV, p. 123; capital emphasis ours)

      The translator explains what al-Tabari meant that Paul was not an apostle:

      317. In Islamic terms the messengers or apostles pave the new path. Their work is continued by the tabi’un, the followers, members of the next generations, who lead the Faithful. (Ibid)

      Thus, al-Tabari even lists Paul as one of those martyred for the true faith!

      Enjoy and be blessed!

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      In fact, according to this Salafi you are now worse than a fornicator, an alcoholic and a murderer!

      Here is another clip for your viewing pleasure, one which shows that you have gone against the consensus of Islamic scholarship! In fact, according to this clip some of these same scholars would say you have now nullified your Islam by congratulating us on the birth of the Son of God!

      Here is one more for you to meditate on:

      Once again Williams, Merry Christmas! 😉

  20. Ken Temple says:

    Jesus said, “Truly, Truly I say to you, Unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins.” (John 8:24)

    By Him saying “I am” – He was making a direct claim to be Yahweh.

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      You seem to be confused here since Muhammad was the one who placed words in the mouth of Jesus and the prophets of God. In fact, THERE IS NO SERIOUS SCHOLAR IN THE WORLD who is not a Muhammadan who believes that the words attributed to Jesus were actually uttered by him. Especially the fairy-tale of Jesus speaking as an infant. So once again, WHY ARE YOU A MUHAMMADAN?

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Incomplete sentence: “who believes that the words attributed to Jesus…” = “who believes that the words attributed to Jesus iN THE QURAN…”

    • Ken Temple says:

      Response to Paul B. Williams claim that most NT scholars don’t believe John actually wrote the gospel of John.

      Most of the NT scholars today that you (Paul Bilal Williams) refer to are mostly non-believers who have an anti-supernatural bias against any miracles or God speaking through prophets or books or inspiring books. Given enough time and political freedom, the same kind of presuppositions will be brought against your Qur’an. But the Muslim world still jails and executes people who question the Qur’an with the same presuppositions and world view that you promote for your attacks against the Bible. That is inconsistent of you.

      Ibn Ishaq, an early Muslim and the first biographer of Muhammad, believed the apostle John wrote the Gospel according to John. (see link below of previous article)

      Also, the Qur’an itself claims that Muhammad can be found in both the OT and NT and in order to back up that verse in the Qur’an up (Surah 7:157), Muslims work hard at trying to argue that Muhamamd is in John 14 and 16. Since the Qur’an thought the previous Scriptures were uncorrupted – Surah 2:136; 5:46-48; 5:68; 10:94; 29:46, etc. and the Qur’an says the disciples of Jesus were believers and faithful, helpers of Allah, (3:52; 61:14; 5:111) ; then it follows that the Qur’an sincerely thought the NT and OT were true, and John wrote the fourth Gospel.
      https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2013/05/31/earliest-islamic-biographer-of-muhammads-life-affirms-that-john-the-apostle-of-jesus-and-eyewitness-of-the-crucifixion-and-resurrection-was-the-human-writer-of-the-fourth-gospel/

  21. Ken Temple says:

    Yes, I know what “tu quoque” is = Latin for “you also” or “you too” (make the same argument).

    Probably 100 % of even the unbelieving and atheists and skeptic scholars believe that it is established historical face that Jesus of Nazareth was crucified and died on a Roman cross, under the orders of Pontius Pilate, by the instigation of the Jewish leaders – so you and your Qur’an and your faith are on even shakier grounds by you incessant repetition of this argument.

    Dan Wallace reported that between 60-80% of the scholars who are members and attend the Society of Biblical Literature are unbelievers in the affects of Christ’s death (but they do believe that he was crucified and killed in history) and the resurrection. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2013/12/a-fish-rots-from-head-down.html

    You are still relying on mostly atheists and skeptics for your main arguments against the Bible.

    Yet, most of the evidence from an Islamic worldview is on ourside.
    We both believe in God, miracles, prophets, inspired books.
    The Qur’an confirms the Bible.
    The Qur’an confirms the disciples of Jesus as true believers and helpers of Allah.
    Ibn Ishaq clearly wrote that the apostle John wrote the gospel of John.
    The Qur’an mistakenly thought Muhammad was mentioned in the Bible. (Surah 7:157)
    Muslims try desperately to find him in John chapters 14 and 16.

    The evidence points to even early Islam believing that the gospel of John was written by the apostle John.

    • Ken Temple says:

      Yes, I am aware of those discussions; and I remember you citing F. F. Bruce and Richard Bauckham and E. P. Sanders (and probably Dunn and some others on this issue).

      As I recall, Bruce made it clear that it was the Holy Spirit leading the gospel writers into all the truth (John 14, 16) and the apostle John interpretation of Jesus’ words and deeds were historical and “God-breathed” and they were “a deep penentration into the mind of Christ” as to who He really is. They are not “made up” out of thin air or “put into the mouth of Jesus”, but reflect the true and right explanation of His statements, deeds, and nature of being.

  22. Ken Temple says:

    Yet, most of the evidence from an Islamic worldview is on ourside.
    We both believe in God, miracles, prophets, inspired books.
    The Qur’an confirms the Bible.
    The Qur’an confirms the disciples of Jesus as true believers and helpers of Allah.
    Ibn Ishaq clearly wrote that the apostle John wrote the gospel of John.
    The Qur’an mistakenly thought Muhammad was mentioned in the Bible. (Surah 7:157)
    Muslims try desperately to find him in John chapters 14 and 16.

    The evidence points to even early Islam believing that the gospel of John was written by the apostle John.

  23. Ken Temple says:

    “The Evangelist records words which were really spoken, actions which were really performed. His record of these words and actions includes their interpretation, in which their inward significance is disclosed and faith is quickened in Jesus as the Revealer of the Father and the Saviour of the world.”

    “The source of the Evangelist’s interpretation of Jesus’ words and actions is clearly indicated in his record. He reports Jesus’ promise that the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, would come to guide his disciples into all truth, especially by bringing to their remembrance all that Jesus had taught them and making it plain to them. ” (F. F. Bruce, from his commentary on John, p. 17 – I got this from your extended large quote from Bruce.) [you had it at your old blog.]

    As I wrote above, Bruce is saying that the Holy Spirit led John to write the way He wrote, penetrating into the mind of Christ, and explaining His true nature.

    More from your own extended quote that you provided. F. F. Bruce is saying it does not take divine inspiration to record historical fact; and he says that John is writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

    ” It does not take divine inspiration to provide a verbatim transcript; but to reproduce the words which were spirit and life to their first believing hearers in such a way that they continue to communicate their saving message and prove themselves to be spirit and life to men and women today, nineteen centuries after John wrote – that is the word of the Spirit of God. It is through the Spirit’s operation that, in William Temple’s words, ‘the mind of Jesus himself was what the Fourth Gospel disclosed’; and it is through the illumination granted by the same Spirit that one may still recognise in this Gospel the authentic voice of Jesus. (F. F. Bruce, The Gospel of John,1983, Eerdmans, pp. 15-17.)

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Ken, let me give you further proof that Bruce is spot on by quoting what John himself wrote. Note the promise of Jesus:

      “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, AND BRING TO YOUR REMEMBRANCE ALL THAT I SAID TO YOU.” John 14:26

      Now compare this with the following verses:

      “After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother and His brothers and His disciples; and they stayed there a few days. The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And He found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables; and to those who were selling the doves He said, “Take these things away; stop making My Father’s house a place of business.’ HIS DISCIPLES REMEMBERED that it was written, ‘Zeal for Your house will consume me.'” John 2:12-17

      “The Jews then said to Him, ‘What sign do You show us as your authority for doing these things?’ Jesus answered them, ‘Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’ The Jews then said, ‘It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?’ But He was speaking of the temple of His body. So when He was raised from the dead, HIS DISCIPLES REMEMBERED THAT HE SAID THIS; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken.” John 2:18-22

      Notice how John says that the disciples REMEMBERED and understood the things that Jesus did, in perfect fulfillment of Jesus’ promise that the Holy Spirit would remind and enable his followers to understand his words and deeds.

      This last one is interesting:

      “On the next day the large crowd who had come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet Him, and began to shout, ‘Hosanna! Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord, even the King of Israel.’ Jesus, finding a young donkey, sat on it; as it is written, ‘Fear not, daughter of Zion; behold, your King is coming, seated on a donkey’s colt.’ These things His disciples did not understand at the first; BUT WHEN JESUS WAS GLORIFIED, THEN THEY REMEMBERED that these things were written of Him, and that they had done these things to Him.” John 12:12-16

      The reason why the disciples which included John only recalled and understood the implication of this event after Jesus was glorified is because that is the time when they received the Holy Spirit who then reminded them of all these things!

      “‘He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, “From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.”‘ But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; FOR THE SPIRIT WAS NOT YET GIVEN, BECAUSE JESUS WAS NOT YET GLORIFIED.” John 7:38-39

      So Bruce is spot on the money since these verses affirm that John wrote down exactly what the Holy Spirit told him to write as he reminded him and brought out the deeper meanings and implications of the blessed words of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.

      It is evidence like this that causes me to stand in awe of God’s true Word!

      Hope this helps. Lord bless you bro.

      • Ken Temple says:

        Sam – Those are great verses for this issue; I was very blessed by seeing them and being reminded of them. They show that Jesus did actually say those things in His earthly ministry; but the disciples were “dull of hearing” (Luke 24:25-27). The Holy Spirit later caused them to remember all that Jesus had spoken. Excellent!

        Paul W. – those verses about the Holy Spirit bringing to rememberance are infallible; but F. F. Bruce is not. (on the issue of Shakespeare and Julius Caesar) Most of what Bruce said in the extended quote is correct and agrees with the principles of the Holy Spirit bringing to rememberance the words of Jesus that He spoke.

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Williams, have a very merry Christmas!

      http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2013/12/the-blessed-virgin-mary-response-to.html

      I notice that you are back to removing my comments from your site again. But don’t worry, you won’t have much of a site left once, Lord Jesus willing, my latest post on you comes out proving that you have become an apostate of Islam. I am sure the Muslims are going to love what I have in store for you!

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Williams, keep deluding yourself in order to justify your reluctance to address my arguments due to your inability to formulate a consistent and coherent response since you know what I end up doing to your feeble replies by the grace of the Lord Jesus, your God and Muhammad’s judge.

      And believe me, after my article gets posted where I will document for the whole Muslim umma to see how you wished us a Merry Christmas in clear violation of the teachings of Islam, no Muslim will ever want to be associated with you again. In fact, you may need to find some protection in light of how crazy and murderous some of your ikhwaan happen to be, all thanks to Muhammad.

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Williams, and Judas kissed Jesus and betrayed him for thirty pieces of silver. Your Christmas blessing is no different since you mock, ridicule, blaspheme and attack the very meaning of Christmas out of an extreme venom and hatred for the true Christ and those who love him through your articles, and then expect us to be all chummy when congratulate us on Christmas! And you say I have mental issues.

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Here is my latest post on Paul Bilal Williams where I quote his words to show how he has now placed himself outside of the fold of Islam due to certain statements he made. In so doing, Williams will now be labeled an apostate by his fellow Muslims. So read it and pass it on to others: http://badmanna.wordpress.com/2013/12/27/paul-williams-apostasizes-from-islam-sort-of/

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Brother Ken, I saw your comment on William’s post concerning Dunn. You had written:

      “I am surprised at the inaccuracy of Dunn’s statement here, as all Trinitarians agree that the Son is not the Father(that’s Monarchianism / Modalism) ; however, the Father is Yahweh and the Son is the Yahweh by nature sharing in the same substance/essence (all the verses below)and the Holy Spirit is Yahweh. (That is not Monarchianism/Modalism) For such a lauded scholar, Dunn made a really elementary mistake…

      “The New Testament writers clearly say that Jesus is God. John 1:1-5, 1:14-18; 5:17-18; 8:24; 10:27-38; 20:28; 18:1-6; 19:1-7; Philippians 2:5-8; Colossians 1:15-20; Hebrews 1:3, 6, 8; Matthew 2:1-12 (The Magi worshiped Jesus and only God is worthy of Worship); Matthew 14:33, Romans 9:5, Luke 1:34-35; and there are many others.”

      I think Dunn’s position is a little more nuanced than this since he doesn’t deny that Jesus was worshiped as God in some sense, rather he denies that the first Christians identified him as Yahweh, and the very quote from him explains why:

      “He concludes, ‘The New Testament writers are really quite careful at this point. Jesus is not the God of Israel. He is not the Father. He is not Yahweh. An identification of Jesus with and as Yahweh was an early attempt to resolve the tensions indicated above; it was labelled ‘Modalism’, a form of ‘Monarchianism’ (the one God operating first as Father then as Son) and accounted a heresy.’ pp 141-142.”

      It is clear that for Dunn Yahweh = Father, and therefore to say that Jesus is Yahweh is to say that he is the Father. Therefore, it’s not so much that Dunn is denying the Deity of Christ, but rather denying that the name Yahweh refers to anyone other than the Father. However, like you, I disagree with him since the NT is clear that the name Yahweh can be applied to either the Father or the Son without this making them one and the same Person.

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Brother Ken, here is another quote from Dunn which demonstrates that Williams hasn’t responsibly dealt with Dunn, but has misrepresented him by citing him out of context as well as quite selectively. Note what he says about monotheism:

      “A second point to be noted takes up the complementary issue of whether worship of Jesus constitutes a denial of Christianity’s claim to be a monotheistic religion. As noted at the beginning of the Introduction, such a critique of Christian worship is made by other great monotheistic faiths, Judaism and Islam. But it has become increasingly clear from the inquiry that the understanding of God as one, of the unity of God, is not so readily defined as such critiques generally assume. The unity or oneness of God is not a straightforward mathematical unity. Only a little acquaintance with mathematics, from ancient times until the present, will be sufficient to remind us that the concept of number is more complex than at first seems likely, once we move on from merely counting apples and oranges or pennies and cents. We should recall, for example, that when Paul talks of the body of Christ, he insists that the body is one, the body is a unity but he insists equally that the one body is made up of many diverse members. Oneness is not necessarily an entity singular in all the elements that make it one, that form its oneness. Alternatively, a singular entity may be too big or complex (the cosmos) to be fully comprehended in its singularity. All that can be perceived are different aspects, aspect that do not easily cohere into one (in fundamental physics no one has yet been able to produce a unified field theory); but the inadequacies of human conceptualization do not constitute a denial of the singularity of the entity. So too, the oneness of God should not be assumed to be a narrowly defined mathematical unity. From earliest days in Israel’s conceptuality of the oneness of God there was also recognized a diversity in the way God has been perceived or has made himself known. The one God made himself known in or through angelic form, as Spirit, as Wisdom, as Word, without detracting from his otherness, his transcendence, his being as the one and only God. So definitions of monotheism, of God’s oneness, should not be so tightly drawn as to exclude such Hebrew Bible/Old Testament and early Jewish reflection on the subject. And Christianity can make the case that its evaluation of Jesus begins with that reflection and develops from it, but does so without calling in question that monotheism whose complex reality such reflection was attempting to articulate, however inadequately, and however open to misinterpretation of the monotheism espoused.” (Ibid., pp. 148-149)

      Note his comment about Islam and how the OT teaching on God’s unit is much more complex than simply saying he is one. So much for Williams appeal to Dunn.

      BTW, I highly recommend you get this book and read it since it contains a lot of fantastic stuff.

      • Ken Temple says:

        An excellent find that refutes Williams – very good! Thank you Sam! Looks like I will have to get that book also. Wish I had time to interact more right now; later.

  24. Pingback: Paul Williams Apostasizes from Islam… Sort of! | Badmanna's Blog

  25. Ken Temple says:

    Dunn seems to not get the exact definition of what Monarchianism / Modalism / Sabellianism was.
    “in some sense” – that is also a favorite phrase of Mike Licona.
    Thanks for your hard work in studying Dunn; and refuting Paul Williams.

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Brother Ken, it is only natural for Dunn to assume that equating Jesus would be modalism seeing that he thinks that Yahweh = Father. Therefore, to him the statement “Jesus is Yahweh” means the exact same thing as saying Jesus is the Father. This is where he is mistaken since the name Yahweh is not limited to the Father.

      • Sam Shamoun says:

        Correction. “that equating Jesus” = “that equating Jesus with Yahweh.”

      • Sam Shamoun says:

        Williams, let me show you why you have no business discussing theology, whether Islam or Christianity. Here is a quote from one of the authors whose book you recommended proving that Yahweh is not limited to the Father:

        “As we saw in the previous chapter, Paul says that it was Christ, and not the human Jesus, who existed from the beginning of creation in the ‘form of God’ but then subsequently emptied himself, being born in the likeness of a mortal human being (Philippians 2:6-7). Paul makes the rather startling assertion that this cosmic Christ, ages before he was born as a human being, HAD MANIFESTED HIMSELF AS YAHWEH, THE GOD OF ISRAEL. He refers particularly to the time of Moses, when the Israelites ‘saw’ Yahweh as a mysterious cloud-fire: ‘And Yahweh went before them by day in a pillar of cloud, to lead them the way, and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light, that they might go by day and by night’ (Exodus 13:21).

        “Paul says that the God who led the Israelites through the Red Sea and in their desert wanderings for forty years, the one they called the Rock, WAS CHRIST (1 Corinthians 10:4; Deuteronomy 32:4, 18). He does not explain the particulars of his view, but the idea that there was AN ‘UPPER’ YAHWEH, who remains unseen, sometimes called ‘God called Most High,’ as well as A ‘LOWER’ MANIFESTATION OF THAT SAME GOD, CALLED THE ‘MESSENGER YAHWEH,’ who appears from time to time in human history in a visible manner on earth, WAS COMMON IN VARIOUS FORMS OF JUDAISM OF PAUL’S TIME. This lower Yahweh is not flesh and blood, even though in some of the stories he seems to ‘materialize,’ but when he appears he is then ‘taken up’ or in one case disappears in a flame of fire.

        “This is very much akin to the Greek notion of the ineffable God manifest in the lower world as the ‘Word’ or Logos, which was an integral part of Platonic and Stoic cosmology. The Logos idea was appropriated by the Jewish philosopher Philo, a contemporary of Paul, to deal with passages in the Hebrew Bible THAT SEEM TO REFER TO TWO YAHWEHS, AN UPPER AND A LOWER. In the New Testament the Gospel of John adopts the Logos idea wholesale, but makes the shocking assertion that ‘the Logos became flesh,’ referring to the birth of Jesus (John 1:1, 14). This is akin to Paul’s view of the preexistent Christ. In the form of God, who emptied himself and was born of a woman.

        “Paul says little more about the preexistent Christ as a manifestation of Yahweh other than that he was present in the days of Moses. Paul is focused entirely on the other end of history, the termination of what he calls ‘this present evil age’ (Galatians 1:14 [sic]). What Jesus represents to Paul is one thing and one thing only–the cosmic, preexistent Christ, being ‘born of a woman,’ as a flesh-and-blood mortal human being now transformed to a life-giving Spirit. This is what drove Paul and excited him most. For him it explained the Genesis creation itself and accounted for all the subsequent ‘blood, sweat, and tears’ of the human story. Humans were created to become Gods! ‘This slight, momentary affliction’ was preparing them for an ‘eternal weight of glory beyond all comparison’ (2 Corinthians 4:17).

        “In the Hebrew Bible, Yahweh, the One God of Israel, had declared: ‘Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God and there is no other … To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear’ (Isaiah 45:22-23). Paul quotes this precise phrase from Isaiah but now significantly adds: ‘At the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on the earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father’ (Philippians 2:10-11). Christ as the newly exalted Lord of the cosmos IS THE FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT OF YAHWEH.” (James D. Tabor, Paul and Jesus: How the Apostle Transformed Christianity [Simon & Schuster, New York, NY 2012], Six. A Mystical Union, pp. 133-135; capital emphasis ours)

        And:

        7. The literal term in Hebrew, “messenger Yahweh,” is usually translated as “the angel of Yahweh” but this is not the best choice for English since “angel” in English has its own set of connotations quite different from Hebrew. In Hebrew the phrase used, malak Yahweh, MEANS A MANIFESTATION OF YAHWEH and this figure speaks and acts as Yahweh in the first person, appearing and departing, sometimes in a flame of fire (see Genesis 16:10; 18:33; 22:11; Exodus 3:2; Judges 13:20). There are a few passages where these “two Yahwehs” are mentioned in a single verse: “Then Yahweh (below) rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh (above) from heaven” (Genesis 19:24). (Ibid, p. 257; capital emphasis ours)

        As Tabor correctly, noted the Hebrew Bible refers to two distinct entities as Yahweh, the upper one the lower one who appears visible and who is referred to as the Messenger of Yahweh. He also correctly points out that Paul (in fact the NT as a whole) identifies Jesus as the visible Yahweh!

        More evidence showing why you should go back into hibernation in my next post.

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Now as far as Jesus being identified as Yahweh, that is found all over the place.

      For instance, all 4 Gospels identify John the Baptist as the voice of Isaiah 40:3 that cries out in the wilderness as he announced the coming of Yahweh God to his people. Here is that prophecy in context:

      “The voice of one who calls out, ‘Prepare the way OF YAHWEH in the wilderness! Make a level highway in the desert FOR OUR GOD. Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low. The uneven shall be made level, and the rough places a plain. YAHWEH’S GLORY SHALL BE REVEALED, AND ALL FLESH SHALL SEE IT TOGETHER; for the mouth of Yahweh has spoken it.’… You who tell good news to Zion, go up on a high mountain. You who tell good news to Jerusalem, lift up your voice with strength. Lift it up. Don’t be afraid. Say to the cities of Judah, ‘BEHOLD, YOUR GOD!’ Behold, THE LORD YAHWEH WILL COME AS A MIGHTY ONE, and his arm will rule for him. Behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him. He will feed his flock like a shepherd. He will gather the lambs in his arm, and carry them in his bosom. He will gently lead those who have their young.” Isaiah 40:3-5, 9-11

      And all 4 Gospels agree that the One whom John was sent ahead of to prepare his way is Jesus Christ (cf. Mark 1:1-8; Matthew 3:1-4, 11-17; Luke 3:1-6, 15-17; John 1:5-8, 14-15, 26-36; 3:; Acts 19:4).

      Thus, since John is the voice of Isaiah 40 who prepares the people for the coming of Yahweh, and since Jesus is the One whom John prepared the way for, this means that Jesus is Yahweh God Incarnate according to all 4 Gospels!

      More evidence to come in the next post.

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Corrections to my comments concerning the reference from Tabor. This,

      As Tabor correctly, noted the Hebrew Bible refers to two distinct entities as Yahweh, the upper one the lower one who appears visible and who is referred to as the Messenger of Yahweh. He also correctly points out that Paul (in fact the NT as a whole) identifies Jesus as the visible Yahweh!”

      Should have read this way:

      As Tabor correctly noted, the Hebrew Bible refers to two distinct entities as Yahweh, an upper one and a lower one who appears visibly on earth, and who is referred to as the Messenger of Yahweh. He also correctly points out that Paul (in fact the NT as a whole) identifies Jesus as this visible Yahweh!

  26. Sam Shamoun says:

    This is the third installment addressing Williams’ ignorance and distortion of the Holy Bible, specifically as it relates to Jesus being called and identified as Yahweh.

    In the following examples, OT texts referring to Yahweh are applied to Jesus Christ:

    “If you confess with your mouth, ‘JESUS IS LORD,’ and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. One believes with the heart, resulting in righteousness, and one confesses with the mouth, resulting in salvation. Now the Scripture says, Everyone who believes on Him will not be put to shame, for there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, since the same Lord of all is rich to all who call on Him. For everyone WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED.” Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

    Here Paul quotes Joel 2:32, which is a passage about calling on the name of Yahweh in order to be saved,

    “Then everyone WHO CALLS ON THE NAME OF YAHWEH WILL BE SAVED, for there will be an escape for those on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, as the Lord promised, among the survivors the Lord calls.” HCSB

    And applies it to Christ!

    In other words, Jesus is the Yahweh whose name a person must call upon in order to be saved!

    This is a fact which even Dunn admits since this is what he had to say concerning Paul’s quotation from Joel 2:32 (3:5 in the Greek version) in Romans 10:13:

    More striking, however, is the fact that it is the Lord Jesus who is ‘called upon’ on several occasions.34 And even more striking is the fact that believers can be denoted simply as ‘those who call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ’ (1 Cor. 1.2).35 The defining feature of these early Christians (‘those who call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ’ is used almost as a definition, equivalent to ‘Christians’) marked them out from others who ‘called upon (the name of)’ some other deity or heavenly being.36 MOREOVER, IN A STILL MORE STRIKING PASSAGE, PAUL REFERS TO JOEL 3.5 (in the Septuagint) TO JESUS: ‘everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved’ (Rom. 10.13)… Here we need simply note that the same language, CALLING UPON A DEITY, CALLING UPON THE LORD GOD, IS USED OF CHRIST, and as a distinguishing characteristic OF THE EARLIEST BELIEVERS.”

    34 Acts 7.59 (Stephen); Rom. 10:12, 14; 2 Tim. 2:22.

    35 Acts 9.14, 21; 22.16; 2 Tim. 2.22

    36 Both Hurtado (Origins 78-9; Lord Jesus Christ 198-9) and Bauckham (Jesus and the God of Israel 129-30) see these texts (1 Cor. 1.2; etc.) as evidence of ‘cultic devotion’ rendered to Jesus from ‘very early moments of the Christian movement’. In contrast, P. M. Case, ‘Monotheism, Worship and Christological Development in the Pauline Churches’, in Newman, et al. (eds), Jewish Roots 214-33, infers that what Paul had in mind was ‘primarily the use of acclamations and confessions such as maranatha and kyrios Iesous’ (225). Hurtado adds the use of Jesus’ name in baptism and healings/exorcisms as supporting evidence for his proposal ‘that the early Christian use of Jesus’ name represents a novel adaptation of [the] Jewish monotheistic concern [to maintain the uniqueness of the one God]’ (200-6; here 204). He comments similarly on 1 Cor. 5.1-5, that the disciplinary action referred to there ‘likely included a ritual invocation of Jesus’ name and power to effect it. Jesus’ cultic presence and power clearly operate here in the manner we otherwise associate with a god’ (Origins 80). (id the First Christians Worship Jesus? The New Testament Evidence [Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge Publishing, UK /Westminster John Knox Press, USA 2010], 1. The language of worship, 1.2 Other Vocabulary, p. 16; capital emphasis ours)

    And:

    “Above all, however, we should recall what we noted in Chapter 1 regarding the use of epikaleisthai (‘to call upon’) in relation to Jesus… Nor should we forget the characterization of Christians as ‘those who call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ’ (1 Cor. 1.2). To call upon Jesus (in prayer) was evidently a defining, and distinguishing feature of EARLIEST Christian worship…” (Ibid., 2. The practice of worship, 2.1 Prayer, p. 36; capital emphasis ours)

    Here is another example:

    “but TO THE SON: YOUR THRONE, GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER, and the scepter of Your kingdom is a scepter of justice. You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; this is why God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of joy rather than Your companions. And: In the beginning, LORD [the Son], YOU ESTABLISHED THE EARTH, and the heavens ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS; they will perish, BUT YOU REMAIN. They will all wear out like clothing; YOU WILL ROLL THEM UP like a cloak, and they will be changed like a robe. BUT YOU ARE THE SAME, AND YOUR YEARS WILL NEVER END.” Hebrews 1:8-12 HCSB

    In vv. 10-12, the author has taken the words of Psalm 102:25-27 which describe Yahweh as the Immutable Creator and Sustainer of all creation,

    “so that they might declare THE NAME OF YAHWEH in Zion and His praise in Jerusalem, when peoples and kingdoms are assembled to serve the Lord. He has broken my strength in midcourse; He has shortened my days. I say: ‘MY GOD, do not take me in the middle of my life! Your years continue through all generations. Long ago You established the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands. They will perish, but You will endure; all of them will wear out like clothing. You will change them like a garment, and they will pass away. But You are the same, and Your years will never end.” Psalm 102:21-27 HCSB

    And has the Father applying it to the Son!

    Thus, the Father addresses Jesus as Yahweh and praises him for creating and sustaining the entire creation!

    Anyway, I will end with this for now. Lord willing, I will come back sometime later and quote more examples where Jesus is expressly identified as Yahweh, even though he is not the Father.

  27. stevecleary says:

    Paul, if you believe that “the historical evidence suggests Jesus did not actually speak the words attributed to him in ‘John’. They were put into his mouth by the anonymous author of the Fourth Gospel.”, does this include those verses which Muslims rely upon to assert that Muhammed is found in John’s gospel such as in John 14?

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Williams, here is what I wrote concerning your recent “reply” to Rogers which you didn’t publish:

      BEGIN
      Williams, thank you for providing further proof that you are an inconsistent Christophobe who doesn’t care about being consistent or truthful, since integrity doesn’t matter to you as it didn’t matter to Muhammad. You just praised Kaleef for making good points denying that the I AM sayings of John prove that Jesus is God, EVEN THOUGH IN YOUR ARTICLE YOU BASICALLY SCOLDED YOUR FELLOW MUSLIMS AND UNITARIANS FOR DENYING THAT THE IAM SAYINGS OF JOHN POINT TO JESUS’ DIVINITY! “Rogers correctly states that I view the I AM statements in John as a claim to divinity and I disagree with my Muslim friends (and Christian unitarians) who unconvincingly in my view deny that Jesus is portrayed as God (in some sense) in John. But John’s christology is John’s – and not that of the historical Jesus, in my view.” Yep, can’t wait for the response to your trash and butchering of God’s Word to come out to your shame and humiliation.
      END

      BTW, get ready for Roger’s response which is only going to further expose your outright inconsistency, dishonesty and utter hate for the Lord Jesus, your God and Muhammad’s Judge. It doesn’t help your case that all you did was simply repost older material as part of your reply, most of which I have already refuted in our Williams’ rebuttal section by the grace of the Lord Jesus, Muhammad’s Creator and Lord.

      So make sure to enjoy reading what we are about to unleash on you. I know everyone else will!

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Here you go again displaying your dishonest and lack of integrity:

      BEGIN
      Paul Williams
      January 1, 2014 • 1:51 pm
      Jesus prayed. You believe Jesus was Yahweh. Ergo Jesus was praying to himself.

      What a bizarre religion!
      END

      You know full well what the actual position is but still, like your prophet did before you, you can’t help but deliberately misrepresent it. The position which you once claimed to have believed is that Jesus is God in essence and distinct from God the Father. Therefore, Jesus is praying to God the FATHER, not himself.

      However, speaking of a bizarre religion, you don’t get anymore bizarre than your sterile impotent monad praying to himself!

      They are those on whom are the prayers (salawatun) from their Lord and mercy (rahmatun), and it is they who are the guided-ones. S. 2:157

      He it is who prays (yusallee) for you and His angels too, to bring you forth out of the darkness into the light, for He is merciful to the believers. S. 33:43 Palmer

      Verily, God and His angels pray (yusalloona) for the prophet. O ye who believe! pray for him (salloo) and salute him with a salutation! S. 33:56 Palmer

      The hadith reports also mention Allah praying for people:

      1387. Abu Umama reported that the Messenger of Allah said, “Allah AND His angels AND the people of the heavens AND the earth, EVEN the ants in their rocks AND the fish, PRAY for blessings on those who teach people good.” [at-Tirmidhi] (Aisha Bewley, Riyad as-Salihin (The Meadows of the Righteous), Book of Knowledge, 241. Chapter: the excellence of knowledge; bold, capital and italic emphasis ours)

      And here is an article where I discuss this issue more in-depth and refute the lame attempt by your fellow Muhammadan-turned apostate-turned Muhammadan-turned apostate again-turned Muhammadan one more time Ibn Unaware: http://answering-islam.org/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/ibnanwar/allah_prays.html

      So perhaps you can be so kind and answer my questions. To whom does your deity pray when he joins the angels in praying for Muhammad and so-called believers? Since the angels are obviously praying to Allah does this mean that Allah is also praying to himself?

      Bizarre indeed!

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      “your dishonest”= your dishonesty.

    • stevecleary says:

      Paul, firstly a happy 2014 AD to you. As a matter of interest, do you agree with your Muslim brothers and sisters, that reference to Muhammed is found in John’s gospel, specifically John 14 and if so where, bearing in mind that the words of Jesus are nowhere found in this gospel according to your view?

  28. stevecleary says:

    Paul, did you not say: “There is virtual unanimity in academia on this point:- the historical evidence suggests Jesus did not actually speak the words attributed to him in ‘John’. They were put into his mouth by the anonymous author of the Fourth Gospel. The only group that DOES believe Jesus actually said these words are fundamentalists like you Ken. It is a polite understatement to say your view has no scholarly credibility.” Given these words, do you not agree that one would reach the reasonable conclusion that you would hold this position personally? If not, which parts of John’s gospel do you believe to be credible and authentic in regard to the words of Jesus Himself and which are not? If my conclusion is not reasonable, I apologise for putting words into your mouth and would ask the same questions.

  29. Pingback: What happened to Paul Bilal Williams? | apologeticsandagape

Comments are closed.