Dear Peaceful,
May peace be with you.
Please see my responses to your verses in blue.
Matthew 28:19
“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,”The process of baptism, which in the main is the Christian ritual of admission into Christian church, involves the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. This verse is
not an explicit description of the
‘nature of God’ and there is absolutely no warrant to read this verse in this way. It is only 'theology' that would potentially read this into this verse.
Psalm 2:7
“I will tell of the decree: The Lord said to me, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you”The Psalms form part of the
Jewish Old Testament canon and
not the Christian New Testament. Even from a Christian perspective, this Psalm is understood to be authored by Prophet David.
If one were to read Psalm 2:1, it says:
"Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?” Now if one were to consult the New Testament (Christian canon) and Acts 4:25 in particular, one reads: "Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said,
Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things?"
Therefore, even the Christians understood this Psalm to be authored by Prophet David and to make use of this verse as support for the Trinity is wholly unwarranted. The concept of Trinity is not accepted by those that follow the Jewish canon (Old Testament) in which this verse is found.
John 6:27
“Do not work for the food that perishes, but for lthe food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal.”There is no indication in this verse that it teaches the Trinity.
John 8:58
“Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”The Greek word which has been translated as
'I am' is
'Ego eimi'. This is a common phrase in John’s Gospel and if one studies the Bible (which some Christians and many Muslims do not), they would appreciate that this term does not necessarily identify itself with God.
In John 5:43, the same term is used to signify that Jesus has been sent by God. In John 18:5, Jesus uses the same term to confirm that he is Jesus of Nazareth. The term is even used by a blind man (John 9:8-9).
Now if we consult the context of the verse you share, one notes a discourse already in situ with regards Prophet Abraham and the emphasis the Jews placed on him with possible rebuke of Prophet Jesus’ ministry.
48 The Jews answered him, “Aren’t we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?”
49 “I am not possessed by a demon,” said Jesus, “but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. 50 I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. 51 Very truly I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never see death.”
52 At this they exclaimed, “Now we know that you are demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that whoever obeys your word will never taste death. 53 Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?”
54 Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. 55 Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”
57 “You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
58 “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”
59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds. (NIV Version)
Such tension between the Jews and Prophet Jesus is also noted in other Gospels:
Matthew 3:9
“And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham”
Only a few verses earlier to the one you have shared, Prophet Jesus says (8:54),
"Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me.". Therefore, there is no warrant to interpret a narrative a few verses later as supporting the Trinity. If the Biblical Jesus wanted to convey that he was God, he would have simply said it. There is no such explicit statement in the entire Bible.
Luke 24:52
“And they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy”As with the Quran, for an avid student / academic, one must attempt to study from the classical texts. The Greek
'Proskuneo' does not exclusively mean
‘worship’. The term is clearly nuanced as Greek lexicons clearly attest to simply imply
'reverence' / 'respect':
- to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence
among the Orientals, esp. the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence
in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication
used of homage shown to men and beings of superior rank
to the Jewish high priests
to God
to Christ
to heavenly beings
to demons [1]
Mark 2:7
“Why does this man speak like that? He is blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”In the Quran, a verse reads:
"...And if, when they had wronged themselves, they had but come unto thee and asked forgiveness of God, and asked forgiveness of the messenger, they would have found God Forgiving, Merciful" (4:64 - part).
Do Muslims interpret this to mean that Prophet Muhammad was part of God's nature? As I am sure you will agree, of course not. Now if we read the whole verse we note that the Quranic verse starts by saying
"
We sent no messenger save that he should be obeyed by God's leave. And if, when they had wronged themselves, they had but come unto thee and asked forgiveness of God, and asked forgiveness of the messenger, they would have found God Forgiving, Merciful".
Therefore, as long as the recipients of the Prophetic message
obeyed the messenger, they would have found God forgiving. It has always been the same message for all messengers as the Quranic verse 4:64 clearly attests.
Similarly, Mark 2:7 does not make him part of God's nature nor does this verse sanction the concept of the Trinity.
Just like the Quran, the Bible should be best interpreted from within itself (Bible interpreted through the lens of the Bible) and not extraneous theology.
Original classical terms should be best studied given their usage in their original linguistic contexts and how they have been used in other parts of the scripture. This is as true for the Bible as it is for the Quran. Sadly many Muslims take verses out of context of the Quran and the problematic approach is only accentuated when they read the Bible with inherent prejudice.
I would assume that both you and I would not accept simple translations of verses out of context with respect to the Quran. I also trust that you will equally concur with me that we should also not accept such an approach towards the Bible either. I trust that you will appreciate this point
I hope that helps, God willing.
Joseph.
REFERENCES:[1] BiblieGateway.com - [online]
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/proskuneo.html [Accessed] 19th February 2013