AHLUSSUNNAH WAL JAMAAH

Answering Some
Objections on Three
Quranic Verses
[Type the document subtitle]
Husam
03-Apr-19

[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of
the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the
contents of the document.]
 Page 1 of 10

Al-Quran Surah 5. Al-Maida, Ayah 17

Indeed, the truth deny they who say, "Behold, God is the Christ, son of Mary." Say: "And who
could have prevailed with God in any way had it been His will to destroy the Christ, son of
Mary, and his mother, and everyone who is on earth - all of them? For, God's is the dominion
over the heavens and the earth and all that is between them; He creates what He wills: and
God has the power to will anything!"

It is said that Christians say that Christ or Son or Logos is God but they do not say that God is Christ or
Son or Logos.

But this is an incorrect objection.

If Son is God then God is Son.

If Christ is God then God is Christ.

If Logos is God then God is Logos.

In the cases of the Individuals the Subject and Predicates are interchangeable.

It may not be possible in case of Genera or Class or Subclass and Superclass.

Consider the following Syllogism.

Tom is a Cat.

All Cats are Mammals.

Hence Tom is a Mammal.

This is a case of Individual and Super-Class.

Consider another Case

All Cats are Mammals.

All Mammals are Animals

Hence All Cats are Animals.

This is a clase of Sub-Class(s) and Super-Class(es).

But in case of individuals where subject and Predicate both Notions are Individuals this is invertible .

For Example “The Person A Is The Person B”

This means that A and B are Not Distinct Persons.

Page 1 of 10
 Page 2 of 10

So It imples that

The Person B is the Person A.

Now we come to the following logically Possible Cases.

1] Christ is God and God is Christ.

2] Christ is God but/and God is not Christ .

3] Christ is not God but/and God is Christ.

4] Christ is not God and God is not Christ.

Trinitarian and Athanasians cannot accept the Forth case.

Since this is against the Dogma of Trinity.

So it is discarded from the list.

The Third case also Contradict the Trinity. Since they do believe that Christ is God.

Now the first two cases are left .

In the entire research no one shall find a Trinitarian or a Athanasian who says:

Christ is God but God is Not Christ.

Father is God but God is Not the Father.

Holy Ghost /Spirit is God but God is not the Holy Ghost/Spirit.

Also it is accepted that if God is not some thing then that thing is Not God.

So If God is not Holy Ghost then Holy Ghost is not God.

Similarly if God is not Christ then Christ is not God.

So no one can say such a thing.

If someone insists that he believes in this i.e he explicitly believes that ‘Christ is God but God is not Christ
‘ then let this belief be send to the higher most authorities of Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox so
that they may present their final decision that is this their belief or it is not.

So the first one is the only possible candidate.

That is Christ is God and God is Christ.

An other argument is that Christ is God the Son.

Page 2 of 10
 Page 3 of 10

If some one Excepts that Christ is God then he must accept that God the Son is God.

If some one accept that God the Son is God then he cannot say that God is not God the Son.

He must have to believe that God is God the Son.

The only possible answer a person may attempt to provide is as follow:

If it is said that God is Christ then it means that Triune God or God the Trinity is Christ, which is Anti-
Trinity.

But this answer is incorrect.

The sentence “God is Christ” can mean “God the Trinity is Christ or Triune God is Christ” if an only if the
word God in the sentence “God is Christ” means God the Trinity or Triune God.

If the word God in the sentence neither means God the Trinity nor Triune God then this cannot be the
meaning of the sentence.

We provide an Anti -Trinitarian argument with a Trinitarian Response.

Anti-Trinitarian Argument in form of Syllogism

Son is God.

God is Trinity

Hence Son is God the Trinity.

The Trnitarian Response is that the word ‘God’ in the Minor Premise and in the Major Premise are not
the same.

This proves the point that unless the meaning is specified and definitise it is incorrect to argue as such.

So if the word God is not used in the meaning of ‘God the Trinity’ in the Sentence it is incorrect to argue
that this meaning emerges just by interchanging the notions of subject and predicates.

So Qur’a:n does not ascribe any thing incorrect.

It may be argued that , although it is correct that ‘Christ is God and God is Christ’ but it is not said in
general. It may be the case in general but if Qur’a:n is Reporting that some did say in Grammatical
Indefinite Past then to discard this Report as False is just a consequence of Disbelief.

To declare that a Report in Holy Qur’a:n is False just because it is not said by Trinitarians in General is an
incorrect way. How ever this does not mean that Qur’a:n is reporting a Non Trinitarian Belief.

If some once says Christ is God then he is saying according to the Dogma of Trinity. Similarly if he is
interchanging the Notions of the Subject and Predicate of the Sentence , he is certainly not contradicting

Page 3 of 10
 Page 4 of 10

The Dogma of Trinity.

So it is possible that some may have said this sentence which is not known to other Trinitarian and this
was not documented. But Qur’a:n is reporting it since it was it might have been practiced in some parts
of ‘:Arab.

It is also possible that Saballians might have said that God is Christ.

In Christianity, Sabellianism in the Eastern church or Patripassianism in the Western church is the belief
that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three different modes or aspects of God, as opposed to a
Trinitarian view of three distinct persons within the Godhead.[1] The term Sabellianism comes from
Sabellius, who was a theologian and priest from the 3rd century. None of his writings have survived and
so all that is known about him comes from his opponents. All evidence shows that Sabellius held Jesus
to be deity while denying the plurality of persons in God and holding a belief similar to modalistic
monarchianism. Modalistic monarchianism has been generally understood to have arisen during the
second and third centuries, and to have been regarded as heresy after the fourth, although this is
disputed by some.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism

Copied on 03-04-2019 CE

This means that I some one believes that Father, Son and Holy Ghost/Spirit are just Three Modes or
Aspects of God and these are not three mutually distinct hypostases in Divine Ousia [Godhead] then it is
very logical that such a peson can say God is Father ,God is Son and God is Holy Ghost.

So it is Absolutely Possible that not only Athanasians and Trinitarians can say God is Christ but Sabailions
and Modelists can also say it with the difference that the former takes the Son as a Hypostasis and the
latter takes the Son as a Mode or an Aspect or a Relation [Non Hypostatic Relation].

So Qur’a:n is just reporting some thing which is not based on confusion or misinformation but a real
event which is not reported to those who were away .

How ever it may be noted that Qur’a:n is not even mentioning a belief different from Athanasian
and Trinitarian Sects and Creeds. Since if Some one is saying that God is Christ he can say it either in
Trinitarian Meaning or in Modelist Meaning. (1)

Anti Islamic Objection makers has assumed that Qur’a:ns report is false that is why they make an
objection that either Qur’a:n is stating the Christian belief incorrectly.

Page 4 of 10
 Page 5 of 10

But these cases are not applicable in this particular case.

Second Ayah

And behold! Allah will say: "O Iesous the son of Marium! Didst thou say unto men, 'Take me
and my mother for two gods beside Allah'?" He shall say: "Glory to Thee! Never could I say
what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou
knowest what is in my heart, though I know not what in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all
that is hidden.

[Qur'an 5:116]

A number of Anti ‘Isla:mic Objection Makers say that this is a wrong interpretation of The Dogma of
Trinity.

Since According to the Dogma of Trinity there is Only One God that has Only One Per Se Subsistent
Essence in the Being Of God and Three Mutually Distinct Per Se Subsistent Rational Hypostases in the
Per Se Subsistent Essence of the Of the Being Of God. Nether Christians believe in the Plurality of Gods
nor Mary as a Hypostasis in the Per Se Subsistent Essence in the Being of God.

First. This ‘A:yah [5:116] is denying the Deification and Apotheosis of Lady Marium/Mary [‘:Alaihas
Sala:m] and Lord Iesous /Iesus [‘:Alaihis Sala:m] .

So if some one Deifies and Apotheosise a Person , then he takes the Person for God beside the God.

In this meaning there is no objection possible.

Meaning Of Deification:-

deification

noun [ U ]

uk ˌdeɪ.ɪ.fɪˈkeɪ.ʃənˌdiː.ə.fəˈkeɪ.ʃən/

the action of making someone or something into a god:

The temple was built to celebrate the deification of Julius Caesar.

the pagan deification of the natural world

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/deification

Page 5 of 10
 Page 6 of 10

Apotheosis

In theology, apotheosis refers to the idea that an individual has been raised to godlike stature. In art, the
term refers to the treatment of any subject (a figure, group, locale, motif, convention or melody) in a
particularly grand or exalted manner.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apotheosis

One may see:-

THE WORSHIP OF THE VIRGIN MARY

The Worship of Mary began in Arabia. †

About the end of the fourth century certain women in Arabia, once in twelve months, dressed a car[t]
or square throne; spread a linen cloth over it; and on a clear day placed a loaf of bread or cakes called
collyrides upon it, which they offered to the Virgin Mary. It would seem that this was a transfer of the
services of the Lord's Supper to Mary from her Son. These first worshippers of Mary were called
Collyridianians. This service, though offensive to the churches at first, under another and milder form
spread rapidly over the East and West. ‡

[† Mosheim, iv. cen. chap. v. sec. XXV. ‡ Neander, ii. 339.]

http://biblelight.net/worship_of_the_virgin_mary.htm

Collyridian noun

Definition of Collyridian

: one of a heretical sect in the 4th and 5th centuries chiefly in Arabia that employed women as
priestesses to offer sacrifices in the form of rolls of bread to the Virgin Mary

Collyridian/ Kollyridians was a sect of adorers of Mary in the fourth-century Arabia, as reported by
Epiphanius in his workg against heretics (: Haer. 78, 23; 79).

Page 6 of 10
 Page 7 of 10

Leontius of Byzance reports an other name for the sect "Philomarianites," which means Mary-lovers
(PG 87, 1364).

Epiphanius commented on them:-

1] "Although Mary is the most beautiful and holy and worthy of praise, we don't owe her adoration."
(Haer. 79, 7, PG 42, 752) .

2] "Adoration must cease. For Mary is no goddess nor has she received her body from heaven. (oute gar
theos hae Maria oute ap'ouranou exousa to soma)" (Haer. 78, 24).

Collyridians are also reported by John Damascene (PG 94, 728).

As the Athanasian Trinity and Athanasianism are Heresies and Deviations from the real andteachings

Of Iesous/Iesus/Isa, Qur’a:n pointed at different innovations. It cannot be claimed that this was the
original teaching of Iesous/Iesus/Isa [Peace Be Upon Him].

So, as to declareday Trinitarianism and Athanasianism 'true' Christianity and all others as 'false' is just
the version of Trinitarianism since the emergence of this dogma is a late innovation .

3] Alfonsus de Liguori (1696-1787) wrote a book “ The Glories of Mary” . In this book,Alfonsu de Liguori
writes that Mary was given rulership over one half of the kingdom of God; Mary rules over the kingdom
of mercy and Jesus rules over the kingdom of justice. De Liguori said that people should pray to Mary as
a mediator and look to her as an object of trust for answered prayer. This further says that there is no
salvation outside of Mary.It does shew that Heresy did develop after the Descension of Holy Qur’a:n.
But the event narrated in Qur’a:n shall occur on the Day of Judgement after the Doomsday. So God shall
ask things which occurred between the Ascension of Iesous and Doomsday, not necessary about the
Heresies which had occurred before the Descension of Holy Qur’a:n.

Some believers in Trinity, may practiced Marium [‘:Alaishas Sala:m] worship without realizing that they
do it.. The prayers and practices were so familiar. They were taught to me by good people, sincere
people that I trusted. I prayed rosaries and wore a scapular and engaged in other “devotions” which I
honestly thought were good and pleasing to God. Because of my lack of knowledge of the Bible and of
Church history, I honestly had no idea that I was actually worshipping Mary.

It may be asked that these views are extreme representation and their official belief. If Merriam
/Maryam /Mary [‘:Alaihas Sala:m] is believed to possess the incommunicable Divine Attributes then this
is Deification and Apotheosis.

If a Person say Mr X commits the Deification and Apotheosis of a Person say Person Y then the Mr X
believes that the Person Y is God/Deity.(2)

The Next Probem

Does Qur’a:n Saith that Ha:ru:n [Aaron] is the Brother of MaryaM [Mariam/Maryam].

Page 7 of 10
 Page 8 of 10

At length she brought the (babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms). They said: "O Mary! truly an
amazing thing hast thou brought! "O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a
woman unchaste!" [Qur'an 19:27-28]

But Aaron was the brother of Moshe [Mu:sa:/Moses] and Moses was born either in the year 1592BCE

OR in the year 1571 BCE.

Iesus /Isa was born on 4 BCE OR 6 BCE.

If we assume that Mary/Merium was 20 years at the time she conceived Iesus without any Male
intervention then her she would have been born in the year

As Aaron was the elder Germane Brother of Moses then he cannot be the Germane Brother of
Mary/Maryam.

The answer to the objection.

There is an answer in S:ah:i:h: Muslim of this objection.

Mughira b. Shu‘ba reported: When I came to Najran, they (the Christians of Najran) asked me: You read
"O sister of Harun" in the Qur'an, whereas Moses was born much before Jesus. When I came back to
Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) I asked him about that, whereupon he said: "The (people of
the old age) used to give names (to their persons) after the names of Apostles and pious persons who
had gone before them."

For example John is the name of the authors of the forth New Testamental Gospel, but it is also the
name of John the Baptist. So are we to confuse the New Testamental forth Evangelist and the Baptist.

Similary one may not confuse Mary the Mother of Iesus and Mary Magdalene. These were two different
(female) Persons . But they cannot be one and the same Person .

The same Answer is applicable to this objection as well.

Brother of Moses and Brother of Mary were two different Persons but they both have once and same

Grammatical Personal Proper Noun.

(1) There us a sect called “Only Jesus” Whose teachers are called Oneness Teachers.

Oneness teachers believe in the Dogma of Jesus of Oneness, that is the Jesus is either the totality of the
Godhead or Jesus is the Only Hypostasis in the Godhead, who was crucified on the cross and was
resurrected from the dead.

Page 8 of 10
 Page 9 of 10

According to Weikipedia

Oneness Pentecostals find in modalistic monarchianism of the fourth century a historical predecessor
that affirmed the two central aspects of their own convictions:

There is one indivisible God with no distinction of persons in God's eternal essence, and

Jesus Christ is the manifestation, human personification, or incarnation of the one God.[4]

The Oneness doctrine differs from Sabellianism in that Oneness Pentecostals conceive of the
"trimanifestation" of God as simultaneous instead of successive, as is the case with classical Modalism.
They contend that, based on Colossians 2:9, the concept of God's personhood is reserved for the
immanent and incarnate presence of Jesus only.[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneness_Pentecostalism

According to modalism and Sabellianism, God is said to be only one person who reveals himself in
different ways called modes, faces, aspects, roles or masks (Greek πρόσωπα prosopa ; Latin personae)
of the One God, as perceived by the believer, rather than three co-eternal persons within the Godhead,
or a "co-equal Trinity".[25] Modalists note that the only number expressly and repeatedly ascribed to
God in the Old Testament is One, do not accept interpreting this number as denoting union (i.e. Gen
2:24) when it is applied to God, and dispute the meaning or validity of related New Testament passages
cited by Trinitarians.[26] The Comma Johanneum, which is generally regarded as a spurious text in First
John (1 John 5:7) known primarily from the King James Version and some versions of the Textus
Receptus, but not included in modern critical texts, is an instance (the only one expressly stated) of the
word Three describing God.[27] Many modalists point out the lack of the word "Trinity" in any canonical
scripture.[28]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism

So if some one is Sabellian or Only Jesus there is no problem for him in calling Christ/Iesus/Jesus as God
i.e he can say with out any contradiction with his believes that God is Christ.

It may be noted that the words Kafara and Qa:lu: are in past tence but it is also possible tp take them as
Prophetic Past Tense or Futuristic Past Tense or Presentative Past tense as in the given translation. Since

Some of the translators have chosen Presentative Past Tense which can include Futuristic past tense as
follow. How ever if it is taken as Real Past Tense then there were some Christians who did use such
expressions. But it is not necessary that they were Non Trinitarians, Since one cannot be declared as an
Anti Trinitarian just because he uses the expression “God is Christ” since if a Trnitarian would have used
this Expression with the given construction he could not mean that ‘Totally Of Godhead is Jesus/Christ’

Page 9 of 10
 Page 10 of 10

But might have meant in the sentence Christ/Son is God just by interchanging the notions of the Subject
and Predicate with out any change of meaning, such a commutation of notions while the meaning is
conserved cannot contradict the Dogma of Trinity.

(2) As this question shall be asked on the Day Of Judgement , so it can include heresies which have
developed from the Day of Ascension of Iesous/Iesus/Isa/Jesus to the Day of Judgement . So there is no
need of taking Prophetic Past Tense or Futuristic Past Tense. The ENTIRE context of the verse is Distant
Future that is after Doomsday on the Day Of Judgement.

There is no implication whether some one believes an Individual as God either in Godhead or not in
Godhead. Even a Catholic like Alphonse de Ligouri took May as God.It may be noted that as a Catholic
this person was an Athanasian I.e a follower of Athanasian Creed and would have believed in Trinity.

But he took Mary as God/Goddess even if he did not predicate her with these terms explicitly.

There is a cult in Muslims who believe that Holy Prophet is Omnivolent [‘Al Mukhta:r ‘Al Kull/
Omnipotent and Autocratic] and believe that Holy Prophet is the Ruler of Entire Universe [Including
heavens i.e Ma:likul Kull ] not just half of the World, have Power to Forgive Sins , and that Holy
Prophet is Omnipotent and omnibenevolent.

See Baha:r e Shariat etc.

We say that this is Apotheosis and Deification of Holy Prophet. Hence a Shirk/Shirc

Although the never use the word God for Holy Prophet but they Have made him a God by ascribing
some Incommunicable Divine Attributes.

Similarly if some one believes that Souls and Spirit and Prime Matter are Eternal then he has taken them
as Gods even if such a person denies the charge since he though do not predicate such beings with the
word God, he does have ascribed Incommunicable Attributes of God thus believing these beings as Gods
even if denying that he does not believe in the respective Divinities of these Beings.

Page 10 of 10