The Qur’an calls Jesus “a Word from God” کلمه / λογος

See Addendum and Clarification at the end. I had originally entitled it “the Word”, but the definite article in Arabic is not in the text of the Qur’an. I should have titled it, “The Qur’an calls Jesus “a Word from God”. کلمه / λογος . Now corrected.

“In the beginning was the Word (logos/ λογος = کلمه – kalameh, or kalima – Arabic and Farsi)

and the word was with God,

and the Word was God.” John 1:1

When the Qur’an also calls Jesus “the Word” کلمه [correction: “a word” کلمه (Surah 3:39; 3:45; 4:171) – Muhammad and the Arabs got this saying from the Christians in the areas of Jordan, Syria, Palestine, Najran (Yemen area), but did not realize what they were saying. The original meaning 500-600 years earlier (in the NT and the orthodox interpretations in 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th centuries, all before Islam) earlier was that Jesus has the same nature as God the Father – logos = “the mind that is in action and expresses itself in words”. Same nature, same substance, same essence = “homo-ousias”. (early church centuries, The Creeds, Nicean Creed, Constantinople, Chalcedon, Athanasian Creed)

The logos of God is the mind of God that it in motion and communicates in words. Is Allah dumb? no. Istaqfr’allah. استغفرالله (“I seek the forgiveness of Allah”, for saying such a thing.) He (God, Allah) is always thinking and speaking. Allah’s word is eternal; since His word is eternally with Him, and Jesus is “the Word”; then Jesus is God, by substance/nature/essence. And since the Qur’an confirms the NT as the true Injeel (Surah 3:3; 5:47; 5:68; 10:94), Muslims have a major problem explaining their internal contradictions.

What about the Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that the final phrase should be translated “the Word was a god” ?

See also here. (A Muslim agrees with the Greek Grammar of John 1:1)

and

here. (John 1:1 – ” . . . and the Word was God.”)

Addendum and Clarification: February 11

Some Muslims asked about the definite article, but I originally thought they were asking about the definite article issue in John 1:1 – about the last phrase where the definite article (the ‘ο) with Theos / θεος is not there, which is why Jehovah’s Witnesses wrongly translate it “a god”. But the issue of the Greek grammar is about the predicate nominative and the position of the words in Greek grammar. (see the 2 articles above which I link to which shows “God” is the proper translation, rather than “a god”; “The Word was God”, not “the word was a god”. The lack of definite article there shows that Jesus as the Word is God by nature/substance/essence. If the article was there, it would have been teaching that The Word is the Father, and that is wrong and heresy; the heresy of Modalism. “with God” shows that the Son existed with the Father from eternity past (2 persons of the 3 person Trinity), and “the Word was God” shows that Jesus is the same nature / substance / essence / quality as God.

I realize I probably should have written “a Word” in the title and article – “The Qur’an calls Jesus “a Word from Allah”, because the definite article (ال) in Arabic is not there. It is true that the text does not have the Al / ال definite article, as in “Al-Kalameh” الکلمه

The three times the Qur’an calls Jesus “kalameh” or “kalima” کلمه are:

Surah 3:39 – about John the Baptist (Yahya – یحیی ) being sent to “confirm a word from Allah”

“So the angels called him while he was standing in prayer in the chamber, “Indeed, Allah gives you good tidings of John, confirming a word from Allah and [who will be] honorable, abstaining [from women], and a prophet from among the righteous.” 

Saheeh International

بیحیی مصدقا بکلمه من الله

“of John the Baptizer, confirming a word from Allah”

Surah 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]. 

Saheeh International

بکلمه منه

of a word from Him = a word from Allah

Surah 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 [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. ” Surah 4:171

Saheeh International

The Saheeh International does an interpretive translation by “a soul [created at a command] from Him”. “soul” would be Nafs / نفس

The literal meaning is “a spirit from Him” – “a spirit from Allah”

The Pickthall and Yusuf Ali translations are more accurate on that phrase, “and a spirit from Him”

و روح منه

O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which He conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not “Three” – Cease! (it is) better for you! – Allah is only One Allah. Far is it removed from His Transcendent Majesty that He should have a son. His is all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender. Pickthall

O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not “Trinity”: desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs. 

Yusuf Ali

و کلمته

and His Word

و روح منه

“and a spirit from Him”

The fact that the Qur’an calls Jesus “a word from Allah” and “a spirit from Him” points to the unique nature of Jesus.

Surah 4:171 also denies that Jesus is the Son of God and it denies His Deity and it asserts that He is only a messenger (apostle, prophet, man) and it also seeks to deny the doctrine of the Trinity. “Say not three” is more accurate than “say not Trinity”.

Still, the wording of “a word from Allah” and “a spirit from Allah” points to the fact that the Qur’an got some of its information from the early centuries of Christianity, because the gospel of John (John 1:1, 1:14; and 1 John 1:1, and Revelation 19:13) called Jesus “The Word” around 80-90 AD, and in all the centuries following, before Islam, 600 years, all Christians called Jesus “The Word”. And because Islam and the Qur’an also teach that Jesus was born of the virgin Mary, and had no earthly father, the Qur’an unknowingly was saying something about His unique nature – implying that Jesus is the Word of God, who became flesh, by the combination of “a word from God” and “a spirit from God” and “virgin born”, Islam unwittingly and unknowingly was affirming Christian doctrine, while at the same time, trying to deny it. But because Mohammad and the Arabs were relying on the Jews and Christians on where they got their information about the previous Scriptures, they could not help but unknowingly affirm certain truths that they were trying to deny.

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 Apologetics, Islam, John 1:1, Muslims. Bookmark the permalink.

66 Responses to The Qur’an calls Jesus “a Word from God” کلمه / λογος

  1. The Expert says:

    “Still, the wording of “a word from Allah” and “a spirit from Allah” points to the fact that the Qur’an got some of its information from the early centuries of Christianity, because the gospel of John (John 1:1, 1:14; and 1 John 1:1, and Revelation 19:13) ”

    Or simply it confirms our position on it ergo Jesus is “a word” as any of us are

    “(And remember) when the angels) i.e. Gabriel (said: O Mary! Allah giveth you glad tidings of a Word from Him) of a son who shall come into being by means of a Word from Allah, (whose name is the Messiah) because he travels from one country to another; it is also said: the Messiah means the king, (Jesus, son of Mary, illustrious in the world) he has standing and position amidst people in the life of this world (and the Hereafter) he has standing and position with Allah, (and one of those brought near) unto Allah in the Garden of Eden. (Ibn Abbaas, Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs, Commentary on Surah 3:45, Source)”

    “And Jesus was named ‘word’ because it was with the word of Allah Almighty that was ‘Be’ (see Surah 3:59) that he was created, for he was without a Father. (Abu ‘Abdullah Al-Qurtubi, Tasfir al Jami’ li-ahkam al-Qur’an, Commentary on Surah 3:45, Source)”

    And also, Theos is indefinite at 1:1c, hope we can discuss further

    • Ken Temple says:

      Read the two articles I linked to in my article about the third clause of John 1:1 (c). and the Word was God. The issue there is what is called in grammar, the Predicate Nominative, and word order.

    • Ken Temple says:

      The articles I linked to in my post about John 1:1c:

      A Muslim agrees with Greek Grammar of John 1:1 that the traditional interpretation is right
      https://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2012/01/muslim-agrees-with-greek-of-john-11.html

      and
      John 1:1 – “. . . and the Word was God”
      https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2017/11/13/john-11-and-the-word-was-god/

    • Ken Temple says:

      Jesus is the only person who is called “Word”, “Word of God. λογος / کلمه الله

      • The Expert says:

        Doesn’t imply he’s necessary the only one like I demonstrated, for example Abraham has the title “Khalil Allah”, the title isn’t acribed to other prophets but logically that doesn’t mean they aren’t

      • Ken Temple says:

        But who else is specifically called “a word of God” and “a spirit from God” ?

        Points to His nature, the virgin birth – that God is Jesus Father and Jesus nature is the same nature as the Father. (homo-ousias = same substance / essence)

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Ken Temple

        First the claim of the word and spirit of Allah(S.W.T) being separate “persons” is ridiculous and I don’t believe wood has adequately shown that they have the traits of “personhood.”

        Next the issue of Isa(a.s) creating in a “similar” manner to Allah(S.W.T) can be refuted by simply looking at Jewish sources and even the Christian bible. In the Talmud it is stated-

        אמר רבא אי בעו צדיקי ברו עלמא שנאמר כי עונותיכם היו מבדילים וגו’ Rava says: If the righteous wish to do so, they can create a world, as it is stated: “But your iniquities have separated between you and your God.” In other words, there is no distinction between God and a righteous person who has no sins, and just as God created the world, so can the righteous.

        רבא ברא גברא שדריה לקמיה דר’ זירא הוה קא משתעי בהדיה ולא הוה קא מהדר ליה אמר ליה מן חבריא את הדר לעפריך
        Indeed, Rava created a man, a golem, using forces of sanctity. Rava sent his creation before Rabbi Zeira. Rabbi Zeira would speak to him but he would not reply. Rabbi Zeira said to him: You were created by one of the members of the group, one of the Sages. Return to your dust.

        רב חנינא ורב אושעיא הוו יתבי כל מעלי שבתא ועסקי בספר יצירה ומיברו להו עיגלא תילתא ואכלי ליה
        The Gemara relates another fact substantiating the statement that the righteous could create a world if they so desired: Rav Ḥanina and Rav Oshaya would sit every Shabbat eve and engage in the study of Sefer Yetzira, and a third-born calf [igla tilta] would be created for them, and they would eat it in honor of Shabbat.

        https://www.sefaria.org/Sanhedrin.65b.16?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en

        the reference to studying Sefer Yetzirah, or Book of Creation is also important. Sefer Yetzirah is said to be the divine revelation given to Abraham(a.s) about how the universe was created. In other words by studying How God creates the rabbi’s were able to make golems (men and even calf) as a symbol of them being learned in scripture and the nature of God.

        This shows what Isa(a.s) was doing. proving his prophethood by preforming a miracle that only someone said to have knowledge of scripture and God could do. After all it is known that prophets are given miracles according to their culture. for more information you can see these links

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sefer_Yetzirah
        https://folklore.livejournal.com/36003.html
        https://www.aish.com/atr/Kabbalah-Versus-Magic.html  https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/aoxp39/golems_are_they_considered_part_of_the_jewish/
        https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/2v8jup/seeking_info_on_golem/  https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/4117874/jewish/10-Facts-About-the-Maharal-Every-Jew-Should-Know.htm
        https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/4285513/jewish/From-Golems-to-AI.htm
        I should add that while some interpret the golems as purely metaphor I have personally contacted Rabbi’s on this subject and they confirmed the interpretation that golems are a real possibility at least to some Jews and rabbis.

        Not to mention Ken, the second beast is said to do the same thing.
          “The second beast was permitted to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship it to be killed” Revelation 13:15

        So the next time someone says Isa(a.s) miracle proves his divinity I guess we know which side they’ll be on according to the bible. And before you ask, yes the book of revelation is filled to the brim with symbolism and has been subject to numerous interpretations. including in recent times that the image of the beast is a hologram or a product of cloning. This doesn’t change the fact that the interpretation of the second beast giving life to an idol is a valid and literal reading of the text held back then and to this day.

        https://www.gotquestions.org/image-of-the-beast.html

        The issue of Isa(a.s) being called the word is also simple to refute. He is given this title because of his creation by Allah(S.W.T) direct command “BE!” like with Adam(a.s). The question that Christians then ask is why wasn’t Adam given the tittle of word to reflect his creation?

        The answers are 1) Prophets are given unique titles all the time, that doesn’t mean that other prophets completely lack the qualities of said title. Abraham(a.s) is called friend of God does that mean all other prophets are strangers to God?

        2) Moreover the reason Isa(a.s) is called the word and not Adam(a.s) is because he already has title that describes his creation. he is someone who “God created with his hand”/ with his two hands. this yaqueen institute article discussing the islamic view of evolution has an entire section discussing Adams titles.
        the portion relevant to my point is under the Theological Implications for Human Evolution part in this article.
        https://yaqeeninstitute.org/dr-david-solomon-jalajel/tawaqquf-and-acceptance-of-human-evolution/#.XOA918hKhPY

        3) Christians don’t seem to realize that when they make this argument they inadvertently shoot their own theology in the foot. The trinity claims that the father, son, and holy spirit are all fully god sharing the same essence. the word-logos is described as an attribute of God, of his creative power and reason.

        Yet ONLY the son is given the title of logos. The father and spirit are, as far as I’m aware, never referred to as logos. This begs an important question to Christians. If the son alone is given /emphasized with the title of logos, does that mean the father and holy spirit do not have that divine attribute? If the answer is no then they have no argument or room to talk. If the answer is yes then that means the father and holy spirit are not fully God and deficient compared to the son with the logos.

      • Ken Temple says:

        The NT shows that there is a personal relationship between the 3 persons of the Trinity. The NT revelation is the final word on this. The Son was eternally with the Father – John 1:1 and 17:5 – restore the glory I had with You before the World was created. The Spirit of God was also eternally with the Father – the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father – John 15:26.

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Ken Temple

        When I said I don’t believe wood has adequately shown that they have the traits of “personhood.” I was referring to Islamic theology. Also I couldn’t help but notice you didn’t respond to any of my points

      • Ken Temple says:

        Your points are moot in light of my points; the NT revelation (John 1:1-5; 1:14; 1 John 1:1; Rev. 19:13; Philippians 2:5-8; John 17:5) trumps all your points.

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Ken Temple

        No they aren’t

        and no they don’t.

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Ken Temple

        How exactly? Surely you can articulate them into points I can understand right?

      • Ken Temple says:

        no time for that now

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Ken Temple

        Fine Ken. Whenever you have the time then. I’ll be waiting.

      • Ken Temple says:

        Varqas wrote:
        1. First the claim of the word and spirit of Allah(S.W.T) being separate “persons” is ridiculous and I don’t believe wood has adequately shown that they have the traits of “personhood.”

        My argument is never that the Qur’anic use of “Word” and “a spirit from God” is about 3 separate persons. The fact that the Qur’an uses these terms points to the Divine nature/substance/essence of Jesus, not the person of Jesus.

        Wood said the same thing – “Islam deifies Jesus without even realizing it”. This is about the nature/substance/essence of Jesus – His Deity.

        Wood then says “there are 2 uncreated persons with Allah, His word, and His spirit that He breathes out” – he is making the Christian theological point that is implied by the theology of the Logos and the Holy Spirit – in Christian, NT and Christian theological terms.

        Wood made a good point by the Qur’an, Sarah 16:40 – everything is created by God’s word.

        The stuff about golems (mankind as servants)and quotes from Talmud is a lot of irrelevant stuff to the issue. I don’t really care about what Rabbis said about things on this issue. A lot of irrelevant speculation. Same for trying to use Revelation 13:15 – the text is saying that “it was given to him” to do those things – as in Islam, under God’s permission and sovereignty, miraculous things take place, but this is irrelevant to the Qur’an’s use of “word” and “spirit” to describe Jesus’ nature.

        As Muhammad Hijab quoted, Surah 3:58-59 (the likeness of Jesus is the likeness of Adam, “be” and he became”, etc. is what Islam teaches, yes, but it ignores the additional information about the Bible’s (NT previous Scripture 500 years before Islam) teaching that Jesus is more than a man. It certainly includes the creation of His human nature in the womb of Mary, but the NT revelation teaches that Jesus also Deity – Jesus is 100 % man (human nature from Mary in the womb) and % God by nature (the Word of God from all eternity past – John 1:1, the Son from eternity past – John 17:5)

        John 1:1 – “In the beginning was the Word” – is pointing backwards into eternity past – the Word was already there with God in eternity past. this precludes any discussion of Revelation 13:15 because the Qur’an is using John 1:1 terminology to describe Jesus, and only Jesus – it is pointing back to Genesis – Genesis 1:1 – “In the beginning God created . . . “ etc. – God was already there before creation, and the Word was already there “and the Word was with God” from the beginning.

        2. Your point here about Adam being created by Allah’s hands is contradictory to Surah 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.
         Saheeh International

        Lo! the likeness of Jesus with Allah is as the likeness of Adam. He created him of dust, then He said unto him: Be! and he is.
         Pickthall

        The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: “Be”. And he was.
         Yusuf Ali

        3. 3) Christians don’t seem to realize that when they make this argument they inadvertently shoot their own theology in the foot. The trinity claims that the father, son, and holy spirit are all fully god sharing the same essence. the word-logos is described as an attribute of God, of his creative power and reason.
        Yet ONLY the son is given the title of logos. The father and spirit are, as far as I’m aware, never referred to as logos. This begs an important question to Christians. If the son alone is given /emphasized with the title of logos, does that mean the father and holy spirit do not have that divine attribute? If the answer is no then they have no argument or room to talk. If the answer is yes then that means the father and holy spirit are not fully God and deficient compared to the son with the logos.

        This is indeed a strange argument. “God” is already there. The NT tells us this is God the Father. It is the NT and Christian theology that distinquishes between the Father, the Son/Word and the Holy
        Spirit – that is why the doctrine is “One God” (by substance) in three distinct eternal persons. Matthew 28:19, 2 Corinthians 13:14 and many other NT verses and passages show the 3 persons in personal relations with each other, so your argument is a dumb argument. The Word and Spirit are other terms that describe Jesus and the Holy Spirit as having the same substance of God (homo-ousias) with God from eternity past.
        God is never without His mind, reason, word, communication, and He is never without His Spirit. Way back in Genesis 1:2 it says “the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters” and Psalm 104:30 teach this also:
        Psalm 104:30 
        You send forth Your Spirit, they are created;
And You renew the face of the ground.

        Psalm 33:6
        By the word of the Lord the heavens were made,
And by the breath of His mouth all their host.

        The word and breath and Spirit of someone are qualities that cannot be separated from the person Himself.
        The NT and Christian theology is using terminology that demonstrates that Jesus is the same nature as God the Father and the Holy Spirit of God has that same nature also, from all eternity.

        Your points are moot and irrelevant because of NT revelation and theology for the 5-6 centuries before Islam came on the scene.
        Spending time on your points and typing it all out seems like a bad use of my time, because your arguments are strange and weird and irrelevant.

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Ken Temple

        First apologies Ken if you think it’s a bad use of your time or that my arguments are strange or dumb, I’ll try to do better from now on. That being said you didn’t seem to understand why i used the arguments I did so please allow me to defend myself in that regard.

        My point was wood in the video is clearly saying that the Quran is saying there are two eternal persons in his word and his spirit that he breathes out and yet has not truly shown that those things have personhood in the Quran or the hadith. As for any “implications” of the deity of Christ alayhis salam those are merely you forcing you’re mindset onto the text. Rather than the Quran implicitly confirming the Christian definition of those terms the Quran is correcting and supplying its own interpretation that you and wood keep brushing aside.

        The reason I used the Talmud on Golems and Revelation 13:15 was to counter wood’s point in the video that Jesus alayhis salam fashioning a bird out of clay and giving life to it by God’s permission still somehow made him co creator. That was the point.

        I don’t see a contradiction between my point that Adam alayhis salam was fashioned by Allah’s hands and Surah 3:59. Care to elaborate? Even the Quran says God made Adam alayhis salam with his own hand in surah 38:75.

        My point about the logos was to show even in Christian theology that while Jesus alayhis salam is the only one attributed with the title of logos, the qualities that make up that title are shared between others despite them never being referred to as such. Just like in Islamic theology with the word “BE!” and Adam and Jesus alayhis salam.

        You keep making these points that you think are automatically conclusive but haven’t been proven. For example the virgin birth, you keep saying that it proves his nature is the same nature as the Father but how? And how is it any different from Parthenogenesis?

      • Ken Temple says:

        As for any “implications” of the deity of Christ alayhis salam those are merely you forcing you’re mindset onto the text.

        No, since the proper interpretation of those terms comes from 500-600 years earlier inspired/ God-breathed texts (John 1:1-5; 1:14; 1 John 1:1, etc.) and history of Christian theology. 500-600 years !

        The Qur’an confirms the NT mindset unknowingly – 5:47; 5:68; 10:94; 3:3

      • Ken Temple says:

        Already read Stewjo’s article a long time ago and we debated over several of his points. Not credible at all.

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Ken Temple

        I disagree I think he showed exactly the problem using those verses to “prove” the interpretation that the Quran confirms the bible. Did you at least look at the other links?

      • Ken Temple says:

        I have read some of the articles at Bassam Zawadi’s “Call to Monotheism”, over the years, yes. Not convincing. Dr. White thoroughly refuted Bassam Z. in the debate, “Does the Qur’an mis-understand the Trinity?” on Surah 5:72-78 and 5:116

        The Qur’an affirms the previous Scriptures. as Paul Williams says, “full stop”

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Ken Temple

        I disagree once again. I feel Bassam did a great job in the debate.

        Did you check the other link I posted, the only one you haven’t commented on?

      • Ken Temple says:

        We will have to leave it that now for us to disagree. Bassam did a very bad job of defending those verses in 5:72-78 and 5:116, etc.

        I don’t have time for any more discussion now.

        Lord willing, I will look at the other link when I have time.
        You already take a lot of time. You and Shad ( “The expert”)

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @ Ken Temple

        That’s fine Ken. Take your time. I hope your in good health.

      • Ken Temple says:

        I wish you peace and health also.
        John 14:27
        Matthew 11:28-30
        Romans 5:1

      • Ken Temple says:

        There are several verses in the NT, which is God-breathed, and the true Gospel, and 500 years before Islam, that say that Jesus created all things. (John 1:3; Hebrews 1:2; Colossians 1:15-20) So that truth over-rides any argument you are making about the Talmud and Golems and Rev. 13:15

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Ken Temple

        Again Ken I was refuting wood’s point in the video you posted that the miracle of the clay bird made Jesus alayhis salam co creator in the Quran. That was why I brought up the Talmud and Golems and Rev. 13:15.

      • Ken Temple says:

        Yeah, I know.
        The story is apocryphal anyway, from Gnostic / apocryphal infancy gospels and heretics that were exiled from mainstream of Christian territory to the deserts / outskirts of the Byzantine / Roman Empire. Muhammad and the Arabs of Hijaz came into contact with heretical and nominal forms of Christianity.
        They were exalting Mary too much and that is why Muhammad thought Mary was part of the Trinity – Surah 5:72-78; 5:116; 6:101

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Ken Temple

        So do you admit that woods point was wrong about the Quran unintentionally making Jesus alayhis salam co creator with the clay bird miracle?

      • Ken Temple says:

        It is an untrue legend, myth. But the Qur’an uses it; and there is some kind of parallel with Genesis 2 in that God breathes into Adam the breath of life and Jesus breathing into the bird the breath of life seems like a valid parallel. (even though apocryphal and not historically true of Jesus.)

      • Ken Temple says:

        parthenogenesis – is in some plants and some animals – asexual reproduction.
        Not so in humans.
        Luke 1:34-35 indicates the reason Jesus is called the Son of God is because He had no human father, and His holy nature in the womb of Mary is from the nature of God – the power of the Most High and the Holy Spirit. John 1:1-5 and 1:14 and Philippians 2:5-8 provide further details on the pre-existance of Jesus as the Son / Word and that He became a human being.

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Ken Temple

        What does it matter if doesn’t happen in humans? If it’s fine for God to incarnate into a man surely it’s also fine for a plant or an animal. If anything it would make more sense for him to be a literal “lamb of God” or as others have correctly pointed out “bull of God.”

        My point was that being virgin born is not a sign of divinity or having the same substance as the father. Honestly the way you’re talking Ken it sounds like a mixture of the natures occurred causing the human nature to be more holy or reflect divinity than an average human nature. I was under the impression that the natures do not mix or affect each other. Can you confirm whether thats true or not?

      • Ken Temple says:

        You are arguing against clear Scripture and creation.

        The virgin birth demonstrates how and why Jesus was sinless, even in His human nature.

        As the perfect and sinless man, He also voluntarily became the sinless sacrifice for sins – foreshadowed and prophesied by the principle in the OT of the unblemished (without fault, without sin) lambs and sheep as sacrifice for sins.

      • Ken Temple says:

        4. Fourthly, there are clear verses in Scripture that show that there is a personal relationship and interaction between the persons in the Trinity, and this is the reason for the “person” category. (“The Father loves the Son”, “the Father sends the Son”, “The Son loves the Father”, “the Father sends the Son”; “the Spirit testifies to the Son”, “do not grieve the Holy Spirit”; “the Son prays to the Father”; etc. The Greeks called this concept “hypostasis” (‘υποστασις ) [the Cappodocian fathers * see about hypostasis below] and in Latin it was “persona”.

        * “The Cappadocians worked to bring these semi-Arians back to the orthodox cause. In their writings they made extensive use of the (now orthodox) formula “one substance (ousia) in three persons (hypostaseis)”.[4]”

        From my article:
        https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2014/01/18/the-doctrine-of-the-trinity-trinitas-unitas-unitas-trinitas/

      • The Expert says:

        “But who else is specifically called “a word of God” and “a spirit from God” ?”

        Re-read my responses Ken, slowly this time

        As for the spirit argument, as the Quran alludes we were all pre existent spirits before our birth, ofc he will be specially alluded as a “spirit FROM God” due to the special circumstances of his birth

        as for the grammar of 1:1c, we’ll discuss tomorrow hopefully, will sleep for now

      • Ken Temple says:

        we are not all “words” – only Jesus is the Word – John 1:1-5; 1:14
        1 John 1:1
        Revelation 19:13

        Jesus existed from all eternity past with the Father
        John 1:1
        John 17:5
        Philippians 2:5-8
        “though He existed in the form of God (God by nature; substance), He humbled Himself and became a man and volunteered to go to the cross, etc.

      • Vaqas Rehman says:

        @Ken Temple

        “But who else is specifically called “a word of God” and “a spirit from God” ?

        Points to His nature, the virgin birth – that God is Jesus Father and Jesus nature is the same nature as the Father. (homo-ousias = same substance / essence)”

        No all it means is that he is given this title because of his creation by Allah(S.W.T) direct command “BE!” like with Adam(a.s).

        “Verily, in the sight of God, the nature of Jesus is as the nature of Adam, whom He created out of dust and then said unto him, “Be” – and he is”
        -Quran 3:59

      • Ken Temple says:

        No, Jesus is called the Word of God in the NT because He is the logos (reason, mind, thought that is always in motion and expresses / communicates in words.) He is also the Son, from all eternity with the Father – John 17:5 – in personal relationship.

        For you to say Jesus is the Word because He is a creation is looking at the product rather than the means by which God creates. If it is the product, then everything and all people are “words”.

        only Jesus is the Word – John 1:1-5; 1:14; 1 John 1:1; Revelation 19:13

      • The Expert says:

        “we are not all “words” – only Jesus is the Word – John 1:1-5; 1:14
        1 John 1:1
        Revelation 19:13

        Jesus existed from all eternity past with the Father
        John 1:1
        John 17:5
        Philippians 2:5-8
        “though He existed in the form of God (God by nature; substance), He humbled Himself and became a man and volunteered to go to the ”

        Seriously Ken? I’m arguing from the Quran in context, not NT

      • Ken Temple says:

        Only Jesus is called “a Word from God” کلمه الله in the Qur’an also

      • The Expert says:

        I read your articles…Any good reason to deny an indefinite theos, Dan Wallace does allude to the possibility in GGBB but tosses it out due to “polytheism”, doesn’t seem to be the case at all in the light of Exodus 22:8; Psalm 8:5

      • Ken Temple says:

        seems like you did not read Dan Wallace very carefully or fully. I provided the main quotes, which explains the issues of the Greek grammar of John 1:1, the issue of the Predicate Nominative and the word order

      • The Expert says:

        “No, Jesus is called the Word of God in the NT because He is the logos (reason, mind, thought that is always in motion and expresses / communicates in words.) He is also the Son, from all eternity with the Father – John 17:5 – in personal relationship.

        For you to say Jesus is the Word because He is a creation is looking at the product rather than the means by which God creates. If it is the product, then everything and all people are “words”.

        only Jesus is the Word – John 1:1-5; 1:14; 1 John 1:1; Revelation 19:13”

        Maybe refute by using the Quran to make it more convincing Ken for obvious reasons

      • Ken Temple says:

        The Qur’an in those 3 places is showing that the information about Jesus as “a word” came from previous Scriptures, which the Qur’an affirms in 5:47; 5:68; 10:94; 3:3

      • The Expert says:

        “Only Jesus is called “a Word from God” کلمه الله in the Qur’an also”

        You’re repeating yourself, I explained why

      • Ken Temple says:

        Truth always bears repeating, since you keep arguing.
        You did not explain why the Qur’an never calls anyone else “a word” from Allah.

      • The Expert says:

        “seems like you did not read Dan Wallace very carefully or fully. I provided the main quotes, which explains the issues of the Greek grammar of John 1:1, the issue of the Predicate Nominative and the word order”

        I’m well aware of the order Ken and yes I read Wallace fully and he does allude to the possibility, and I’m also aware he also make the qualitative argument in the case John 1:1 for his personal reasons…case in point, my first question is a curious one

        1) what’s the root of the Qualitative rule?

        2) the indefinite rendering fits the sense of the construct in the light of other anarthous predicate nominatives such as John 4:19, John 6:70 and so on and so on

        3) same as the first question, but with more emphasis due to the fact that an indefinite rendering seems more natural

      • Ken Temple says:

        You have not studied the Greek grammar very deeply.
        By the way, Shad, why do you keep changing your name and avatar on blog discussions?

      • The Expert says:

        @Ken,” By the way, Shad, why do you keep changing your name and avatar on blog discussions?”

        OmG I still wonder how on earth you always correctly guess that’s me

      • Ken Temple says:

        I just click on your Avatar to see who it is and it leads me to your blog, etc.

      • Ken Temple says:

        Also, your style is apparent. You had the “silent snake” before.

  2. The Expert says:

    Btw where did John get his idea of the Logos from?

    • Ken Temple says:

      From the Old Testament – Genesis 1:3; Psalm 33:6
      “God’s powerful activity in creation, revelation (Jer. 1:4; Isaiah 9:8; Ezekiel 33:7; Amos 3:1, 8
      “The mind and thought always moving forward expressing itself in words”
      Genesis 1:3, 6, 9 – “God said, Let there be . . . and there was”
      “God said” = God’s word

      “By the word of the Lord the heavens were made,
      And by the breath of His mouth all their lights.” Psalm 33:6

  3. The Expert says:

    “Truth always bears repeating, since you keep arguing.
    You did not explain why the Qur’an never calls anyone else “a word” from Allah.”

    Again Ken, Read my point about Khalil Allah or read the verse drawing similitude between Adam and Jesus or read again where I said why he’s highlighted with the term due to the special circumstances of his birth…just because he’s the only one alluded as “a word” doesn’t mean the others are not (following the logical flow of the tafseer)…your argument is unconvincing Ken

Comments are closed.