Did Jesus have two spirits and two minds: one divine and one human?

Did Jesus have two spirits and two minds: one divine and one human?

Ahmed Al-Amir

Translated by

European Islamic Research Center (EIRC)

ISLAMLAND.COM

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

Foreword by Dr. Abd Ar-Rahman Al-Sheha

Since the dawn of creation, human beings have existed to worship Allah, who created them from a single soul, Adam, and from him, He created his mate, Eve. From them, He spread many men and women across the earth. However, they would not be able to worship Him in the proper manner except through His messengers, whom He sends to guide people to the correct way of worshiping Him.

All of these messengers, from Adam (peace and blessings be upon him) to the final messenger, Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), were human beings with the same core belief: calling people to worship Allah alone without associating any partners with Him. This belief serves as the distinguishing factor between a believer and a disbeliever.

The previous divine scriptures were subjected to alteration and distortion because Allah did not guarantee their preservation, as they were revealed for specific nations at specific times. The Torah, which was revealed to Moses (peace and blessings be upon him) for the Children of Israel, was later corrupted due to various influences that led them astray from the teachings of Moses [See 2 Kings 22:8, where it is claimed that the Torah was found after being lost for centuries]. So Allah, Glorified and Exalted be He, sent Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) and revealed the Injeel to him to complete the law of Moses, to rectify what people had corrupted, and to bring them back to the right path.

However, people exaggerated in their reverence for Jesus (peace be upon him), elevating him to the status of a god or the son of God, due to the miraculous nature of his birth, -being born of a mother without a father-, and his ability to speak in infancy. Yet, Adam (peace be upon him) was created without a father or a mother, and he was never considered a god or the son of God. It was simply the command of Allah, who, whenever He wills something, says to it, "Be," and it is:

{Indeed, the example of Jesus in the sight of Allah is like that of Adam. He created him from dust, then He said to him, ‘Be,’ and he was.} (Aal-Imran 3:59)

Likewise, the miracles that Allah performed through Jesus, such as raising the dead, healing the sick, creating birds from clay, foretelling hidden matters, and bringing down a table from the heavens, were all carried out by Allah’s permission and will -not by the independent power of Jesus himself-. These miracles were meant to affirm his mission and validate his message.

Such miracles were not exclusive to Jesus (peace be upon him). Other prophets before him were also granted extraordinary miracles. By the permission of Allah, Ezekiel raised a vast army of the dead (Ezekiel 37:1-9). Likewise, Elijah revived a dead boy (1 Kings 17:21), and another prophet, Elisha, also raised the dead (2 Kings 4:32) and miraculously fed a hundred men with just twenty loaves of barley bread (2 Kings 4:42). Even after his death, Elisha’s body brought a dead man back to life by the permission of Allah (2 Kings 13:20). Abraham (peace be upon him) was thrown into fire, yet it did not burn him, and through him, Allah brought the dead back to life [Quran 2:260]. David (peace be upon him) was granted the ability to soften iron and shape it as he wished, and Allah made the mountains and birds glorify Him alongside David. Solomon (peace be upon him) was given control over jinn and devils, the ability to speak with birds and animals, and command over the winds.

In contrast, the message of Islam was divinely preserved, without any distortion or alteration, because Allah promised to protect it as a universal message for all of humanity until the end of time. Islam upholds the true belief that is in harmony with reason and logic. It has placed Jesus (peace be upon him) in his rightful status as a noble prophet of Allah. The Islamic creed concerning Allah is clearly stated in the Quran:

{Say, He is Allah, the One. (1) Allah, the Self-Sufficient (and the Eternal Refuge). (2) He neither begets nor is He begotten. (3) And there is none comparable to Him. (4)" (Al-Ikhlas 112:1-4)

This belief affirms that Jesus (peace be upon him) was a human being and a messenger:

{The Messiah (Jesus), the son of Mary, was nothing more than a Messenger; many Messengers had passed before him. His mother, Mary, was a truthful woman who had unwavering faith. Both of them ate food (i.e., they were humans and not gods, while Allah does not eat). See how We make Our verses (and signs) clear to them; yet, look at how they turn away (from the truth)!} (Al-Ma'idah 5:75)

Jesus (peace be upon him) was a servant of Allah whom Allah honored with prophethood:

{(Mention, O Muhammad) when Allah will say (on the Day of Judgment): 'O Jesus, son of Mary! Remember My favor upon you and upon your mother: how I supported you with the holy spirit (the angel Gabriel) so that you spoke to the people from the cradle (defending your mother against the Jews who accused her of immorality) and later when you became an adult (beginning your mission of calling them to the religion of Allah); how I taught you writing, wisdom (understanding of religion), the Torah, and the Injil (the original Gospel of Jesus); how you fashioned from clay the form of a bird, by My permission, and then you breathed into it, and it became a bird, by My permission; how you healed those born blind and the lepers, by My permission; how you brought the dead back to life, by My permission; how I restrained the Children of Israel from harming you (when they planned to kill you) after you came to them with clear proofs. Yet, the disbelievers among them said: ‘This is nothing but clear magic.’} (Al-Ma'idah 5:110)

Islam also honors Mary (peace be upon her), considering her one of the best women on earth:

{And (mention, O Muhammad) when the angels said: 'O Mary! Indeed, Allah has chosen you (for your devotion in worship and your noble character), purified you (from any bad traits), and chosen you above all the women of the world (of your time).'} (Aal-Imran 3:42)

She was pure and free from sin:

{And (Allah also presents as a good example for the believers) Mary (the mother of Jesus), the daughter of Imran, who guarded her chastity. So We commanded Our angel (Gabriel) to breathe into a slit in her garment, (and thus she conceived Jesus). She believed in the Words of her Lord and His Books and was among the devoutly obedient.} (At-Tahrim 66:12)

Islam also teaches that sin and accountability are individual responsibilities:

{Whoever is guided, their guidance is only for their own benefit, and whoever goes astray, their misguidance is only against them. No (sinful) soul will bear the burden of another. And We never punish until We have sent a Messenger (to give warning first).} (Al-Isra 17:15)

Furthermore, Islam emphasizes that no matter how much a person sins, they can always repent:

{Say (O Muhammad, that Allah says): 'O My servants (of Allah) who have transgressed against themselves through excessive sins! Do not despair of the mercy of Allah (thinking that He will not forgive you), for indeed, Allah forgives all sins (for those who turn to Him in repentance). Indeed, He is Al-Ghafur (the All-Forgiving), Ar-Rahim (the Most Merciful).'} (Az-Zumar 39:53)

Islam establishes a direct relationship between Allah and His servants without the need for intermediaries:

{And when My servants ask you (O Muhammad) about Me, indeed I am near. I respond to the supplication of the caller when he calls upon Me (without any intermediary). So let them obey Me and believe in Me, so that they may be rightly guided.} (Al-Baqarah 2:186)

The goal of this book is to promote goodwill towards people and encourage them to cooperate in righteousness and piety. It also aims to serve as a means of saving many who have gone astray by adopting a false belief that is neither supported by sound logic nor reason. Such a belief leads to undesirable consequences, for indeed, Allah does not forgive associating partners with Him, but He forgives anything less than that for whomever He wills.

The author has excellently conveyed the truth that is hidden from many adherents of Christianity in an engaging style, relying on rational evidence, logical arguments, and textual proofs from the Bible to demonstrate the human nature of Jesus (peace be upon him).

I believe that any enlightened person, free from religious fanaticism and political biases, upon reading this book, will recognize the falsehood of considering Jesus (peace be upon him) as a god or the son of God. They will come to realize the true nature of Jesus as a human being, a servant of Allah, and a prophet sent to convey Allah’s message.

My sincere prayers are that every reader of this book is guided to know the truth, accept it, and call others to it.

And our final supplication is that all praise is due to Allah, the Lord of all worlds.

Dr. Abd Ar-Rahman bin Abd Al-Karim Al-Sheha

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

Author’s Introduction

Praise be to Allah, who sent Muhammad as a bearer of glad tidings and a warner, a caller to Allah by His permission and an illuminating lamp, and who favored his companions and granted them great merit. May Allah send abundant and continuous peace and blessings upon Muhammad, his family, and his companions.

A Message of Love for Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him):

The love of Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) is deeply rooted in the heart of every Muslim and Christian. Each of them is willing to sacrifice their life and wealth for him. If Jesus were to appear today, all sincere Muslims and Christians would follow him and stand behind him. In fact, if Jesus were to appear now, he would follow the teachings of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), as the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) said: "If Moses were alive, he would have had no choice but to follow me." (Authenticated by Al-Albani).

Thus, we all wish to follow the true religion, creed, and teachings of Jesus (ﷺ) so that we may be true and sincere followers. However, those who lie about Jesus (ﷺ) are the ones who attribute to him a religion, beliefs, and teachings that he neither preached nor knew of.

I have studied the creed of Jesus (ﷺ), his teachings, and the history of the Church, and I found a fundamental difference between the doctrine of Jesus (ﷺ) and the doctrine currently taught by the Church. Initially, this difference was small, but over time, it grew and led to major theological problems. The Church attempted to resolve these issues by inventing new ideas, but these ideas only deepened the differences further. The situation reached a point where the Church resorted to inventing an astonishing and strange idea, one that neither Jesus nor his disciples nor Paul nor anyone in their time had ever imagined!

This idea is the most dangerous secret that most Christians are unaware of regarding the doctrine of today's churches, that:

“Jesus had two spirits: one divine and one human, two minds: one divine and one human, and two wills: one divine and one human!”

In this book, with Allah’s permission, we will discuss this concept in detail, exploring how it became the fundamental and official doctrine upon which the faith of all modern churches is based, despite its severe contradictions with the beliefs of Jesus, the early Church fathers, the Christian Bibles, and all human logic!

We will go back to the time of Jesus (ﷺ) to highlight the doctrine he explicitly declared, which his disciples believed in, and which all his true followers adhered to. This doctrine is clearly mentioned in the Christian Bibles.

Furthermore, we will examine the intense theological conflict between Jesus’ disciples and Paul the Apostle, and how the Christian world later split into two schools: the school of Jesus and his disciples and the school of Paul and his followers. We will analyze how today’s Christian world follows Paul’s school rather than that of Jesus, and how that school evolved over time, changing doctrines and teachings until it established a completely different religion from that of Jesus (ﷺ). This shift became especially pronounced when churches abandoned their original doctrine and the beliefs of the early Church Fathers, and, under political pressure from a pagan emperor, they adopted the creed of a young Egyptian man in his twenties who, at that time, was not even a priest!

Ahmed Al-Amir

Chapter One

Did Jesus Have Two Spirits and Two Minds?

Christians' Perception of Jesus:

The Christian perception of Jesus has been a subject of intense debate among churches and clergy since the first century and continues to be so today. Each group has its own understanding of who Jesus was. Generally, Christians are divided into three main beliefs regarding Jesus:

1. Some believe that Jesus is the Son of God because he was born without a father. However, they do not consider him to be God Himself but rather a sacred human being connected to heaven. Nevertheless, they also see him as divine because "the Son of God must be God." According to this belief, God sent Jesus to be crucified and to die in order to redeem humanity from original sin.

2. Others believe that Jesus is truly the Son of God, similar to the ancient Greek gods who married and had children.

3. Another group follows the official doctrine of the Church, which teaches that Jesus is God Himself, who took human form so that people could see Him.

A Brief Overview of the Doctrine of the Trinity:

The current churches believe that God [Glorified and exalted is He beyond such attributions] has existed eternally as three Persons or Hypostases:

1. The Hypostasis of the Essence (meaning the very being of God).
2. The Hypostasis of the Word or the Mind (meaning God's Rational Word or His Speaking Intellect).
3. The Hypostasis of the Spirit (meaning the Spirit of God).

The Church explains these terms by saying that God has an «Essence», a «Word (Mind)», and a «Spirit». However, these are not parts or components of God. This doctrine states that the Hypostasis of the Essence has its own Mind and Spirit, the Hypostasis of the Word has its own Essence and Spirit, and the Hypostasis of the Spirit has its own Essence and Mind! Thus, each of them is an independent God, yet all of them are still one God [Glorified and exalted is God beyond such attributions].

According to the Church, after the birth of Jesus, these terms were modified:

1. The Hypostasis of the Essence became the Father.

2. The Hypostasis of the Word became the Son.

3. The Hypostasis of the Spirit remained as the Holy Spirit.

Before the birth of Jesus, the Church teaches that there was no Father or Son -these roles only emerged after Jesus’ birth!

The Purpose of Jesus’ Incarnation:

The Church believes that the Hypostasis of the Essence (God) wanted to atone for Adam's sin, which occurred when he ate from the forbidden tree in paradise. To forgive this sin, blood had to be shed, and someone had to be crucified! Since this sin was passed down to all of Adam’s descendants, it became an infinite sin, meaning that a finite person (a human) could not atone for it.

Thus, the one to be crucified had to be an infinite being (i.e., God Himself, -may He be glorified beyond such beliefs-). Therefore, the Hypostasis of the Essence sent the Hypostasis of the Word (the Mind of God) to incarnate in a human form, be crucified, and die on the cross.

The Indwelling of the "Word of God" in Mary’s Womb and Its Incarnation in Jesus:

The Church teaches that the Hypostasis of the Word descended and dwelt in the womb of Mary, taking some blood from her womb to form a human body for itself so that it could appear in human form and be crucified for the atonement of original sin.

However, a serious issue arose: According to the Bible, Jesus was a human being who exhibited human traits such as weakness, lacking knowledge, and suffering. Ultimately, he was crucified and died. Before his death, he even cried out loudly:

"My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?"

How could he be God if he died, lacked knowledge, and needed help?

To resolve this contradiction, the Church introduced another doctrine, claiming that when the Hypostasis of the Word descended into Mary's womb and took blood from her to form a human body, it also acquired a human soul with its own mind, consciousness, and will.

But if Jesus had both a separate divine spirit and a distinct human spirit, wouldn’t that mean there were actually two distinct persons within him -one divine and one human?

The Church rejects this notion and insists that Jesus was one person with two spirits, two minds, two wills, and two abilities!

This belief, however, led to several theological contradictions. Before discussing them, we will first define some key concepts that will help clarify the topic.

1. Definition of Indwelling:

Indwelling refers to the process where a spirit that has no body enters another person's body (which already has its own spirit and body) without merging or uniting with it. Instead, it remains separate but takes control over the host’s body and soul.

An example of this is found in the Gospel of Matthew (Chapter 8, verses 28-32), where evil spirits (demons) entered two men, and Jesus later expelled them, causing them to enter a herd of pigs instead:

"²⁸ When Jesus arrived … two demon-possessed men met him as they were coming out of the tombs ... ²⁹ They (the demons) screamed: “What do you want with us, Son of God?” … ³² He told them: “Go,” and they came out and went into the pigs. Suddenly, the whole herd rushed down a steep slope into the sea and drowned in the water."

Another example is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as mentioned in Acts of the Apostles (Chapter 2, verses 3-4):

"³ They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. ⁴ All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit."

Thus, the Church teaches that “God, the Word” (the second Hypostasis) descended into Mary’s womb and took some blood from her womb to form a human body. However, it did not unite or merge with Mary’s body or soul. If it had merged with her, Mary herself would have become a fourth Hypostasis of God, “the Hypostasis of the Mother” [Glorified and exalted is God beyond such attributions].

2. Definition of Incarnation:

Incarnation refers to a spirit that has no body and is invisible taking on physical body of its own so that it can be seen by human eyes. In this case, the spirit possesses and fully owns this body.

For example, if an evil spirit were to incarnate in the form of a sheep, this does not mean that it has indwelled within an existing sheep that already has its own body and spirit. Rather, it means that the evil spirit has taken on a sheep-like body of its own -where the spirit is truly its own, and the body that appears in the form of a sheep is also its own (belonging to it).

This concept is supported by the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (11:14):

"And no wonder! For Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light." 

(This means he appears in the form of an angel with a body of light, not that he has indwelled in an already-existing angel.)

Similarly, in Revelation (20:2):

"He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the Devil or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years."

3. Definition of Union and Fusion:

Union and fusion occur when two independent and separate entities merge so completely that they dissolve into each other, making it impossible to separate them.

For example when a drop of vinegar dissolves in water, it becomes indistinguishable from the water itself. When two companies merge completely, they form a single larger company, losing their previous independent identities.

4. Definition of Union and Companionship:

This type of union refers to two independent and separate entities coming together and accompanying each other as a unified pair, yet each retains its own separate identity and nature.

Unlike fusion, this kind of union does not involve blending, mixing, or dissolving, nor does it alter the nature of either entity.

For example: Two companies may form a partnership under a larger entity while maintaining their own independence and identity.

The Relationship Between the "Hypostasis of the Word" and Christ in Light of the Previous Definitions:

1. Indwelling:

The Church rejects the idea of indwelling, the notion that the "Hypostasis of the Word" indwelled within an already existing man named Jesus, because Jesus had not yet been born when the "Hypostasis of the Word" entered Mary's womb. According to the Church, the "Hypostasis of the Word" is Christ himself. 

Therefore, the relationship was not one of indwelling.

2. Incarnation:

The Church rejects the idea of incarnation, the notion that the Spirit of God (the Hypostasis of the Word) took on a human body that had no spirit of its own, merely to appear in it.

The Church believes that Christ had two spirits, one divine and one human, inside his physical body.

Thus, the relationship was not one of incarnation.

3. Union and Fusion:

The Church rejects the idea of union and fusion, the notion that “Christ’s human spirit” merged and fused with the Divine spirit of the "Hypostasis of the Word" in such a way that they became a single spirit.

It also rejects the idea that “Christ’s human will” was absorbed into “the Divine will”, forming a single unified will.

Instead, the Church teaches that Christ had two distinct spirits, two separate wills, and two independent minds, all within a single human body.

Therefore, the relationship was not one of fusion or complete union.

4. Union and Companionship:

The Church rejects the idea that Christ was actually two independent persons who united and accompanied each other inside his physical body: one person being "God the Word" and the other being "Jesus the human being".

This belief of union and companionship would imply indwelling, which contradicts the doctrine of atonement and crucifixion.

If Christ were two distinct persons, it would mean that the one who was crucified was merely the limited human rather than the infinite God, -an idea the Church considers unacceptable.

Therefore, the relationship was not one of union and companionship.

Chapter Two

The Church’s Doctrine on the Nature of Christ and the Relationship Between His Humanity and Divinity

If the relationship between the divinity and humanity of Christ was neither indwelling, nor incarnation, nor fusion, nor companionship, then what was it?

The Church’s Doctrine on the Nature of Christ, Born of the Virgin:

"He is the Hypostasis of 'God the Word' united with a human body and a human soul. He indwelled in the Virgin’s womb and took blood from her womb to create for himself a body in which he could appear to us, be crucified, and die. However, he also created for himself a human soul. Thus, the divine spirit united with the human spirit and the human body, making Christ possess two complete natures: one fully divine and one fully human. This union occurred without fusion or mixture (each remained distinct and independent without blending), without alteration (the divine nature did not change the human nature in any way, nor vice versa), and without separation (the divine did not separate from the human for even a moment, from the moment this human was created, through the crucifixion and death. He remained united with him on the cross, remained united with the soul after it left the body, and remained united with the body after the soul departed). Therefore, he is fully God and fully human at the same time. He is not two persons but one person with two spirits, two natures, two minds, two intellects, two abilities, and two wills: one divine and one human."

Thus, the one who experienced human weakness, such as eating, dying, and lacking knowledge, is "Christ the human", whereas the one who performed miracles is "Christ the God."

The Church provides an analogy for the union of the two natures, -divine and human-, within Christ, likening it to the union of iron and fire. When iron is heated by fire, the fire unites with the iron without the fire turning into iron or the iron turning into fire. Striking the iron does not affect the fire nor reach it. Similarly, the crucifixion and death affected the human nature but did not reach the divine nature, despite their union.

Statements by Church Fathers on the Union of Christ’s Natures:

Saint Athanasius the Apostolic[1]:

"The Word of God came in his own person."

Saint Cyril the Great[2]:

"God the Word did not assume a human person but took upon himself a complete human nature, a body with a rational soul, and made this human nature entirely his own, bringing it into a natural union with his divinity."

Saint Cyril the Great also said:

"He (Christ) is considered one, composed of two. He is one Son in whom the divine and human natures have been gathered and united in an indescribable and unfathomable manner, forming a single entity. For this reason, he is also considered the mediator between God and humanity, as he has brought together and united within himself two things that were once very distant from each other, separated by a vast gulf, -namely, divinity and humanity. He has united them in himself, thereby connecting us to God the Father through himself."

Saint Cyril the Great further stated:

"The Logos (God the Word) cannot be called Christ on its own; likewise, Christ should not be described merely as a 'God-bearer,' as this would imply that God the Word simply used human nature as a mere instrument. Instead, we must affirm that 'God truly became man'."

Refuting This Doctrine:

This doctrine is irrational and contradicts logic for the following reasons:

1. Union must either be fusion or companionship:

This doctrine simultaneously affirms and denies the union of the two natures. Union must necessarily fall under one of two categories:

1. Union and fusion of the two natures:

This would mean that Christ either had only a divine nature or only a human nature, as the two would have merged into one.

2. Union and companionship:

This would mean that there were actually two persons living within Christ’s body: one divine and one human.

However, this contradicts the doctrine of crucifixion and salvation, because it implies that the one who was crucified and died was merely the human Jesus, while the divine did not die.

Since God cannot die, this means that the act of redemption was never fulfilled, making Christ’s coming pointless!

2. The role of the soul is to give life to the body:

According to Christian belief, God is a spirit. If God incarnated [Glorified and exalted is He beyond such attributions], He would not need a human soul to give life to the body He took on! So how can it be claimed that Christ had two souls, one divine (God’s spirit) and another human?

3. The role of the mind is free will, reasoning, and choice:

The Church teaches that “God the Word” is the “rational Word of God” or the “speaking intellect of God”.

If that were true, then the mind within Christ’s body should have been the mind of God rather than a human mind, as God does not need a human intellect.

The Church claims that 'Christ had two wills, but they did not conflict because his human will submitted to his divine will.' As evidence, the Church cites the following verse:

Matthew 26:39:

"Going a little farther, Jesus fell with his face to the ground and prayed, 'My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me. Yet not as I will, but as You will.'"

However, this verse actually proves that Christ had only one will, and that it was human.

If he had two wills: one belonging to “God the Word” and another human, then why did he pray to “God the Father” instead of referring to “God the Word” within him?

This shows that the divine will was in heaven, not on earth.

Similarly, in John 5:30, Jesus says:

"I can do nothing on my own accord. I judge according to what I hear, and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will but the will of the one who sent me."

Here, he clearly refers to the will of “God the Father”, not the will of “God the Word”!

Moreover, the notion of two wills existing within the same person is nothing more than philosophical speculation without any real foundation. It is mere wordplay and a contradiction in terms. Even if we assume that Jesus' human will was entirely subordinate to the divine will, what purpose would it serve if it had no function whatsoever?

4. The analogy of iron and fire is a flawed comparison:

This analogy is merely philosophical rhetoric and wordplay, making it unfit to be included in religious texts or used as evidence. Fire does not unite with iron, once the iron cools, the heat disappears. Similarly, fever does not merge with the mind when it causes a high temperature, nor does illness become one with the body. Countless other examples can illustrate this point.

There is a significant difference between saying that the two natures united and became one person and saying that fire indwelled in iron, affecting it by heating it, without them becoming one entity, -or fire turning into iron, or taking the form of iron. 

However, the Church claims that Christ is "God the Word incarnate" or "God-man," which implies an eternal and inseparable union, where the two natures became one person.

As for the argument that the crucifixion and death affected only the human nature, not the divine, this actually proves that the entire doctrine is a staged fabrication.

For example: 

Suppose a man named Mark needs surgery, but instead, he unites with another man named Luke and tells him to undergo the operation in his place. Mark remains “united” with Luke by holding his hand while Luke is in surgery. The operation is performed on Luke, but they insist on claiming that Mark is the one who underwent the surgery!

Likewise, the doctrine of crucifixion and redemption is based on the idea that the one who was crucified must be infinite, -that is, God Himself [Glorified and exalted is God beyond such attributions]. Yet, the Church says that the one who was crucified was the human nature, not the divine! The Church provides an analogy stating that just as a hammer striking iron does not affect the fire within it, so too, crucifixion and death did not affect the divine nature at all!

5. The phrase “having two natures: one divine and one human” is a misleading expression:

The word "nature" has only three possible meanings:

1. "Nature" as a characteristic or trait:

For example, we say that a person has both a good nature and an evil nature, sometimes he behaves kindly, other times cruelly, but he remains the same person.

If Christ had two natures, then this would mean that he was one person, but sometimes God and sometimes a human, which the Church rejects because they believe he was fully God and fully human at all times.

2. "Nature" as a person:

This would mean that inside Christ were two persons, one divine and one human. However, this contradicts the Church’s belief that Christ is one person.

3. "Nature" as an essence or substance:

This implies that Christ possesses two essences: one divine and one human. 

However, by doing so, the Church has essentially created a new god with its own hands, because essence refers to the very being or nature of something, its reality, identity, origin, substance, and fundamental components.

How can a divine essence be merged with a human essence?

How can a divine essence be united with earthly dust, which is the essence of human beings?

6. The statements of Cyril the Great and Athanasius the Apostolic are merely philosophical ideas without any religious foundation:

Both of them lived in the 4th and 5th centuries and were part of the Alexandrian School, which leaned heavily toward Platonic philosophy and allegorical interpretation of doctrines. The scholars of Alexandria were primarily concerned with Christ’s divinity rather than his humanity.

Their statements have no foundation in the Bible, Christ’s teachings, or the teachings of his disciples, -or even the teachings of Paul!

Thus, their statements are mere philosophical ideas that cannot serve as the foundation of a religious belief.

Moreover, their views contradict the teachings of earlier, more knowledgeable Church fathers, as well as those of other theological schools, such as the Antiochian School.

The Antiochian School focused on concrete, tangible realities and relied on literal interpretation of Scripture rather than symbolic interpretations. It also based its teachings on historical facts, rational analysis, and the writings of early Church fathers.

Chapter Three

At Christ’s death, which spirit departed: his divine spirit or his human spirit?

The Reason for Claiming That Christ Had Two Spirits:

According to Christian doctrine, Christ was crucified, died, and his spirit left his body. This raises a fundamental question: 

How can God die?

God is eternal and does not die, so Christ’s death invalidates his divinity, which in turn would undermine the doctrine of sin and atonement.

Moreover, Christ’s death means that his lifeless body became worthless, as it became a just body without a spirit. But how could the body of God be worthless?

Since "God the Word" took on a human body, it means that this body became divine because God had incarnated in it.

Furthermore, since Christ’s spirit returned to that body at his resurrection -as the Church claims-, this means that it is undoubtedly a sacred body, one that could not have been devoid of a spirit, not even for a single moment!

Thus, a completely new idea was invented, -one that no one had ever thought of before-, which is that Christ’s body contained two spirits, one divine and one human, which were united with his human body and never separated from it, not even for a single moment—not on the cross, not at death, and not even after death!

Did the divine spirit also depart from Christ’s lifeless body?

1. The claim that the divine spirit remained united with the human spirit after leaving Christ’s Body raises a crucial question:

How can two spirits remain united after they have left Christ’s body?

Imagine seeing two spirits united, would this not imply the existence of two distinct persons rather than one?

For instance, if Christ’s divine spirit spoke about his body, it would say, "This is my body."

But if it were to speak about Christ’s human spirit, could it really say, "This is my spirit" or "This is my human spirit"?

Would it make any sense to claim that God [Glorified and exalted is He beyond such attributions] has another spirit, which is a human spirit?!

2. The claim that the divine spirit remained united with Christ’s lifeless human body after the human spirit departed defies logic and reason!

This notion is completely irrational and illogical, it could even be considered one of the seven wonders of the world!

We are speaking about a lifeless body, meaning a body without a spirit. So how can anyone claim that the divine spirit was still within the body, yet at the same time, the body was dead?

Would this not be a contradiction in itself?

Moreover, the phrase "the union of the divine spirit with the human spirit and body" implies indwelling rather than incarnation!

Who Died on the Cross?

If we say that only the human nature died, this contradicts the doctrine of crucifixion and atonement, which requires that the one who is crucified and redeems humanity must be God Himself [Glorified and exalted is He beyond such attributions]!

If we say that God died [Glorified and exalted is He beyond such attributions], this is impossible because God does not die.

If we say that both the divine and human spirits died and departed together from Christ’s body, then this means that his body was completely lifeless and empty of both natures (which the Church rejects). Moreover, as mentioned earlier, God does not die!

Thus, we find that the matter is extremely complex, and anyone who thinks they fully understand it has actually misunderstood it!

To clarify how this entire issue is mere wordplay and that the Church’s excessive exaltation of Christ has led to all these contradictions, let us revisit a previous example regarding indwelling:

In Matthew 8:32, it says:

"³² He told them (to the demons): “Go,” and they came out and went into the pigs. Suddenly, the whole herd rushed down a steep slope into the sea and drowned in the water."

When these pigs drowned and died, which spirit left them? Was it the spirit of the pigs? Was it the spirit of the demons? Or was it both?

Of course, both spirits left, the pigs’ own spirit and the demons’ spirit.

However, there is an important distinction: the spirit of the pigs departed as a soul leaving a lifeless body, while the spirit of the demons departed as an indwelling entity leaving the pigs’ bodies after possessing and controlling them.

Thus, it was the pigs that drowned, not the demons.

This means that the demons were not incarnated in the pigs; rather, they indwelled within them. The pigs already had their own bodies and spirits.

If the demons had incarnated as pigs, this would mean that they created bodies for themselves in the form of pigs, without souls, instead of indwelling in already-existing pigs.

Applying This to the Crucifixion of Christ:

From this, it becomes as clear as daylight that it was the human nature that died, and that God was never inside this man, because God does not die and never unites with His creation.

As for the Church’s claim that God was inside Christ, this means that His presence was indwelling, not incarnation, -and this destroys the doctrine of crucifixion and atonement!

Moreover, as Muslims, we reject both indwelling and incarnation, [Glorified and exalted is He beyond such attributions]!

Chapter Four

The Different Doctrines on Whether Christ Had Only a "Divine Spirit and Mind," Only a "Human Spirit and Mind," or "Two Spirits and Two Minds"?

1. The Doctrine That Christ Had Only a Divine Spirit and Mind:

Many clergy, such as Apollinaris[3], Bishop of Laodicea, believed that Christ had no human spirit or human mind, because "God the Word" was himself the divine spirit and the mind of God. Therefore, he did not need a human spirit to give him life, nor did he need a human mind to grant him free will.

Thus, Apollinaris denied the existence of a rational human soul in Christ, to avoid the implication that Christ had two persons: one divine and one human.

He stated that just as a human being is composed of body, soul, and a rational spirit, similarly, "God the Word Incarnate" must be composed of a body, soul, and a rational spirit, which is the Hypostasis of the Word (i.e., his divinity).

2. The Doctrine That Christ Had Only a Human Spirit and Mind (The Doctrine of Indwelling and Companionship):

A group of clergy held that Christ had only one spirit, which was human. According to this belief, the Virgin Mary did not give birth to God, but only to a human being, into whom the Spirit of "God the Word" indwelled at baptism and departed from him before his death on the cross.

According to this doctrine, the indwelling of "God the Word" was in the form of companionship and indwelling, not incarnation.

This belief was upheld by Theodore of Mopsuestia (Bishop of Mopsuestia)[4], Paul of Samosata (Bishop of Antioch)[5], and Nestorius (Patriarch of Constantinople)[6], among others.

Nestorius, in his Fourth Letter to Proclus[7], wrote:

"They claim that the life-giving divinity is subject to death and dare to reduce the Logos (Hypostasis of the Word) to the level of theatrical myths, as if he were a child wrapped in swaddling clothes and then died. Pilate did not kill the divinity, but rather the garment of divinity."

Nestorius also said:

"I will never call a two- or three-month-old child 'God'."

3. The Doctrine That Christ Had Two Spirits and Two Minds: One Divine and One Human:

Another group of clergy held the belief that Christ had two spirits and two minds: one divine and one human.

These were the proponents of the doctrine that Christ had two distinct natures, one divine and one human, which will be discussed in detail later, God willing.

Refuting the Three Doctrines:

1. Refuting the Doctrine That Christ Had Only a Divine Spirit and Mind:

1) God, who created time and space, cannot be confined within a small, limited human body! God created the universe, yet He is not a part of it and does not dwell within it.

If we compare the size of a human being to the Earth, then compare the Earth to the solar system, and then compare the solar system to the trillions of galaxies in this universe, how can anyone claim that "the Spirit of God"[8] descended and incarnated in a weak human body?

And all this, allegedly, because God was unable [Glorified and exalted is He beyond such attributions] to forgive Adam for eating from a tree?!

2) If Christ had a divine mind, then he would be all-knowing, and his ‘knowledge and will’ would be the same as God's knowledge and will.

However, many passages in the Gospels confirm that Christ had only a human mind, not a divine one.

Mark 11:12-14 - Christ’s lack of knowledge about the fig tree:

"The next day, as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, 'May no one ever eat fruit from you again.'”

Mark 13:32 - Christ’s lack of knowledge about the Day of Judgment:

"But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."

These texts show that Christ was not omniscient, which contradicts the idea that he had a divine mind.

2. Refuting the Doctrine That Christ Had Only a Human Spirit and Mind (The Doctrine of Indwelling and Companionship):

This doctrine undermines the doctrines of original sin, incarnation, crucifixion, and atonement because its proponents believe that the one who died on the cross was "Jesus the human," in whom "God the Word" indwelled but never truly incarnated.

Moreover, they believe that "God the Word" left Jesus before his death!

However, the doctrine of atonement requires that the one who was crucified must be infinite, meaning that he must be God Himself [Glorified and exalted is He beyond such attributions] so that his sacrifice would be unlimited and sufficient to atone for the original sin inherited from Adam.

If only a human died, then the atonement is finite, which contradicts the very foundation of Christian theology!

3. Refuting the Doctrine That Christ Had Two Spirits and Two Minds, One Divine and One Human:

When another group of clergy realized:

1. That the doctrine claiming "Christ had only a divine spirit and mind" was incorrect, because it contradicts numerous Gospel passages confirming Christ’s human personality.

2. That the doctrine claiming "Christ had only a human spirit and mind" (and that "God the Word" only indwelled in him at baptism and left before his death on the cross) was also incorrect, because it would destroy the fundamental doctrine of Christianity (original sin, incarnation, crucifixion, and atonement), -since without this doctrine, there would be no reason for Christ’s coming and no justification for considering him divine-. 

They decided to adopt a compromise doctrine: That "Christ had two natures: he has both a divine spirit and mind, as well as a human spirit and mind."

This belief attempted to preserve both his divinity and humanity, but as we will see later, it also led to serious contradictions.

This Doctrine Can Be Refuted as Follows:

1. They Made Christ into Two Persons While Claiming He Was One: 

The claim that Christ had two spirits living in one body contradicts logic and reason. This would mean that there were two rational persons in Christ: one divine and one human.

The Virgin Mary could not have given birth to two sons: one being God and the other a human!

2. They Made Christ One Person with Two Minds and Two Wills:

It is impossible for any person to have two minds or two wills. The four Gospels confirm that ‘Christ’s will’ was a ‘human will’ distinct from ‘God’s will’.

For example, in John 5:30, Christ states:

"I can do nothing on my own accord. I judge according to what I hear, and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will but the will of the one who sent me."

In Matthew 26:39, Christ prays:

"Going a little farther, Jesus fell with his face to the ground and prayed, 'My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me. Yet not as I will, but as You will.'"

In Matthew 27:46, Christ cries out:

"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Despite these clear statements, the Church made a strange claim: that Christ’s human will was submissive to his divine will, thus avoiding any contradiction between them!

However, what kind of logic is this?

The term "two wills" naturally implies "two persons", not "one person with two wills"!

When Christ said "not as I will", he referred to himself with the pronoun "I" (regardless of whether the Church claims that both God and man existed within him). 

Then, he directed his words to God, saying "but as You will", yet he did not say, "as the Son or the Word within me wills."

3. It Confirms the Doctrine of Indwelling and Companionship:

By claiming that Christ had two spirits, they essentially confirm that the fetus inside the Virgin Mary was merely the human Jesus, -a human with a human spirit and body-, and that "God the Word" then indwelled in him, just as he had indwelled in Mary’s womb, without uniting or merging with her.

This completely destroys the doctrine of the incarnation of "God the Word." because it means that the one who was crucified was a limited human, not the infinite God!

4. The Creator and the Created in One Body:

If Christ had two spirits, this would mean that the "created human spirit" was a servant to the "divine Creator spirit".

So how can the Creator be, at the same time, the created?

How could the Creator and the created exist within the same body?

This would also imply that when Christ prostrated in worship, both his human spirit and his divine spirit prostrated together!

5. There Was No Need for a Human Spirit Inside Christ:

The primary function of the spirit is to give life to the body. Since the Spirit of God was already inside Christ’s body, it would have been the source of life. So why would he need another source of life?

6. How Can a Spirit Have Another Spirit?

The Church teaches that the Spirit of "God the Word" incarnated in a human body, meaning it took on a body like a garment to appear in it. But how can the Church claim that there was a second spirit inside Christ?

We can understand how a spirit can incarnate, but how can a spirit indwell within another spirit? A spirit is already a complete entity, so why would it need another spirit?

The presence of two spirits contradicts the doctrine of incarnation and confirms instead the doctrine of indwelling and companionship!

7. How Did the Church Determine That Christ Had a Divine and a Human Spirit?

How does the Church claim something for which it has no evidence from Christ’s words, his disciples’ teachings, or the four Gospels?

Chapter Five

The Emergence of Doctrines About Christ’s Nature

Due to Gospel passages describing how Christ was struck, crucified, and died, and how he prayed, fasted, worshiped, and called upon God, questions arose:

• How could he be God himself?
• How could the Virgin Mary have given birth to God?

Thus, a theological school emerged that introduced a strange idea:
Christ had two natures: one divine and one human!

However, this idea led to another theological problems:

• What is the relationship between these two natures?
• How did they unite in one body?
• Did they merge or remain separate?
• Or did they unite without merging or separating?

Because of these contradictions, many different sects emerged, each with its own interpretation of Christ’s nature, including:

1. Monophysitism (One-Nature Doctrine):

This doctrine holds that Christ had two natures, one divine and one human, but after the incarnation, they merged into a single divine nature.

According to this belief, the human nature (man) was absorbed into the divine nature (God), just as a drop of vinegar dissolves in the ocean.

Thus, Christ was viewed as "one hypostasis and one person with a single nature: God-man."

One of the most prominent figures who followed this doctrine was Eutyches[9], the head of a monastery in Constantinople, which housed over 300 monks.

2. Dyophysitism (Two-Nature Doctrine):

This doctrine asserts that Christ had two distinct natures: one divine and one human, that remained unchanged, unmerged, and inseparable after the incarnation.

One of the most well-known proponents of this doctrine was Pope Leo I (Leo the Great), Patriarch of Rome[10]. He criticized Eutyches' Monophysite beliefs in his letter to Flavian[11], Patriarch of Constantinople, stating:

"Thus, while preserving the properties of both natures and substances in one united person, majesty assumed humility, strength assumed weakness, and eternity assumed mortality.

Thus, the same one who, while remaining in the form of God, was the creator of humanity, later became a man himself in the form of a servant. Each nature retains its own properties without defect, just as the divine nature does not take away the form of the servant, nor does the form of the servant diminish the divine nature.

Thus, the Son of God entered this lowest world, descending from the heavenly throne, yet not departing from the glory of the Father, being born in a new order, by a new birth. By a new order, because the invisible became visible, the incomprehensible willed to be comprehended; the eternal began to exist in time; the Lord of the universe took on the form of a servant, veiling the immensity of His majesty. The impassible God did not disdain to become a passible man, and the immortal accepted to be subject to the laws of death."

After Leo’s letter was read at the Council of Chalcedon (year 451), the attending bishops declared:

"This is the faith of the Fathers, this is the faith of the Apostles. We all believe this, and all the Orthodox hold this faith. Anyone who does not believe this is excommunicated. Peter speaks through the mouth of Leo. This is the teaching of the Apostles. This is the true faith."

So, was this the final resolution on Christ’s nature? No! Other theological schools later criticized Dyophysitism, as we will explore further.

3. Miaphysitism (One-Composite-Nature Doctrine):

This doctrine asserts that Christ had two natures, one divine and one human, but they united into a single nature, the "nature of the Word incarnate."

The two natures could not be separated, merged, or altered after their union.

This belief is held by the Oriental Orthodox Churches (Coptic, Armenian, Syriac, Ethiopian, and Indian Orthodox churches).

When Dioscorus, Patriarch of Alexandria[12], saw that Pope Leo I, Patriarch of Rome and Flavian, Patriarch of Constantinople, had promoted the doctrine that Christ had two natures and two wills after the union, he actively sought to refute this doctrine and said:

"Christ is one. He was invited to the wedding as a man, and he turned water into wine as God. In all his actions, he remained one."

He also cited Cyril of Alexandria, who said:

"The union of the Word of God with the body is like the union of the soul with the body or the union of fire with iron. Though they are of two different natures, once united, they become one. Likewise, Christ is one Messiah, one Lord, one nature, and one will."

4. Paulicianism (Adoptionism Doctrine):

This doctrine, named after Paul of Samosata, Bishop of Antioch[13], taught that Christ was the Son of God by adoption, not by nature.

The Virgin Mary gave birth to Jesus the human, and later, the Word of God indwelled in him, making him divine.

Thus, Christ was a man who became divine, not God who became human. At the crucifixion, the Word of God left him, and only his human nature died.

5. Nestorianism:

Named after Nestorius, Patriarch of Constantinople, this doctrine taught that the Virgin Mary did not give birth to God, but only to a human being, and that the Word of God indwelled in Jesus at his baptism (when John the Baptist baptized Jesus, Matthew 3:16), but departed from him before his death on the cross.

The indwelling of divinity was not a hypostatic union (the union of the divine essence with the human essence), but rather an indwelling in the sense of accompaniment. 

Thus, there was no union between the human and divine natures in the person of Jesus Christ; rather, there was merely a connection between a human being and divinity. That is, Christ had two distinct hypostases (essences), one divine and the other human.

Therefore, Mary should not be called "Theotokos" (Mother of God), but only "Mother of Jesus." 

The Virgin cannot give birth to God, for the created cannot give birth to the Creator, and what is born of the flesh is merely flesh.

Theodore of Mopsuestia, Bishop of Mopsuestia[14] (a friend of John Chrysostom), taught that:

"God the Word" indwelled in the human Jesus and used him as an instrument for the salvation of humanity.

The union between them was external (a connection), not a hypostatic union. Therefore, the link between them was the human spirit.

The divine essence does not unite with the human essence, and the divine nature does not unite with the human nature.

He considered 'God the Word' to be a complete person and Jesus the man to be a complete person. Thus, in Christ, there were two persons: one divine and the other human, who were united externally in the sense of a connection. Through this external union, they were regarded as one person.

The Consequences of These Theological Disputes:

Many other sects emerged, but we cannot mention them all here. All these doctrines were labeled as heresies by the adherents of the Miaphysite and Dyophysite doctrines.

It is worth noting that all these so-called "heresies" were actually led by major bishops, patriarchs, and popes with large followings across different regions.

For example, Patriarch Nestorius, who was deeply influenced by the theological principles of the Antiochian School, was opposed in his Christological doctrine by Pope Cyril of Alexandria, who was deeply influenced by the theological principles of the Alexandrian School.

In Antioch, theologians and interpreters were more inclined toward an Aristotelian perspective, focusing on tangible and visible realities. They relied on a literal interpretation of the Scriptures, drawing on historical information, rational analysis, comparisons between biblical passages, and philosophical theories. Therefore, they focused more on Christ's humanity and his earthly life rather than on his divinity.

Antiochian theologians were more Aristotelian, focusing on historical analysis and logical interpretation of scripture.

As for the Alexandrian School, it was more inclined toward Platonism and the allegorical interpretation of theological issues. The scholars of Alexandria were primarily focused on Christ’s divinity rather than his humanity. 

This difference in theological approach became increasingly intense due to sectarian bias and rivalry over episcopal positions.

This theological dispute led to the Great Schism of (year 451) at the Council of Chalcedon, dividing the Church into:

Chalcedonian Churches: These are the churches that accepted the decisions of the Council of Chalcedon and affirmed that Christ has two natures, divine and human, without mixture or separation. This includes the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches in Greece, Russia, Romania, Serbia, Hungary, and Jerusalem. Later, the Protestant churches also aligned with this belief.

Non-Chalcedonian Churches: These are the churches that rejected the decisions of the Council and believed that Christ has only one nature, the 'nature of the incarnate Word,' which consists of the union of the divine and human natures into a single nature without mixture or separation. This includes the Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, Ethiopian, and Indian churches.

Those who rejected the Council’s decisions faced severe persecution.

Chapter Six

The Belief of Christ and His Disciples

After all the previously mentioned statements, opinions, philosophies, and various doctrines of the clergy, and their numerous councils held to determine the truth about Christ and his nature, we will now present, in the simplest way, the correct belief that Christ and his disciples held, which is clearly stated in the Bible.

The reason behind all these different doctrines among the clergy is their excessive glorification of Christ, believing that he must be God [God forbid], because he was born without a father and performed miracles. However, they overlooked the fact that Adam was also created without a father or mother and that all prophets and messengers performed miracles as tangible proof of their mission. Performing miracles does not mean they were gods!

Christ’s Belief That He Was a Prophet and Messenger of God:

Gospel of Mark 6:4:

"Then Jesus said to them: “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown, among his relatives, and in his own household!”."

As we see, Christ clearly called himself a prophet and did not say anywhere that he was God or the Hypostasis of the Word.

Gospel of Luke 13:33:

"Yet today, tomorrow, and the next day, I must continue my journey, for no prophetcan perish outside of Jerusalem!"

The Belief of the General Public That Christ Was a Prophet:

When Jesus raised a dead young man by the will of God, the people did not say that he was God, but rather that he was a prophet.

Gospel of Matthew 21:10-11:

"When Jesus entered Jerusalem, the whole city was stirred, asking, “Who is this?” The crowds answered, “This is Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee.”."

Gospel of Luke 7:16:

"Fear seized them all, and they glorified God, saying, “A great prophet has appeared among us, and God has visited His people!'"

Gospel of John 6:14:

"Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, “This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world.”."

Gospel of Matthew 21:46:

"But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet."

The Belief of Christ’s Disciples That He Was a Prophet:

Peter’s first sermon in Acts 2:22:

"Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:"

Peter’s sermon in the temple (Acts 3:13):

"The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our ancestors, has glorified His servant Jesus."

Note: Although Peter called Christ a "servant" in the phrase "His servant Jesus," some translations altered the word "servant" to "His Son,"! Here is the Greek translation issued by the official Greek Orthodox Church:

"Ο Θεός του Αβραάμ, του Ισαάκ και του Ιακώβ, ο Θεός των προπατόρων μας, έδειξε τη δόξα του Ιησού του δούλου Tου."

Christ’s Belief That He Was Sent Only to the Israelites, Not for the Atonement of Humanity:

Gospel of Matthew 15:21-26:

"A Canaanite woman from that region came to him, crying out, “Have mercy on me, o lord, son of David! My daughter is severely possessed by a demon.” But he did not answer her a word. So his disciples came and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us!” He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” But the woman came and knelt before him, saying, “Lord, help me!” He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs!”."

Christ Was Not a Christian, Nor Were His Disciples, and They Did Not Carry Crosses:

Acts 11:26:

"It was in Antioch that the disciples were first called Christians."

By the grace of God, this concludes Part One.