Friday, March 8, 2013

Muhammad in the Bible - Debate


Zakir Hussain & Samuel Green Dublin 2013.

Thank you Zakir for the debate. You presented a clear 4 point argument that helped me to understand the Islamic position better and clarify my own theology.
Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, (1 Peter 3:15, NIV)

15 comments:

akairey said...

@David...please pass or post this:
http://www.persecution.org/2013/02/21/muslim-accused-of-beheading-two-christians-in-u-s/

bam bamba said...

Well done Samuel Green. Your presentation was articulate and full of grace. It is a known fact that muslims use circular reasoning to debate. the plan is to throw you off course so that the inconsistencies in their argument will not be exposed. God bless you all for shining the light of the gospel in the darkness.

WIKI's Page said...

Dear brother David,
Nice debate where Samuel Green had presented the case beautifully. But one thing I want to know. How do we reconcile Deut 34:12 and Jesus as a prophet like Moses and refute muslim claim. Zakir was arguing that since there was no prophet like Moses that came afterwards in Israel, the only other option is the prophet coming from outside Israel.

David Wood said...

WIKI, Deuteronomy was written more than a thousand years before Jesus. So how does a line saying that no prophet had arisen in Israel by the time of the writing of Deuteronomy rule out Jesus coming as a prophet like Moses more than a thousand years later?

Besides, Muhammad was ruled out as a prophet by Deuteronomy 18:20, just two verses after the passage Muslims quote.

Craig said...

@ Zakir Hussain

If your available please respond. John 5:46 says If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. I was wondering where in the Torah did you think Jesus was talking about?

Sam said...

Here are some challenges to raise whenever Muslims try to use the Bible to prove that Muhammad is a prophet.

First, Deuteronomy 34:10-12 provides the criteria which identify what a prophet like Moses must be like. A prophet like Moses must do miracles like he did and must know God face to face, i.e. speak to God directly in time and space which is what God did for Moses (cf. Exodus 24:1-2, 9-18; 33:7-11, 18-23; 34:1-9, 28-35; Numbers 12:1-8). Even the Quran agrees that Allah spoke to Moses directly in Q. 4:163. Muhammad fails both criteria since Q. 28:48 says he couldn't do any miracles like Moses, and Allah never entered into time and space in order to appear to Muhammad in a visible form like he did for Moses.

Second, a prophet like Moses must have the same theology Moses did, a point which Green briefly touched on, i.e. sacrifices, priesthood etc. However, I think in future debates Christians need to emphasize this point more strongly. We need to show that, according to Deuteronomy 14:1, 32:6, 18, Moses proclaimed that Yahweh is a spiritual Father to Israel whom Yahweh spiritually or metaphorically gave birth to. This is something which the Quran denies most emphatically. See, for example, Q. 5:18. As such, Muhammad stands condemned as a false prophet for contradicting the theology of Moses. Therefore, he cannot be the prophet like Moses.

Third, Zakir said that the Jews who came to John to ask whether he was the Christ or that prophet were sent by the religious authorities who knew their Scriptures. He specified this in order to refute Green's appeal to the disciples telling Jesus that the people thought that he was Elijah, Jeremiah or one of the other prophets that came back from the dead. It is unfortunate that Zakir doesn't he how this destroys his entire argument.

Since he accepts these Jews as experts of the Law who correctly understood their Scriptures then he must accept the fact that their asking John if he was that prophet to come conclusively proves that Muhammad is a false prophet, since this shows that they knew and believed that that prophet to come would be an Israelite, not an Ishmaelite. After all, why did they ask John who was an Israelite if he was that prophet, if in fact Moses' words in Deuteronomy implied that the prophet like him would be from another nation that was related to Israel?

Fourth, next time anyone mentions the Paraclete passages use this to show how this method of interpretation ends up proving that Jesus is Muhammad's God, and that the Quran must have been corrupted. Here is what I mean.

John 14:16-17, 26, 15:26, and 16:7-15 clearly say that the Father and the Son together send the Paraclete from the presence of the Father in the name of Christ in order to glorify Christ. Muslims say that Allah sent Muhammad in the name of Allah to glorify Allah. Therefore, if Muhammad is the Paraclete, then the Father and the Son must be Allah, the God that sent Muhammad.

In light of this fact, this means that the Quran must have been corrupted sometime after Muhammad's death since Muhammad would have never denied that his God, Allah, is the Father and the Son since, being the Paraclete, he would have clearly known that it was the Father and the Son who sent him to glorify their name. Therefore, all those statements in the Quran that deny that Allah is the Father and that Jesus is the Son must have been added later on, after Muhammad was already dead, which means that some dishonest group of Muslims changed the text and the message of the book which the Father and the Son sent down to Muhammad to proclaim to others.

These points show just how truly embarrassing this Muslim polemic is for Muhammad's prophetic claims.

Excalibur said...

< How do we reconcile Deut 34:12 and Jesus as a prophet like Moses and refute muslim claim. Zakir was arguing that since there was no prophet like Moses that came afterwards in Israel, the only other option is the prophet coming from outside Israel.>
This was up to the time of Moses. Read it for yourself. Besides Jesus said John the Baptizer was the greatest prophet of God.

Sam said...

Another point to raise whenever a Muhammadan appeals to John 1:19-25 to show that the prophet to come was someone other than the Christ, is to emphasize the Baptist's testimony to show how his statements prove that Muhammad is a false prophet. If you read John 1:23, and 26-36, the Baptist identifies himself as the voice mentioned in Isaiah 40:3, the one who would be sent to announce the coming of Yahweh God Almighty to his people, which would be the time when all flesh would see the glory of Yahweh (cf. Isaiah 40:3-5, 9-11). However, John clearly testifies that he was sent to prepare for Christ's coming, which means that Jesus is the Lord God whom Isaiah said would come to dwell with his people in order save them!

John goes on to testify that the Christ existed before him and is greater than him, since the Baptist isn't even worthy enough to stoop down and untie the thong of Jesus' sandal. The Baptist further says that Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, the Son of God, and the One who will baptize people with the Holy Spirit.

Now which of the above statements agree with Muhammad's theology? And since these statements are all found within the very same context of the section that Muslims distort in order to convince people that Muhammad is the prophet like Moses, this only further highlights and exposes the utter intellectual bankruptcy and deceptive nature of Muslim apologetics.



Derek Adams said...

Bassam Zawadi like other Muslims, claims that this deut passage is also a prophecy of Mohammed, but then asserts because of the falsification of the text, the prophecy has been rendered more unclear and ambigious, thus he refuses to use this as an argument any longer.

Note: anyone who has to say the text was falsified in order to escape the reality that Mohammed is not clearly in the text has already conceded this debate.

In fact not only has this person conceded the debate, but if you were to read the Quran and Islamic Sources you would see the clear charge that Mohammed is their Torah and INJEEL CLEARLY: 7:157 which is why the people of the book are held directly accountable for rejecting Mohammed. Numerous sources point this out.

Hence there is a contradiction here:

1)The Quran says Mohammed is said to be in the Injeel explictly (possessed by Christians at the time of Mohammed)
2)Mohammed is not in the Injeel explictly (possessed by Christians at the time of Mohammed (or any time).
3) The Quran is false

Thank you for the opportunity to make this clear, unambigious argument, nailing Islam once again.

Dk out.

Radical Moderate said...

Wow he has a book in his bag written by a Jew that refutes the prophesy's about Jesus.

Yup that same Jew also denies that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah that Muslims claim he is. That same Jew will mis pronounce Jesus name to mean "May his name be blotted out"

Well done Muslim well done

Radical Moderate said...

Zakir the Hebrew scholar says that mam·ṯaq·qîm, strongs 4477 does not appear anywhere in the Hebrew bible. The other words have different vowel points.

First the vowel points came later, and the consonantal text has precedence over the later vowel pointing.

Second the word appears with the same vowel points twice in the Hebrew. First in Song of Songs 5:16 and second n Nehemiah 8:10.

1. מַֽמְתַקִּ֔ים
2. מַֽמְתַקִּ֗ים

In Nehemiah the verse reads.

"Then he said to them, “Go your way. Eat the fat and drink sweet (mam·ṯaq·qîm,מַֽמְתַקִּ֗ים) wine and send portions to anyone who has nothing ready, for this day is holy to our Lord. And do not be grieved, for the joy of the Lord is your strength.”

So Mohamed is sweet WINE to be drank.

Good job Muslim good job.

Zack_Tiang said...

Sam wrote, "Since he accepts these Jews as experts of the Law who correctly understood their Scriptures then he must accept the fact that their asking John if he was that prophet to come conclusively proves that Muhammad is a false prophet, since this shows that they knew and believed that that prophet to come would be an Israelite, not an Ishmaelite. After all, why did they ask John who was an Israelite if he was that prophet, if in fact Moses' words in Deuteronomy implied that the prophet like him would be from another nation that was related to Israel?"

Good insight! Never thought of that. Thank you, Sam.

Zack_Tiang said...

Zakir mentioned about questioning Jesus' Jewish lineage, since He had no father...

My church pastor recently visited Israel... and he shared what they were taught while there; how a person is considered a Jew if and only if he/she was born of a Jewish woman.
This means if a Jewish man marries a non-Jew, the child born is not considered a born Jew...
But if a Jewish woman marries a non-Jew, the child born is considered a born Jew.

Craig said...

Muslims say Muhammad's name is in the the songs of Solomon, my question is what's the prophecy about him? What he suppose to do?

buszz said...

Now we have a lot of prophecies muslims nitpicking out of the bible. Now my question is... Did Muhammad, as a prophet of the almighty God Jahweh/Jehovah of the existance of these prophecies and did he qoute out of the bibleverses where he was mentioned?