Thursday, December 20, 2012

Refuting Zakir Naik on the Crucifixion of Jesus

Zakir Naik claims that a careful reading of the New Testament shows that Jesus never died on the cross. But are his arguments sound? Sam Shamoun and I discuss Naik's main arguments in our latest episode of "Jesus or Muhammad?"


Zack_Tiang said...

Good show. Zakir's popularity is probably an extension of Ahmed Deedat's... it is disappointing and upsetting how his misrepresentation and misconception and deliberate deception is eagerly accepted uncritically by the regular Muslim.

israelinzion said...

God bless you guys
check this link it is eyes opener

Melvyn Cyrus said...

David, Sam, and the last caller made a good point. If Allah made someone else look like Jesus then he deceived those who believe in the crucifixion because the death on the cross is what apparently occurred. Even if you pretend like Shabir that Jesus was indeed on the cross, we are still in a situation in which Jesus apparently died ("so it appeared unto them", 4:157), which news was passed on, resulting in every non-muslim today believing that it really happened. Allah is therefore, through his deceptive action (whether he put someone else or saved Jesus afterwards while he apparently died to everyone present , see same quote) responsible in the belief in the crucifixion.
This is exactly the point the caller made. How can you trust a God who deceived billions of people just for the kicks? Even if you are a Muslim, you can't guarantee that you're not being deceived.

Melvyn Cyrus said...

BTW, if you read the Qur'an carefully, even the majority of Muslims is being deceived by Allah. Read the following verse carefully:

"14.4 And We never sent a messenger save with the language of his folk, that he might make (the message) clear for them. ..."

The message of the Qur'an is in Arabic in order to be clear to Arab Muslims. But what about non-Arab Muslims? Most of them don't have a clue about Arabic (except S. Fatihah that they learn by heart in Arabic no matter if they understand it). According to this verse, the quranic message cannot reach a desirable level of clarity because it is in another language than theirs (that's why you always hear from Muslim apologists that you have to refer to the Arabic...).
Look now at the rest of the verse:

Then Allah sendeth whom He will astray , and guideth whom He will. He is the Mighty, the Wise."

It is clear that "sendeth whom he will astray" is to be related to the language problem mentioned in the previous sentence pertaining to the same verse.
The logical conclusion is that Muslims who are non-Arabic speakers (the vast majority) are being deceived by Allah!
This is indeed true. Think about all those Muslims who have to learn to pray in a language they might even not be able to pronounce (e.g. Arabic in unpronounceable for most people having an Asian language like Chinese or Japanese as a mother tongue...). Some go as far as reciting the Qur'an without understanding a word just for the sake of reading it in Arabic.This is true. I've heard about it from a Muslim.
We can really be glad that we can enjoy real freedom in Jesus Christ!

simple_truth said...

israelinzion said...

God bless you guys
check this link it is eyes opener


I've seen that film. The first 25-30 minutes is fairly accurate; but the next 30-35 minutes is certainly a different perspective, as the author disclaims. While I agree with the overall idea of that section of the film, the author implies that Mohammad concocted the plan to elevate himself to satisfy his desires. To a certain point, I can agree that there had to have been some internal motivation for him; but, it seems more likely that he actually was possessed by an evil spirit that directed him on his course. The remainder of the film also goes in line with most historical accounts. Overall, I like the different perspective. A new, fresh perspective is a welcome change.

Thanks, David, for posting this video. Is there any chance that you could post the las 4 episodes of Jesus or Mohammad. I either missed part of the show or missed entirely because of Internet problems with the ABN stream.

Herakleios said...

OFFTOPIC - Mohammed Movie 2.0

Sorry for posting something offtopic, but it might be interesting for you - i hope its some kind of news:

I just read in my german Newspaper, that Katar will be financing a MOVIE ABOUT MOHAMMAD. The Sheiks will give about $ 1 Billion (Milliarde in German, i hope i got the number correct in english, german and english mix up the names of billion etc.) and the Producer of "Lord of the Rings" Barrie Osbourne might be involved in the Project.
It is supposed to be a Movie for "non-Muslims" to give them a better understanding for islam (Propaganda Movie in other words).
The Funny thing is - Mohammad will not be shown as a character, because that might insult Muslims. The Newspaper wrote: "It is forbidden in Sunnite Islam to make pictures of Allah or his Messengers". This could become difficult to make a movie about a person, without showing that person :-D
The actors will all be Muslims, but speak english.

Hope thats something new for you ... at least i can think of some debates about the movie after its release!

Ah and one question about the pictures. I know that there are a lot of pictures of mohammad from pre 17th century - why is it, that muslims made pictures of Mohammed back then? If it is forbidden, why did they do it then? As the Newspaper said "his Messengers", shouldnt Muslims be insulted by the Christian "Jesus on the Cross" you see in Churches, jewelry and other places? I wonder, when the UN will have a resolution that will forbid pictures of Jesus, so that no Muslim has to be offended.

Herakleios said...

here is a link - some people might understand it, or just use google translate:

Unknown said...

zakir misinterpreted the bible a lot more. You have only showed us and refuted 1/10 of his actual speech. I want you people to prove that all his assumptions about crucifixation of JESUS CHRIST is false and give us proper interpretation .

Jose Joseph/ CTW24 said...

Question I have David wood is close to the end of the video you mentioned that opposing the death of Jesus, just as Peter attempted to do is satanic, one of the difficulties am having David is reconciling the idea that opposing the death of Jesus on the cross is satanic but yet satan wanted Jesus to be crucified? It's either opposing the crucifixion is satanic or endorsing the crucifixion is satanic, can't wrap by mind around how Satan can be doing both in which would mean he has a kingdom divided against himself. Asking for help on this issue, thanks

David Wood said...

As I said in the video, Satan doesn't know everything about Jesus' work. But Satan opposes Jesus' work. Hence, when Peter opposed Jesus work, he was inadvertently in league with Satan.

Jose Joseph/ CTW24 said...

Thanks David for clarifying for me, Sidenote have you ever wondered if the Bible according to Muslims don't teach the deity of Christ, his death by crucifixion, the trinity, his unique sonship, that God is unipersonal, predicts Muhammad, and all of these comport with Islam, why in the world do Muslim say its corrupted?? Just amazing

Selecta Mark said...

Hi David and Sam, great refutation of Zakir Naik's crucifixion. Regarding the sign of Jonah. I use to believe growing up as a kid that Jonah was alive in the belly of the Whale. However, Sam rightly points out a strong argument for Jonah being dead because the scriptures refer to Sheol the place of the dead where he cries out to God. It is important to note that the New Testament also records communication beyond the grave such as Luke's account of the Rich Man and Lazurus. In addition 1Peter 3:19 speaks of Jesus preaching beyond the grave to the spirits in prison. Therefore, the sign of Jonah not only refers to the time factor 3 days and 3 nights but also the literal death of Jonah for the same time frame and resurfacing from the Whale alive!