Refutation: If Yahweh alone is the Creator, and Jesus a servant sent by him, how can Jesus be God?
بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ ,
Isaiah 44:24 says that Yahweh was alone when he created the heavens and the earth. Matthew 12:18 quotes Isaiah 42:1 which says that Yahweh will send his servant, who is Jesus. Now if Yahweh was the one true God (Exodus 20:2-3) who alone created the heavens and the earth and he was the one who was to send his servant (Jesus), then that means that Jesus is not Yahweh. Why then do Christians contradict what their own Bible teaches?
Shamoun’s response is quite muddled. If you were to read this response, as well as this one, I have demonstrated that his response to all of the questions of this form are presented logically as such:
- Claim that the person asking the question does not understand the nature of God.
- Claim that God can only exist in a multi-personal form.
- Does not prove that God is multi-personal.
- Since God is multi-personal, the questioner is wrong.
- The answer is that God does have X attribute(s) because questioner is wrong and God is multi-personal.
To get to the crux of this current response, he says two important statements:
The Holy Bible clearly teaches that Yahweh used his Spirit, his Power, his Word and his very Wisdom to create all things
The NT states that Jesus is God’s Word, Wisdom and Power
In doing this, he is attempting to equate Christ Jesus with YHWH, yet this is known as the fallacy of false equivocation. It can be demonstrated as such:
- Tom is a man.
- Paul is a man.
- Tom is Paul.
This is inherently, a logical fallacy – he should try to study a bit of logic. In continuing we read:
This is why the NT authors could speak of Christ in such highly exalted terms without compromising monotheism. The Judaism of Jesus’ day knew that God’s Word, Wisdom and Power were not separate beings but intrinsic aspects of God’s very own Being. Thus, for the NT to describe Jesus as God’s eternal Word, Wisdom and Power meant that Christ was intrinsic to the very identity of the one true God. In other words, Jesus isn’t someone who is other than God, but one who is fully God in essence.
Besides using the faulty logic above, we can even prove from the New Testament, that Christ himself cannot be a God, or that Christ’s wisdom, and power cannot be considered Godly. Our argument is therefore presented as such:
- YHWH is omniscient.
- Christ is not omniscient (Matthew 24:36, Mark 13:32 – But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father).
- Christ is therefore not YHWH.
If Christ was God, or the God known as YHWH, then he (Christ), must be all knowing, for if God is ignorant, then God is not all knowing and thus not God. In response to the argument that Christ is the ‘arm of the Lord’ and therefore YHWH himself, we must identify what the ‘arm of the Lord’ is, Shamoun says:
“By calling the Servant the Arm of Yahweh, Isaiah indicates that the Servant isn’t only a human being but is also an intrinsic part of God’s very own eternal Being!”
This logic is faulty as Moses and Aaron are also referred to as the ‘arm of the Lord’:
“So the LORD brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, with great terror and with signs and wonders.” – Deuteronomy 26:8.
“Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the LORD your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm.” – Deuteronomy 5:15.
So unless Jesus + Moses + Aaron are also Gods, then Shamoun has essentially manipulated his own scripture and debunked his own religion as one which is/ was monotheistic. In another great example of the fallacy of false equivocation, Shamoun writes:
The fact that the Servant is exalted to a status that belongs to Yahweh alone provides further evidence of him being an extension, a manifestation, of Yahweh himself. Note how this plays out logically:
Yahweh alone is exalted and lifted on high.
The Servant is exalted and lifted on high.
Therefore, the Servant is Yahweh God.
YHWH who alone is God, is exalted in His nature of being a deity, whereas the servant of God, would also be exalted and lifted on high in his nature of being a servant of God. In simple terms, if I praise a car for its performance and praise a truck for its performance, according to Sam’s logic, the car is the truck, whereas I am saying, I am praising either or, as separate entities according to their independent and respective natures.
Shamoun therefore has been completely demolished and his arguments refuted en toto.
wa Allaahu ‘Alam.