Who is the comforter

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

 JerryMyers wrote:

 2Acts wrote:

You are wrong where you say Muslims never re-fer to the Bible to seek the truth of God. Your Quran validates the Bible as truth. For example-
And in their footsteps, We sent 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) confirming the Taurat (Torah) that had come before him, and We gave him the Injeel (Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Taurat (Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for Al-Muttaqun S. 5:46. S. 57:27

The Quran in 10. 94 states If you have any doubts in the Quran which I give you go and read the Bible or ask those who read the Bible

Thus, the Qur'an sees itself as the guardian of the message of all scripture: To thee We sent the scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety (5:48 MP/51 AYA).

He [Jesus] said, "Lo, I am God's servant; God has given me the Book, and made me a Prophet." S. 19.30 (Book could be recita-tion as is the Quran ?)

It is He Who has sent down the Book (the Qur'an) to you (Mu-hammad SAW) with truth, confirming what came before it. And he sent down the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel). S. 3:3

Sura 5:46 states that the Injil was given to Jesus by Allah. Sura 19:30 and 3:3 then clarify that the Injil is a book just as the Qur'an and the Torah are books that were sent down by Allah.

Well, why would Muslims need to refer to the scriptures when the Quran already outlined the truths as you quoted above ??  All the Quranic verses you quoted tell us everything what we need to know about the previous scriptures. For example, Jesus is a servant and a prophet of God. It is only when Christians said Jesus is God or equal to God that the Muslims will direct the Christians back to their own scriptures which clearly said Jesus IS a servant and a prophet of God. Other than that, why would the Muslims need to refer to a Book that is a mixture of truths and lies when the Muslims have a Book that is all truths when it comes to who Jesus is??

 2Acts wrote:

Original sin and the Trinity are doctrines based on scriptural truth.  Regarding original sin there are several lines of biblical basis to the doctrine that we are all born into the world with sinful natures, due to the sin of Adam. Refer to Psalm 51:,5 Ephesians 2:2 -3, Proverbs 22:15 ,Genesis 8:21 and Psalm 14:2–3.

None of those verses you mentioned refers to the concept of original sin.  Sin, by definition, simply means to go against or to disobey the Command of God. Sin is also a choice you made, NOT by birth. Adam was not created with sin, Adam was given the breath of life, or, you can say, created, in the image of God, meaning, he was created PERFECT.  Likewise, man too was given the breath of life in a state of perfection. Adam was said to have sinned because he disobeyed the Command of God.  In other words, he had a choice to sin or not, but, he was influenced by Satan and he made the wrong choice. Likewise, man too had a choice to sin or not – it all boiled down to the strength of your faith to disobey God or not. Anyway, let’s review those verses you quoted :

“Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me” – Psalm 51:5 ESV

This simply mean he was born in a world which was already filled with sin, that is, sin was rampant at that time. Similarly, a child born in a time of war could also have said “I was brought forth in violence” which would mean he was born in a world already filled with violence and not that he was born growling and holding a gun !

Then you mentioned Ephesians 2:2-3. Again, these words of Paul had nothing to do with the original sin, because, prior to that, Paul said “And you were dead in the trespasses and sins” – Ephesians 2:1. He said “And you were dead…”, NOT “And you were born…”. So, where did you see ‘original sin’ in Ephesians 2:2-3 ??

“Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him” – Proverbs 22:15

This simply means foolishness or lack of good sense and judgment are normally in children but good discipline can make them wise. So, where did you see ‘original sin’ in Proverbs 22:15 ??

“And when the LORD smelled the pleasing aroma, the LORD said in his heart, “I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the intention of man's heart is evil from his youth” – Genesis 8:21

Again, like Proverbs 21:15, the intention of evil begin from the age of youth, NOT from birth. So, where did you see ‘original sin’ in Genesis 8:21 ??

“The LORD looks down from heaven on all mankind to see if there are any who understand, any who seek God.  All have turned away, all have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one” – Psalm 14:2-3

The key phrase here is “all have BECOME corrupt”, in other words, they became corrupt, NOT that they were born corrupted or sinful. So, where did you see ‘original sin’ in Psalm 14:2-3 ??

 2Acts wrote:

Regarding the Trinity you need to know that the word “Trinity” is not even found in the Bible. However the doctrine exists due to such verses as Genesis 1.26 , Isaiah 6.8, Isaiah 42.1,Matthew 3:17, Mark 14:61-62.

OK, let’s review those verses you mentioned :

“Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” – Genesis 1:26

Where did you see trinity in Genesis 1:26 ?? Because God used plural terms such as “us”, “our” ?? Have you heard of the term “Royal we” ? If you want to convince anyone that God is a ‘3-in-1’ God, you need to show the words of God saying He’s that or the words of Jesus saying that, NOT the words of other people.

“And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?” Then I said, “Here I am! Send me.” – Isaiah 6:8

Where did you see trinity in Isaiah 6:8 ?? This was about Isaiah’s commission from God. The ‘Lord’ here referred to God, NOT Jesus.

“Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations.” – Isaiah 42:1

Where did you see trinity in Isaiah 42:1 ?? If this was about Jesus, then, it only shows that Jesus IS a servant of God and he was  strengthened with the Spirit of God (I will put my Spirit on him).

"And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” – Matthew 3:17

Where did you see trinity in Matthew 3:17 ??  Because God said “This is my son/Son, whom I love” ?? First of all, don’t be taken in by the CAPITALISED ‘S’ as in Greek or Hebrew, which was the original language the English Bibles translated from, do not make any distinction between CAPITAL and non-capital letters, they are all CAPITALISED. Secondly, the term ‘Son/son’ as used by God and Jesus in the scripture means servant and they are used synonymously with one another.  So, Isaiah 42:1, which you mentioned above, used ‘servant’ instead of ‘son’, so, did Matthew 12:18. So, ‘son/Son of God’ does not mean God the Son, but, it means the servant of God.

“But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”,  “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sit-ting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” – Mark 14:61-62

Where did you see trinity in Mark 14:61-62 ?? Because Jesus said “I am” in response to the question “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?” ??  The question you should ask yourself is how did Jesus understand that question. I will tell you - Jesus understood that question as “Are you the Messiah, the servant of the Blessed One?” and that was why he responded with “I am”.  However, in Luke 22:70, when he was asked “Are you then the Son of God ?”, Jesus understood this as “Are you God the Son ?”, thus, Jesus responded with “You said that I am”. In other words, Jesus was saying he never claimed to be God the Son, it was only them who have been saying that (You said that I am).

 2Acts wrote:

How convenient for you to say the Bible is not corrupted in its entirety! “a mixture of truth and lies” you say. So tell us then what is your criteria for determining which is truth and which is lies. No doubt the verses that support a Muslim view are seen as truth and verses that contradict the Muslim view are lies. And until you do so you have no authority to quote from the Bible at all and pick and choose what suits you.

Well, yes, the verses that are in agreement with the Quran were the truths, but, for your sake, let’s ignore the Muslims’ view or what the Quran said. So, the criteria to determine which are the truth and which are lies in your scripture is really simple – what are the truths are those that are in total agreement with what God Almighty had said or what His prophets had said and in the case of Christians, what Jesus himself had said in your gospels. So, if you said Jesus came to die for all mankind sin, then you need to show from your scripture that Jesus, NOT what other people, said or implied that he came to die for the sin of all mankind. Question is - can you ??

 2Acts wrote:

If you are going to quote Jeremiah 8.8 then you need to understand Jeremiah 8.8. It is clear Jeremiah was simply rebuking the scribes for their traditions that led people astray. He was not stating The Word had been corrupted. Consider these points -
1. Other godly men also had copies of the Torah in their posses-sion. Eg. the prophet Daniel. Plus other prophets affirm that the book of Moses was still available during their day.eg. Nehemiah 8:13-14,18. This occurred approximately 430 B.C., nearly 180 years after Jeremiah.
2. The Lord Jesus and his followers quoted from the Torah as we know it today and never thought that it was corrupt (cf. Matthew 4:4,7,10; 22:31-32d
3. Even Jeremiahs enemies knew that the Law could never dis-appear. Jeremiah 18:18  
4. If you read Jeremiah 36: 1-7, 20-32, 27-32.You will see that If God was capable of restoring the revelation given to Jeremiah af-ter it had been destroyed, then God would also have been capa-ble of restoring the original Torah.
5. Jeremiah said …“ If you do not listen to me and follow MY LAW …. So how could Israel follow the Law, i.e. the Torah, if it had been corrupted?  Jeremiah 26:4-6.

Well, Jeremiah 8:8 CLEARLY said "'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?”.  The ‘lying pen of the scribes’ obviously is NOT a reference to their traditions, BUT, it’s a reference to what they have been writing which are edited or fabricated (handled it falsely). Of course, not ALL are fabricated as there are those that are truthfully written too and survived to-day but unfortunately, the edited/fabricated verses also survived till today and that’s why the Bible you have today is a mixture of truths and lies. 

 2Acts wrote:

You asked me where did I get the fact that Mo-hamad was not a comforter but a war Lord who lived by the sword? You obviously do not know your own Quran and hadith.
Read Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 261 and you will see Mohamad had the men of Ukl or Uraynah tortured by hav-ing their hands and feet cut off. Then he ordered for nails which were heated and passed over their eyes, and they were left in the desert. When they asked for water, they were given none and left to die.

Well, you need to understand that hadiths are written by men and therefore, not all hadiths are true. In other words, like the Bible today, the collection of hadiths is also a mixture of truths and lies. So, one need to validate the hadiths with the teaching of the Quran, to know which hadiths are reliable and which are not.

 2Acts wrote:

Your Quran is full of directives to violence –
 “Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits, for Allah does not love transgressors”. 2:190
 “And slay them (the infidels) wherever you catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out, for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter” 2:191

“And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and Faith in Allah; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression”. 2:193

“Fighting is prescribed for you, and you dislike it. But it is possi-ble that you dislike a thing which is good for you, and that you love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knows, and you know not” 2:216

"Let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah, whether he is slain or gets victory soon shall we give him a re-ward of great (value)" 4:74

 “Seize them and slay them wherever you find them: and in any case take no friends or helpers from their ranks.” 4:89

"Allah has granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit at home "4:95

"Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly" 8:60

"O Prophet! rouse the Believers to the fight. If there are twenty amongst you, patient and persevering, they will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, they will vanquish a thousand of the Unbe-lievers: for these are a people without understanding" 8:65

"Fight them and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you to victory over them, and heal the breasts of the Believers"  9:14

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued"  9:29

"Say: can you expect for us (and fate) other than one of two glo-rious things (martyrdom or victory)? But we can expect for you either that Allah will send his punishment (for not believing in Al-lah) from Himself, or by our hands. So wait (expectant); we too will wait with you" 9:52

When reading verses from the Quran, or verses from the Bible for that matter, you need to consider the circumstances of the time those verses were revealed, the contexts of the verses, the culture/traditions of the society of that time, etc. In other words, the verses of the Quran are revealed at a specific time for specific reason(s).  For example, lets take Quran 9:29 which Christians like to bring up to show Islam is against all non-Muslims. The verse read :

“Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not acknowledge the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture, until they give the tribute (Jizyah) willingly while they are humbled” – Quran 9:29

On the surface, this seems like a command to fight non-Muslims until they are conquered. However, a fundamental principle of Quranic exegesis is that the verse must be understood in the context in which they were revealed and in conjunction with other verses delineating the rules of warfare. The event that led to this verse being revealed was that the Prophet (pbuh) had sent Al-Harith ibn Umair Al-Azdi on an errand to carry a letter to the ruler of Busra. On his way, Al-Harith was intercepted by Sharhabeel ibn Amr Al-Ghassani, the governor of Al-Balqa and a close ally to Caesar, the Byzantine Emperor and was beheaded by Al-Ghassani. This was the first act of Roman aggression against the Muslims that further led to the revelation of verse 9:29. Executing emissaries from other countries is a war crime that could never be committed by those who sincerely believe in God. Thus, the verse 9:29 was a reference to the aggressors as those “who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day,” because they committed this act of treachery – it’s NOT a reference to ALL non-Muslims. Likewise, in WW2, when the Americans with its allies were fighting the Germans, its common for the army generals to issue commands to fight all the Germans BUT was the command really to fight ALL Germans, that is, ALL German children, women and non-military citizens ?? No, the command was to fight only the German soldiers who were fighting AGAINST the US and its allies, NOT every German they find. 

As for “the Quran is full of directives to violence”, well, obviously, you do not know your own Bible.  Personally, I always believe in a loving God, and NOT a God of violence in nature, and so, any verses in the Quran or the Bible that contains “directives of violence”, I would say there must be a logical explanation or those verses are read out of context. 

However, since you started this rant “the Quran is full of directives to violence”, perhaps you can explain to me these “directives of violence” in your own Bible :

Kill all non-believers
They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13)

Kill People Who Don’t Listen to the Judges or Priests 
“Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death.  Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12) 

Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God
“Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods.  In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully.  If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. “  (Deuteronomy 13:13-15)

Of course, there are more violence verses in the Bible, BUT, suffice for now. If you can explain the above 'violence command' verses in your Bible, that would be very helpful.

 2Acts wrote:

Prove to me that Jesus that Jesus would expect his disciples to draw their swords and fight for him. And please do not refer to Luke 22.36 as when Muslims do they only display their ignorance. It was Jesus that said “turn the other cheek” and to “bless your enemies”

OK, I am not going to quote Luke 22:36, altho’ one may wonder why did Jesus tell his disciples to sell everything they had and buy swords instead. Hmmmm..

Anyway, if one never spoke of fighting, it does not mean one don’t believe in fighting. Jesus may not believe in unjust fighting, in fact, all prophets of God do not believe in unjust fighting, but I can assure you Jesus do believe in fighting in defense of the right cause.

To show you that this is the case, let’s examine Jesus’ words - ‘Jesus answered, "My Kingdom is not an earthly kingdom. If it were, my followers would fight to keep me from being handed over to the Jewish leaders. But my Kingdom is not of this world."’. – John 18:36

What is Jesus saying here ? Jesus is saying that he expects his followers to fight the Jews from capturing him (fight to keep me from being handed over), but they will not fight for him because he’s a man of God (my kingdom is not of this world) however, they (his followers) would fight for him if he was not a man of God but was someone with worldly interests (of an earthly kingdom) and they would have not handed him over to the Jews. So, Jesus, like Muhammad, do believe in a just cause fighting for the cause of God, that is, the Message of God he was preaching.

Hello Jerry Myers.

I must say for
someone who does not believe the Bible to be reliable with a mix of truth and
lies you do seem fond of quoting bible verses. You are wrong where you say it
was Christians that said Jesus is equal to God. Jesus Himself said in John
10.30 “I and The Father are One”.

You ask why would
Muslims need to refer to the Bible as a Book that’s a mixture of truth and lies
? I don’t know. However that’s your problem to work out. You tell me why your
Quran tells you to refer to the Bible when at the same time Muslims believe its
not trust worthy. Muslims don’t seem sure about what to believe !

Regarding Original
Sin you are only partly correct in your definition of sin. “Sin” is actually a
state of imperfection that falls short of Gods perfection.   It is
more than just disobedience as you say. It is a imperfect state of being. In
fact the Bible states the whole creation is in a state of sin and the whole of
creation is under a curse –Roman 8.18 -22 and Genesis 3.17.

The idea of the curse
is further developed where the Bible presents Adam as the first man, and gives
the Lord Jesus Christ the curious title of ‘the last Adam’ (1 Corinthians
15:45). All of the verses I provided corroborate this. Psalm 51.5 refer to life
being brought forth in an environment iniquity and sin.

You state man has a
choice to sin or not and it boils down to the strength of our faith to obey God
or not. Im sure you will admit that in your life and in all of our lives there
is a predisposition to do not what we know to be right. No matter how many
Salahs you recite will ever change that. 

You need to read Ephesians
2.2 -3 more fully. “As for you, you were
dead in your transgressions and sins, which you used to live when you followed the
ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who
is now at work in those who are disobedient.” 

Again it talks the
ways of the world being sinful and about a power of sin in the world more
powerful than us making simple choices. It actually talks about the power of
Satan influencing mankind to sin.

Regarding Proverbs
22.15 foolishness falls short Gods perfection and is “sin”. And the word for
“folly” here  is 'ivveleth which actually
implies impiety or evil. Proverbs 22.15  implies
this state of sin is bound up in the heart of children. 

You are wrong about
Genesis 8.21 where you say evil began with youth. It states the “ground” itself
was cursed. The ground that supports all life. 

Regarding Psalm
14.2-3 you need to understand it in the context of the Bible as a whole and in
the context of my explanations above. People are made in the image of God.
People are partly divine. However ALL of mankind have become corrupt because as
I said earlier the curse that is over the world.  People are born into a cursed world and
become further corrupted with life. All verses are to be read in literary
context, not out of context as you tend to do. 

Regarding the trinity
let me remind you the term “Trinity” is not found in the Bible. Christians believe
God is One. “The Lord our God, the Lord is one .” (Mark 12:29). But for your sake
lets pull this apart a bit. While God is One, you will consistently find is a
plurality with three distinct aspects of God identified. “Royal we”? Royal WE
is more accurate regarding Genesis 1.26. Plural !  Isaiah 6:8 is another example of the plurality
of God. 

Regarding the verses
already mentioned, lets discuss them further. Plurality is found in Isaiah 6.8.
“And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go
for us?” (plural!) … 
Isaiah 6:8.

Regarding the person
identified in Isaiah 42.1 it is essentially a Messianic verse that implies an earthly
ruler with divine qualities. This becomes apparent when read in the context of
the whole chapter and other Messianic verses in Isaiah and elsewhere. For the
purposes of our argument however it implies a plurality or extension of God
into an earthly ruler with divine attributes.

You are wrong about
Mathew 3.17 as referring to a servant. The word used in the Greek  is 
“Huios” which means “Son” not 
servant as you claim.  While  “Huios / Son ” is used in other contexts  it means Son in the general context of the
offspring of men, and in a wider sense, a descendant, or one of the posterity
of someone, and in this sense, of God The Father. 

Regarding Matthew
12:18. This verse is prophetic and in reference to the earthly but divine ruler
referred to in Isaiah 42.14 which I have  discussed above. But anyway read on. After
Jesus heals a demon possessed dumb and blind man …  “All the people were astonished and said,
“Could this be the Son of David?” Mat 12:23. The Jews themselves were expecting
a Messianic figure being the “son of David which is part of the basis to the Messianic
Jewish / Christian doctrine of “Sonship”.  

Have a good read of
Mark 14.61 Jerry Myers and read on to verse 64. First Jesus states he is
the  Son of the Blessed One (in this
context an exclusive Title)  , then he
refers to himself as the figure of God who will return to judge the world in
Daniel 7.13 -15, and then the Chief Priests condemn him to death for the
blasphemy of making himself equal to God. 

Regarding Luke 22:66 it
needs to be read in the context of Mark 14 as discussed above, and the same
argument holds First Jesus states he is the 
Son of the Blessed One (in this context an exclusive Title) , then he
refers to himself as the figure of God who will return to judge the world in
Daniel 7.13 -15, and then the Chief Priests condemn him to death for the
blasphemy of making himself equal to God. Matthew 26:63 says the same thing. 

Jesus himself said: “I have come down from heaven.”  John 6:38; 8:23.

In John 3.16 where it talks about Jesus as
the only “ begotten Son”.  (Monogenēs - μονογενὴς meaning the one and only
legitimate “Son”) this is in reference to Psalm 2:7 - "I
will surely tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to Me, 'Thou art My Son,
Today I have begotten Thee. 

 Did Jesus claimed to
be “the son of God”? Yes. Why was he was accused of blasphemy ? Read the
Gospels …  ‘but for blasphemy, because
you, a mere man, claim to be God.’(John 10:31-38) … Later, before Pontius
Pilate, “The Jews insisted, ‘We have a law, and according to that law He must
die, because He claimed to be the Son of God’” (John 19:7). Why would His
claiming to be the Son of God be considered blasphemy and be worthy of a death
sentence? The Jewish leaders understood exactly what Jesus meant by the phrase
“Son of God.” To be the Son of God is to be of the same nature as God. The Son
of God is “of God.” The claim to be of the same nature as God—to in fact be
God—was blasphemy to the Jewish leaders; therefore, they demanded Jesus’ death,
in keeping with Leviticus 24:15.

 As well as Jesus
admitting he is The Son of God he also referred to Himself as The Son of Man”
referencing himself to Daniel 7 where he will return to judge the world. Not a
mere man obviously!

 Also the Tenakh (OT) stresses God is
One but with many dimensions. Examples of verses in the Tenakh (OT)  that referrer to God in the plural (many).are
Genesis 1.26 and Isaiah 6.8. Jews have always known this. 

Even some of the
Jewish names for God imply him having more than one characteristic, for example
the names “Echad” and “Elohim” describe God in the plural (many). A Hebrew name for God is  “Echad” 
implying  cluster,
like a cluster of grapes (plural but one).

The plurality of God and God The Son is also found in the
Old Testament. For example -

 Psalm 45:6-7, You love righteousness and hate wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.
 For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will
be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. (Isaiah 9:6) 

 Do homage to the Son, lest He become angry, and you
perish in the way, For His wrath may soon be kindled. How blessed are all who
take refuge in Him! (Psalm 2:12) 

 Who has ascended into heaven and descended? Who has
gathered the wind in His fists? Who has wrapped the waters in His garment? Who
has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name or His Son's name?
Surely you know! (Proverbs 30:4) 

 Then a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse, And a
branch from his roots will bear fruit. And the Spirit of the LORD will rest on
Him, The spirit of wisdom and understanding, The spirit of counsel and
strength, The spirit of knowledge and the fear of the LORD. (Isaiah 11:1-2) 

The third member of the trinity of God, The Holy Spirit,
is also found as an exclusive entity and extensively in the Old Testament.
Examples of this are found in Genesis 1:2, 1  Samuel 11:6, Psalm 106:33,Genesis 6:3, 1
Samuel 16:13. 

 Regarding “God The Father, the
third element of The Godhead, the Bible repeatedly speaks of God as Heavenly
Father. God is Father in a spiritual sense. His Fatherhood does not begin with
Mary and Jesus; He is eternally Heavenly Father. His name "Heavenly
Father" identifies His relationship with His creatures. 

Further points I
would make about “ the Trinity” are that there is nothing new in your
doubting the doctrine of the trinity. These arguments have been common within
the Christian world and Christian history. There is a theological discipline
called “Christology” where Christians have been discussing and debating these
points for the last 2000 years. A lot longer than what Muslims have been
presenting it to Christians

Also you don’t
have to believe in the trinity to be a Christian. My personal view of God is 1
but having many dimensions or being multi dimensional but at the moment there
appears to be 3 main dimensions or aspects of his Oneness that are being
emphasized. 

Finally you state
that if I want to convince anyone that God is a ‘3-in-1’ God, I need to show
the words of God saying He is that or the words of Jesus saying that, not the
words of other people.  This argument of
yours is bordering on what is called a “straw man” logical fallacy ( a common
poorly formed argument based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's
argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that
opponent in the first place.)

If want to follow
this line of reasoning, let me ask you. If Mohamad is the “Comforter” then you
need to show from your scripture that Mohamad said, and NOT other people said,
or implied, that he is the comforter as Jesus promised. Can you??

Regarding your
criteria for determining which is truth and which is lies in the Bible you admit Bible verses that support a
Muslim view are truth and verses that contradict the Muslim view are lies. This
is actually faulty reasoning and circular logic on your behalf and is also
known as a circular logical fallacy ( where the reasoner begins with what they
are trying to end with). 

Your attempt of an exegesis(
critical explanation or interpretation of a text) where you said “the criteria truth
in my scripture are the truths of those in agreement with what God  or His prophets or what Jesus himself had
said is correct for basic Christian exegesis, but my point stands - you still
have not adequately determined your Muslim criteria for determining which is
truth and which is lies and until you do so you have no authority to quote from
the Bible at all and pick and choose what simply suits you.

Your challenge to
show from my scripture that Jesus, and not what other people, said or implied,
that he came to die for the sin of all mankind is again also bordering on the
straw man logical fallacy . Any way Jesus often talked in parables but John
8:12, 12.24 and 2.19 are all examples of what Jesus said about dying for the
world. 

Again I challenge
you. If want to follow this line of reasoning, let me ask you. If Mohamad is the
“Comforter” then you need to show from your scripture that Mohamad said, and
NOT other people said, or implied, that he is the comforter as Jesus promised.
Can you ??

Regarding Jeremiah
8.8 it not saying the Word had been corrupted, it is saying a certain group of
scribes have handled it falsely.  Consider these points -

1. Other godly men
also had copies of the Torah in their posses-sion. Eg. the prophet Daniel. Plus
other prophets affirm that the book of Moses was still available during their
day.eg. Nehemiah 8:13-14,18. This occurred approximately 430 B.C., nearly 180
years after Jeremiah.

2. The Lord Jesus and
his followers quoted from the Torah as we know it today and never thought that
it was corrupt (cf. Matthew 4:4,7,10; 22:31-32d

3. Even Jeremiahs
enemies knew that the Law could never dis-appear. Jeremiah 18:18 

4. If you read
Jeremiah 36: 1-7, 20-32, 27-32. You will see that If God was capable of restoring
the revelation given to Jeremiah after it had been destroyed, then God would
also have been capable of restoring the original Torah.

5. Later Jeremiah
said …“ If you do not listen to me and follow MY LAW …. So how could Israel
follow the Law, i.e. the Torah, if it had been corrupted? Jeremiah 26:4-6.

Regarding the
violence in the Quran proving Mohammad in not the “Comforter”. The reason I
quoted the verse in Sahih al-Bukhari, where Mohamed had his enemies tortured
with hot nails in their eyes was because you asked where I got my idea of Mohamad’s
warfaring nature. Proof has been provided. Sahih Hadith is integral to Orthodox
Islamic Sharia and always has been. You 
are being evasive by minimising the importance of your Sahih Hadith.

You state the violent directives and verses
in the Quran need to be understood in the context of the times. In saying this
you are implying the Quran is not a literal, eternal, universal, absolute
message for all people for all time ? !

Besides the point to all of this is how can Mohamad have been The
Comforter” when he was so inclined to wield the sword, torture his enemies and
instruct his men to take women captive sex slaves. You have not yet answered
this question?

Violence in the Bible
? you will only find violence in the Old Testament not the Christian New
Testament . The reason violence is found in the Old Testament is that the Old
Testament is only a partial revelation of God. Jesus as the final revelation
and he preached Jesus preached to “love ones enemies”.

As I said above. The
point to all of this is how can Mohamad have been the “Comforter” when he wielded
the sword, tortured his enemies and instructed his men to take women captive
sex slaves. You have not yet answered this question?

In Luke 22.36 Jesus
was not encouraging His disciples to defend themselves through violence, which
would have contradicted His previous instruction, in Matthew 5:38-39, against
harming others,In Luke 9:56, and  In
Matthew 5:44  “…Love your enemies, bless
them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which
despitefully use you, and persecute you.”

Why did Jesus
instruct his disciples to get swords? To assure the fulfilment of the prophecy
in Isaiah 53:12. He was to be considered a lawbreaker or transgressor.

You say if one never
spoke of fighting  it does not mean one doesn’t
believe in fighting. Jesus never spoke of UFOs or flying pigs either. Did he
believe in UFOs or flying pigs ? and besides he did talk about fighting. He
said to love our enemies (Mathew 5.43) and to put our swords down and those who
use the sword will die by the sword.  (Mathew
26.52). 

Regarding John 18.38
You have totally twisted and misread the verse. He is saying because His
kingdom is not of this world he does not expect his followers to fight.
You need to read it properly and stop twisting verses to suit your own world
view. 