Try the Trinity.

[talib-al-kalim]

The main problem when it comes to explain the trinity dogma is that it is at first not a theological, but a political concept. After the Church had become a stately institution in the Roman Empire, this institution needed to be united. The trinity dogma was created to allow both, the monophysites (essentially saying, Jesus was God on Earth) and the Subordinarists (who have written quite complicated theories that finally come out that Got is One, not human, and Jesus is human, sent by God, and the divine aspect of Jesus is that he received authority from God) to meet half-way and to interprete the dogma in the one or the other sense.

The second problem is that the position of the monophsites contradicts what Jesus said according to all four Gospel accounts, so that a compromise is half-wrong.

The third problem is that Christianity had spread out into the Greek and Roman area with its polytheist religion, where the myths depicted humanoid deities that had sons and daughters with each other and with mankind, creating half-gods. The relationship of Father and Son got a different aspect under this influence, seeing in Jesus a kind of half-god, and Mary was called mother of god, and both were being worshipped like a deity. This is actually what is rejected in the Quran, and if you read and accept the Gospel accounts, you should also get to the conclusion that such idea is against the teachings of Jesus.

If you want to uphold some senseful thoughts that have later been developed around the confuse trinity dogma, parting from the position of John - as I understand him - that may be acceptable even to a Muslim:

1. God is the CREATOR of the immense universe, the origin of all matter and the physical laws, and all we need to live, and ourselves.
2. God is familiar to us through the righteous prophets and the Messiah who gave us His WORD for good guidance in this universe.
3. God is inside those who let Him enter into their heart and mind, that we be guided in His SPIRIT.

All 1,2,3 is God, only our point of view makes the difference.

John says that Jesus is the WORD. He does not only speak the Message but he also lives it with all his heard, and all his mind and all his deeds.
It is the imperfect, not perpetual but recurring experience of this being-one-with-God that makes the believer part of the Kingdom of God on Earth, following Jesus in this integral immergance by aid of the SPIRIT, and which is a foresight to the promised perfect and perpetual Kingdom of God.

 

[Faithfulservant]

I just want to get it all since you are missing some key points


John 1

The Eternal Word
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

The Word Becomes Flesh
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

15 John bore witness of Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is preferred before me, for He was before me.’ ”

18 No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.

And the trinity

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

 

[talib-al-kalim]

That is what you believe.
I believe that Jesus is "the son of God", because he was sent by God as Messiah.
The OT includes several "sons of God" in a similar manner.
I do not subscribe to the author of "Gospel of John's" opinion, where he philosophises in his prologue.
It is not the words of Jesus.


..nothing to do with trinity .. another topic.

I was also feeling scandalized when I read the Gospel according to John the first time. Meanwhile, I have a more differentiated opinion on his theology. Read also John 7:16-18

So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me.If anyone’s will is to do God's will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority. The one who speaks on his own authority seeks his own glory; but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and in him there is no falsehood.

 

[talib-al-kalim]

I just want to get it all since you are missing some key points


John 1

The Eternal Word
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

The Word Becomes Flesh
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

15 John bore witness of Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is preferred before me, for He was before me.’ ”

18 No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.

And the trinity

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

The translation of John you have chosen seems quite tendentious to me. Young's literal translation sounds different:

The Beginning
(Genesis 1:1-2)

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God; 2this one was in the beginning with God; 3all things through him did happen, and without him happened not even one thing that hath happened. 4In him was life, and the life was the light of men, 5and the light in the darkness did shine, and the darkness did not perceive it.
The Witness of John
(Malachi 3:1-5)

6There came a man — having been sent from God — whose name [is] John, 7this one came for testimony, that he might testify about the Light, that all might believe through him; 8that one was not the Light, but — that he might testify about the Light.
9He was the true Light, which doth enlighten every man, coming to the world; 10in the world he was, and the world through him was made, and the world did not know him: 11to his own things he came, and his own people did not receive him; 12but as many as did receive him to them he gave authority to become sons of God — to those believing in his name, 13who — not of blood nor of a will of flesh, nor of a will of man but — of God were begotten.
The Word Made His Dwelling among Us
(Psalm 84:1-12)

14And the Word became flesh, and did tabernacle among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of an only begotten of a father, full of grace and truth. 15John doth testify concerning him, and hath cried, saying, ‘This was he of whom I said, He who after me is coming, hath come before me, for he was before me;’ 16and out of his fulness did we all receive, and grace over-against grace; 17for the law through Moses was given, the grace and the truth through Jesus Christ did come; 18God no one hath ever seen; the only begotten Son, who is on the bosom of the Father — he did declare.

 

[Faithfulservant]

It's the new king james version. It reads the same to me.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I was also feeling scandalized when I read the Gospel according to John the first time. Meanwhile, I have a more differentiated opinion on his theology. Read also John 7:16-18

So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me.If anyone’s will is to do God's will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority. The one who speaks on his own authority seeks his own glory; but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and in him there is no falsehood.

That is not John's theology .. that is what Jesus is reported to have said..
One needs to differentiate between the two in Gospel of John.
The synoptic Gospels read differently.

 

[talib-al-kalim]

That is not John's theology .. that is what Jesus is reported to have said..
One needs to differentiate between the two in Gospel of John.
The synoptic Gospels read differently.

I am persuaded that John understood all he learned from Jesus and all he wrote in his Gospel account. Supposing that the introduction has been written by John, not by a secondary editor, he knew what Jesus said when he was writing the introduction. Thus, these stubborn words in the introduction need to be interpreted at least from what he evidently knew.
Further, John had likely a Greek scribe who wrote it down. It was usual in this time that an elder had texts written by a scholar, even if they knew well how to write. John's native language was not Greek but Hebrew (perhaps Aramaic or a mixture of it). "only begotten" is a literal translation of "μονογενής" but the Greek is probably a false translation of בְּכ֣וֹר, which means first-born, which is a title of the Messiah, following Psalm 89:26-28

He shall say to Me, ‘My father, You are my God, the rock of my salvation.’
I will appoint him first-born, highest of the kings of the earth.
I will maintain My favour for him always; My covenant with him shall stand firm.

John is certainly difficult not only because of his introduction but also because the long speaches of Jesus he writes cannot be litteral, so that we always read what John understood from Jesus more or less in John's formulations.
The thesis of John is the pre-existance of the WORD (Logos, Kalam) personified in Jesus (peace be upon him).
"The Word became flesh" does not mean that the "flesh" (Jesus, the prophet and Messiah) is identical to the Word of God, and as the Word of God is part of God, Jesus is God. It means that Jesus bears the Word.
The pre-existance of the Word (in this case, the Holy Quran) is also a common but disputed concept in Islam. The difference is that nobody ever said that Muhammad (peace be upon him) is the Quran. The two prophets were not the same, and Muhammad is not Messiah, but the WORD is one.

 

[Faithfulservant]

The Logos..

 

[EricPH]

Jesus prayed that we should be 'One', in exactly the same way as he is One with the Father.

John 17,20,

Lifting up his eyes to heaven, Jesus prayed saying:
"Holy Father, I pray not only for them,
but also for those who will believe in me through their word,
so that they may all be one,
as you, Father, are in me and I in you,
that they also may be in us,
that the world may believe that you sent me.
And I have given them the glory you gave me,
so that they may be one, as we are one,
I in them and you in me,
that they may be brought to perfection as one,
that the world may know that you sent me,
and that you loved them even as you loved me.
Father, they are your gift to me.

Could the greatest commandments possibly describe how Christ is One with the Father?

The Father loves the Son as he loves himself.
The Son loves the Father as he loves himself.
Could the spirit be the power of God’s love; working through the perfection of the greatest commandments?

1 Samuel 18-1, NIV version
Jonathan became one in spirit with David, and he loved him as himself.

 

[muhammad_isa]

John's native language was not Greek but Hebrew (perhaps Aramaic or a mixture of it). "only begotten" is a literal translation of "μονογενής" but the Greek is probably a false translation of בְּכ֣וֹר, which means first-born, which is a title of the Messiah, following Psalm 89:26-28

OK

John is certainly difficult not only because of his introduction but also because the long speaches of Jesus he writes cannot be litteral, so that we always read what John understood from Jesus more or less in John's formulations.
The thesis of John is the pre-existance of the WORD (Logos, Kalam) personified in Jesus (peace be upon him).
"The Word became flesh" does not mean that the "flesh" (Jesus, the prophet and Messiah) is identical to the Word of God, and as the Word of God is part of God, Jesus is God. It means that Jesus bears the Word.

That would be one way to understand it, but most people see it as meaning Jesus is "God incarnate".
Oh well..

 

[Thomas]

The main problem when it comes to explain the trinity dogma is that it is at first not a theological, but a political concept.

That would be a near-impossible position to defend, I rather think.

After the Church had become a stately institution in the Roman Empire, this institution needed to be united.

Scholars now reckon the Decree of Thessalonika, issued by Theodisius in 380, was aimed at Constantinople, seat of semi-Arianism, and not the empire as a whole (where it had little impact) – so Theodosius never actually declared Christianity the State Religion.

Emperors tried various means of 'uniting' the church, and all of them failed.

The trinity dogma ...

The Trinity, the confession of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, is as old as the Church.

... the monophysites (essentially saying, Jesus was God on Earth) ...

You'd have to clarify that point. Monophysitism in theological discussion applies the the doctrine from Antioch in the middle of the 5th century – that Christ's human nature was completely subsumed by His divine nature.

and the Subordinarists (who have written quite complicated theories that finally come out that Got is One, not human, and Jesus is human, sent by God, and the divine aspect of Jesus is that he received authority from God) ...

Subordinationism is a trinitarian teaching, as is monophysitism, both were eventually rejected as orthodoxy emerged from the sometimes furious debates across the centuries – both declare Jesus is God.

... to meet half-way and to interprete the dogma in the one or the other sense.

Ah, no, that's not correct at all.

The second problem is that the position of the monophsites contradicts what Jesus said according to all four Gospel accounts, so that a compromise is half-wrong.

And it was defended on Scriptural grounds, too ...

The third problem is that Christianity had spread out into the Greek and Roman area with its polytheist religion, where the myths depicted humanoid deities that had sons and daughters with each other and with mankind, creating half-gods.

But we know Christianity did not follow polytheist mythology, so that's a popular fallacy.

The relationship of Father and Son got a different aspect under this influence, seeing in Jesus a kind of half-god, and Mary was called mother of god, and both were being worshipped like a deity.

Not, that's quite wrong. Mary was never declared divine.

If you want to uphold some senseful thoughts that have later been developed around the confuse trinity dogma, parting from the position of John - as I understand him - that may be acceptable even to a Muslim:

1. God is the CREATOR of the immense universe, the origin of all matter and the physical laws, and all we need to live, and ourselves.
2. God is familiar to us through the righteous prophets and the Messiah who gave us His WORD for good guidance in this universe.
3. God is inside those who let Him enter into their heart and mind, that we be guided in His SPIRIT.

Two out of three – not bad.

However Jesus is the Word incarnate.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Subordinationism is a trinitarian teaching, as is monophysitism

That doesn't make much sense, does it?
Jesus is reported to have said, "My Father is greater than I"
..so we would then have God, the Father, who created the universe, and then Jesus .. who is also God?

.. both declare Jesus is God..

Divine in nature, maybe..

However Jesus is the Word incarnate.

Ah, back to "and the Word became flesh".

 

[Thomas]

John's native language was not Greek but Hebrew (perhaps Aramaic or a mixture of it).

John's native language would have been Aramaic. He would be conversant in Greek.

"only begotten" is a literal translation of "μονογενής" but the Greek is probably a false translation of בְּכ֣וֹר, which means first-born... is a title of the Messiah, following Psalm 89:26-28

Or not ...

"The Word became flesh" does not mean that the "flesh" (Jesus, the prophet and Messiah) is identical to the Word of God, and as the Word of God is part of God, Jesus is God. It means that Jesus bears the Word.

That's an understandable view from the perspective of Islam.

 

[Thomas]

That doesn't make much sense, does it?

LOL, if you understand the terms, it does.

Jesus is reported to have said, "My Father is greater than I"

Yes and, surprise, surprise, we Trinitarians are well aware of that.

..so we would then have God, the Father, who created the universe, and then Jesus .. who is also God?

Who's 'we'?

All Christians, be they subordinationist, Arian, semi-Arian and Nicene, etc., believe Jesus is God before the creation of the universe.

If you're going to criticise, please get don't misrepresent the doctrine – this is something you assume Athanasius and other Nicene commentators did, but didn't, whereas you do.

Divine in nature, maybe..
Ah, back to "and the Word became flesh".

Yep.

 

[muhammad_isa]

That's an understandable view from the perspective of Islam.

..but not from the perspective of a JW, Unitarian or Arian Christian?

 

[muhammad_isa]

All Christians, be they subordinationist, Arian, semi-Arian and Nicene, etc., believe Jesus is God before the creation of the universe.

If you're going to criticise, please get don't misrepresent the doctrine – this is something you assume Athanasius and other Nicene commentators did, but didn't, whereas you do.

I don't know of any Christian who doesn't claim to be a monotheist, do you?

How am I misrepresenting doctrine?
It is you, a Nicene Trinitarian, who asserts what the doctrine of Arians are/were.
I assume that you agree with the following..

The focus of the Council of Nicaea was the nature of the Son of God and his precise relationship to God the Father.
..so why was this so important in your view?
What was it that made people hostile towards each other?

I've seen a similar problem in Islam. Some people claim that Muhammad, peace be with him, is made of light,
and others claim that Muhammad is made of clay.
It is clear to me, why hostility exists. The problem is one of Oneness .. deity.
Making a man into a deity is highly questionable.

..which is why Orthodox Christians like to argue that Arians believed that "Jesus is God", as otherwise,
the triune God fails on the principle of Occam's Razor.
i.e. the simplest explanation is the most likely .. God is not 3 in 1, as in Isaiah 49..

5 To whom will you liken me and make me equal
and compare me, as though we were alike?
6 Those who lavish gold from the purse
and weigh out silver in the scales—
they hire a goldsmith, who makes it into a god;
then they fall down and worship!
7 They lift it to their shoulders; they carry it;
they set it in its place, and it stands there;
it cannot move from its place.
If one cries out to it, it does not answer
or save anyone from trouble.

8 Remember this and consider;
recall it to mind, you transgressors;
9 remember the former things of old,
for I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is no one like me,

 

[Faithfulservant]

You know that there are a number of us that consider that is Christ pre-incarnate speaking? It creates a problem when people try to use OT scriptures to disprove the diety of Jesus when it just affirms our belief. It's ironic really.

 

[muhammad_isa]

You know that there are a number of us that consider that is Christ pre-incarnate speaking?

I believe that Jesus refers to God as "Our Father" in the Gospels.
Jesus also confirmed the Shema..

Mark 12:28-29 One of the scribes came and heard them arguing, and recognizing that He had answered them well, asked Him, "What commandment is the foremost of all?" Jesus answered, "The foremost is, 'Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is one Lord.'"

Yes, one can start talking about "parts" of God, and insisting on such a doctrine..
..but beware .. it's a serious matter replacing [or qualifying] the most important commandment of all.
It would be better to remain silent.

 

[Faithfulservant]

I believe that Jesus refers to God as "Our Father" in the Gospels.
Jesus also confirmed the Shema..

Mark 12:28-29 One of the scribes came and heard them arguing, and recognizing that He had answered them well, asked Him, "What commandment is the foremost of all?" Jesus answered, "The foremost is, 'Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is one Lord.'"

Yes, one can start talking about "parts" of God, and insisting on such a doctrine..
..but beware .. it's a serious matter replacing [or qualifying] the most important commandment of all.
It would be better to remain silent.

I could say you should beware. Jesus was quoting Deuteronomy 6 and many of us believe He was speaking of Himself to Moses.

Psalm 2:12 Kiss the Son,
Lest he be angry, and you perish in the way,
for his wrath is quickly kindled.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

Isaiah 9:6-7 For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

 

[RJM]

I believe that Jesus refers to God as "Our Father" in the Gospels.
Jesus also confirmed the Shema..

Mark 12:28-29 One of the scribes came and heard them arguing, and recognizing that He had answered them well, asked Him, "What commandment is the foremost of all?" Jesus answered, "The foremost is, 'Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is one Lord.'"

Yes, one can start talking about "parts" of God, and insisting on such a doctrine..
..but beware .. it's a serious matter replacing [or qualifying] the most important commandment of all.
It would be better to remain silent.

However Christians do not consider themselves subject to what Muslims tell them they should believe. They do not regard the Quran as the inerrant word of God. They do not think Muslims have the right to lecture them. They have their own New Testament scriptures, which includes the Pauline and Johannine writings. Christians do not regard their Trinitarian belief as polytheism, and they do not feel obliged to have to keep explaining the subtlety of their belief to Muslims who ignore their explanations anyway.

Muslims who want to know about Christ have to read the New Testament anyway, because the Jesus of the Quran is a sketchy figure who says and does little. Below, in bold, is a complete list of the words spoken by Jesus in the Quran:

And [make him] a messenger to the Children of Israel, [who will say], 'Indeed I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I design for you from clay [that which is] like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird by permission of Allah . And I cure the blind and the leper, and I give life to the dead - by permission of Allah . And I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your houses. Indeed in that is a sign for you, if you are believers. (3:49)

(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me. (3:50)

When Jesus found Unbelief on their part He said: “Who will be My helpers to (the work of) Allah?” (3:52)

“…and the Messiah said: O Children of Israel! Serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Surely whoever associates (others) with Allah, then Allah has forbidden to him the garden, and his abode is the fire; and there shall be no helpers for the unjust.”
(5:72)


[And remember] when the disciples said, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, can your Lord send down to us a table [spread with food] from the heaven? [Jesus] said," Fear Allah , if you should be believers."

They said, "We wish to eat from it and let our hearts be reassured and know that you have been truthful to us and be among its witnesses."

Said Jesus, the son of Mary, "O Allah , our Lord, send down to us a table [spread with food] from the heaven to be for us a festival for the first of us and the last of us and a sign from You. And provide for us, and You are the best of providers."

Allah said, "Indeed, I will sent it down to you, but whoever disbelieves afterwards from among you - then indeed will I punish him with a punishment by which I have not punished anyone among the worlds."

And [beware the Day] when Allah will say, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah ?'" He will say, "Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within myself, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen.

I said not to them except what You commanded me - to worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them as long as I was among them; but when You took me up, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things, Witness.

If You should punish them - indeed they are Your servants; but if You forgive them - indeed it is You who is the Exalted in Might, the Wise. (5:112-120)


He said, I am God's servant; He has given me the Book, and made me a prophet. He has made me blessed wherever I am, and has enjoined on me the Worship and Alms, so long as I live; and to be dutiful to my mother; and has not made me oppressive, impious. Peace is on me the day I was born, the day I shall die, and the day I shall be raised alive. (19:29)

When Jesus came with Clear Signs, he said: “Now have I come to you with Wisdom, and in order to make clear to you some of the (points) on which ye dispute: therefore fear Allah and obey me.” (43:63)

https://legacy.quran.com/

That’s all. The Quran is not an authority on Jesus. To learn about Jesus, it is necessary to turn to the New Testament, which includes the Pauline and Johannine writings, imo