Has Islam Misunderstood Christianity? Rebuttals

Now, we're starting to get into the heart of the matter. We've had the opening presentations.

Now we have to start thinking together. My real hope, folks, for this evening is that you will enter into this discussion with us.

Not verbally, by the way. That's not what I was meaning. But that you will enter into this and think with us about what it is that we're saying.

It struck me that with all of the citations of later writers, and if we can take into consideration later writers, it's clear to me that as Islam grew and later theologians began to interact with Christians, that you have people saying,

Oh, this is what you believe, then now they start going back to the Qur 'an. My question is this. What defines

Islamic belief? I labor under the assumption that since there is only one uncreated

Qur 'an, one revelation from God, that it is the ultimate source of things. And as Bassam pointed out, there are all sorts of different interpretations of each one of these texts to be found in Islamic scholarship.

So the question really is, as we just saw in the brief cross -examination period, can we go to the

Qur 'an and say, What does it teach on the subject? Our subject this evening is a little bit odd.

Does Islam misrepresent Christianity? Misrepresent is a negative term. So what is the positive statement of our thesis this evening?

Does Islam accurately represent Christianity? Well, that would be for Bassam to demonstrate.

Because remember, what does the Qur 'an say? The Qur 'an says that the people who say these things, who say three, who say the third of three, who do these acts of kufr and shirk, and say

Allah is the Messiah, and the Son of God, and Surah 114, all these things, what's the result for these people?

It says that Allah makes heaven haram to them, and the fire will be their abode.

So, folks, from my perspective, if Allah is going to say that, he better be really clear about what he's talking about.

And if these are a part of the not -so -clear verses, the things that are not foundational, isn't that a problem?

Isn't it a problem to say, well, you know, when it comes to the Trinity and the Deity of Christ, yeah, okay, the

Qur 'an never talks about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Somebody three or four hundred years later did, but the

Qur 'an did not. That's why I asked you a question early on. Would you accept a religion that comes along six hundred years after Islam, and says that what you believe is a delusion, it's unbelief, and it's going to send you to hellfire, and yet when you ask, okay, you say what

I believe is wrong. Show me the evidence. Interact with what I believe. Well, we don't really need to do that. We don't need to really ever use

Tawheed. We don't need to talk about Tawheed. We don't need to talk about the prayers. We don't need to have any understanding of all the ramifications of Tawheed in Urubiya and in worship and in names and attributes.

We don't need to know anything about any of that. We can just simply say you're going to hell without really entering into that.

Would you as a Muslim accept that as a valid type of argumentation against your own faith?

And if you wouldn't, then why would you expect that we could come here this evening and be told that each one of these texts that we just looked at, the talk about Say Not Three, immediately it says there's one

God. Well, that doesn't really mean that there's an accusation of polytheism. Really?

When Muhammad first recited those verses, what would anyone who heard him saying that have understood him to say?

Did those words have meaning when they were first said? And if they had a meaning, what was it?

And is that meaning something that can be traced from the beginning of the Qur 'an to the end of the Qur 'an? If there's a difference in what the

Qur 'an means between those two, and there's lots of scholars who would say that in Western countries, but if the

Qur 'an has a different meaning from beginning to the end, how is it moving? Especially when, again, it is bringing this condemnation of someone and saying you're going to go to hellfire.

You're not going to be in the presence of God. I think that most

Muslims I know of believe that when it comes to identifying Kufr, and when it comes to identifying

Shirk, that the Qur 'an is more than sufficient to define those terms. But if it is, then we have to come back and ask the question, is there a consistent interpretation all the way along in these matters?

So let's think about the text that we were looking at. Say not three, there is only one

Allah. Third of three, the psalm is exactly right. You can find some

Syriac references to Jesus in that way, but is it his argument that that is the best way to interpret this?

That Muhammad had access to that? Or is Allah utilizing external sources?

Where does this come from? And when it says, Jesus, did you say, worship yourself and your mother as gods in derogation of Allah, did those words have meaning?

Notice it says, fear the day. This is the day of judgment. And Allah says in that context, did you say to men, again, if this was the

Choleridians, why is it in the Qur 'an? They were gone. Why would you reveal, and this is one of the questions in cross -examination, we're going to have to have a discussion, because I need to understand what

Basam believes about the nature of the Qur 'an. Is it relevant to our modern day, or was it only speaking then?

Is it a divine revelation that's meant for all peoples, and therefore it can speak with clarity and hence will address the most relevant issues to Islam, which would obviously be

Christian. And let's face it, folks, from the conservative Sunni perspective, thank you, okay.

While he was drinking, we almost had an explosion, right? While Basam was drinking, right? I didn't know you were drinking,

I'm sorry, I apologize. Did it go up your nose? Yeah, I think it did, yeah. From the conservative

Sunni perspective, I have spent many hours listening to Sheikh Yasir Qadhi.

Would you consider him to be a... All right, thank you very much. I would say Sheikh Yasir Qadhi is probably the primary person that I have listened to for hours and hours and hours on the nature of Tawhid and Islamic jurisprudence the whole nine months, okay.

And he's very straightforward. Christianity is sure.

What we believe about Jesus Christ is sure, okay. Now, if that's the case, then where does that come from?

Where does that come from in the Quran? Is it only dependent upon later interpretations, or does the

Quran actually represent this? And when Muhammad spoke in the context in which he spoke, and he quoted those words, the

Surah 5, and he talks about Mary, and he even provides in the

Quran, and you would say Allah provides in the Quran, but I hope you understand that from my perspective, what I'm saying here, even provides apologetic arguments against what

I believe. Remember what one of the apologetic arguments is? We saw one of them, and that was Allah could destroy

Jesus and Mary. But what was another argument that he made? They both have to eat their daily food, remember?

And so since they partook of humanity, then they cannot truly be deities.

Why present arguments about Mary as a deity, when nobody in the audience listening to Muhammad is even making the argument?

Now there are many, you and I both know this, and I'm going to have to ask the psalmist this, is he going to join with me in pointing out that Ahmed Didak was wrong about the

Trinity every time Ahmed Didak talked about the Trinity? Because he was wrong all the time.

You all have heard it, I've heard it, I've listened to all of his stuff. What did he say? To have a son is of the lower sexual nature?

Is that not what Ahmed Didak said? Is that not what Zakir Naik says to this day? Are they wrong?

Yes, they're wrong. Does Bassam believe they're wrong? Do Muslims here believe they're wrong? I would encourage you to say that.

I've been very open in pointing out bad arguments against Islam on my side of the fence.

We have to have a high standard here. And were they wrong? Where do they get their wrongness?

Where do they get misled as to what the doctrine of the Trinity is? It seems to me, here's my understanding.

If I treat the Quran the way I would want the Bible to be treated, then

I will allow it to have a consistent testimony. I believe that I charted out a consistent testimony as to what the

Quran teaches concerning the fact that there's only one God. He does not have a wife. He does not have a consort.

He does not have a sahiba. And that becomes the very central aspect.

One of the four ayahs of Surah Al -Ikhlas, which is as close as you get to it.

I mean, Muhammad said to quote Surah Al -Ikhlas is to quote the third of the Quran. And what does it say? لَمْ يَلَيْ وَلَمْ يُلَيْ

Why does it say that? كِي بِيَدَثْ نَعْنُرْسِي بِقَابْنِ I think I have laid out a clear understanding of what that is.

Now, if what we're going to say tonight is you can't do that. You have to be able to cut everything up and there's no context and there's no consistent teaching from the

Meccan surahs and the Medinan surahs and you can just cut these things apart and there's nothing about sonship and you have to look at every single one and it might be about a completely different group.

Maybe it's about a Meccan group that had some son to God and it has nothing to do with Christians.

I would suggest that given that there's clearly text specifically about the people of the gospel, the people of the book, that talks about sonship, that it should be very clear when the

Quran is talking about either paganism and its many gods or when it's talking about Christians and our belief that the father and the son have eternally existed as father and son.

The son never came into existence as a son. There was no wife. It is a relationship situation.

Shouldn't there be something about that? And if someone simply says, well, you know, we just don't feel it's necessary to get into that.

We don't need to go to that level. We just need to deal with these other things. If the tables were turned, my

Muslim friends, would you accept that kind of argumentation against your own faith?

We seek consistency. That's what's brought us here this evening. And I'm very thankful that we have gotten a good start in laying out the information that we need to have to be able to understand whether Islam in the

Quran has misrepresented Christianity. Thank you. Okay, now,

Faisal has an opportunity to provide his rebuttal. He'll be given 12 minutes.

Thank you. Okay, some of these points.

Dr. White said that we have to assume that there is one thing running through Surah 5.

Says who? Why can't we treat the issue of Mary being worshipped as a god, or taken as a god, or treated as a god, as one thing, and the

Trinity as another thing? Why is that not possible? Hopefully in the cross -examination, James White would be clear on that issue.

He said that the Quran must identify the three persons of the Trinity. No, it doesn't.

The Bible itself does not even clearly define what the Trinity is. The Christian would say we infer from the

Bible that this is what the Trinity is. The Bible nowhere explicitly says that God is one essence being shared by three persons.

Rather, Christians claim to infer these things. Similarly, Muslims infer from their scriptures that God is one person, and he's unitarian, and we don't use being or essence as the criteria or factor to determine monotheism.

So, Christians would say since he's one being, that means he's one god. No, we don't say that. We say one person means one god.

If you say more than one person, that makes it polytheistic. That's what Islam believes.

I'm not here to prove that to you today or make an argument for that, but that's what

Islam believes. So, the reason why Islam keeps saying that Christians believe in polytheism or making utterances of polytheism is because they're saying that God is more than one person.

So, according to us, that is polytheistic. Now, can Islam make that claim and still understand what you're saying?

I understand what you're saying. God is one being and three persons share that being, share that essence.

I believe that's polytheism. Now, you can disagree with that, and I can make that claim, but that doesn't mean that I misunderstand what you're saying.

Similarly, I've said in my opening statement that the Qur 'an could be speaking based on the assumption by de facto reality according to it that this is polytheism.

And Dr. White did not tell us why the Qur 'an cannot be communicating with this intent and purpose.

So, I don't see these passages as illustrating or showing that Islam has misunderstood

Christianity. And I'm surprised that Dr. White was saying, would you believe in the

Qur 'an that came six centuries later and it just made that claim? Show us the evidence.

But that's not the topic for today's discussion. I'm not even gonna, I'm not gonna come here and say, prove to me that Trinity is the true concept of monotheism, prove to me the

Bible is the accurate word of God. We're not here to provide evidences for the veracity and truthfulness of our faiths.

We're only here to discuss one question, has Islam misunderstood Christianity? And I hope we stick to that subject tonight.

He said that the burden of, Dr. White said that the burden of proof is on me to show that Islam accurately represents

Christianity. I'm gonna have to disagree with that. I believe that the accusation is coming from Dr.

White's side and I think the burden of proof would be on him. If any of you saw the flyer, you would see that the topic of today's discussion is, has

Islam misunderstood Christianity? Dr. White is the one taking the affirmative position, saying, yes, it has.

I think the burden of proof would be on him. Brought up the verse, surah 5116 again, no, sorry, 6101, about how can

God have a son if he had no consort? I provided an explanation to that at the end of my opening statement, but I didn't hear a response to it.

Dr. White said, shouldn't there be something in the Quran related to the eternal begotten son?

The thing is, if you look at surah 10, ayah 68, it says, how could

God have a son? He is self, how could Allah have a son? He is self -sufficient. Now here, the way scholars have understood this passage is that since Allah is one person,

Allah is one person, he is self -sufficient, he cannot rely on anyone else, so how could he have a son?

I think that's a pretty good, I think that's hitting the target when it comes to Orthodox Christianity because Christians claim that the three persons in the

Godhead are not independent of one another, but they're interdependent upon one another. So this

Quranic verse is saying, Allah as one person is independent, so how could he have a son?

So that seems to be addressing the trinity.

Okay, unfortunately my computer just turned off. Let me, sorry, excuse me.

Really sorry about that. Okay, Dr. White said, where is the proof from the

Quran that Allah is one person? Well the thing is, as I said in my opening statement, the

Quran is not the only source of authority when it comes to Islam.

We also have authentic prophetic traditions. So when we look at the authentic, and we also have the consensus of scholars, according to Islam, if all of the scholars agree on a particular point, we take that to be infallible because the

Prophet Muhammad said, my community will never agree upon an error. So one thing to take into consideration is that no

Muslim scholar would say that God has more than one center of self -consciousness within him.

Secondly, some Muslim scholars have appealed to this tradition, which says, this is in Sahih Muslim, there is no person more jealous than Allah and there is no person more fond of accepting an excuse than Allah on account of which he has sent messengers, announcers of glad tidings and warners.

And no person is fond of praise than Allah on account of which Allah has promised paradise.

So many Muslim scholars have used this hadith to show that Allah is one person. But it comes in a much more clearer narration.

It comes in a very long narration discussing the afterlife. After the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, tells his companions that Allah will gather all the

Muslims and they will look at him on the day of judgment, the companion that Prophet Muhammad was speaking to said,

Ya Rasulullah, كيف وهو شخص واحد ونحن ملاء الأرض O Messenger of Allah, how will that happen when he, referring to Allah, is only one person while we fill the earth?

So it's pretty clear that Islam teaches that Allah is one person. He talked about the verse where Jesus eating food and how come you don't understand that we believe that God took form of human flesh and that he could eat and drink.

Well firstly, the Quran may very well be directing this verse towards all Christians who claim that Jesus is divine by asking them to contemplate more seriously about what

Islam would view to be a blasphemous idea about God attaining a human nature and doing what humans do, like eating.

The Christian at this point could say that he disagrees with this Quranic argument, but however, this evening's debate is whether Islam has misunderstood

Christianity. And there's no reason to think that the author of the Quran wasn't aware of the Christian belief in the incarnation with Jesus being

God and human at the same time. Secondly, the Quran could have possibly intended this argument only against heretical sects like the monophysites who held the belief that Jesus had one nature with his humanity being absorbed by his deity.

And according to the Encyclopedia of Islam, this sect was prevalent in the

Arabian Peninsula contemporary to Prophet Muhammad's time. So those who claim that Jesus had only one nature and that Jesus was

God have to deal with the problem regarding Jesus eating food. For if he ate food and he only has one nature, which is divine, then surely that nature must be purely human for God does not eat food.

Now, Dr. White mentioned some passages from the Quran taken as a god.

So it was temporal. But we orthodox Christians believe that God, that Jesus was the eternal son of God.

Well, the Arabic word that is used in those passages is ittehada, and it simply means to take or to have or to acquire.

It does not necessarily mean to take a son biologically, though it could mean so depending on context.

Jeffrey Perinder, who was the professor of comparative religion at King's College London, in his book,

Jesus and the Quran, said that these passages, mentioning the word ittehada, taken as a son, and its derivative, deny that God acquires a son in the course of time, which has been said by adoptionists and Aryan heretics in Christianity, who said that Jesus became or was adopted son of God at his baptism or some other moment.

Furthermore, he argues that none of these passages could be shown to have any clear reference to orthodox

Christian groups and could be assumed to be directed primarily against pagan polytheism or, at the most, adoptionist heresy.

These passages may also apply to those like Marcellus of Ancrea, a 4th century bishop who said that Jesus existed eternally as the logos and only became the son during the incarnation, a belief known as incarnational sonship.

Dr. White seems to take issue with the fact why would the Quran be addressing a heresy that existed a couple of centuries before?

Why not deal with the problem, the contemporary issues that you're facing right now? Well, I mean, let's, for example, the

Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, during his time, he never confronted any major problem of homosexuality or bestiality amongst his community.

Yet he still condemned it, he still made a big issue of it. So, the thing is that it's possible that someone could revive that heresy again in the future.

Or another thing is for the Quran to make its stance clear on this heresy so that if people were to ever ask a question, well, okay, fine, the

Quran condemns the orthodox view, well, what would be its take on this other view? So it's possible that, and the response was already some people during the

Prophet's time who still adhered to those heretical views. So we shouldn't be surprised that the

Quran would be addressing a heresy even though it wasn't, it's not in the mainstream Christian view.

The Quran could be addressing the mainstream Christian view and heretical sects as well. Okay, I don't have time for what

I'm gonna say now, so I'll come back and finish up what I'm gonna say. Thanks. I'll see you next time.