Catching Shabir Ally Red Handed!

On September 28, 2015 my colleague, noted Christian philosopher and apologist, David Wood debated Shabir Ally on the following two topics:

“Is Jesus the Son of God?”

“Is Jesus a Prophet of Islam?”

Both debates can be viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idHxegbSunQ&feature=youtu.be.

These were perhaps the most embarrassing debates that I have ever seen Ally engage in, since Wood was simply superb in refuting Ally’s arguments, especially as he highlighted Ally’s blatant inconsistencies, as well as doing such a masterful job of bringing out the quite damaging implications of Ally’s own claims and criteria upon Allah supposedly being a competent and trustworthy deity. In my opinion, Wood simply outclassed Ally in both debates and it seemed that the latter didn’t know what hit him.

With that said, I have often noted that Ally will shamelessly misquote and misrepresent scholars and sources in order to mislead his audience into thinking that the authorities that he appeals to basically agree with his assumptions and objections against the Christian faith. It is not surprising then to find him doing so again against Wood, such as misrepresenting what renowned NT scholar Robert Gundry stated concerning Matthew’s account of the risen Jesus’ commissioning his disciples to baptize all nations in the name of the Triune God. Ally basically claimed that Gundry denies that this text supports the Triune nature of God. Suffice it to say that is NOT what Gundry wrote or even insinuated, as anyone reading any of his commentaries on Matthew can easily verify.

When I called in during the Q&A segment of the debate so as to challenge Ally’s manhandling of Gundry, Ally sought to justify his deliberate misuse of this reputable exegete by claiming that he was referring to a different commentary on Matthew’s Gospel that Gundry wrote.

In light of Ally’s attempt to go into damage control mode, I am going to cite from two of Gundry’s commentaries on Matthew’s Gospel. The purpose in doing so is to establish the fact that Ally got caught red handed in a lie, and he knew it. And yet instead of owning up to his misrepresentation of this fine scholar, Ally decided to make the problem even worse for himself by compounding his lie further.

Pay close attention to what this noted NT scholar says regarding Matthew’s reference to Trinitarian baptism:

“For those who enter the school of Christ, baptism is the rite of initiation. Matthew describes this baptism as ‘into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.’ eis to onoma is a favorite phrase of his (3,2) and occurs nowhere else in the synoptics. Further Mattheanisms include patros (22,13), hyiou (27,16), and hagiou pneumatos (0,3). Matthew edited the story of Jesus’ baptism so as TO EMPHASIZE THE TRINITY (see the comments on 3:16-17; cf. 12:28); yet only Jesus’ name is associated with baptism in Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5; 1 Cor. 1:13, 15 (cf. Rom 6:3; 1 Cor 6:11; 10:1-4). Therefore Matthew seems to be responsible for the present formula. But the formula does not imply utterance OF THE TRINITARIAN PHRASE at the time of baptism. Instead ‘in the name of’ means ‘with fundamental reference to’ and distinguishes Christian baptism, demanding allegiance TO THE TRIUNE GOD, from John’s baptism, requiring only repentance.” (Robert Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church Under Persecution [Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI; 2 edition,1995], p. 596 https://books.google.com/books?id=6b9x0Cgkch8C&printsec=frontcover&dq=robert+gundry+matthew&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAGoVChMIopjgqcuayAIVCVaSCh0mUA1M#v=onepage&q=Matthew%20edited%20the%20story%20of%20Jesus’%20baptism%20so%20as%20TO%20EMPHASIZE%20THE%20TRINITY%20&f=false; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Does this sound like Gundry didn’t believe that this specific verse could be used to support the Trinity?

Now compare the following:

“…  Usually others approach Jesus. But because the disciples are kneeling on the ground in worship, he approaches them. His claim to have been given all authority in heaven as well as on earth contrasts with the Devil’s having offered to give him ‘all the kingdoms of the world and their glory’ if only he’d fall down and worship the Devil (4:8-9 [compare Daniel 7:14]). ‘Therefore’ makes this claim of universal authority the basis for the Great Commission. The passages 7:29; 9:8; 11:27; 21:23 show that Jesus has had this authority all along. But the present passage confirms that authority and lifts geographical restrictions on his exercise of it. ‘All nations’ corresponds to ‘all authority.’ No nation lies outside the sphere of Jesus’ authority, and therefore nobody is exempt from the obligations to follow his example of getting baptized (see 3:13-15 with comments) and to learn and keep his commands…

“Baptism is the rite of initiation into Jesus’ school. Baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit PUTS A TRINITARIAN CAST ON THIS BAPTISM, ESPECIALLY IN THAT ALL THREE ARE INCLUDED IN ‘THE NAME,’ AND THUS HIGHLIGHTS JESUS’ DEITY BY SANDWICHING ‘THE SON’ BETWEEN ‘THE FATHER’ AND ‘THE HOLY SPIRIT.’ ‘In the name of’ indicates acceptance that God is both Jesus’ and your Father, that Jesus is his Son in an unrivaled sense, and that the Holy Spirit (not Beelzebul [12:22-28]!) empowered Jesus. As a whole, THIS TRINITARIAN FORMULA distinguishes this baptism from John’s baptism, which had to do only with repentance in view of the soon coming of the kingdom of heaven (3:1-12). ‘All things … that I’ve commanded you’ links up with ‘as many as they are’ to underline the obligation of complete obedience (compare Exodus 7:2; Deuteronomy 1:3; 30:8; Joshua 1:7; Jeremiah 1:7). ‘Behold’ underscores Jesus’ presence with the disciples wherever they go throughout the inhabited earth in fulfilling their commission (compare 24:14). He won’t be physically present with them, as he has been heretofore, but he’ll be with them in the way the Lord was with his people to help them in the past (compare 18:20; Genesis 26:24; 28:15; Exodus 3:12; Joshua 1:5, 9; Judges 6:12, 16 and so on) and in this sense will continue to be ‘Immanuel … God [is] with us’ (1:23). (So as to not call such presence into question, Matthew omits an account of Jesus’ ascension to heaven, though the return from heaven in 10:23; 16:28; 24:30; 26:64 implies an ascension.) In line with the deity of Jesus, his ‘I’ in ‘I am with you’ replaces ‘God’ in the echo of ‘God [is] with us.’(So as to not call such presence into question, Matthew omits an account of Jesus’ ascension to heaven, though the return from heaven in 10:23; 16:28; 24:30; 26:64 implies an ascension.) In line with the deity of Jesus, his ‘I’ in ‘I am with you’ replaces ‘God’ in the echo of ‘God [is] with us.’ ‘All the days’ assures the disciples of Jesus’ uninterrupted presence and implies an extended period of time such as a worldwide making of disciples will take. ‘Till the consummation of the age’ assures the disciples of Jesus’ untruncated presence. They’ll need it especially throughout the time of unprecedented affliction just before the second coming (24:15-30).” (Gundry, “Matthew,” Commentary on the New Testament: Verse-by-Verse Explanations with a Literal Translation [Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, MI 2010], pp. 135-136 https://books.google.com/books?id=WrBZXtCwE1sC&printsec=frontcover&dq=robert+gundry+matthew&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDUQ6AEwA2oVChMIuOLk8IKbyAIVDHySCh3Exw5K#v=onepage&q=Usually%20others%20approach%20Jesus.%20But%20because%20the%20disciples%20are%20kneeling%20on%20the%20ground%20in%20worship&f=false; bold and capital emphasis ours)

The exact same quotation above is found in his other commentary on Matthew as can be easily verified by simply clicking on the following: https://books.google.com/books?id=SDt4uW-hxCUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=robert+gundry+matthew&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAWoVChMIopjgqcuayAIVCVaSCh0mUA1M#v=snippet&q=Usually%20others%20approach%20Jesus.%20But%20because%20the%20disciples%20are%20kneeling%20on%20the%20ground%20in%20worship&f=false.

In light of the foregoing, could Gundry have been any clearer as to his position regarding Matthew 28:19 and its affirmation of the Triunity of God and Jesus’ essential Deity? And can it get any more obvious that Ally deliberately misrepresented what this scholar actually believes about this particular text?

More importantly, what greater proof does one need to confirm my assertion that Ally is notorious for misquoting and mishandling scholars and sources?

For that Ally needs to be exposed and put to shame, as opposed to being hailed as some alleged great Muslim scholar and debater.

Source: https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2018/08/23/catching-shabir-ally-red-handed/ 

IHS

John 17:3 is a Stumbling Block for Muhammad’s god Pt. 1

In this post, I will be responding to the following article, which argues that John 17:3 poses a serious challenge for the Trinity https://unveiling-christianity.net/2017/12/07/john-173-stumbling-block-trinity/. I will begin by showing how this very passage ends up exposing Muhammad as a false prophet.

Here is the verse in question, along with some of its immediate context:

“When Jesus spoke these words, He lifted His eyes toward heaven and said: ‘FATHER, the hour has come. GLORIFY YOUR SON, that YOUR SON may also glorify You. As You have given Him authority over all flesh, He will give eternal life to all whom You have given Him. This is eternal life: that they may know You, the only true God, AND Jesus Christ, whom You have sent. I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work You have given Me to do. And now, O FATHER, GLORIFY ME in Your own presence with the glory which I had with You BEFORE THE WORLD EXISTED… All that are Mine are Yours, and all that are Yours are Mine. And I am glorified in them.” John 17:1-5, 10

According to the words of the Lord Jesus, the only true God is the Father, specifically the Father of Christ who glorifies Jesus his Son in the same way that the Son glorifies the Father. Jesus further claims to be the Son who existed with the Father in the same divine glory from before the creation of the world, to whom the Father has given sovereign authority over all flesh, being the King that possesses everything that his Father owns,

“On the next day a great crowd that had come to the feast heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem. They took branches of palm trees, and went out to meet Him, and cried out: ‘Hosanna! “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!” The King of Israel!’ Then Jesus, having found a young donkey, sat on it. As it is written: ‘Fear not, daughter of Zion; see, your King is coming, sitting on a donkey’s colt.’ His disciples did not understand these things at first. But when Jesus was glorified, they remembered that these things were written about Him and that they had done these things to Him.” John 12:12-16

“All that the Father has is Mine. Therefore I said that He will take what is Mine and will declare it to you.” John 16:15

“Again Pilate entered the Praetorium, called Jesus, and said to Him, ‘Are You the King of the Jews?’ Jesus answered him, ‘Are you speaking of your own accord, or did others tell you about Me?’ Pilate answered, ‘Am I a Jew? Your own nation and the chief priests handed You over to me. What have You done?’ Jesus answered, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would fight, that I would not be handed over to the Jews. But now My kingdom is not from here.’ Therefore Pilate said to Him, ‘Then are You a king?’ Jesus answered, ‘You say correctly that I am a king. For this reason I was born, and for this reason I came into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.’” John 18:33-37

“From then on, Pilate tried to release Him. But the Jews cried out, ‘If you release this Man, you are not Caesar’s friend. Whoever makes himself a king speaks against Caesar!’” John 19:12

And who will give immortal, incorruptible life to all whom the Father brings to him:

“This is the will of the Father who has sent Me, that of all whom He has given Me, I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. This is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” John 6:39-40 – cf. 5:25, 28-29

This is precisely the reason why our glorious Lord stated that eternal life depends on personally knowing God AND HIM, thereby making himself a necessary object of saving faith. In other words, a person must love, trust, and hope in Christ to the same extent that they love, trust and hope in the only true God if s/he wants to receive eternal life:

“‘Let not your heart be troubled. You believe in God. Believe also in Me. In My Father’s house are many dwelling places. If it were not so, I would have told you. I am going to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, you may be also. You know where I am going, and you know the way.’ Thomas said to Him, ‘Lord, we do not know where You are going. How can we know the way?’ Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also. From now on you do know Him and have seen Him.’” John 14:1-7

And yet in saying this, our Lord implies his essential coequality with the Father, since trusting in a mere creature to the same extent that one trusts in God would be both idolatrous and blasphemous. After all, no mere creature is capable of granting eternal life to all those who would place their trust in him, since s/he would have to be omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent to be able to do so:

The Latin Fathers (Aug⁽²³⁰⁾, Amb., Hil⁽²³¹⁾), anxious to avoid the inference unwarrantably drawn by some from this verse against the Godhead of Christ, construed: ἵνα γιν. σε κ. ἰ. χ. ὃν ἀπ., τὸν μόνον ἀλ. θεόν,—which is of course inadmissible. Others (Chrys., Euth.), construing rightly, yet regarded Jesus Christ as included in the words μόν. ἀληθ. θεόν. But all such violences to the text are unnecessary. For, first, the very juxtaposition of Jesus Christ here with the Father, and the knowledge of both being defined to be eternal life, is a proof by implication of the Godhead of the former. The knowledge of God and a creature could not be eternal life, and the juxtaposition of the two would be inconceivable. Secondly, the ὃν ἀπέστειλας most distinctly expresses the ἐξελθεῖν from God, John 17:8—implies the ἡμεῖς ἕν of John 17:22, and cannot, in connexion with what follows, possibly be understood in a Socinian, or an Arian sense. I do not scruple to use and preach on the verse as a plain proof of the co-equality of the Lord Jesus in the Godhead. (Henry Alford, Greek Testament Critical Exegetical Commentary https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hac/john-17.html; bold emphasis ours)

Seeing that Ibn Anwar’s prophet was flesh whom God owns, this means that Muhammad belongs to the Lord Jesus who has now been placed under the glorious feet of Christ!

“Then comes the end when He will deliver up the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. For He will reign until He has put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. For He ‘has put all things under His feet.’ But when He says, ‘all things are put under Him,’ it is revealed that He, who has put all things under Him, is the exception. When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” 1 Corinthians 15:24-28

Now does any of this comport with what Ibn Anwar’s prophet taught concerning God and Christ?

Not at all, since Muhammad’s monad is most definitely not the Father of Christ, who shares his sovereignty with his beloved Son.

In fact, Muhammad expressly taught that his god wasn’t a father to any one, especially Jews and Christians,

The Jews and Christians say: We are sons of Allah and His loved ones. Say: Why then doth He chastise you for your sins? Nay, ye are but mortals of His creating. He forgiveth whom He will, and chastiseth whom He will. Allah’s is the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them, and unto Him is the journeying. S. 5:18 Pickthall

Since he is too glorious to have a son,

If Allah had willed to choose a son, He could have chosen what He would of that which He hath created. Be He Glorified! He is Allah, the One, the Absolute. S. 39:4 Pickthall

Which is why the only relationship a creature can ever have with the Islamic monad is that of a slave and master relationship:

And they say: The Beneficent hath taken unto Himself a son. Assuredly ye utter a disastrous thing Whereby almost the heavens are torn, and the earth is split asunder and the mountains fall in ruins, That ye ascribe unto the Beneficent a son, When it is not meet for (the Majesty of) the Beneficent that He should choose a son. There is none in the heavens and the earth but cometh unto the Beneficent as a slave. S. 19:88-93 Pickthall – cf. Q. 21:26

Muhammad further stated that his god would kill anyone who would dare believe that Christ is the Son of God:

The Jews say, ‘Ezra is the Son of God’; the Christians say, ‘The Messiah is the Son of God.’ That is the utterance of their mouths, conforming with the unbelievers before them. God assail them! How they are perverted! S. 9:30 Arberry

Muhammad also proclaimed that his deity does not and will not share his authority over all creation with anyone, let alone a son:

Say: “Allah knows best how long they stayed. With Him is (the knowledge of) the unseen of the heavens and the earth. How clearly He sees, and hears (everything)! They have no Wali (Helper, Disposer of affairs, Protector, etc.) other than Him, and He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule.” S. 18:26 Hilali-Khan

He to Whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and Who has begotten no son (children or offspring) and for Whom there is no partner in the dominion. He has created everything, and has measured it exactly according to its due measurements. S. 25:2 Hilali-Khan

This puts Ibn Anwar in a dilemma since the only true God according to the biblical verse he referenced is the Father of the Lord Jesus who glorifies and exalts his Son over all flesh, and who requires all creatures to intimately know the Son in the same way they know the Father, since it is the Son who will raise the dead at the last day and give all believers eternal life, all of which Muhammad rejected!

Therefore, according to the very passage appealed to by this polemicist, Muhammad was nothing other than a false prophet and deceiver who did not know the only true God revealed by/in Jesus Christ.

In fact, the NT clearly teaches that anyone who denies God’s Fatherhood and Sonship of Christ is an antichrist:

“Who is a liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? Whoever denies the Father and the Son is the antichrist. No one who denies the Son has the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father.” 1 John 2:22-23

Muhammad was, therefore, an antichrist who stands eternally condemned since he basically turned God into a liar by denying God’s very own witness to Jesus’ being his uniquely beloved Son:

“And a voice came from heaven, saying, ‘You are My beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.’” Mark 1:11

“Then a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, ‘This is My beloved Son. Listen to Him.’” Mark 9:7

“For we have not followed cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For He received honor and glory from God the Father when a voice came to Him from the majestic glory, saying, ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.’ And we ourselves heard this voice, which came from heaven, when we were with Him on the holy mountain.” 2 Peter 1:16-18

“If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for this is the testimony of God which He has given concerning His Son. Whoever believes in the Son of God has this witness in himself. Whoever does not believe God has made Him out to be a liar, because he does not believe the testimony that God gave about His Son. And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. Whoever has the Son has life, and whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. I have written these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.” 1 John 5:9-13

We again want to thank Ibn Anwar for again employing an objection that ends up condemning Muhammad as a false prophet whom Satan used to lead people away from knowing the true God and Jesus Christ his beloved Son.

We’re not through just yet since we have more woes for Ibn Anwar in the next part of our rebuttal.

Source: https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2018/08/21/john-173-is-a-stumbling-block-for-muhammads-god-pt-1/ 

IHS

God NEVER means Muhammad’s Allah, a non-existent monad, in the New Testament

 In this short post I am going to be responding to the following article https://unveiling-christianity.net/2017/11/30/god-means-trinity-testament/.

Muslim polemicist Ibn Anwar attempts to refute Trinitarianism by arguing that the term “God” never refers to the Trinity in the NT. He then cites the following Trinitarian scholars to prove that in the NT the word “God” is most often employed for the Father:

“In all but seven places in the New Testament the term theos refers to the one whom the Jews knew as their God and earliest Christians called “Father” or “Abba.”…The term [God] never refers to the Trinity in the New Testament…” (Ben Witherington III, New Testament Theology and Ethics [InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, Illinois 2016], Volume 1, p. 46)

“The scripture, when it mentions GOD, absolutely and by way of Eminence, always means the Person of the Father.” (Samuel Clarke, The Works of Samuel Clarke, Volume 4. [John and Paul Knapton, London 1738], Volume 4, p. 134)

It never ceases to amaze me how these Muslim antagonists routinely fail to see that the very objections which they level against Christianity end up proving that Islam is a false religion and that Muhammad was a false prophet.

For instance, doesn’t Ibn Anwar realize that this admission that the term God refers to the Father in the NT means that Muhammad was an antichrist? After all, the Quran plainly states that Muhammad’s god isn’t a father to anyone, since he is supposedly too glorious to have a son:

Say the Jews and Christians, ‘We are the sons of God, and His beloved ones.’ Say: ‘Why then does He chastise you for your sins? No; you are mortals, of His creating; He forgives whom He will, and He chastises whom He will.’ For to God belongs the kingdom of the heavens and of the earth, and all that is between them; to Him is the homecoming. S. 5:18

Had God desired to take to Him a son, He would have chosen whatever He willed of that He has created. Glory be to Him! He is God, the One, the Omnipotent. S. 39:4

And Muhammad’s monad is most definitely not the Father of Christ,

The Jews say, ‘Ezra is the Son of God’; the Christians say, ‘The Messiah is the Son of God.’ That is the utterance of their mouths, conforming with the unbelievers before them. God assail them! How they are perverted! S. 9:30

Since the highest relationship one can have with the Islamic deity is that of a slave to a master, no more and no less:

And they say, ‘The All-merciful has taken unto Himself a son. You have indeed advanced something hideous! The heavens are wellnigh rent of it and the earth split asunder, and the mountains wellnigh fall down crashing for that they have attributed to the All-merciful a son; and it behoves not the All-merciful to take a son. None is there in the heavens and earth but he comes to the All-merciful as a servant; S. 19:88-93

And yet according to the Christian Scriptures, the one true God is the Father, since he is Father of the Lord Jesus, his uniquely divine Son, as well as of all those who believe in Christ:

“And a voice came from heaven, saying, ‘You are My beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.’” Mark 1:11

“Then a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, ‘This is My beloved Son. Listen to Him.’” Mark 9:7

“He said, ‘Abba, Father, all things are possible for You. Remove this cup from Me; yet not what I will, but what You will.’” Mark 14:36

“Yet to all who received Him, He gave the power to become sons of God, to those who believed in His name, who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, the glory as the only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth.” John 1:12-14

“Jesus answered them, ‘MY Father is working still, and I am working.’ So the Jews sought even more to kill Him, because He not only had broken the Sabbath, but also said that God was HIS Father, making Himself equal with God.” John 5:17-18

“So Jesus said to them, ‘When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and I do nothing of Myself. But I speak these things as MY Father taught Me. He who sent Me is with Me. The Father has not left Me alone, for I always do those things that please Him.’… Jesus answered, ‘If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing. It is MY Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say that He is your God. Yet you have not known Him, but I know Him. If I say, “I do not know Him,” I shall be a liar like you. But I know Him and keep His word.’” John 8:28-29, 54-55

“MY Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all. No one is able to snatch them from MY Father’s hand. MY Father and I are one… do you say of Him, whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? If I am not doing the works of MY Father, do not believe Me. But if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him.” John 10:29-30, 36-38

“The Jews answered him, ‘We have a law, and by our law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God!’” John 19:7

“Jesus said to her, ‘Stop holding on to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father. But go to My brothers and tell them, “I am ascending to MY Father and your Father, to My God and your God.”’” John 20:17

“But for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist. And there is one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.” 1 Corinthians 8:6

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ… so that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him,” Ephesians 1:3, 17

“one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.” Ephesians 4:6

“With it we bless the Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who are made in the image of God.” James 3:9

“For we have not followed cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For He received honor and glory from God the Father when a voice came to Him from the majestic glory, saying, ‘This is MY beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.’ And we ourselves heard this voice, which came from heaven, when we were with Him on the holy mountain.” 2 Peter 1:16-18

“Grace, mercy, and peace will be with you from God the Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love.” 2 John 1:3

“Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James, To those who are sanctified and called by God the Father and preserved in Jesus Christ:” Jude 1:1

The NT is equally clear that anyone who denies God’s Fatherhood and/or the unique divine Sonship of Christ is an antichrist:

“Who is a liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? Whoever denies the Father and the Son is the antichrist. No one who denies the Son has the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father.” 1 John 2:22-23

Hence, since Muhammad denied that his monad was anyone’s father, and cursed all those who would dare believe that Christ is God’s Son, this makes him an antichrist according to the very documents that Ibn Anwar appealed to in his attempt to refute the blessed and glorious Trinity!

We therefore want to personally thank Ibn Anwar for employing arguments that end up proving that his prophet and his religion are of the devil, and not from the one true God of the NT who is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and of all true believers.

All Biblical references taken from the Modern English Version (MEV) of the Holy Bible.

All quranic citations taken from A. J. Arberry’s version of the Quran.

Source: https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2018/08/21/god-never-means-muhammads-allah-a-non-existent-monad-in-the-new-testament/ 

IHS