Ali Dawah - September 01, 2020


WHO IS GOD? - THEOLOGIAN VS MUSLIM - SPEAKERS CORNER


Episode Stats

Length

40 minutes

Words per Minute

192.45996

Word Count

7,843

Sentence Count

585

Hate Speech Sentences

18


Summary

In this episode, we discuss the difference between monotheist and trinitarian views on God and the concept of the Trinity. Why does God require us to share our power with other entities? What does it mean to be a tri-being and who are the three persons in the Trinity?


Transcript

00:00:00.000 You're a monotheist and you're a Unitarian. I'm a monotheist and I'm a Trinitarian.
00:00:05.180 So you're a monotheist and a Unitarian because you believe there's one person who is God
00:00:09.520 and there is only one person who is Divine. I'm monotheist because I believe there's one
00:00:15.740 person who's God, but I'm Trinitarian because I believe, yeah, there are three persons who
00:00:20.020 are Divine. Divine. The all-knowing. Yeah? The all-powerful. The all-seeing. The all-wise.
00:00:26.560 Why does he require to share his power with other entities? The question number one is
00:00:34.200 why would God require that?
00:00:38.580 Check out our sponsors, Nature's Blends. They specialize in premium Ethiopian black seed
00:00:43.260 products. Their products are fantastic health supplements and also from the sunnah. The
00:00:47.880 website is in the description link below. You can also use the discount code SALAM10 for
00:00:52.960 10 percent of their products. So, Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi barakatuh, brothers and
00:00:58.720 sisters. Welcome to Salam Corner. We're starting again. We're going to try, inshallah. Like I said
00:01:04.300 before, we have Joshua today. Joshua had a discussion with brother Mansour Hashim, Mohammed Hijab. I've
00:01:10.060 spoken to him a long, long time ago. Last year, I think we started as well. Like I said today,
00:01:14.700 I want to, I want to, I want to learn from him and his belief system because there is some, not tweaks, but
00:01:22.700 maybe what you may tell me and educate me, your belief in Trinity. How is it different to the common
00:01:29.820 belief? And if you can just elaborate on that. Okay, so yeah. So my, my, um, my position is that there are
00:01:36.380 three persons in the Trinity. Each of them are divine. Father's divine, Son and the Spirit are each divine.
00:01:41.660 And because they are each divine, we can use the term God in a certain sense, in a predicative sense.
00:01:48.980 So we're using it as a predicate for that being. So the Father is God because he has a divine property.
00:01:54.880 The Son is God because he has a divine property and divine nature. And the Holy Spirit is God because
00:01:59.160 he has a divine property and divine nature. However, we can use the term God also in another sense,
00:02:03.860 which is called the nominal sense. That basically means using it as a name for an entity, using as a name
00:02:10.980 for a thing. So God is now is used solely as a name for the father. So if we go to scripture and it
00:02:18.200 says there is only, only one, only one true God. Okay. Or it says, um, Jesus says, I'm going to my
00:02:25.140 father and to your father, my God, or my God. Or Paul says, um, there is one God, the father and one
00:02:31.200 Lord Jesus Christ. What Paul is saying when we, Paul and Jesus are saying is that yes, there is one God,
00:02:36.820 the father, and he's a soul God because he has the name God. And that name is applicable to him.
00:02:42.980 And that name is not applicable to the son. Neither is it applicable to the spirit. However,
00:02:47.380 the father, son, and the spirit are each God. Like I said at the beginning in a predicative sense,
00:02:51.940 because they each have the divine property. They are each all powerful, all knowing,
00:02:56.360 all loving, and so forth. And so what I'm saying to you, where the differences between me and maybe
00:03:01.140 the common view is the idea when we say who is, what's the one God, a lot of the common view would
00:03:07.100 be the one God is the Trinity. And I think I saw that also in, I think a video in the past,
00:03:11.240 uh, the diagram one where the one God was equal to the Trinity. I would say, no, the one God is equal
00:03:16.420 to the father. The one God is equal to one of the persons in the Trinity. So why we are monotheist is
00:03:22.240 because we believe in one person who is one God, the father. However, we are Trinitarians because we
00:03:28.440 believe in three persons who are each divine. So they're each divine, but one of them is God in
00:03:34.020 a nominal sense as a name who is the father. And that's why we are monotheist. Sorry, if it might
00:03:38.840 get confusing, if you want to break down. No, no, no, it didn't actually. I'm actually surprised
00:03:42.340 myself. I understood it very well. Okay, let me get this right. So you're saying when it comes to the
00:03:46.100 title, when, when it says I'm going to my God, that title is referred to the father. However, in actual
00:03:55.440 sense, they all have some kind of divinity. We have divinity in that. So when we're, when we see in
00:03:59.940 other parts of the Bible where it says in Acts five, the Holy Spirit's God, or it says in Titus
00:04:04.580 two 13, that Jesus is a God and savior. It's using that word God, not in the same way as a name.
00:04:10.960 Yeah. As the father, it's not using as a name. It's using as a predicate saying they are, it's this
00:04:16.500 being the Holy Spirit and the, and Jesus Christ and Titus two is a divine person. He has the divine
00:04:22.120 properties. So it's using, so God can be used in different ways. That's what I'm trying to say.
00:04:26.500 Yeah. That's interesting. Okay. So now what I want to delve into is that firstly, okay. Thank you
00:04:33.240 very much for educating me on that because it's very important that we understand where you're
00:04:36.880 coming from. Yes. Because sometimes what we do is dawah. We do dawah to our judgment. Oh, did you get
00:04:41.920 that? Some people do that with us. Yeah. They come and talk to us because they have a judgment
00:04:44.620 about Islam and we're like, look, that's not what we're talking about. We don't believe that. So it's good
00:04:49.400 that you've educated me and I've learned from that and I thank you for that Joshua. Um, what
00:04:53.280 I wanted to say was the following. When you say the father, so the father is the one who's
00:04:59.280 entitled to the title of God, like the name, the name, the name, the name, the name. Yeah.
00:05:04.320 But in essence, the father, the son and the Holy Spirit are divine. Isn't that some kind
00:05:11.680 of a hierarchy? Yes. I agree. Okay. If there is an hierarchy, it reminds me of why Islam came
00:05:19.560 to Arabia. And tell me if I'm wrong. Because the pagan Arabs, they affirmed and acknowledged
00:05:27.000 that Allah is their Lord. So we have in Tawheed, the oneness of God, we have three categories.
00:05:34.320 We have Tawheed, Tawheed al-Rububiya, Tawheed al-Ulahiya and Asma wa Sifat. So what that means
00:05:41.420 is we affirm and acknowledge and single out God in his Lordship. So when we say God is
00:05:48.620 the one who's created, he did not need any other entity to carry that Lordship out. He
00:05:53.460 is the ultimate Lordship. Now, where we differ with you guys, and this is the reason why I
00:05:59.200 wanted to ask about the hierarchy and why Islam came down. Because Islam came for this very specific
00:06:04.200 reason that you have your belief system. Because the pagan Arabs did not have free persons who
00:06:12.380 were divine. And they just said, for example, the only reason we go to the statute is just
00:06:17.080 to get closer to the ultimate God, which they gave a title. Like here we acknowledge, he's
00:06:21.880 Allah, he's the one who's created us. We are just using that. Now that comes to the second
00:06:26.180 part of the Tawheed al-Ulahiya, worship. So what we do is we single out God in worship. Because
00:06:34.360 otherwise, if we didn't, then there is no difference because you said you're a monotheist. We'll say
00:06:38.520 that kind of monotheism is not the monotheism that we understand. That's the reason why Islam came
00:06:43.460 down with a pure monotheism and came to the pagan Arabs and told them that you are mushriks, pagans.
00:06:50.500 In the context of, you say you believe in Allah, but you've made these handmade statues and you're
00:06:56.180 worshipping them. Just as the story of Ibrahim alayhi salam in the old times in the Quran, where they
00:07:01.460 had the main idol, his father had the main idol, uncle, uncle, uncle, there's a camera, in the camera, yeah?
00:07:06.260 Sorry, forgive me. Sorry uncle, it's just because it will get in the way, yeah? And so for example,
00:07:12.100 in that angle, they said for example, you're affirming God, but you've got, oh sorry, Ibrahim. So Ibrahim,
00:07:18.660 what he did is his father, he was telling his father, look, look, you've made this with your own
00:07:22.660 hands and you're worshipping it. Like, come on. One day, his father was out and he went into the
00:07:28.100 specific place, yeah? And he destroyed all the statues, except the big one. And when his dad came
00:07:33.300 and said, what has happened to our gods? He said, you see that big one? He destroyed all of them. And he
00:07:38.820 said, son, do you not know that it doesn't speak? How could it destroy it? When he said, father, duh,
00:07:44.660 like in the context, that's what I'm trying to tell you. So he's trying to tell him, look,
00:07:48.820 you've made it with your own hands. Now, this is the reason why Islam has pure monotheism.
00:07:54.420 Because the third thing, which I said, lordship, worship, and his names and his attributes.
00:07:59.700 So we do not give those names and attributes to men or the creation. Yeah, we can't say to a creation,
00:08:05.460 he's the all-knowing. We can't say Prophet Muhammad is the all-knowing. No, he's not. God is all-knowing.
00:08:09.220 He's the all-powerful. No, he's not. And we do not ascribe that to mankind. Now, what you've told
00:08:15.060 me is that even though the title belongs to the father, and when we say God, we're actually talking
00:08:19.380 about the father, even though the three of them share the divinity, this is the very reason,
00:08:24.660 Joshua, Islam came to abolish. So I'm just asking, like, I just want you to understand from our
00:08:30.100 perspective, what you believe, how could it be true monotheism where you're sharing the same traits
00:08:36.980 as pagans in Arabia? So I'll just say that a distinction needs to be made between two concepts,
00:08:44.180 monotheism and monolatry. It's a weird, difficult word to say, but monolatry. So monolatry is the
00:08:52.260 worship of one entity, one being. Monotheism is the belief in one being or belief in one God. So,
00:08:59.700 yeah, so one belief in one ultimate God. Okay. That's monotheism. Monolatry is just monolatry.
00:09:06.980 Monolatry. Yeah. Yeah. It's the, it's the worship, it's the worship of only one being. Okay.
00:09:15.860 So where I would differ with you is that I, I'm happy to say I agree. And I think actually
00:09:20.580 we share, funny enough, funny enough, we share, um, even more things that maybe a common, let's
00:09:27.140 say a common Trinitarian will say to you that God is tri-personal. God is three persons. I disagree
00:09:32.500 with that. I say, God is one person, the father. Yeah. So yeah. So some common is more lay level
00:09:42.340 common. Trinitarianism will say, God is tri-personal. God is three persons. God is the trinity. Okay.
00:09:49.700 As you did in that diagram before, God is the father. Okay. However, each of them are divine.
00:09:56.180 And so they're God in another way, in another sense. But when we're using that monotheism God
00:10:00.900 term, we're referring to the father. So why we are monotheists is because there's only one entity,
00:10:05.700 one being, one person who is God in that sense. And that will be a shared thing. Actually,
00:10:10.820 interestingly, this position with a Jew and with a Muslim who say, yeah, God is one person. God is
00:10:15.940 not three persons. So we will share that. But where I'll disagree with you is the conflation of
00:10:20.900 monotheism and monolatry. I don't believe that you need to say that, oh, because I believe there's
00:10:25.780 only one God, one ultimate being who we term the father, that also we can only worship that father.
00:10:32.900 I would say worship is contingent on a being being divine. So if a being has all power,
00:10:39.700 all knowledge, perfectly good, necessary, eternal, then it's worthy of worship. It has these properties,
00:10:45.620 so it's worthy of worship. Why I wouldn't worship that thing that couldn't do that action is because it
00:10:50.260 lacks one of those properties. It's not all powerful. It's not all knowing. It's not all
00:10:53.300 big. So the reason why I'll worship the sun and worship the spirit as well is because they are
00:10:57.460 equally, they're equally divine. The sun, the, the, the sun and the spirit are equally worthy of
00:11:04.660 worship with the father because they are equally divine because they have omnipotence or omniscience
00:11:09.540 and so forth. But why I, why I had that problem with you is because you are saying to be monotheist,
00:11:16.180 you also have to be hold some monolatry and there's only one entity that's worthy of worship.
00:11:20.500 Well, I disagree with you. I believe in monotheism, but I think that there are entities that can be
00:11:25.380 worshipped if they are divine. And we will say there are three entities, the father,
00:11:28.740 son and the Holy Spirit who can equally be worshipped because they're divine.
00:11:31.780 Okay. That's brilliant. Thank you. I've, I've learned something new again today. And it's very
00:11:34.740 interesting because what it is, it's like, it's like to us from an assignment perspective, it's like
00:11:39.540 gradual steps towards monolatry, monolatry, monolatry, monolatry. Yeah. So it's, it's, it's,
00:11:45.780 thank you for that. I learned a new word as well today. Yeah. Um, so it's, it's steps towards monolatry.
00:11:50.260 That's what we're calling to. So if your definition is going to be that in that aspect, what it shows
00:11:54.900 is that Joshua, you're another step closer in that context from our perspective, yeah, is that we can see
00:12:00.740 the innate disposition calling for that. And it's like a step towards it. That might be intentional or unintentional.
00:12:06.180 I'm not saying the intention is doing that. It might be unintentional, but then again, it comes
00:12:10.260 back to the same point where if God is the all divine, the all knowing, yeah, the all powerful,
00:12:18.020 the all seeing, the all wise, why does he require to share his power with other entities? The question
00:12:26.820 number one is why would God require that? And secondly, for example, isn't it a contradiction to his very
00:12:34.740 essence? Because what we say, when we learn this, like when we study these books, the reason why
00:12:39.220 Islam appealed to me so much besides the textual scripture, like preservation, is that it was
00:12:46.100 calling to pure monotheism, which prophets before, because you believe in many prophets. Yeah. Yeah.
00:12:51.700 And we believe, yeah. That's what Allah said to us in the Quran,
00:12:55.060 not of the people of the book of the same. Yeah. So that's the reason why when it comes to monotheism,
00:13:02.740 monolatary. Yeah. It's the only religion where I found in Islam. And not only that,
00:13:07.300 I'm not saying Islam is true just on this, but I'm saying the nature, the human nature understands it,
00:13:12.900 it clicks with it. And when it comes to, for example, you had to do a lot of explanation. Now,
00:13:16.740 this doesn't mean it makes it false. I'm not trying to say, oh, just cause you was,
00:13:19.460 no, what I'm trying to say is that it's very simple in Islam. We single out God in his lordship. He's
00:13:24.980 the all powerful, the all knowing. Okay. Then we sing them out in worship. We worship him to a
00:13:30.340 Lord. A lot of Christians who come to Islam, which is one thing, I'm not using this point to prove that
00:13:34.660 Islam is right. The main thing that they see is the following. As a Catholic, I didn't know, Mary, Jesus,
00:13:40.500 the spirit. And there was a confusion. Joshua, can you relate and understand as Muslims and as
00:13:48.340 someone who's a Christian and those Christians who may have left the faith because it doesn't
00:13:54.020 make sense that the essence of God and his divinity is shared? Why does God need to share that? Can
00:13:58.500 you, can you maybe just answer that question? So I would say to you that God needs to share it
00:14:01.940 because it's, it's necessitated by his nature, necessitated by his nature. So I would say if God
00:14:08.340 has the property of being perfectly good, then it requires there to be two co-equal divine persons with
00:14:15.060 him. So if there's one divine person who has, we agree the property of all powerful, all knowing,
00:14:20.900 and he's perfectly good, everything that he does, he does, he, um, he does a good action. Um, I would
00:14:26.980 say for a being to exist in that way, there has to be two other beings. Why two other, but not four other,
00:14:36.180 or five other. Okay. Good. Okay. So we can get, uh, thank you. I don't get it. You don't like me and
00:14:42.020 you're heckling him. Heckle me. Um, yeah, what was your question? Okay, good. Why two more? Okay. Okay.
00:14:48.900 So the idea. So the idea, yeah. So the idea, the idea here is, is that for, for the first,
00:15:00.340 for one divine person to be perfectly good, it needs to inevitably, that means from the beginning,
00:15:07.060 there's no time that passes. It has to bring into existence another being so that it can
00:15:14.420 instantiate. So I'm using a big word, but it means like, um, uh, instantiate just means to make real
00:15:22.660 the action of loving. So this being would not be perfectly good if it does not instantiate
00:15:31.860 the action or perform the action of loving. Okay. Okay. You're sort of getting one thing. So now
00:15:39.860 the idea here is, is that there are three or there's more than this, but there's at least three
00:15:44.660 qualitatively different forms of love. There is self-love. That's just me loving myself. Okay.
00:15:50.100 I can live on an island and just love myself. Then there is shared love. Example of this will be
00:15:55.700 like a marriage. You love your wife. She loves you. You reciprocate in your love. And then there's a
00:16:00.500 cooperation together in sharing your love. So me, my wife, we now share our love together with another
00:16:07.140 being, which could maybe be our child or for some people it's an animal or whatever, but you work
00:16:11.460 together, you love each other and you want to share your love with that third being. So there's self
00:16:15.300 love, shared love and cooperative love. Okay. Now each form of love is better than the other one. It's
00:16:22.980 qualitatively better. So I'm a better being. If I'm not just selfish and love myself, I'm a better
00:16:28.340 being. If I share my love with another, and I'm, we're even a better, we're better together. If we're
00:16:33.540 not just set selfish together and say, no, we don't want to give our love to anyone. We don't
00:16:37.540 want to help people. We don't want to give our love to a child or to an animal or whatever. We
00:16:40.740 just want to selfishly love each other. We're better if we cooperate together in sharing our
00:16:45.940 love with another. So each love is qualitatively better. Now the idea here is, let's say there is
00:16:51.860 one divine person who's solely by itself. What it does by itself is, well, it has self-love.
00:16:57.540 It loves itself, but it cannot show or exemplify. Okay. So if you just have a divine person,
00:17:06.180 one divine person, let's say in Islam or Judaism, there's just one divine person, no other beings
00:17:10.660 with it. That being can only instantiate, only show, only exemplify self-love. It can't exemplify
00:17:17.700 the qualitatively better form of love, which is shared love because there's no other being. So if it existed
00:17:23.700 by itself, it didn't create anything, there's no other being for it to share its love with.
00:17:28.340 Okay. And so the idea here is for that being to exemplify a better form of love, shared love,
00:17:35.620 it needs to inevitably bring into existence an equal entity who it can share that love with.
00:17:42.020 But then remember, qualitatively cooperative love is better than just shared love. So if there were just
00:17:48.820 two entities, there will only be shared love. But remember, we said that there's a qualitatively
00:17:55.780 even better form of love, which is cooperative love. When two entities share their love together,
00:18:00.260 and then they cooperate together in sharing their love with another. And so what the idea here is,
00:18:04.820 is that they will either two of them together, they will inevitably bring about a third equal to
00:18:11.860 cooperate in sharing that love with. Now, the question, sorry, you said, because the idea could be,
00:18:16.420 well, why would it stop at three? Why couldn't there be another fourth divine person or fifth
00:18:20.420 divine person that they all cooperated in sharing their love? The issue is, is that there is no,
00:18:25.540 there's no qualitative difference between me cooperating with one being and cooperating with
00:18:32.820 another being. So I'll explain it. So if I have a wife, yeah, I have a wife, I have someone that I'm
00:18:37.780 sharing my love with, and we work together to share our love with another being, if we shared it with
00:18:43.140 another being and another being and another being, the forms of love are not different.
00:18:47.300 Remember each step, there was self love, shared love, cooperative love. But then if I share it
00:18:53.220 with another, there is no other form of love, it's still cooperative love. There's not a qualitatively
00:18:58.420 greater form of love than I'm bringing about. So the problem that you'll have then is that if
00:19:03.140 one of the divine persons brings about a fourth or a fifth divine person, this will be an act of the
00:19:08.260 will. And a divine person by definition can only exist out of necessity. It can't exist because it
00:19:15.060 was willed to exist. It has to exist because it's necessary that it exists. So the idea here is if
00:19:20.500 there was a fourth being, that being would not be divine, because it would not be necessary. It would
00:19:25.140 have been a choice to bring about that being. But the second and third are existing out of necessity.
00:19:30.260 Okay. All right. There's some very interesting points you mentioned. And once again, I personally
00:19:36.420 don't believe it justifies and neither does it answer the very nature of God to have more than
00:19:44.740 two or even if we were to give it on the terms of like you said about sharing that love with the
00:19:49.300 second and the third. Yeah. And you talked about necessary existence. It's necessary for it to
00:19:55.780 do it with three but not four. Yes. So I want to point out something because this is something that
00:19:59.700 we studied in Creed books in Tahaweah. And it's very interesting because it touches this topic.
00:20:05.700 Because what you're seeing is in order, so for example, God is the most merciful. He's the most loving.
00:20:11.780 Therefore, so there's a discussion happening here. Therefore, he needs to bring about,
00:20:17.780 you're seeing another divine being in order to share that love with. Now we have this discussion,
00:20:24.180 but we have it with human beings. So what we say is from the get-go, we do not believe
00:20:29.140 God shared his divinity. God's against his nature. However, we say this. Is God still the all-knowing,
00:20:34.740 the all-lovable, the all-loving, the all-merciful without creation? Okay. Thank you.
00:20:40.100 So just to elaborate. Yeah. So what we say is Islamically, God is always the all-knowing
00:20:45.460 when, for example, there was no creation. God is still the all-merciful when there was nothing to
00:20:50.900 have mercy on. Because that is his innate attribute. Now, him carrying that mercy out,
00:20:56.820 yeah? For example, he will have a creation. Yeah? So for him to, for example, carry those certain
00:21:02.980 actions out all-loving, he will have a creation. But what you're saying is similar. But what you're
00:21:10.500 saying is, no, he needs to share his divinity. Now what we're saying is the following. We're on the same
00:21:14.900 page, but in a bit of a different way. Because you're trying to justify God sharing his divinity,
00:21:18.580 where he is saying God in his essence is the most merciful, the all-loving. And he's always
00:21:24.100 been like that. He's been, he's been like that, even when there was no creation. But you're taking
00:21:30.340 that a step further and trying to justify why God needs to free or more. Well, you're saying it
00:21:37.460 stops at free. The question is why? And you, and you, and you said by necessary, by necessity,
00:21:41.700 God is a necessary fact. If God is necessary, there can't be nothing like it. So once again,
00:21:55.220 do you see as Muslims, monolatary? Got it right, yeah? Why it's so unique that we say God doesn't share it,
00:22:03.700 doesn't share it, it goes against attribute. And by necessity, he doesn't need to, to become the
00:22:08.980 all-loving or the all-merciful. He doesn't need the creation, let alone having another divine being.
00:22:14.820 Do you see the problem we're trying to pose? And we're trying to say that God almighty in Islam is
00:22:20.660 the sole creator. He doesn't share his divinity. He doesn't need to. The moment he says, I need to have
00:22:26.580 another divine being, or I need to. What that means is God needs something to show his, do you
00:22:33.540 know what I'm trying to say? Yeah, yeah. So what the idea here is, as I said, God has the property or
00:22:37.940 attribute of being perfectly good. And defining perfectly good, that just means that this entity
00:22:43.780 will inevitably, that means just out of its nature, perform a good action if there is one. So if there's
00:22:49.700 a good action there, God will perform it. If there's another good action there, God will perform it.
00:22:54.020 He will just inevitably do it. Now, what I'm trying to say to you is that there is a good action,
00:22:59.700 but you're saying to me that God wouldn't perform it. Because there's a good action of
00:23:03.460 loving. That's an action there. But remember, we just agreed that by definition, God is perfectly
00:23:09.220 good. And so if there's a good action, he will inevitably do it. He will just do it. And so there's
00:23:14.300 a good action there in front of God saying, love, it's called loving. Now, if God is perfectly good,
00:23:20.900 he will just inevitably perform that action of loving, being in a loving relationship.
00:23:26.500 But then that requires and that entails that there is another entity who he can love. Because
00:23:32.980 what I'm saying to you is that... Why not creation? Why divine? Okay, good. Yeah, that's a very good
00:23:37.140 point. Because that's not a perfect form of love. A perfect love is where the love is reciprocated in
00:23:44.340 quantity and kind. Okay. So if I'll give you an example, why obviously, there'll be loads of
00:23:49.620 reasons why someone can't do this. But why you can't, why you can't be in a loving, romantic,
00:23:56.500 loving relationship with let's say a child is because that child cannot reciprocate the love
00:24:01.460 that you give to it. The love, the knowledge, everything that I bestow and give the totality
00:24:06.020 of my being that I give to that child, they won't be able to give it back to me because they don't have
00:24:09.940 the mental faculties to be able to do it. But someone who's equal to me, let's say my wife,
00:24:14.580 she can reciprocate in quantity and kind the love and the totality of myself that I give to her. She
00:24:19.780 can also give the totality of herself to me and everything to me and we reciprocate that. Now,
00:24:24.100 the problem that you'll have is that if God does that with creation, it's impossible because creation
00:24:28.980 is not equal to God. And so they can't reciprocate what God gives to them. Because when you love,
00:24:35.860 like I was saying, you give everything to that entity. Well, then can God give all of his divinity,
00:24:40.500 all he has, all he possesses, which is his divinity to creation? No, I'm saying, no,
00:24:46.100 I'm saying the question was, is that why can't he share that love with creation? So I'm answering
00:24:49.540 and saying, yeah, but I'm saying, yeah, exactly. Because a divine person is only the entity that can
00:24:54.660 reciprocate the thing that he gives. Because a divine person, if I'm divine and another being divine,
00:24:59.460 and I love that being, I give all that I have my divinity to that being. And that being gives his
00:25:04.260 divinity or whatever their divinity back to me, they reciprocate everything I give in quantity and
00:25:09.380 kind. But creation can't do that. Created reality by definition is created. So they can't give divinity
00:25:15.540 back to me. So God can love us, but he doesn't love us perfectly. He only loves us perfectly if he loves
00:25:22.500 a thing that's equal to him. And we are not equal to him. Okay, Joshua, who sets those standards? Because
00:25:27.060 what you're doing now is you're, you're giving a definition of love, how love can be shared.
00:25:33.540 Yes. But you're giving these standards. Now, this is the reason why in Islam, one of the biggest sins
00:25:38.660 as shirk is to say something about God, he doesn't, he hasn't never said. That's why as Muslims,
00:25:43.860 we have a dialogue with Christians, because we believe you're uttering something that God has not
00:25:48.180 verified. So now when you're saying, Joshua, that God needs something divine to share it,
00:25:52.900 because that's, and give it his divinity, only so it can give it the same back. What we're saying
00:25:57.860 is number one, God doesn't need human beings. Let alone another divine being. We say from the get-go,
00:26:02.100 God doesn't need anything, another divine being, because he goes against his nature. God doesn't
00:26:06.100 need human beings from the get-go. That's the reason why we are told that we only enter paradise by the
00:26:11.300 grace, you would say, or by the mercy of Allah. Because, sorry, because the thing is, God doesn't need us.
00:26:18.180 We need him. So he shows us his mercy by, for example, the things he's blessed us with, the
00:26:23.220 guidance that he shows us, and he wants us to enter his paradise. That's why Allah says in the Quran,
00:26:28.100 what will I get out of putting you in the hellfire? You think I'm somebody who's
00:26:32.740 hungry to put people in the fire? No, I don't want that for you. So the question that needs to be asked
00:26:37.620 again is, Joshua, what I said to you, God is all merciful and all loving,
00:26:43.380 all loving, even if there was no human beings and no creation. Why does God require another divine
00:26:52.420 being? Because it goes against his essence. Because the moment you say he needs, remember
00:26:56.420 what I said, I said, God doesn't need human beings. Yeah? So why does he need another divine?
00:27:02.260 And if he does, it goes against his nature, because it means I need love myself and to love,
00:27:07.300 I know, you said he will be just loving himself. So therefore, he needs another divine being
00:27:12.500 that is not sharing the title, the essence, but not the title, like you said, and he will love me
00:27:18.260 back. Why does God even need that? Because remember what I said to you, I said,
00:27:21.380 there are different qualitative forms of love, and each one is greater or better than the other.
00:27:37.300 Remember, God has the attribute of being perfectly good. So everything that he does
00:27:41.140 would be to the greatest standard. So he wouldn't bring about a worse form of love than one that's
00:27:50.020 available. So if there's self-love, there's shared love, and there's cooperative love,
00:27:54.180 and each one is greater than the other. If God is just self-loving, then he has a depreciated
00:27:59.380 form of love that he's instantiating, which is a perfectly good being wouldn't do. A perfectly good
00:28:04.340 being would instantiate the greatest form of love possible. And that will be qualitatively including
00:28:09.300 self-love, him loving himself, sharing love, sharing love with an equal, and then cooperating and
00:28:14.340 sharing love with another equal. That allows it to be the qualitatively greatest form of love.
00:28:19.300 You're instantiating each form of love, and each one is greater than the other.
00:28:23.300 So just answering what you were saying about God being, I think, all-powerful, all-knowing.
00:28:29.220 Yeah, so the problem is that there's a difference between being, let's say, perfectly good and
00:28:35.220 loving, performing the action of loving, and being all-powerful or being all-knowing.
00:28:40.420 Those are properties that you have without any entity. You don't need anything to have it.
00:28:45.860 Okay? So God is all-powerful without anything. Okay? He, that just means he has, he's able to
00:28:51.380 perform any action. All-knowing means he knows all truths, and he doesn't need anyone to know those
00:28:56.340 all those truths. But to be perfectly good, and that means also being loving, that does require
00:29:03.300 something else. And that's what I'm trying to argue here. I'm trying to say...
00:29:05.860 Yeah, I disagree. Yeah. Okay.
00:29:08.420 Oh, no, no. I'm just saying, so that certain property, that attribute requires something
00:29:15.700 outside of itself. The other... Yeah, so my problem is, is that where my argument will be is that
00:29:21.300 it seems then that your view of God, not your view personally, but the view of God that's not
00:29:26.980 arguing the way that I'm trying to put forward, is an incoherent idea of God. Because you're saying
00:29:31.720 God is all-powerful, he can perform any action, all-knowing, he knows all truths, perfectly good,
00:29:36.920 he'll perform any good action, inevitably, if he does, if there is one. But there is a good action
00:29:42.280 that he doesn't perform. That's contradicting. Because you're saying he will perform any good
00:29:46.280 action if there is one. There is a good action, loving, shared and cooperating in love, but he
00:29:51.880 doesn't do that. Then that means that he's not perfectly good, and so that's incoherent.
00:29:55.560 Okay, so the reason, okay, the reason why I believe, is it recording that one, by the way?
00:30:03.080 Okay, the reason I believe, where, like, with all due respect, the incoherence is coming from your
00:30:10.680 behalf, is because you're making statements about God that contradicts his nature. I'm not
00:30:15.400 contradicting his nature. You said something, you said, he can be the most powerful and all-knowing,
00:30:19.240 that's within his nature. But in order to be the most merciful and the most loving, he needs creation.
00:30:24.040 Because you're saying, you're saying, how could he be, but you said that, I misunderstood.
00:30:31.160 No, so I didn't say most merciful. So mercy, I think, is a dispositional attribute of a thing.
00:30:36.920 So it has it, it's a disposition that it has. It doesn't need something else to,
00:30:41.240 it doesn't need to exercise it to be merciful. Love is different, no. So remember what I said,
00:30:48.120 loving is an action. So it's an action, it's not a dispositional property. I didn't say,
00:30:53.880 God is, is God, is God perfectly loving. Okay. I said, is he loving? Is he performing the action
00:31:01.560 of loving?
00:31:03.720 Yes. So, so I'm not arguing. I could agree with you. You can be perfectly loving without anything,
00:31:08.360 because that's just the, sorry, one second. That's just, that's, that's just a disposition to
00:31:13.960 be loving. So God is perfectly loving if he just has a disposition to love. But can God perform the
00:31:19.560 action of loving and not love something else? That's what I'm saying. Okay. So what I'm saying is the
00:31:24.040 following, yeah? One second, one second, brother. What I'm saying is the following. The reason I
00:31:27.960 believe that there's incoherence on your behalf is because you're attacking the very nature. Not,
00:31:32.680 not literally, yeah. But what you're doing is you're going against the very nature of God by saying
00:31:36.920 that if he's the loving, there must be something to love. What we're saying is the following. God
00:31:43.080 Almighty has always been the loving when there was no creation, because he had the power to carry the
00:31:49.720 will out. So we can't say you're not the all loving because there was nothing to love. No,
00:31:54.600 he had that innately. That's his disposition. So what we're saying is that that can be carried out
00:32:00.280 and God is the all merciful or specifically all loving. He's all loving when there was no creation.
00:32:05.080 It's not contradictory because he has that in his essence and he chooses to will that if he created
00:32:10.840 creation. Yeah. So, but where you, what you're saying, Josh, is that God needs. So for example,
00:32:18.440 in order for God to be all loving, you're not even saying he needs a creation because we can say,
00:32:22.920 okay, look, Islam has that creation. He's loving, most merciful, wants paradise. What you're saying
00:32:27.240 is he requires another divine being. And we're saying, why the stretch? And once again,
00:32:35.480 it doesn't, it's contradictory. It doesn't make sense because, because what you're doing is you're,
00:32:40.920 you're given some laws, but I'm saying, where are you getting these from? Because logically speaking,
00:32:45.880 logically speaking, I believe the all divine being, the one and only, he's the all loving,
00:32:51.720 the all merciful, the all powerful, and he doesn't need anyone to share it with. The moment you say he
00:32:56.360 shares it, it's a contradictory statement to his very essence. You're doing that. I'm,
00:33:01.320 I'm saying his loving, his love is shared with the creation. You're saying his love is shared with
00:33:06.200 another creator. No, no, listen. So remember what I said though, that the, the shared love that God will
00:33:12.840 have. So let's say God creates the world and shares his love with that world. It will not be a quality,
00:33:18.680 the quality, the, the best form of shared love. The best form of shared love is sharing between,
00:33:24.760 with an equal because creation cannot reciprocate the love I give. And this is,
00:33:29.640 this is the way we apply things to things. Well, I can't go in. Sorry.
00:33:33.080 That means, doesn't that mean that God needs love to be sent back to him?
00:33:39.800 Yes. And I have no problem. But the moment we say God needs, requires so much so that he's going
00:33:46.040 against his very nature to create another divine being's love. But remember, you're saying going
00:33:49.560 against his nature, but I'm not saying that. I'm saying part of God's nature is certain attributes,
00:33:55.080 all powerful, all, all knowing, and being perfectly good. And then part of him being perfectly good means
00:34:01.240 that he will perform the good action of loving. And so I'm not going against the nature. Maybe it's
00:34:05.880 the nature that you might hold to, but the nature that I'm arguing for, there is no contradiction in
00:34:10.520 what I'm saying. I'm saying from this nature, it leads to there being two other divine persons.
00:34:15.480 But if you hold it, because the thing is, I think you will not disagree with me with the attributes
00:34:19.480 I've said, I said to you all power, I said to you all knowledge. It's just we're saying you're sharing
00:34:23.560 that with another being. Yes. But I'm saying that third attribute requires that. So unless you say to me,
00:34:28.520 Josh, perfect goodness. So if God, you can say to me, okay.
00:34:31.880 He's perfectly good. It's like the one who came to Jesus, all good master. Yes.
00:34:35.320 He referred him back to who? Yes. The all good. Yes.
00:34:38.200 So if that is the case of Jesus as one of the divine entities, referring back to the all good
00:34:43.400 of the father, that's, it's like Jesus speaking as a Muslim. He's saying the all good is good.
00:34:48.680 Don't call me good. That's the essence of all good. Why does he need to share that goodness with another being?
00:34:54.120 Can I just address that, that verse? That verse is not negating the goodness of Jesus.
00:34:59.000 What it's saying is that look to the source of goodness. So, but remember what I said to you,
00:35:03.800 God, so the father is understood in a nominal sense to be God.
00:35:08.120 And I didn't say that the reason why he has that is because he's the source of everything,
00:35:12.760 the ultimate source. If you, as you understand with the Trinity, ultimate source of everything.
00:35:17.880 Even for the second creation that would love him back.
00:35:19.800 Even for the son. Yes.
00:35:21.240 So they rely on.
00:35:22.200 Yes. So remember, yeah, remember we are with the doctrine of the Trinity. Remember the father
00:35:28.120 begets the son and he spirates the spirit. So he generates the son and he generates the spirit.
00:35:34.280 That's the orthodox understanding of the Trinity. Now they come from the father eternally, inevitably.
00:35:40.920 So the ultimate source is the father because the father does not come from anyone else.
00:35:45.320 The father is an uncaused being. So he's the ultimate source. And so the reason why,
00:35:49.960 and this is why in the first, second, third, going into the fourth century, why the father was
00:35:55.080 understood to be the one God in that sense is because he is the sole ultimate source of all reality
00:36:00.760 and even of the son and even of the Holy Spirit. But that doesn't negate from them,
00:36:05.480 each being perfect, each being divine. And so the Trinity says there are three divine
00:36:10.840 persons, father, son, and the Holy Spirit who are co-equal ontologically with their divinity.
00:36:16.680 However, where there is a distinction is that the father is God in the sense of having the name
00:36:22.360 God, because he is the ultimate source of everything. He brings about the son, the spirit,
00:36:28.280 and that is the reason why he has the name God. And that's why Jesus points to the father,
00:36:33.320 says point to the father, because the father is one who's the source ultimately of the divinity
00:36:38.280 that the son has. And so the goodness that the son has comes from him. So that's why he's always
00:36:43.240 pointing back to him. So just a few last ones. What I would say is that I'm, as I can get to the
00:36:50.600 corner as much as possible, I'm trying to let people understand that there's an alternative
00:36:54.520 understanding of the Trinity, which is not a new understanding, but it's the historical
00:36:58.280 understanding. So the view that I'm trying to argue for is not a view that just popped out of
00:37:02.440 nowhere. It is the historical view that was defined at Nicaea. So in 325 and at Constantinople in 381.
00:37:10.040 So the authoritative councils were arguing for what I said, because if you remember, as the council
00:37:15.400 says, the Nicaean creed, I believe in one God. Who does it say God is? The father. Then it says,
00:37:21.480 I believe in one Lord. And it doesn't use that term God in a name for the son. And it doesn't say that
00:37:27.240 for the Holy Spirit, but it says that they are homoousios. They share the same nature. They are divine
00:37:33.560 as each other, but there's only one who's God. And that's why I'm a monotheist. And that's why
00:37:37.480 Trinitarians in this sense are monotheists because they believe in one person who is the one true God,
00:37:42.520 the father. And however, they are co-equal in their divinity. And that's why they're Trinitarians.
00:37:47.320 So you would be, sorry, just, I am talking a lot, but you would be, you would be a Unitarian
00:37:51.880 because you only believe in your monotheist and your Unitarian. I'm a monotheist and I'm a Trinitarian.
00:37:58.120 So you're monotheist and Unitarian because you believe there's one person who's God,
00:38:02.920 and there is only one person who is divine. I'm monotheist because I believe there's one person
00:38:08.760 who's God, but I'm Trinitarian because I believe, yeah, there are three persons who are divine.
00:38:13.160 Exactly. Joshua. Yeah. So have you always hold this position or is this in a position?
00:38:18.280 No, no, no. So this came from my PhD research. So when I, when I, when I, when I was going,
00:38:22.680 um, cause I, I, the prior understanding was the understanding. I think you, you, and most people,
00:38:27.400 you were attacking. So, and other people were saying this, if there's a problem with it,
00:38:30.920 which I agree with you, that saying that there are three divine persons. So they're Trinitarians,
00:38:35.160 like me, three divine persons, but how they will call themselves monotheists,
00:38:38.520 because they say the Trinity is the one God. So they would say the one God is the Trinity itself,
00:38:44.680 the, the collective of all the three. I disagreed. And that's why I used to have,
00:38:48.840 but looking at the historical texts, looking at scripture, where it says there's one true God,
00:38:53.960 the father, where Jesus says, my father, my, uh, your father, my father, my God, and your God,
00:38:58.920 where it says, Paul says there's one God, the father and one Lord Jesus Christ. And then looking at the
00:39:04.600 historical texts, I realized that actually the position of Trinitarianism was not that
00:39:09.160 position to say that the Trinity is the one God. It was the father. Who's the one God.
00:39:12.680 Can I ask you a personal question? Yeah. Did you feel a bit more at ease with what you believe now?
00:39:19.720 Oh yes, of course. Cause yeah, sorry. Just in an actual, I'm so sorry. Cause, cause do you not believe
00:39:25.240 Joshua? Yeah. And I'll be honest with you. I genuinely, I'm not here to win an argument.
00:39:30.200 I'm genuinely not here to have one of you. I genuinely want the best for you as you want the
00:39:34.440 best for me. Do you believe your innate disposition is, is calling out to my belief of monotheism
00:39:45.320 and Unitarianism in the context of one divine being? Because the fact that you felt at ease,
00:39:50.680 what you've discovered recently, would you say Joshua is Islam? What's stopping you from saying,
00:39:56.840 you know what, the concept of Islam, because I know a lot of Christians I speak to, yeah? And the
00:40:00.520 reason I'm getting personal is because at the end of the day, I just really want to hear you out,
00:40:03.160 yeah? Do you think, because a lot of Christians I speak to is like, oh, Mohammed married,
00:40:06.520 I'm sorry, and all these moral things, oh, it doesn't sound good to the ear. And to me,
00:40:10.760 I have the position, whatever's the truth, if God told me you climb Sundays to the tree,
00:40:15.880 get two apples, sit down, do press ups and do four black vips, I'm doing that. And there's a
00:40:20.840 misunderstanding of that whole, the prophet's marriage. What's stopping you from coming?
00:40:25.080 Because we're saying, because obviously we disagree with this, we've made that clear,
00:40:28.360 to the ultimate worship of the one divine being, because to us,
00:40:31.960 what you believe still falls into idol worship, because you're giving divinity to other beings,
00:40:37.000 and attributes of God to that. What's stopping you from saying, you know what, the Islamic concept,
00:40:41.960 or Islam in general, what's stopping you? Okay, just to, just to,