Keep sharing good news without ads.
No description available
Comments are turned off for this media
And welcome to Midnight Cry, a program that is committed to speaking the truth in love.
I'm your host, Romuald Gossein, and today we have with us Dr. James White, who'll be discussing with us what is Islam. First of all, welcome to the show, James. It's a pleasure to be with you. Thank you.
Now, I'd like to find out how is it that we can define Islam?
Well, thankfully, Islam is intent upon defining itself, and does so rather clearly, unlike a lot of modern, post-modern folks, Islam prides itself on its being able to go back to its original sources and say, here is who we are, here is what we believe.
And it's interesting, Western culture will allow that for Islam, but it is more and more not allowing that for Christianity, to do the exact same thing. It's very interesting in my interactions with Muslims that that is coming out more and more.
And so how do we define Islam? What is it? What does the word mean? Well, you know, it's funny. When I was in seminary, I was taught that Islam meant submission. And I have found many an Islamic lecturer and teacher who has confirmed that.
But ever since 9 -11, I keep hearing people saying Islam means peace. The reality is that while the root is related, salaam, to the concept of peace, it is peace that is only produced via submission to Allah.
And so I think that it's really not an arguable thing, outside of those people in the West who are trying to present a non-historical perspective, that the way to peace with Allah is through submission to Allah and his will, which is embodied in the sharia.
So I think Westerners need to be careful that we don't accept very surface-level excuses on this issue.
Sir James, please tell us, who was the founder of Islam?
From a Christian perspective or from an Islamic perspective? Because obviously, from the Islamic perspective, Islam has existed from the beginning. In fact, its message has been the unifying message of all the prophets that have ever been sent, so that Muhammad becomes the final prophet, but not the initiatory prophet of Islam.
From the Islamic perspective, even Jesus is a Muslim. All the true prophets said la ilaha illallah. That's what united them together in their message. Now obviously, from a Christian perspective or from a secular perspective, given the uniqueness of the beliefs of Islam, we would say that Muhammad is the founder of Islam, and that Muhammad drew from many other sources, sources which we can identify, to create really a monotheistic reformational religion in the midst of polytheistic Mecca at the beginning of the 7th century, and that really there's no evidence that the message that was his in its unique and specific form pre-exists him outside of those elements, monotheism and things like that, which are part of other religious beliefs.
Sure, and what are the major tenets or the major pillars of Islam?
Well, let's make sure that we're focusing here primarily upon Sunni Islam, which represents the vast majority of the world's Muslims, just as we would want to differentiate between various groups within Christianity.
In the same way, we recognize that there are differences between the major Islamic groups, such as the Sunnis and the Shiites, especially, which everyone hears about whether they know about the theological and historical backgrounds or not.
There are differences between them and different emphases and things like that. But what are called the five pillars of Islam starts with the Shahada, the confession that there is only one God worthy of worship, and that is Allah, and that Muhammad is the prophet of Allah.
Now, that first phrase, la ilaha illallah, is found in the Quran. That second phrase, joined with it, is not. That is, in the opinion of many scholars, somewhat of a later addition as far as the development over time in the most primitive forms of Islam.
But that is considered to be the heart of the Islamic faith. The confession of not just monotheism, but I think we need to emphasize the confession of Unitarian monotheism. That is, that there is one being of God and there is only one person of God.
The reason I emphasize that is because we as Christians, we likewise believe that there is only one true God. But we are not Unitarians. We are Trinitarians. And so it is a specific form of monotheism called Unitarianism that is emphasized within Islamic beliefs.
The second, of course, is Salat, the prayers. In many places in the world, you don't even ask if a person is a Muslim. You ask if they do the prayers because it is that daily exercise at that particular time, joining in communion with others, for example, in the mosque or something like that, if you have that opportunity to do so, that marks people off as a Muslim.
Then you have the month of fasting, Salm, in Ramadan. And especially in my country, Ramadan was something that was hardly known until after 9 -11. The only time we had been introduced to it was when a particularly popular Muslim basketball player by the name of Hakeem Elijahwan had to play the finals once during the month of Ramadan.
And that is when we found out about the fasting and the inability to drink water during the day and things like that. But as you know, Ramadan is a lunar month, and so it moves forward in the solar year.
So it sort of traverses the solar year by about 11 or 12 days each year, during which time the Muslims fast during the day, and not just from eating, but from water as well. Then we have Zakat, the giving of alms, which takes different forms depending on where a person is.
And then, of course, Hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina, which was a religious ritual pre-existing Muhammad. He changed elements of it, but it was a religious ritual predating Muhammad, which Muslims believe go back all the way to when the Kaaba was initially established by Abraham and Ishmael, even though I would just point out there really isn't any historical information whatsoever that Abraham was involved in anything like that at all.
Also, do the books of Scripture, the canon of Scripture, the Law, the Prophets, the Injil, the Gospels, do they predict the coming of Muhammad? I mean, this is really a big question, because what we do find is that you mentioned that Islam is a religion which proclaimers of Muslims say that it was always there.
And so we should be able to cite some reference point to books that were before it that were considered sacred in order to be able to prove that a prophet would come who would be called Muhammad.
Is that true? Well, I think it's important to emphasize that Muhammad himself saw himself as continuing a line of prophecy going back primarily, according to Surah 5, verses 44 and following. All the way back to the Torah and Moses.
The Torah is given by Allah in which is light and guidance. And then Jesus comes. He confirms what was in the Torah. And the Injil, the Gospel, is given to him. And then Muhammad in the Quran, and of course the Muslim doesn't believe it's Muhammad in the Quran doing this.
From the Christian perspective, we have to believe that this is Muhammad writing these things, and it's representing his understanding of things. Muhammad then draws the line from Moses through Jesus to himself, from the Torah through the Injil to the Quran.
That's a very strong assertion, and it connects Islam in such a way that you cannot break that chain and still have the argument for the prophecy of Muhammad to be a valid one. Clearly, Muhammad wants to look at the Quran as a fulfillment of what is found in what he thought was in the Torah and the Injil.
As a result, the Quran itself says, for example, in Surah 7, verse 157, those who follow the apostle, the unlettered prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own scriptures in the law and the Gospel.
Now, notice it says, not who used to find him mentioned in their scriptures in the law and the Gospel, but who find him mentioned. Now, that would make no sense if the law and the Gospel had become so corrupted at the time of Muhammad that there is no longer even an existence amongst Christians and Jews.
It is a given. There are a number of texts in the Quran where the words would make no sense if the modern Islamic claim that the Torah and the Injil were just, they're basically lost, they're completely corrupted by this point in time.
There are many texts that just would not make any sense from the Quranic perspective. It seems very clear to me that Muhammad did believe that there was a consistency there. And so, allegedly, we find mentioned in our scriptures, in both the law and the Gospels, these references to Muhammad.
Now, where in the world would they come from? Well, as far as the Old Testament is concerned, the primary texts, there are a number. One, for example, in the Song of Solomon, Chapter 5, where the term machmadim appears in Hebrew is pointed to as, well, there's the actual name.
Actually, it's an adjective, and it is describing someone as altogether lovely. And it has a perfectly clear meaning in its context. It's one of those places where simply finding a similarity of sound does not mean that there's a meaning connected to that at all.
No one reading in Hebrew that line would have any concept whatsoever that there was some prophecy about someone coming who's named Muhammad. I think it's really an abuse of the language to go there. But the one that is almost always cited and is really a part of historic Islamic theology at this point is Deuteronomy, Chapter 18, verses 15 through 19, where there is a prophet who is to come.
And I would say probably most Muslims are familiar with this one because of the teachings and videos of Ahmadiyyat. This was one of his primary talks that he would literally go on for lengthy periods of time, proving things that actually were not under dispute, all to come up with this idea that the prophet who is to come could not have been Jesus, even though Acts says it was Jesus.
It had to be Muhammad. And we don't have time to go too deeply into the subject, but the reality is when you look at the meaning of the actual text and you actually honestly ask it the question, this prophet is to be from amongst your brethren.
Ahmed Didat said, well, brethren would include the Arabs because of Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, so on and so forth. If you actually look at among your brethren in the book of Deuteronomy, it very clearly defines its own language and within the very same context limits this solely to the Jewish people.
They are to choose a king, for example, from amongst your brethren. That didn't mean they were allowed to go outside the nation of Israel to find a king. There are just so many reasons why contextually you have to recognize that whoever this prophet is, he's not from the Arabian Peninsula.
He is not of the sons of Ishmael. He is one of the children of Israel. Muhammad simply cannot possibly fit into this. Now, what they try to do is they say, well, there are differences between Moses and Jesus.
Well, there were differences between Moses and Jesus. But the specific things that the prophecy says this one will do, Jesus specifically did fulfill in his ministry in revealing the words of the Father to the people and everything else that he did.
So I actually have debated Islamic apologists on the subject. In fact, one of the leading Islamic apologists in the world today, Shabir Ali, and I did two debates in London on this very subject. And so I would direct people to that dialogue if they want to hear both sides.
Right now they're hearing one side. I'm not one of those types of people that only gives you one side. I'm looking to have opportunity for both sides to be expressed at the same time.
What about in the Gospel of John, Chapter 14, the reference that is there that is another commonly cited reference in reference to someone who is coming, but this time it's different because we know that Jesus is ascended, Jesus will ascend, and someone will come after him.
In John, Chapter 14 and John, Chapter 16, we have Jesus' discussion of the parakletos, the paraclete in the English language, the helper that he and the Father are going to send to the disciples. The standard argument amongst Muslims is that there has been a corruption of the text of Scripture at this point, and that instead of parakletos, it was the periklutos, the exalted one who was to come, which they associate with the name Ahmed, and hence to Muhammad.
When one reads the text itself, one discovers very, very quickly that there simply isn't any possible way. Let me just give you some facts here. John 13 -17 is a consistent whole providing the final ministry of Jesus to the disciples.
John 14 -17 is thoroughly Trinitarian, speaking easily of the divine roles of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. So if they're going to say that this is still accurate enough to predict Muhammad, is it still accurate enough to teach the Trinity?
If it isn't, why not? I've always wondered why that is. In John 14 -14, after encouraging prayer to himself, now why would a prophet ever say you should pray to me? Prayer is only meant to be directed to God.
He speaks of another comforter of the same kind as himself, John 14 -16. The paraklete will be with believers forever. Is Muhammad with believers forever? The world cannot receive the paraklete because it cannot see him or know him.
How can that be fulfilled? That's John 14 -17. How can that be fulfilled in Muhammad? The paraklete is the spirit of truth. Now, I've actually heard people say that all of this is descriptive of Muhammad, but this is a description of the spirit who is sent forth by the Father and the Son to indwell believers.
This isn't something about just a message that is given by a prophet that people are going to contemplate. That's not what Jesus is talking about. He's talking about another person who is spirit who will dwell with believers, who is the spirit of truth.
He dwells with and in believers in John 14 -17. He's called the Holy Spirit in John 14 -26. He teaches all things, and this is important, brings to remembrance what Jesus said in John 14 -26. Now, I immediately stop right there and go, wait a minute.
Muhammad did not know almost anything that Jesus said. The few times that Jesus speaks in the Koran, he's just arguing for either monotheism or the prophethood of Muhammad. There is nothing new that Jesus said that Muhammad brings forth.
In fact, he forgets the vast majority of Jesus' actual words and undercuts them by his teachings. So there is no way that John 14 -26 can be fulfilled in Muhammad. He's not the parakletos. Besides that, the paraclete proceeds from the father, John 15 -26, which means he's divine.
He testifies of Jesus in the same text, and while Muhammad spoke of Isa 25 times in the Koran, he did not testify of the Jesus of the New Testament because I see no evidence that he actually knew who the Jesus of the New Testament was.
Then there's a really interesting one. He proceeds from the father, but he's sent by Jesus. Now, in Islamic theology, if Muhammad is a prophet, who sends prophets? Allah does, and only Allah does. So if Muhammad is a prophet and he's prophesied in this text, then Jesus has to be God.
So pick your poison. Which is it going to be? Either Jesus is God and therefore Muhammad is not a prophet, or Muhammad is not a prophet because he was sent by Jesus, who can't be God. So either way, the same conclusion comes up whichever way you go at that point.
The paraclete convicts the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment. The vast majority of the world's population has not experienced conviction of sin on the basis of Muhammad. But I say to you that every pygmy in Africa who ever felt conviction and was kept from doing something evil, it was the Spirit of God that did that, that had been sent into the world.
He guides the disciples into all truth, John 16, 13, and he does not speak on his own authority, but reveals to what is to come. He does not speak on his own authority. How does that fit with some of the things that Muhammad said and commanded to be done in his own name?
And then in chapter 16, verse 14, he glorifies Jesus. Muhammad does not glorify Jesus by saying he's a mirror of Azul. That is a tremendous downplaying of the glorification of Jesus that we find in the New Testament text.
And so when you actually allow the text to stand, it is very, very clear that the paraclete cannot be fulfilled in the person of Muhammad in any way, shape, or form.
One of the main differences that I find is that we see that the person of Jesus in the Koran or in Islamic teaching, he's been restricted to being just a prophet. Yes. And he is one of many prophets, but not the most important or the greatest prophet.
He's only on the second level of heaven in Muhammad's vision of those, and there are many who are above him.
Yes. What is being kept back or what Islamic teaching does keep back is the true identity of Jesus, who Jesus really is. So I am not saying that he is not a prophet. He is certainly a prophet, but he is so much more than a prophet.
Right. And so can you please explain to us the true identity of Jesus?
You know, it is a tragedy in my mind that Muhammad did not know who Jesus was. I mean, and I have to say that with all honesty. I once interviewed a young man who had been born on the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan, and missionaries had left a Bible with his parents before he was ever born.
And when he got old enough to read, his parents made the great mistake that all parents make, and I know that you're a young parent, and so you'll make this mistake. His parents said, don't read that book.
That was the best way to guarantee that that book was going to get read. And he did, and I remember his words to me. He said, I encountered a Jesus that I had never, ever seen before. When he read the Gospels, the Jesus of the Gospels was so different than the Jesus of the Quran.
Because let's face it, the Jesus of the Quran is an argument. The Jesus of the Gospels is a living person. You can't have a relationship with an argument, but you can have a relationship with a living person.
Who is the Jesus of the Bible that Muhammad did not know? Well, first and foremost, he did know about the virgin birth. The Quran affirms the virgin birth. He did know that Jesus worked miracles. He believed that Jesus worked some miracles that historically Jesus never did because Muhammad uncritically accepted the stories that the Gnostics had written about Jesus and making little birds and causing them to fly away and all that kind of stuff, speaking from the cradle and all that kind of thing.
But he did work miracles. He raised the dead. They recognized that Jesus did great things. But then again, so did the Jews. And I guess I would point you to John chapter 11 where Jesus comes to Lazarus' tomb and he raises Lazarus from the dead and in the process identifies himself as the Son of God, as the resurrection and the life.
And that was the Jesus Muhammad never knew. He did not know Jesus as the source of all life. He did not know him as the incarnate Son of God. And at some point, and I don't know when it was, at some point, probably after 610 A .D. or so, there was a hardening.
I mean, he begins his prophethood, as it's called, in 610. And some of the early portions of the Quran seem to say positive things about Christianity. But then there seems to be a change. And I think simply at some point he was misinformed.
He hoped the Christians would follow after him and they didn't. Something happened. We may never know exactly what it was. But a line was crossed. And there didn't seem to be any openness any longer for him to know who the Jesus of the Bible and the Jesus of history was.
Now, as the prophet of Islam, he had to define who this Jesus was and that Jesus could not compete with the final prophet, which was himself. And as a result, the incarnate Son of God, who voluntarily gives himself on the cross of Calvary, who is the source of all life, who is the risen Lord, who is the intermediary between God and man, who is our mediator in heaven, that person has been shut off from the Muslim people.
And the result is a tragedy. The result is a religion with a holy God, wrath against sin, the standard that must be met, and yet no mediator to bring us into God's presence. That is a tragedy. And I don't know when it happened, but very clearly the final Muhammad, the leader of the Islamic armies, condemned as unbelief, and I think most Muslims would agree, some do not, but most Muslims would agree, identified as Mushrikim, those who would follow the real Jesus of history, and as such, cut them off from really the greatest revelation that God has given of himself in Jesus Christ.
And that really is why we do everything we do to try to reach the Muslim people, to proclaim to them a Jesus that has been denied to them.
That's right. And I think sometimes Muslims do say that, look, we do accept your Jesus, why don't you accept our prophet, Muhammad? But that's the key component, because the Jesus that we know of the scriptures, the historical Jesus is not the same Jesus that is being portrayed and represented.
And essentially, unless we believe that this Jesus is the mediator, is the saviour, we don't have reconciliation, we don't have redemption, we don't have salvation. James, thank you for your time. Thank you for sharing your insights with us.
Thank you. To our viewers, we really hope and see that this Jesus that we're talking about is so important and so great. He is the son of God and he is saviour. Please stay in tune for the very next episode of Midnight Cry.
And until then, may God bless you. Thank you.