返回总目录
Response to Misha'al Al-Kadhi: Trinitarian scholars admit it!
A response to 1.2.2.16
Trinitarian scholars admit it!
Introduction
Mr. Al-Kadhi continues his assault against the Trinity be implying
that Trinitarian "scholars" deny, or at least seriously question,
the existence of the Trinity. After all, according to Al-Kadhi, the
Trinity was the invention of the Byzantine Emperor Constantine at
the Council of Nicea. When reading this section, we must remember
two questions: Who are these "scholars" and precisely what are
they saying?
The Trinity is a concept that many Muslims simply love to hate and
some, such as Al-Kadhi, labor very diligently in order to misunderstand
and misinterpret this doctrine. To begin this discussion, we must
first realize that many Muslims misunderstand the concept of the
Trinity. Christians do not worship three Gods, nor do they consider
Mary a member of the Trinity as Sura 5:116 incorrectly implies.
The Trinity is God, God's Word, and God's Spirit - not three Gods.
The one true God, was well established in the Old Testament (Isaiah 43:10
and Deuteronomy 6:4), and is made up of the Father, the Son, and the
Holy Spirit. Each is called "God" in the Bible. The Father is God
(Galatians 1:1 and Titus 1:4) ; the Son (or Word), is repeatedly called
God (John 1:1,14, Acts 20:28, John 20:28, Titus 2:13, and Hebrews 1:8);
and the Holy Spirit is identified as God in various Scriptures (Acts 5:3-4,
1 John 4:2,3, and Hebrews 10:15,16). The concept of the unity within
the Trinity is seen in Matthew 28:19, where the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit comprise one "name" because the term is singular in Greek.
Incidentally, the Koran also testifies to the existence of the Holy
Spirit as a separate manifestation of the godhead: "We gave Jesus the
Son of Mary evidence, clear [signs] and strengthened him with the
Holy Spirit" (Sura 2:87) and "To Jesus the Son of Mary We gave clear
[signs], and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit" (Sura 2:253).
If Mr. Al-Kadhi wishes to read about the nature of God in the Bible,
the account of the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist clearly reveals
the existence of a Triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit:
Matthew 3:16-17
- 16
- As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water.
At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending
like a dove and lighting on him.
- 17
- And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love;
with him I am well pleased."
A second issue that Mr. Al-Kadhi loves to belabor is the first Ecumenical
Council of Nicea. Al-Kadhi, and many other Muslim apologists, believe that
the Council of Nicea was a vehicle by which the Emperor Constantine foisted
the concept of the Trinity on Christianity. This viewpoint reflects
Mr. Al-Kadhi's complete misunderstanding (or intentional distortion) of
Church history. The Council of Nicea was not called to debate the Trinity,
in fact no such controversy even existed at that time. During this first
age of the Christian Church, the main topic that was debated by orthodox
Christians and various heretics, was the issue of the divinity and humanity
of Jesus Christ. These debates did not extend beyond the consideration of
the second Person of the Trinity, Jesus. [For more detail see this
article on The Council
of Nicea.] The formulation of the Trinity was a explanation of
the nature of God that was derived completely from the Bible. For those
of you who are interested in this topic, read the primary documents
of the Nicean Council. Mr. Al-Kadhi makes a great amount of noise
over the fact that the term "Trinity" did not exist during the lifetime
of the Apostles. The Apostles would not have been aware of the term,
however, they were most certainly aware of the concept of God, God's Word
(Jesus), and God's Spirit (Holy Spirit).
Al-Kadhi's Trinitarian "Scholars"
Now Mr. Al-Kadhi goes on to cite his "scholars" in order to make his
argument against the Trinity. Al-Kadhi makes the same error that many
of my freshman students make: any words that are printed on paper must
be true if these words support their claims. He also continues his bad
little habit of quoting things out of context and never cites primary
sources. In fact, he attempts to use the Encyclopedia Britannica to make
his point! He also enjoys "establishing" writers who disagree with the
teachings of orthodox Christianity as "Christian" or "Trinitarian" scholars.
Let us look at Mr. Al-Kadhi's citations and what they really say:
"The New Catholic Encyclopedia"
Al-Kadhi's first source is the New Catholic Encyclopedia. I disagree
with some of the theological teachings of this work, however, it is of
very high scholastic quality. Even Mr. Al-Kadhi gives respect to this
wonderful work saying: "(Bearing the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur,
indicating official approval) we get a glimpse of how the concept of
the Trinity was not introduced into Christianity until close to four
hundred years after Jesus (pbuh)". Incidentally, for those of us who
do not understand Latin (this probably includes Mr. Al-Kadhi), "Nihil
obstat" (Latin for "no problem") indicates that the work has been
reviewed by a knowledgeable clergyman and "Imprimatur" (Latin for "let
it be printed") indicates that a Bishop permitted the printing of the
work. According to The New Catholic Encyclopedia:
".......It is difficult in the second half of the 20th century to
offer a clear, objective and straightforward account of the revelation,
doctrinal evolution, and theological elaboration of the Mystery of
the trinity. Trinitarian discussion, Roman Catholic as well as other,
present a somewhat unsteady silhouette. Two things have happened.
There is the recognition on the part of exegetes and Biblical
theologians, including a constantly growing number of Roman Catholics,
that one should not speak of Trinitarianism in the New Testament
without serious qualification. There is also the closely parallel
recognition on the part of historians of dogma and systematic
theologians that when one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism,
one has moved from the period of Christian origins to, say, the last
quadrant of the 4th century. It was only then that what might be
called the definitive Trinitarian dogma 'One God in three Persons'
became thoroughly assimilated into Christian life and thought ...
it was the product of 3 centuries of doctrinal development" (emphasis
added). "The New Catholic Encyclopedia" Volume XIV, p. 295.
Now, Al-Kadhi is really excited: `They admit it!
Jesus' twelve apostles lived and died never having heard of any
"Trinity"!' No, Mr. Al-Kadhi! You are deliberately mixing terms
and concepts. They did not know of the term "Trinity", but they most
certainly knew of the concept. Please refer to the numerous verses
that I mentioned in my introduction and read them!
Mr. Al-Kadhi continues, in his great excitement, by saying:
Did Jesus leave his closest and dearest followers so completely and
utterly baffled and lost that they never even realized the "true"
nature of God? Did he leave them in such black darkness that neither
they nor their children, nor yet their children's children would ever
come to recognize the "true" nature of the One they are to worship?
Do we really want to allege that Jesus was so thoroughly incompetent
in the discharge of his duties that he left his followers in such
utter chaos that it would take them fully three centuries after his
departure to finally piece together the nature of the One whom they
are to worship? Why did Jesus never, even once, just say "God, the
Holy Ghost and I are three Persons in one Trinity. Worship all of
us as one"? If he had only chosen to make just one such explicit
statement to them he could have relieved Christianity of centuries
of bitter disputes, division, and animosity."
Jesus left his disciples with overwhelming proof concerning the Triune
nature of God. There are numerous references that reveal the concept,
of what we now call the Trinity, in both the
Old and New Testaments. The Apostles and early Christians were
very familiar with these verses and the ideas that they conveyed.
Incidentally, for those of you who want to know what the Catholic
Encyclopedia says about the Trinity,
please read the online version - this entry (as well as the rest of
the book) is excellent. Read this entry and decide for yourself if
Mr. Al-Kadhi has an adequate understanding of the Trinity.
The Dictionary of the Bible
Al-Kadhi then cites The Dictionary of the Bible which, he proudly
announces as "bearing the Nihil Obstat, Imprimatur, and Imprimi Potest
(official Church seals of approval)". Imprimi Potest is the Latin term
for "it can be printed".
"the trinity of God is defined by the Church as the belief that
in God are three persons who subsist in one nature. That belief as
so defined was reached only in the 4th and 5th centuries AD and
hence is not explicitly and formally a biblical belief."
The Dictionary of the Bible, John L. McKenzie, S.J., p. 899
The Trinity IS implied in the Bible and the term "Trinity" is an
explanation used by humans to attempt to comprehend the nature of
God. This is one of many distorting
quotations by Al-Kadhi. Has Mr. Al-Kadhi made any effort to
read and understand the complete article from which he quotes?
What does it actually say? Note the words "explicitly" and "formally".
KcKenzie does NOT deny that the teaching is Biblical, he only states
correctly that these exact formulations are not used in the Bible
itself but were developed later. The concept is Biblical. We have
decided to present more of McKenzie's entry so that the reader
can see for himself that McKenzie clearly states that
the doctrine of the Trinity is
based on the Biblical data.
For Christ's Sake
Al-Kadhi's next "scholar" is the religion reporter for the Toronto
Sunday Star, Tom Harpur, who wrote in his book "For Christ's Sake"
(my comments in bold):
"What is most embarrassing for the church is the difficulty of
proving any of these statements of dogma from the new Testament
documents. You simply cannot find the doctrine of the Trinity
set out anywhere in the Bible.
(WRONG!! Read the Biblical
Proof). St. Paul has the highest view of Jesus' role
and person, but nowhere does he call him God.
(WRONG AGAIN!!! Read Corinthians 13:14)
Nor does Jesus himself anywhere explicitly claim to be the second
person in the Trinity, wholly equal to his heavenly Father. As
a pious Jew, he would have been shocked and offended by such an
Idea....(this is) in itself bad enough.
WRONG ONCE AGAIN!! But
there is worse to come. This research has lead me to believe
that the great majority of regular churchgoers are, for all
practical purposes, tritheists. That is, they profess to believe
in one God, but in reality they worship three.." (I believe
that this condition is the result of creeping modernism and poor
ministry, not the orthodox teachings of the Church.)
Mr. Harpur is a very eloquent and highly educated man and I have
read many of his articles and books. Unfortunately, he has fallen
in to the trap of "Modernism" and admits that he is an "uncomfortable
Christian" who does not believe in the exclusive claims of religion.
I assume that he would also disagree with Islam's exclusive claims.
The Oxford Companion to the Bible
Mr. Al-Kadhi once again cites the Oxford Companion to the Bible:
"Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian
doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the
New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal
partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations
cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon ...
While the New Testament writers say a great deal about God,
Jesus, and the Spirit of each, no New Testament writer expounds
on the relationship among the three in the detail that later
Christian writers do." The Oxford Companion to the Bible, Bruce
Metzger and Michael Coogan, p. 782
Once again Mr. Al-Kadhi cuts and pastes phrases to get what he wants.
He used this same technique to quote this same book out of context
in another chapter. If Al-Kadhi had
continued reading this entry, he would have found an excellent
definition and defense of the Trinity. But then again, I do not
believe that a finding a good definition or explanation is his goal!
The Rebuttal to "What Did Jesus Really Say?"
Answering Islam Home Page