Jesus: Divine Son of God or Prophet of Allah?

The subject before us this evening is Jesus Christ, with a question mark of who he is, divine son of God or prophet of Mohammed.

Sami Zatari, he's born in California, in LA, and he's half

Palestinian, half Iranian, so you have the three axes of evil there, America, Iran and Palestine.

He's a Muslim apologist, he's 21 years old, and he runs the website muslimresponses .com

and that website has had 185 ,000 hits in its first year, which is quite impressive.

Sami's debated a few debates now, he's done one debate with Nabil Qureshi, who's two -time state debate champion of his state in America, and he's done three debates now with Professor Wood, who's at the back.

Now I'm going to introduce Sami. Assalamu alaikum to all the Muslims, and greetings to all the non -Muslims.

So today's topic is Jesus, the divine son of God, or a prophet of Islam.

Now I'm a Muslim, and I say he's a prophet of Islam. Let me tell you how

I'm going to approach my presentation. I'm going to first start off by showing you the

Islamic position of Jesus, because many people are ignorant of it, and some Christians think we hate

Jesus, and think we reject Him, which I'm going to show you is not the case. Then I'm going to move into examining whether Jesus is actually divine.

I'm going to give you six attributes of God, and we're going to see if Jesus matches those six attributes.

Basically, when you have somebody missing, and there's a description of that person, if the person fails the description, then he's not the person.

And if a person matches the description, then he's obviously the person. So we're going to see if Jesus matches the description of God.

And the attributes of God, which I'm going to give you, is not from my belief, but from your own

Bible. Then if I have time, I'm going to examine what Jesus said about Himself in your own

Bible. I'm going to examine what the people around Jesus during His life believed about Him.

And we're going to examine other points. This debate will really go into the heart of the matter during the rebuttal period, which is when

I will respond to his points about Jesus' divinity. So now what about Jesus in Islam?

Now, one of the fundamental beliefs of a Muslim is to believe in the messengers and prophets of God. And that's

Jesus. No Muslim can be a Muslim if he rejects Jesus. You can't be a

Muslim. Even if you pray five times a day, you fast, it doesn't matter. Number two, we believe that Jesus is the

Messiah, Al -Masih. And He's also a prophet. And He was given the

Gospel, in Jihad, not the Gospels, in the plural, the Gospel, singular.

And we believe He was born of a virgin, Mary. We believe

He performed miraculous miracles. He preached Tawheed, which is the oneness of God, et cetera, et cetera.

Here is the virgin birth given in the Quran, in Surah 3, verse 47.

Mary said, Oh my Lord, how shall I have a son when no man has touched me? And Allah said,

It is easy. He just says be, and it is. So this is the virgin birth.

We also get miracles of Jesus in the Quran. Unlike the Bible, which says Jesus' first miracle was turning water into alcohol, which is a big problem in this country with the teen alcohol addiction.

In Islam, the first miracle Jesus did comes from Surah 19, verses 28 to 30, when

Jesus talks when He was a baby. Because the people were accusing Mary, how do you bring this baby to us?

We thought you're a chaste woman, oh sister of Aaron, not literally. And then she said, she pointed to the baby.

And Jesus said, Indeed, I'm a servant of Allah and a prophet.

So we get the description and position of Jesus in Islam from this verse.

We also get many miracles recorded by Jesus. I just gave you one. Other miracles which

He did during His ministry come from Surah 3, verse 49.

Jesus went to His people and He told them, I come to you with a sign from Allah, in that I make for you clay, as it were a figure of a bird, and I breathe into it and it becomes alive by God's permission.

Not by His own permission, by God's permission. And if you read Surah 5, the ending,

Jesus specifically says, when I create life, when I breathe into it, it only happens by Allah's will and power.

God gave Him that permission and power, which I'm also going to show you from your own Bible. Now, what else do we have?

That's it. And now, basically, Jesus was given miracles. It's very simple in Islam.

It's nothing complicating at all. He's a prophet, a Messiah, the last prophet sent to the

Israelites. And He's going to come back as well. We believe that Jesus will return and kill the

Antichrist. We strictly disbelieve that Jesus is

God or a divine son of God. We do not believe any of this. That's the difference between us and you.

While you believe everything I just said, you add extra to it.

You say, well, Jesus is more than a prophet. He's the Messiah, He's the prophet, and He's the divine son of God.

Now, that's the point we Muslims disagree with. So now, let's get to the point.

Let me just give you some extra information about Jesus. In surah 3, verse 45. This surah right here, this verse, proves that Islam is a religion of God.

Because your own Bible teaches that He who confesses that Jesus is the Christ is of God.

That's what your own Bible says. And this is what the Quran says. In surah 3, verse 45. O Allah, O Mary, Allah giveth glad tidings of a word from Him.

His name will be Jesus the Christ. And the Bible says, whoever says that is a man of God.

So we Muslims, we don't hate Jesus. We don't insult Him. Like many

Christians insult the prophet Muhammad. We Muslims make up the full house. We believe in Moses.

We believe in Jesus. And we believe in the prophet Muhammad. Unfortunately, the

Jews fall short because they reject Jesus. And they insult Jesus. And unfortunately, the

Christians fall short and they insult and reject the prophet Muhammad.

Now what about Jesus' message in Islam? As I said, He taught Tawheed. But let's go into some more detail from surah 3, verse 50 to 51.

Surah 3, verse 50 to 51. I have come to attest to you the Torah, the Jewish holy book.

He came to confirm it to the Jews. And I came to make lawful to you some things which were forbidden.

So Jesus came to abrogate some of the strict, strict rules of the Old Testament which became impossible to follow.

In fact, today none of you would be able to follow the Old Testament. So that's why Jesus was sent to abrogate some of its laws.

And then here comes the most important part. It is Allah who is my Lord and your

Lord. We worship Him. This is the straight path. And this is the message of Jesus.

He came and He taught that God is your God and my God. To Him we submit and to Him we worship.

Not to me you submit and to me you worship. He never taught that and I'm going to show it from the

Bible. Lastly, Jesus is shown to have a good character in the

Quran. Jesus says, God has made me blessed and has enjoined on me prayer and charity as long as I live and to make me kind to my parents.

So we Muslims respect Jesus. We say He has a very good character as you just saw. And that's basically the message of Jesus in Islam.

We believe He is a prophet, the Messiah, born of a virgin birth. He taught oneness of God, not trinity.

And He taught you to worship one God. So now let's move in to the main part.

And one actually last point. None of you Christians can actually reject the Muslim Jesus. You just add to it.

So that's a good point for me. I don't really have to prove much tonight. Because you already believe that Jesus is a prophet, the

Messiah, and born of a virgin birth. So we're in the same boat. All I have to do tonight is disprove

His divinity. And then you just have to come back to the straight path. So now here's the six criterias of God from your own

Bible. Now as I said, let's say you have a description of a person. You have a description of this man.

He has this and this and this attribute. When you read the news, they tell you a guy has black hair.

He's six foot tall, etc, etc. He has this kind of characteristic. So what does your own

Bible say about God? Well the first thing, your God declares

Himself to be God. What do I mean by that? He says, I am

God. Simple. I am God. There is no other God beside Me.

Worship Me alone. No need for deep, what's it called? No need for deep interpretations of verses which you're still debating with each other

Christians. Since the day of Christ, you're still debating what John 1 means or John 8, etc.

But in the Old Testament, God leaves no room for these deep arguments. He says in Isaiah 45 verse 5,

I am the Lord and there is no one else, no God beside Me. Jeremiah 32 verse 27,

Behold, I am the Lord, the God of all the flesh. The God of all the flesh.

Ezekiel chapter 20 verse 20, And hallow my Sabbath, etc. I am the

Lord, your God. Do you get a pattern? Do you get something here? What's God saying?

Does He come and say, I am three in one, I am, or all of this, which you can interpret differently.

No, He is saying in clear English like me. I am Sammy Zachary. No debate.

I am God. Genesis 35 verse 11, And God said unto him,

I am God almighty. Genesis 46 verse 3,

And he said, I am the God, the God of your father. So God clearly and explicitly says,

What does he say? I am God. Easy. So my first challenge to Dr.

White tonight is to produce one clear, explicit, explicit verse where he says,

I am God. Worship me. There is no God beside me.

That's what I want to hear tonight. Number two, another attribute of God.

God is not a man. Not just I'm not a man. God is not a man, nor the son of man.

What a coincidence. Both titles given to Jesus. God explicitly says, I'm not neither of them.

In 1 Samuel 15 29, And also the strength of Israel will not lie nor repent, for he is not a man that he should repent.

So the God of the Bible makes it clear that God is not a man.

But what does Jesus say in John chapter 8 verse 40 when he's talking to the

Pharisees? But now you, you seek to kill me, a man who has brought you the truth.

Now what's more interesting, if you go read the Greek, the word that is used for man is called

Anthropos. The word Anthropos is meant to distinguish between man and God.

Basically, when someone is called Anthropos, it's like a distinction that he's not

God. It's to separate man from the animal and man from the divine.

So isn't that interesting? Jesus says, I'm a man, Anthropos. From where we get the word anthropology, which is a study of man.

Jesus uses this word, which distinguishes you from God. Keep that in your mind.

This is from the Greek lexicon itself, from a Greek scholarly lexicon. You can go get it yourself.

The word Anthropos, keep this in your mind, is meant to separate man from the divine.

Don't forget that point. Number three, God's nature doesn't change.

He's always the same. That's why he's God. He doesn't change. As he says in Malachi 3 verse 6, for I am the

Lord, I change not. Now Christians, they say, well, when

Jesus was ignorant, when he prayed, that was the man Jesus. But if he did that, didn't he change his nature and become a man?

God says, I don't change my nature. But Jesus becomes a man. If that's not a nature change, then

I don't know what is. Jesus completely is radically different from God.

God is all knowing. I'm still going to get into this. God says, I'm God. Jesus doesn't. God is all knowing.

Jesus isn't. God is not a man. Jesus is a man. And God, it's like he's reading the mind of Christians in the future because he knows you're going to say, well,

Jesus became a man. That's why in the Old Testament, God is saying, wait a minute, my nature doesn't change.

That's like telling you in case somebody comes and says, I'm a man. Show them this verse where I say, I don't change.

Now, they might quote Philippians chapter 2 verses 67. But first of all, even

Trinitarians and Christians don't even agree on what Philippians chapter 2 verses 67. They don't even agree on what does empty mean.

Some Christians say that empty means when Jesus says in Philippians chapter 2. By the way,

Philippians chapter 2 is not about Jesus. It's not him. It's after Jesus. But either way, Philippians chapter 2 says

Jesus emptied himself. That's what some Christians say. Now, some

Christians, they debate each other. What did he empty himself of? Some say he emptied himself of divinity.

Now, if God empties himself of divinity, isn't that change in your nature? If I go become a female and empty myself of my manliness, my manlihood, that's not a nature change.

Of course it is. So, yes, Jesus becoming a man, God becoming a man is a nature change.

Which I'm sorry, Old Testament says it doesn't happen. Number four, as you all know,

God is all knowing. We all agree with that. Well, Jesus, not once, but twice, showed his deep ignorance.

First, from Matthew chapter 24 to 36. Matthew chapter 24 to 36.

No one knows about the day or the hour. Not even angels, but only the Father.

Not even the Son, emphasizing his own point. Not even me, but only the

Father. And that's what Islam teaches. Only God knows the last hour. So, Jesus is ignorant of the last hour.

Another incident, Mark chapter 11 verses 12 to 13. The incident of the fig tree.

I want you to read the context. I want you to read the text of the verse itself. Before the Christians give you the dancing interpretation.

This is what the text says. On the morrow, when they came to Bethany, Jesus and his disciples,

Jesus was hungry, and he saw a fig tree having leaves.

Fig tree, by the way, figs are teen in Arabic. Which my dad likes to eat, but I don't.

But either way, Jesus saw a fig tree, and he saw some leaves. And he happily, he happily went to the tree to find some teen to eat.

But then he saw there was no figs, so he cursed the tree. Now Christians say,

Jesus is giving a parable. I agree, he makes the best of a bad situation.

After he realizes there's no figs, I'll just give a parable and liken this fig to some people.

But notice the context. The disciples themselves said, Jesus is hungry. He sees a fig tree, and he happily,

I'm so happy, I'm gonna go eat now. And then there's nothing on the tree. You can't ignore that.

Okay, I'm a student of creative writing and literature. When you put a story together, someone's hungry, he sees a tree, he's happy.

He goes to the tree, that means he wants to eat from it. Not give a parable. He gives the parable after he finds no figs.

As I say, he's making the best out of a bad situation. Number five,

God is all powerful. We all know that, God is all powerful.

Jesus himself, when he was two years old, can you believe that God is two years old?

He even admitted that in September when he debated Usama Abdullah. Usama Abdullah brought up a point that Jesus ran away from King Herod when he was two years old.

Can you imagine this? God runs away from his own creation. Do you know what

James White's response to that was? He was like, yeah, he was two years old. That's not a rebuttal.

He was two years old, God was two years old, and he ran away. And remember, back to point three,

God's nature does not change. So that answer will not work tonight. That Jesus is man here, he's

God here. Malachi 3 .6 disproves that. And here are some more verses which show that God gave

Jesus power and authority. Just like the Quran says, in John chapter 17, verses 6 to 8, verses 7 says,

Jesus says to his disciples, Now you know that all things whatsoever that has been given to me are from the

Father. All my miracles, all my doctrine, it's not my power.

When Jesus heals the leper, it's not him, it's God who gave him the power. And Jesus himself says that.

John 13 .3, Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands.

The Father gave him everything. John 12, verses 49, The Father has told me the commandment, he has given me the commandment, of what

I should say and what I should speak. John chapter 7, verse 16,

Jesus answered them and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. Exactly. It's the doctrine of God, which is the oneness of God.

Attribute 6, Jesus so far, he failed five so far, he's not gone.

Attribute 6, God is perfect. Matthew chapter 19, verse 16,

Jesus is not perfect. And behold, one guy, one came to Jesus and said,

Good master, what good thing shall I do? And Jesus tells him, Why do you call me good?

There is none good, but one, and that is God. Is this guy trying to show he's perfect?

A guy's coming up to him, he's saying, Good master, and I go, Why are you calling me good? There's only one good, not me,

God. Get it? He points up God. God. So this doesn't mean that Jesus is bad.

It simply means that he's not perfect. He's not good in the perfect sense that God is.

Jesus is not perfect. Now, who did Jesus declare himself to be?

Who did he say he is? Who did he say? Did he say, I am God? Did he say, I am the divine son of God?

No. Luke chapter 19, verse 24. Matthew chapter 13, 57. Keep these in your head.

Luke chapter 19, verse 24. Matthew chapter 13, verse 57.

He was a prophet. Matthew chapter 16, verse 20. He was the

Messiah. Matthew chapter 16, verses 16 to 17. He was the son of God.

Son of God, not divine son of God. Now, here's a point that Christians often misunderstand.

You claim that Jesus is the divine son of God. But when Jesus is called the son of God, that doesn't prove your point.

If you study the Jewish law, if you study the Israelite teachings, being a son of God only means you're a servant of God, a prophet.

Jesus himself said in Matthew chapter 15, verse 24, I am only sent unto the lost sheep of Israel.

So he's preaching according to their understanding. So when he's called the son of God, it only means the servant.

So why is Jesus never called the divine son of God? Why is he called the son of God, which simply means a servant?

It would have been so easy for one man to go up to Jesus and say, when Jesus asked them, who do you say that I am?

We say you're the Christ, the son of the living God. It's so easy. He could have just said, you are the divine son of God.

He could have simply said, you are God. Why don't they ever say it?

It's so easy to simply say it. In that exact moment, Jesus asks you, who do you say

I am? They couldn't say you're God. They couldn't say you're the divine son of God.

Instead, what they say is what I say. That's why I'm not going to become a Christian.

Now, what else? What did Jesus want his people to believe?

That he was God, the divine son of God? Is that what he wanted to believe? No, no, no.

A trinity of no's. In John chapter 17, verse 3, And this life eternal, that they may know you, the only true

God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. Get it? That they may know, so you may know, the true

God and Jesus whom you have sent. It doesn't say that they may know you, the true

God, and the God, the son, whom you have sent. Or the divine son of God whom you have sent. No.

John chapter 16, verses 30 to 31. This is right before Jesus is handed to the

Jewish Pharisees. What does Jesus say? What do the disciples say to Jesus?

And what's his response? Now we are sure that you know all things, and you don't need, and no man should ask you of anything.

By this we believe that you have come from God. Jesus answered them and he says,

Finally, do you believe now? Finally, after all this time, you finally believe? So what did the disciples say?

Did they say, we believe you are God, second in the Trinity, the divine son of God?

He says, they say, no, we believe you came from God. You came from God.

That's what we say, he's a prophet. Now what did the people around Jesus believe?

Now I don't believe this is a main argument. But I'm using it because Christians seem to think it's an argument.

They always quote the evil Jewish Pharisees. They say, you see the Jew, the Jewish Pharisee wanted to kill

Jesus for claiming to be God. So therefore Jesus must have claimed to be God, or they wouldn't say such a thing.

Instead of looking at the disbelievers, why don't we look at the believers of Jesus? What they said about him.

Because that makes it so interesting. In Matthew chapter 16, I already brought this up. And they said, some say you are.

This is what Jesus asked his disciples. He said, who do the people say I am? Look what the people say about Jesus.

And they said, some say you are John the Baptist. Or Elias, or others,

Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. You get it? All the people, the believers are saying

Jesus is one of the prophets. Not one of them say he's God. But you guys in the church say he's

God. But these guys around Jesus say he's not God. Now David Wood likes to argue about his historical information.

The earliest record says it. So it must have some credibility to it.

This is the oldest, this is the most historical info. The first historical info according to Christians, the gospel.

And we see here, the first believers, the first believers. While Jesus was alive was saying he was a prophet.

You can't have your historical criteria and then throw it out when it doesn't suit you. So what else?

In John chapter 1 verse 26. This is what John the Baptist said. The next day

John saw Jesus and he said, behold the Lamb of God. Lamb of God.

Why couldn't he say God? Behold there's God the Savior. God the Lamb, the Savior. Christians might say, yeah well

Jesus is Lamb the God. Why didn't John just say God the Lamb, the Savior?

Why just the Lamb of God? In the same chapter, John chapter 1 verse 34.

And I saw and I bear record that this is the Son of God. Not the Divine Son of God.

John chapter 4 verses 13 to 19. Before I make this point, let me make it explicitly clear.

The gospel of John, the most Christological gospel according to some. There is not one person in this gospel during the lifetime of Jesus who believes he's

God. Not one. He's going to bring up Thomas. But we're going to see what his own Trinitarian scholars have to say about Thomas.

Not one person in the gospel of John ever goes to Jesus and says you are

God. John chapter 4 verse 13 to 19. I love this verse. You know why?

Because Christians use this verse to try to prove that Jesus is God. But they don't quote the next part.

You know how Christians always come to Muslims and they say, well Jesus gives eternal life. In John chapter 4 verse 13 to 15.

Jesus told the lady, the water I give you will give you eternal life. So the

Christian says, Jesus is saying, I'm going to give you water that gives you eternal life.

How could a mere Rasul say such a thing? How could Jesus, if he's just a prophet, say

I'm going to give you water that gives you eternal life. He must be God. But what did the lady say to Jesus?

This is what she said to him right after he said it. Sir, I perceive you to be a prophet.

This lady who witnessed Jesus, this lady who witnessed Jesus saying

I give you water that gives you eternal life. Did she bow and say you are God?

No, she said, I say you are a prophet. So why do you Christians interpret this and say we should believe he's

God for making this claim. When his own follower didn't believe he was God when he made such a claim.

And we're going to get into this in the rebuttal period. Because Jesus explains clearly what he means when he says

I give eternal life. You have to put it into context. There are many more passages in the

Gospel of John, which I could show to you. I could spend two hours on the eyewitnesses in John. What they believed about Jesus.

None of them, none of them believed that he was God. What about Matthew chapter 21 verse 10 to 11?

When Jesus entered Jerusalem, what did they say? The people when they congratulated him, when they stood beside the donkey.

What did they say? This is Jesus, the divine son of God. Hallelujah. Did they say that?

You say that. But what did the people say? This is Jesus, the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee.

What a coincidence. Instead of saying he's the... Notice everything they say is what

I say. He's a prophet. The people say he's a prophet. When he enters Jerusalem, this is

Jesus, the prophet of Nazareth. Not Jesus, the divine son of God.

In John chapter 7 verses 40 to 41. Do you know what the people were debating in the time of Jesus?

Isn't this interesting? Tonight we're debating if Jesus is a prophet or a divine son of God.

What did the people in the time of Jesus debate about the believers? Do you know what they debated about?

They debated whether Jesus was a prophet, the prophet of Deuteronomy 1818, or if he was the

Christ. John chapter 7 verse 40 to 41. Many people, therefore, when they heard the saying of Jesus, said of truth,

This is the prophet. Then the others said, No, no, this is the Christ. But some said,

Shall a Christ come out of Galilee? So why are we debating if Jesus is the divine son of God when his own people were debating whether he was a prophet or the

Christ? So really, Christians do not go to eyewitness testimonies during the lifetime of Jesus because it helps my case.

They said this. You can't refute this. These people were debating. Is he the

Christ or a prophet? Don't you think that's interesting? In the Gospel of John, the debate that's taking place is whether he's a prophet or the

Christ. I say he's both. So we went to debate. But now another point.

Jesus himself has a God. Five seconds. Okay. I have so much info.

But he's away. Jesus has a God. And that was my last point. Anyway, thank you. Well, good evening and welcome.

I thank you very much for being here this evening as we gather to discuss an extremely important issue.

Is Jesus the prophet of Islam or is he the divine son of God? In the

Islamic -Christian conflict, there truly can be no middle ground. There can be no compromise.

There is no place where the Christian can simply say, Well, he's sort of a mixture of the two.

Neither can the Muslim allow any type of divinity for the Lord Jesus Christ. Christian is a person who believes.

And that's why many of the people that I hear Muslims citing as Christians, I have to chuckle just a little bit when they do.

A Christian is one who believes with Thomas that Jesus is our Lord and our God, as we see in John 20, 28.

And with the early church confesses that he is our great God and Savior, as we see in Titus 2, 13 and 2

Peter 1, 1. For the Muslim, the question is answered by the overriding authority of the

Qur 'an. In Surah 112, Al -Ikhlas, Allah begetteth not, nor is he begotten.

That being, I believe, a direct reference to Christianity. And in Surah 4, 171,

Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, was no more than an apostle of Allah.

Indeed, as we look at Surah 9, we read, The Jews called Uzair the son of Allah, and the

Christians called Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth, in this they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say.

Allah's curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth. They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah.

And they take as their Lord Christ, the son of Mary. Yet they were commanded to worship but one

Allah. There is no God but He. Praise and glory to Him. Far is He from having the partners they associate with Him.

This from Surah 9. Ibn Kathir comments on these ayahs, Allah the exalted encourages the believers to fight the polytheists, disbelieving

Jews and Christians who uttered this terrible statement, and utter lies against Allah the exalted. As for the misguidance of Christians over Isa, it is obvious.

This is why Allah declared both groups to be liars. This is the reason given for fighting against Christians, to ensure their, quote, continued humiliation, degradation and disgrace, end quote.

Now, what are the ground rules this evening? What are we talking about? We need to understand what

Christians really believe. It is my firm conviction that in the vast majority of these conversations, the

Christian position is misrepresented, and it must be misrepresented because I believe that the Quran misrepresents the

Christian position on the doctrines of Trinity and who Jesus is. We believe as Trinitarians within the one being that is

God, there exists eternally three co -equal and co -eternal persons, namely the Father, the

Son and the Holy Spirit. We do not believe that there is one being that is three beings. We do not believe that there is one person that is three persons.

We differentiate between being and person. There is no association in the Trinity, for Trinitarians are absolute, unquestionable monotheists.

We are simply not Unitarians. Let's look at just some of the descriptions that are used of Jesus Christ in the

Word of God. He is called the Lamb of God. He is called the Son of God. He is called the

First and the Last, the Word of God. He is called the Risen Lord, the Creator of all things.

He is worshipped by men and angels and all of creation. He is the object of prayer. He is called the

Alpha and the Omega. All creation bows down to Him. All the fullness of deity dwells in Him in bodily form.

All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are in Him. He is called the Great I Am. Every thought is to be taken captive to His obedience.

He is called our Great God and our Savior. He is called the eternally blessed God. The early church prays and suffers in His name.

He is called Emmanuel, God with us. El Gabor, the Mighty God. Lord, God, Creator, Savior.

Lamb of God, Risen and Coming. King of kings and Lord of lords. Can there be any question as to what the inspired

Scriptures say about Jesus Christ? I do not believe that there can be.

This evening, the question is going to be, can a mere prophet be described by these words?

Could any prophet accept the worship of people, prayer of people, call himself the names that Jesus called himself, and still be a good prophet in Islam?

No, I do not believe that he could. Now, we need to avoid a very false dilemma that often comes up in these debates.

The most common Islamic question is, where did Jesus ever say the specific words, I am

God, worship me? Of course, Christians have never claimed Jesus said these words in the first place.

But the logic is completely missing in demanding specific words.

Positively, Jesus said and did all sorts of things that a mere human prophet could never do.

So why demand this specific set of words before believing? What is the basis of this?

I'd like to give you a counter challenge. For the Muslim that accepts the logic of this question, let me ask you.

Where did Jesus ever say the specific words, I am not God? Does this prove that he is God? Does every human being have to say those exact words?

Are they claiming to be God? Where did Jesus ever say, I am not the son of God? Or where did Jesus ever say,

I did not come to die for your sins? You see, this kind of semantic game does not really mean anything.

We have to deal with the text as it stands, and determine what it itself is proclaiming to us about this person,

Jesus Christ. Indeed, where did Mohammed say the specific words, I am the last of the prophets, or Allah has made me the seal of the prophets?

Is it logical to reject these merely on the basis of these specific words not being used?

Or can the concept be taught in other ways? Obviously, we need to use one standard of logic and thinking in examining both religions.

The honest and logical question is, did Jesus speak and act as a mere prophet would?

Did his followers view him as a mere prophet? There is no question that they accepted him as a prophet.

That is not even an issue this evening. Almost everything that Samuel has presented to Christians says, yep, we believe he is a prophet, we believe he is all those things.

But you are just not allowing all of scripture to complete the picture of who Jesus is. This is the only way to discover the truth of the matter.

Now, Rasul or deity? How do we know? Well, I believe that the deity of Christ is demonstrated by the identification of Jesus with the word theos, which means

God. It is also demonstrated by the identification of Jesus as Yahweh. And it is demonstrated by ascribing to Jesus the prerogatives, rights, and powers of the creator.

Let's look at these. Jesus as theos. He is described as mighty God, El Gabor, prophetically, 700 years before his birth.

In Isaiah chapter 9, verse 6. 700 years before his birth, he is described as the mighty

God. In Titus 2 .13 and 2 Peter 1 .1, in what's called the Granville Sharp Construction, the original language in the

New Testament, Koine Greek, he is described as our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Both words, God and Savior, applying to the one person, Jesus Christ. Would a monotheistic

Jew say this of a mere prophet? The answer clearly is no. In John chapter 20, verses 28 -29,

Thomas, being absent when Jesus first appears to the apostles, now Jesus appears to Thomas.

He knows what Thomas has said, even though he's been absent. He invites Thomas to see and to touch the wounds in his hands and in his side.

Thomas does not need to, for he immediately bows before Jesus and he says, he answered and said to him, these words are to Jesus, my

Lord and my God. How does Jesus respond? A mere prophet would have to rebuke him.

A mere prophet would have to say, no, no, no. Don't do that to me. But Jesus said to him, because you have seen me, have you believed?

Blessed are they who did not see and yet believed. Jesus identifies the description of him as Lord and God as a matter of faith.

Now please make sure, we need to understand this. Here is the Greek of John 20, 28. It says,

Thomas answered and said to him, I've actually heard people argue, it's an amazing argument, that Thomas was just amazed.

He goes, my Lord, my God. That is impossible on the basis of the language of the text.

Absolutely, 1000 % impossible. Notice the word auto, he said to him.

This is followed by the quote, my Lord and my

God. Those are the words that are said to Jesus. Jesus blesses this statement of faith.

This comes at the end of the Gospel of John. Clearly, the writer of the Gospel of John did believe that Jesus was

God because he begins the entire Gospel with the description of the eternal deity of Jesus.

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. John 1 .1

describes the pre -incarnate Word, the Logos, as existing in eternal fellowship with the

Father. The original language indicates that Jesus does not have any origination in time. It does not say that the

Word came into existence at the beginning. As far back as you want to push the beginning, the Word is already in existence.

When it says the Word was deity, it's an expressive translation of John 1 .1c. As to his nature, he is the os, he is

God. Clearly, the author of the Gospel of John wanted his readers to understand that. In Colossians 2 .8

-9, the Apostle Paul, warning about the early movement of Gnosticism into the church, said,

See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

Can you imagine those words being said of a prophet? That any one prophet is the measure of all human knowledge.

Why is Jesus the measure of these things? For in him all the fullness of deity dwells in bodily form.

The fullness of deity, theatetos, that which makes God, God. It is a very strong term and it is ascribed of Jesus Christ.

How about Jesus as Yahweh? The Old Testament God. The New Testament writers often quote

Old Testament passages that are uniquely about Yahweh and apply these texts to Jesus.

In Hebrews chapter 1, verses 10 -12, you have a direct quotation of Psalm 102, verses 25 -27, which is about Yahweh as the unchanging creator.

And it's applied to the incarnate Son, Jesus Christ. Read Psalm 102. It is a Psalm that Muslim and Christian could both agree with in the description of Yahweh.

He does not change. He's created all things. All things will grow old. All things will age.

But Yahweh does not change. How can the writer of Hebrews apply these words to Jesus Christ, the

Son? Only if he believes that Jesus is truly the Word who has become flesh.

John 1, verse 14. The eternal Word who has entered into flesh. And that is the biblical witness.

Here, in fact, is the quotation from that. I'll move on from there. Yahweh is called the first and the last in Isaiah 41 -4, in Isaiah 44 -6, in Isaiah 48 -12.

Even Allah is identified in Surah 57 -3 as the first and the last. But Jesus is the first and the last.

The Alpha and Omega in the book of Revelation. Now, there is such a thing as my

Muslim friends here know. In Tawheed, there's three forms of Tawheed.

And in one of these forms, God's names and attributes are to be used of Him and Him alone.

Yet, the names and attributes of God are widely and regularly applied to Jesus by all the

New Testament writers. Clearly, they believed that Jesus was Yahweh.

They believed in the Incarnation. He is even described as a creator. Listen to these words from Colossians 1, verses 16 -17.

And tell me that this is a mere resul. This is a mere prophet. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities.

All things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things consist or hold together.

Can you imagine Moses saying these words? Can you imagine Abraham saying these words?

Of course not. They weren't the creator. But Jesus is described as the creator of all things here in Colossians 1.

He is also the I Am. Jesus said to them in John 8, 58, Truly, truly,

I say to you, before Abraham was born, Ego Aime, I Am.

The Jews understood exactly what He meant. They picked up stones to stone Him.

They understood He was using the very name of their God. And Samuel said,

Well, we shouldn't look at what the enemies of Jesus thought. Well, the enemies of Jesus fully understood exactly what

He was saying. They're the ones standing there. And Jesus never said, Whoa, whoa, whoa, guys, you misunderstood. He, in fact, forced this confrontation to force upon them this clear identification of who

He Himself is. In John 13, 19, talking to the disciples, He says,

From now on, I am telling you before it comes to pass, so when it does occur, you may believe that Ego Aime, I Am.

That uses the exact parallel grammatical language from Isaiah 43, 10, where Jehovah says there's no other

God but Me and identifies Himself as the I Am. How could Jesus take a text that was about Yahweh and apply it to Himself?

Is that not blasphemy? Unless He was exactly what Christians believe that He was.

In John 18, verses 5 through 6, the soldiers come to arrest Jesus. He says,

Who are you seeking? And they said, Judas and Nazarene. We pick up there. He said to them, I am

He. And Judas also, who was betraying Him, was standing with them. So when He said to them, I am He, Ego Aime, they drew back and fell to the ground.

Can it be more obvious than this? The writer is communicating to us the force of these words.

And that's why this is so important this evening, my friends, because Jesus also said in John 8, 24,

Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins, for unless you believe that Ego Aime, I Am, you will die in your sins.

Jesus made faith in Him for who He is, not for who we might want to accept

Him to be, but in who He is as the very foundation of whether we receive eternal life and forgiveness of sins.

I will ask Sammy to explain to us, how can Jesus say that to have forgiveness of sins, that's dependent on my believing that Jesus is the

I Am. How is that? We need to understand. We did have reference by Sammy to what's called the

Carmen Christi, Philippians chapter 2, verses 5 through 11. Most scholars believe this is a fragment of an ancient hymn of the church, probably from within only 10 years of the time of the crucifixion itself.

And what were the Christians singing? Well, Paul says, You must have the same mindset among yourselves that was in Christ Jesus, who although He eternally existed in the very form of God.

Does a prophet eternally exist in the very form of God, ladies and gentlemen? He did not consider that equality

He had with God the Father, something to be held on to at all costs. But instead,

He made Himself nothing. Now Sammy said, see, emptied, emptied.

There's the word, kenosis. How did He do so? How did He do so?

He did so by taking on the very form of a slave, by being made in human likeness.

This quote -unquote emptying is done positively by taking on a human nature.

He made Himself nothing. He entered into our existence as a servant. And He didn't glow as in many of the paintings have

Jesus glowing or anything like that. As Isaiah had prophesied long before, there was nothing about Him that would have attracted us to Him.

He looked like us. And having entered into human existence, He humbled

Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death. Even to death one dies on a cross.

That's why He came. Because of this, God the Father exalted Him to the highest place and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name.

So the name mentioned, the exalted name of Jesus, everyone who is in heaven, on earth, and under the earth bows the knee and every tongue confesses

Jesus Christ is Lord, all to the glory of God the Father. Notice there's no confusion between who the

Father and the Son is here. This is Trinitarian language, but you have kurios, the very name used in the

Greek translation of the Old Testament for Yahweh. Jesus is Lord, all to the glory of God the

Father. This has been the primitive Christian faith and here almost 2 ,000 years later we still confess it here in the great city of London.

Was He a mere razul? I ask you to think very carefully about these questions this evening.

Does a mere prophet say and do what Jesus did? You must take everything that Jesus said and everything that Jesus did and plug it into the idea that Jesus is just a prophet.

He's merely a razul in the words of the Quran. Does a mere prophet accept the worship of his followers?

Does a mere prophet say, come unto me all you who are weary and burdened and I will give you rest?

I will give you rest? Does a mere prophet claim that capacity or is he only speaking for God?

Does a mere prophet claim to be the way, the truth, and the life?

Does a mere prophet say those words as Jesus said them in John 14?

Does a mere prophet bless a disciple who calls him his Lord and his God as Thomas did in John 20, 28?

The only proper response that Jesus could have given to the words of Thomas, I submit to you, would have been a rebuke.

When men tried to worship the apostles, what did the apostles say? Don't do that, worship only

God. When the apostle John tried to worship an angel in the book of Revelation, what did the angel say?

Don't do that, worship only God. Thomas sees the resurrected

Lord and says, my Lord and my God, and Jesus says, that's an act of faith. A mere prophet?

Does a mere prophet claim to be Lord of the Sabbath? A clear reference to God's authority in Mark 2, 28.

Lord of the Sabbath. Lord of the Sabbath. This is very similar to John 5 when

Jesus claimed the very same prerogative that God the Father had to work on the

Sabbath. The Jews understood that God continues to work on the Sabbath. He's got to keep the sun shining and the world turning and the stars moving in their orbits.

And Jesus said, my Father is working until now and I am working. Therefore, the

Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him not only because He broke the Sabbath, but because He called God His own

Father in a unique way, making Himself equal with God. That's why Son of God is a title of deity.

Sammy is in error. He says, well, we need to look at how the Jews did. How did the Jews understand it? He's calling God His own

Father in a unique way. And they were seeking to kill Him because they understood that made Him equal with God.

That is the biblical testimony. There can be no question of it whatsoever. Does a mere prophet claim the title

Son of Man in a unique sense? Son of Man is used of men all the time in the

Old Testament, even in the New Testament. But Jesus claims to be the Son of Man drawing from the vision of Daniel 7 even to the point of claiming to come upon the clouds of heaven.

In Mark 14, 62, as He's facing His crucifixion, He applies this vision of a heavenly figure whose followers worship

Him and serve Him and applied it to Himself. Blasphemy for a mere prophet.

Here's the text in John chapter 5 that I just read to you, just quoted to you. Notice He was calling God His own

Father, making Himself equal with God. There is a unique sense in which

Jesus is identified as the Son of God. Would a mere prophet claim to have the right to work on the

Sabbath just as His Father does? The language of Jesus concerning His Father is unique.

He is not claiming to be a Son of God, but the Son of God. The term that John uses is monogamous, unique.

That separates it from any usage of any human being. And Sammy said, well, calling the

Son of God doesn't mean you're God. Well, ask the Jews in John chapter 19. The Jews answered him, we have a law.

And by that law, He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the

Son of God. Go back to the Old Testament. What was the death penalty used for?

It was used for a number of things, but what would be the only one that would be relevant to a claim to be the Son of God?

Blasphemy. Blasphemy. That's how the Jews understood it. John 5, John 19, cannot be overthrown.

That is the definition provided by the text itself. Now some might say, well, this is just all later invention.

This just all came along later. I'd like to read you some of the early Christian writings. For example,

Ignatius, the Bishop of Antioch, writing AD 107. AD 107 is very early. There is one physician of flesh and of spirit, generate and ingenerate,

God and man, true life and death, both from Mary and from God, first passable and impassable,

Jesus Christ our Lord. That's high Christology in the first generation after the apostles. Writing to Polycarp, the same writer says, to the

Ephesians, by the will of the Father and of Jesus Christ our God, or for our

God, Jesus the Christ, in his epistle to the Ephesians. Writing to Polycarp, await the one who is above every season, the eternal, the invisible, the one who for our sake became visible, the untouched, the impassable, who for our sake suffered, who endured in every way for our sake.

This has been the belief of the Christian people from the beginning. You want further evidence?

How about some archaeological evidence? Here is a picture from 2005. They were redoing a prison in Megiddo and they found one of the earliest

Christian churches ever found from the 2nd century. And here is a picture of a mosaic on the ground.

Here is another angle of that same mosaic. And here is that mosaic, a little up close here.

That's what it says. I'll give you the translation. The God -loving Akeptus has offered this table as a memorial to our

God, Jesus Christ. We have literary evidence.

We have archaeological evidence. It is very, very, very clear that when you go to the 1st century documents, that's what comes from the first 100 years after Jesus.

They all testify to a belief in the deity of Christ. The scriptures are clear in teaching there is only one true

God. The scriptures are clear in identifying Jesus as the Son of God, the incarnate second person of the

Trinity. No mere prophet could say and do the things that Jesus said and did.

Therefore, we conclude that the evidence is clear and convincing. Jesus is not a mere prophet, but prophet, priest, king, the creator of all,

Lamb of God, divine Son of God, Lord and God. You see, this evening, the question is going to be, will we allow the scriptures to speak in full?

For so many times, Sammy in his presentation this evening has been focusing upon Jesus as the

God -man. John 1 .14, the Word became flesh. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

And that same author, John, said that we must confess, yes, that Jesus is the

Christ, but he also said that anyone who denies he's the Son of God or that he came in the flesh is the antichrist.

Let all of what John said speak. There are so many things, so many of the objections that were raised were based upon simply ignoring the fact that we believe that Jesus has eternally existed as God, and he took on a human nature.

God's nature did not change. God remained infinite. The Father did not become flesh.

The Spirit did not become flesh. That divine person took on a human nature. That did not make the divine nature any less divine.

Jesus is the God -man. And so if you're going to make objections to Jesus, you're going to say, well, he's different than the

Father here, he's different than the Father there. We believe that the Father can be distinguished from the Son. The Father didn't become flesh.

The Father doesn't know what it is to exist as flesh. But the Son does. The Spirit indwells us all.

By the Spirit's presence in us, the Father and the Son live within believers. You see, the

Father, the Son, the Spirit take different roles in our redemption. That's again something Christians believe.

It is not an argument against what we believe to simply repeat what we believe and then isolate it from the rest of what we believe.

If we simply look at only what the inspired writings of the

New Testament say, look at everything from those first decades, those who walked and talked with Jesus, what did they say about Jesus?

They called Him the Son of God, and they knew that was a title of deity. They called Him God, they identified

Him as Yahweh. Yes, they called Him Lamb of God. Why can't someone call Him the Lamb of God? It is amazing to me that Sammy can argue, well, why didn't

John say, here comes the divine Lamb of God or something like that? That is not argumentation, that's begging the question.

The question is, given the nature of the text itself, can those words be applied to a mere prophet?

Christians have answered that question down to the centuries with a resounding no. And this evening, once again,

I simply lay before you the evidence and I ask you, the audience, you are the ones we are here to debate for.

You are the ones who judge these things. Why is it that the vast majority of Islamic apologists today attack the validity of the

New Testament text? It's very clear, because if you allow the text to stand as it is, you cannot possibly believe that the

Jesus of the New Testament is the Jesus of the Koran. You can't possibly believe it.

So, the vast majority of Muslim apologists say, well, the New Testament has been corrupted, it has been changed. If we allow the text to stand, who is

Jesus Christ? The text is clear, and believers down to the centuries, only by the

Spirit of God changing our hearts and our minds are the ones who say, with Thomas, my

Lord and my God. Thank you very much. Okay, first of all, there was a strong argument.

I never said God has to say I'm God, but your God does it to identify Himself as one of His attributes.

So, why are you all laughing? If you're laughing at someone, you should be laughing at your own God's criteria, not at my argument.

So, either way, your own God says, I am God to identify Himself. I'm not saying

He has to, but your God makes this a criteria for Himself.

So, that was a strong man right there. And then there was one part I loved. When He brought up Colossians chapter 1,

Jesus, the Creator of all things, and then He said, would Moses say such a thing?

Did Jesus say that in Colossians 1? Did Jesus say,

I'm the Creator of all things? Or was that Paul speaking? Notice how he refuted himself.

Moses never said that. Jesus never said what He said in Colossians 1. That's Paul talking.

And then what else? Then He says, Jesus is unique. Indeed, He is unique. Does unique make you

God? No, it doesn't. He has a virgin birth. Of course, He's unique. Adam is unique.

No father or mother. And then He showed you the lovely pictures. Earliest history.

I went even earlier than Him to the Gospels. The people around Jesus. He didn't refute my point.

That the people alive during Jesus' time were debating whether He was the Christ or the

Prophet. None of them were debating whether He was God. Yeah, let's go to the people who walked with Jesus before the picture.

They didn't believe He was God. And then would Amir Rasool say these things?

Would the Almighty God come out of the vagina and womb of a lady?

Would the Almighty God get hungry and cry? Would the Almighty God have

His foreskin circumcised in 8 days? Would this say that?

Or would that say that? We don't want to go there. You say the Almighty God. Would the

Almighty God do that? You say yes. So I'll say yeah, Amir Rasool can do that.

Why not? If Almighty God can come out of a lady, anything's possible. Amir Rasool will say that.

What's the problem with that? And now here's the point about doubting

Thomas. I don't have to refute him. I'll let the Trinitarian scholar himself,

Michaelis, in concessions of a Trinitarian, he himself writes, I do not affirm

Thomas' past at all wants from the extreme doubt. Thomas was extremely doubtful to the highest degree of faith and acknowledged

Christ to be the true God. This appears to me too much for them, the existing knowledge of the disciples.

And we have no intimation that they recognize the divine nature of Christ before the outpouring of the

Holy Spirit. I am therefore inclined to understand this expression which broke out in the height of his astonishment in figurative sense, denoting only who

I shall ever revere in the highest degree. This is a Trinitarian scholar. Go to Luke chapter 24, verse 19, 21.

What did the disciples say about Jesus? They said Jesus was a prophet.

This is right after he died, when they were walking and they meet the traveler who was Jesus. They mistook him.

What did they say? He was a prophet. And they said, we thought he was going to help us, but he's dead, etc.

This is right before Thomas did it. So even after Jesus is dead, before his appearance, they're saying this guy is a prophet, not

God. And Trinitarians there agree with me. Not all Trinitarians admit that Thomas is actually calling

Jesus God. And it doesn't refute all the other people I brought to you who didn't believe that Jesus was

God. And then he brings up the point about the disciples.

Why would a monotheistic Jew preach this? I'll give an easy answer.

Why? Well, let's read Mark 8, 17 -18. While Jesus was alive,

Jesus told them, Why do you reason? Because you have no bread. Do you perceive not?

Do you not understand? Have your heart hardened? Having eyes, have you not seen?

And having ears, have you not heard? Do you not remember? So even while his disciples are alive,

Jesus is saying, you look at me, you see what's going on. And you still don't understand. Imagine when

Jesus is gone, how much worse their misunderstanding is going to get. In Mark chapter 9, 17 -19,

Jesus gets extremely angry at them. How long shall I be with you? He tells his disciples.

How long shall I suffer with you? Bring him on to me, the blind man who they couldn't heal. So they're not actually reliable.

Because even in the time of Jesus, they never understood anything. What about when

Jesus is gone? Secondly, did the disciples actually believe he was God? Acts chapter 2 verse 22,

Ye men of Israel, hear these words, Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God.

Acts chapter 3 verse 13, The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, Jacob, the

God of our fathers, and his glorified son, Jesus.

Not the God of our fathers, Jesus. Notice the distinction. And I could go on and on.

So that's not a point. And then he brings up the point, Jesus is called the first and the last, etc, etc.

The mighty God. Well, pagan kings were also called the mighty God. The exact same phrase in Ezekiel chapter 31 verse 11.

In Ezekiel chapter 32 verse 12. In Nehemiah chapter 9 verse 27.

Titles of God are given to men. Savior. In Ezra chapter 7 verse 12.

A king is called the king of kings. In Ezekiel chapter 26 verse 7.

Another pagan king is called king of kings. Daniel chapter 2 verse 37.

Thou, O king, are a king of kings. Many men in the Bible are given titles of God. Moses himself was called

God. So the titles mean nothing to me. And then he says,

Jesus was worshipped. What did Jesus teach you to worship him? In Mark 11 chapter 25 to 26.

And when you stand praying, what do you say? Do you stand and pray to me?

If you have ought against any, that your father, which is in heaven, may forgive you.

When you pray, you're praying to your father. Matthew chapter 6 verse 9. And in this manner pray.

This is how he's teaching him to pray. This is how you pray. Our father, which is in heaven.

Case closed. He taught you to pray to him. He's saying pray to the father. Not to himself.

And then he brings up the point. Well, the Jews accused Jesus. Not the Jews. The Pharisees make a distinction between them.

Now, of course, the Pharisees wanted Jesus dead. And Jesus answers why they wanted him dead.

In chapter John verse 7 -7. The world cannot hate you, but it hates me, because I testify it, that they work evil.

Notice what Jesus said. He says, they hate me, because I testify against their evil.

And the Pharisees were the most evil. They had the power and the money. Jesus was exposing them.

He was getting rid of their power, for their hypocrisy. These same Pharisees, made their own traditions.

Isn't it ironic? Dr. White claimed that these Pharisees went to the Bible. The same

Pharisees, who had their own Bible. Who had their own man -made tradition.

In Mark chapter 7 verse 13. This is what Jesus said to them. You make the word of God nothing, through your tradition.

So how are you going to appeal to a Pharisee, who tries to appeal to the Bible, when

Jesus himself says, you don't even use the Bible, but your own man -made traditions. That doesn't work at all.

In Mark chapter 7 to 6, Esaias prophesied a few hypocrites, as it is written, these people honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

These Pharisees cannot judge by the Bible. Jesus himself says, they even threw it away.

So of course they want him dead. He was getting rid of their grip of power. Taking their money away from them.

Because they were taking all the money. And he was talking about charity. And he was telling them, you make your own law for yourself, but for others it's different.

Of course, when a revolutionary comes, and he speaks against the people in power, they want to get rid of him.

And what best way to get rid of somebody, by making things against him. Making false accusations, to get the people behind you.

Number two, he said, Jesus never said, no, no, no, you're wrong. Did he?

He never accused them of being wrong. John chapter 10 verses 30 to 36. This is what

Jesus said. You say that I blasphemy, because I said I am the son of God.

You say I'm blaspheming, because I said I'm the son of God. That's a refutation to them.

He said, they said, you're making yourself God. But Jesus saying, wait a minute, you're saying I'm blaspheming, because I said

I'm the son of God. While you're called gods. He did refute them.

Number two, he says, while Jesus was making himself unique. No, he wasn't.

When he said, I and the Father are one. He wasn't making himself unique. In John chapter 17 verses 17 to 21.

John chapter 17 verse 21. The disciples will be one with Jesus and the

Father. One in purpose. So these Pharisees, it's you can't appeal to them, because they don't even understand their own book.

And I showed you all the believers who don't believe Jesus is God. And I never said we can't go to the

Pharisees. I said, you always like to go to the Pharisees, but ignore the believers, which

I'm not going to allow. Then he brought up the point in John 8 verse 24.

Jesus said, I am he. And this is a direct similar statement, exact statement to Isaiah chapter 43 verse 10.

He refuted himself. You know what Isaiah 43 verse 10 says? This is what it says.

You are my witnesses, says the Lord, and my servant who I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he.

Before me there was no God formed, and neither shall there be after me. When Jesus said,

I am he, where did he say, I am God, there is no God after me? He left the second part out.

So in Isaiah 43 verse 10, when God says, I am he, he goes on to explain.

I am he means I'm God. So when Jesus says, I am he, who is he? Well, the

Bible answers it for you. I gave it to you. Jesus identifies himself as the Messiah, the prophet.

That's who he is. I am he. Indeed, if you don't believe I am he, the Messiah, you won't be saved.

He assumed it and he said, I am he means I am God. He didn't show it. And Isaiah chapter 43 verse 10, far from, it doesn't help him at all.

And then he says, Jesus gives eternal life. Context. He explains it in John 5 verse 24.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that hears my word and believes on him that sent me has everlasting life.

Get it, put it in context. Yes, if you believe in Jesus, you have eternal life. But do you know why?

Because he's a prophet. You have to believe in a prophet. And that's what he says in John 5 verse 24.

Because Christians always say, well, the text doesn't say that. That's a Muslim interpolation. John 5 verse 24 says that.

He that hears my word and believes on him that sent me has everlasting life. John 12 verse 44.

Jesus cried and he said, he that believes on me, he doesn't believe on me, but on him that sent me.

And that's what the Quran teaches. The Quran teaches that no one from the people of the book will die before they believe in Jesus.

And that's what Jesus, he taught you. You have to believe in him as a prophet.

What about Jesus said, I am. And the Jews accused him. The very same Pharisee Jews who understand nothing.

The same hypocrites. First of all, the word Amy, to make it simple, ego Amy, it simply means to be, to exist, to happen, to be present.

So, of course, it makes sense. Before Abraham, I am. I exist.

I was there. I was already happening. I was to happen. What does that mean? We all know that God, he doesn't get a new idea on Tuesday and by Sunday he changes his mind.

That's why we say the Quran is eternal. He always knew what was going to happen, but he waited for the right time to reveal it.

So, yes, before Abraham, Jesus existed in God's foreknowledge.

We don't disagree with that. Secondly, the context even affirms it.

Abraham saw the day of Jesus. How do you see something which is in the future?

The context shows that Jesus, yes, he did exist in God's foreknowledge.

Jeremiah 1, verse 5. This is what he says to Jeremiah, God. Before I formed thee in the belly,

I knew you. And before you even came out of the womb, I sanctified you and I ordained you to be a prophet.

Before Jeremiah was even in the belly, he was a prophet. So, yeah, we can say, before Jesus, Jeremiah is.

Jeremiah could have easily said it, before Jesus, I am, because he existed in God's foreknowledge.

Let me start backwards with the last things that you heard while they're fresh in your memory.

Sammy is a little confused. I did not parallel John 8, 24 with Isaiah 43, 10.

I paralleled John 13, 19. There is no question, if you look at the Greek Septuagint of Isaiah 43, 10 and John 13, 19, that Jesus is applying this to himself.

He just got the wrong text there. He confused the terms. He then quoted you John 5, 24. He's supposed to believe in God, not me.

He skips the entire context there in the very next second verse after that, verse 26. Jesus gives life to whom he will.

Who is the only one in the Quran that gives life? Does Muhammad give life? No. Allah gives life. Jesus gives life in his own words in John 5, 26.

Again, let the text speak for itself. He quoted John 12, 44. So, you're believing in someone other than Jesus.

That's right after John, the apostle, had just identified Jesus as Yahweh by quoting

Isaiah 6 and applying it to Jesus in verses 39 through 41. He tells us that the I am sayings just mean

Jesus existed in God's foreknowledge. Where does Jesus say that in any of the I am sayings? Did the soldiers fall back upon the ground in John 18, 5 through 6 because they believe

Jesus existed in God's foreknowledge? Is that what soldiers were thinking of? Is that why they fall backwards when

Jesus says I am? Probably not. And when it says Abraham, he said, well, Abraham rejoiced to see

Jesus' day. So, Abraham had access to God's foreknowledge? I'm sorry, but those are not meaningful responses to the text that we were looking at.

We were told in the opening presentation by Sammy, well, you know, God is not a man. Of course. The gospel is not that men can become gods, but that God became a man, the person of Jesus Christ.

We are not saying that the nature of God changed from being God into man. That divine person took on a human nature.

He is the God -man. That kind of argumentation demonstrates that the Muslim does not understand or does not want to understand what the

Christian believes. And that only strengthens me in my faith because I'm still looking for the consistent

Muslim who will spend as much time and effort in studying Christian faith and accurately representing it as I try to do with Islam.

And that doesn't seem to be what happens in so many of these debates, and it saddens me. We are told that God's nature does not change.

Christians do not believe that God's nature changed in the Incarnation. We looked at Mark chapter 11 and Sammy used an

English translation that used the old English term happily, as if Jesus was happy to find figs or something like that.

There is nothing in the Greek text that even looks like that, and if you looked at any modern translations, that wouldn't have been there.

Yes, obviously, Jesus was doing this in a parabolic sense, not, of course, out of ignorance.

Then we had that Jesus the God -man was two years old. Yes, my friends, that is the amazing statement of Christianity, that God loves his people so much that he entered into human flesh and lived amongst us.

He wasn't just a phantom. He didn't just play act. He truly entered into human existence so the sacrifice offered upon the cross would be complete.

Yes, that is what we believe. No question about it. And only by the Spirit of God will a person ever be able to bow the knee to that one.

He quoted the good master text. The person who came to Jesus didn't realize who he was dealing with.

He was dealing with the one who was perfectly good. He read John 17, 3, but he skipped John 17, 5, because in John 17, 5,

Jesus says, Father, glorify me now together with yourself the glory which

I had with you before the world was. What Razul says. Nothing about foreknowledge in here.

He specifically says the glory that I had at your side. Was any Razul glorified and worshipped by the creatures of heaven before they came to earth?

Jesus was. And in John 17, 3, Jesus said, Eternal life is to know thee, the only true

God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. Jesus connects himself in that way. And by the way, it's not an argument against the

Trinity to point out that Jesus was a monotheist. We don't believe that he was a polytheist. He then quoted from Matthew chapter 16,

Who do men say that I am? And identified these were believers. Folks, that's the exact contrast of Matthew 16.

Matthew 16 is saying, Who do men say that I am? But who do you say that I am? And Peter's response to the apostles is,

Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. The Son, not a son. And we've already demonstrated quite clearly that that indicates deity.

The Samaritan woman says, I perceive you're a prophet. Yes. Here's this woman. She's exchanged three or four sentences with Jesus.

And because she doesn't know everything about him and says he's a prophet, well, then he must be just a prophet.

That is a misuse of the text very clearly. In the rebuttal period, Sammy dismissed

Colossians chapter 1. Why? Well, because I don't like Paul. Well, so here starts the, well,

I'm just going to start rejecting the elements of your scripture that disagree with my thesis. Now, it's interesting to me, Ibn Kathir reports an early

Muslim belief that I believe it's in Surah 34 when there was a discussion of the city that the three people were sent to, that one of those people said that city, whether it was

Antioch, was Paul. And so some of the early Muslims had no problem in seeing Paul as one who was sent by God to those people.

Now, in modern Islamic context, oh, Paul, evil man. Why? Because Paul's testimony to the deity of Jesus Christ is unquestionable.

It's repetitive. It's over and over again. And why would he be quoting Philippians if he doesn't believe that what Paul's writing is relevant to our beliefs this evening?

He says none of those people were debating whether Jesus was God. Well, most of those people didn't even believe in the deity of Christ or in the prophethood of Christ, didn't even know where the prophet was coming from at that time.

The crucifixion hadn't taken place, the resurrection hadn't taken place, and the Holy Spirit hadn't been poured out on anybody. That's hardly surprising.

Then he said, would the Almighty God go through all of these things? Again, talking about natural human birth and everything else.

It's exactly what the prophet said 700 years before Jesus. A child will be born to us.

The term to be born there in the Hebrew is the natural form of childbirth. Yes, Jesus truly became flesh.

That has been the Christian proclamation from day one. He quoted a prophet,

I'm sorry, some scholar, some Trinitarian scholar didn't even hear the name. It appears to me,

I am inclined, figurative. I gave you the actual text of John 20, 28, and I explained to you that in the grammar those words can be nothing but addressed to Jesus.

The idea, well this is figurative, I'm inclined to believe that other thing. I leave the text to you.

I don't say, well I'm inclined this way. I think this is figurative. That's an easy way around anything.

Anyone can look at the Quran and say, well I think that's just figurative. That shouldn't be taken literally. He said, why would the apostles teach these things later on?

Why did we find these things in Colossians and Philippians and things like that? And he says, well the apostles just got more and more confused as time went on.

Is that the New Testament teaching? No, it's not the New Testament teaching. Well, we allow the New Testament to speak for itself.

What does John 14 through 16 tell us? The very book that Sammy's been quoting most this evening tells us of the coming of the

Holy Spirit. And what will the Holy Spirit do? He will bring to your remembrance everything that I have said and taught you.

And so, I don't trust what the apostles taught because I trust the apostles. I trust what the apostles taught because I trust

God. And I trust the promise of Jesus Christ that he would send another comforter to them, not to someone 600 years later, to them who would guide them into all truth.

Now, was Jesus telling the truth? Did he fail? Got to answer that question. Jesus said he'd send the comforter and this is the things a comforter would do.

Did he or didn't he? If you say he didn't, then you said Jesus failed and he was a man who was not of truth.

Is that what you want to say? I would like Sammy to answer that question. He said that in many other places phrases like El Gabor are used to people who are not

God. Of course. Context determines meanings of words, does it not? When Moses is called a god, no one thinks, oh,

Moses is the creator. No. He is being put in the place of announcing God's judgment to Pharaoh and so he's made like a god to him.

That doesn't mean Moses is a god. But in Isaiah chapter 9, look at the context. 700 years before the birth of this one who is called

Prince of Peace, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, excuse me,

Avi Ad is the Hebrew term, the very one who originates time. Who is that?

That's God. And so context determines these things. He pointed out the fact that Jesus spoke about prayer to the

Father. Well, that's true. And they said case closed. Well, it's a little early to say case closed if you haven't dealt with the passages where Jesus is prayed to.

Like John 14. When speaking of the future after his ascension to the

Father, he specifically makes reference to the fact that they will call on his name. They will pray to him.

If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it. And the early Christians were known, according to 1

Corinthians, as those who epikaleo, call upon the name of Christ. So the case was closed a little bit early.

Then we were told, well, Jesus did refute the Jews. I had said, where did

Jesus say, oh, you're wrong, you're wrong. Well, and I really appreciate, Sammy, presented a counter -argument.

Is it a valid counter -argument? Well, look at John 10, the text that he cited.

In John 10, Jesus has said that he and the Father are one in the salvation of God's people.

And so the Jews are going to stone him. And he says, many good works have I shown you from the Father. Of which of these works do you stone me?

And they say, because you're making yourself out to be God. And Jesus' response, is it a rebuke by saying, oh, no, no, no, no.

No, his response proves the error of Sammy's position. He identifies himself as the

Son of God, and then he quotes a text. And I'm not sure if Sammy's looked at the Old Testament to find out what text he's quoting.

He quotes from Psalm 82. Psalm 82, verse 6. A lot of people just look at that and say, oh, it says, ye are gods, and so you can call

Jews gods, and Jesus is just a god like Jews are gods. No. Read Psalm 82.

What's it about? The 82nd Psalm is a psalm of judgment upon the unrighteous judges of Israel.

The unrighteous judges of Israel, and the very next verse says, but you shall die like men and fall like any one of the princes.

Jesus is applying a text to these men that was originally about unrighteous judges, and what he's saying to them is, you are unrighteous judges just like the unrighteous judges of Israel.

He didn't refute his claim. He actually repeated it by saying he's the Son of God. And then he demonstrated that they were unrighteous to accuse him of blasphemy because they were the unrighteous judges.

So has Sammy provided a counter -argument? When we actually examine the text, when we take the time to do something more than just proof texting, when we look at the background, when we allow the

Bible to speak as a whole, we discover that these arguments simply do not hold up.

He said Jesus never made himself unique. He never made himself unique. Monoghanes means unique.

John describes him as the monoghanes theos, the unique God in John 1 .18. He describes him as the monoghanes huios, the unique Son.

And in John 5, that same text where Jesus is the one who gives life, where Jesus says you must honor the

Son just as you honor the Father. Again, can any mere prophet say these things?

Yes, Jesus is a prophet, but it's that term mere that is the issue.

Can any mere prophet say you are to honor me as you honor the Father? I give life to those whom I please.

That's what Jesus says. It is in that very same context that Jesus had claimed the prerogative of God to work on the

Sabbath, making himself equal with God. So I have looked at everything

I marked that was really even semi -relevant in the presentation and in the rebuttal.

Have we seen any meaningful response to how Jesus could say all these things? How he could say, come unto me, all you who are in heavy laden,

I will give you rest. How can a mere prophet be described as the first and the last, when only

Allah is the first and the last, according to Islam? We have not heard a response to how, well,

I guess the response to anything outside of the Gospels, well, I guess the response to anything is, well, since it doesn't agree with Islam, it's just not right.

Because once I quoted Colossians 1 or Colossians 2, it describes Jesus as theatetos, the fullness of deity dwells in him.

Well, you know, the disciples just got confused. But again, upon what basis, logically, are we to determine the debate this evening?

Do we do so on the basis of the unanimous testimony of everything that comes from the first 100 years after Jesus?

Or on the word of a book that is written six centuries later, in a completely different culture, in a completely different language, with absolutely, positively, no connection to first century

Judaism at all? That I leave to you to determine. The testimony of the inspired scriptures is clear.

It is consistent, and it stands unrefuted this evening. When Thomas said, my

Lord and my God, there is nothing figurative. A modern scholar might go, well, I just have a hard time with these things.

It doesn't change the grammar of the text or the meaning of the text. Even if it was meant figuratively, what should

Jesus' response have been? Jesus blessed that as faith.

That's what we must do this evening as well. Thank you. Okay. First of all,

I never said I don't like Paul in Colossians 1. If you know what James Wright, Dr.

James Wright said, would any prophet ever say such a thing? You remember he said that most of us say such a thing.

My argument is based on his own argument that even Jesus didn't say such a thing.

Right? This was Paul. It's nothing against Paul. It's against his own argument. So he had a strong argument.

I didn't say it. So that's why it remains. Number two, he made the claim that Muslims saw

Muslims except Paul, like Ibn Kathir. But if you read

Ibn Kathir's chapter on Paul and his story, he actually refutes the story.

He says, no, it has nothing to do with Paul. And it's right on the same page but on a different paragraph.

So then Paul, it means nothing to me. Secondly, he talks about Isaiah 53.

Now, I want to spend one minute on this. Now, Isaiah 53, according to Christians, is clear.

A virgin is going to give birth and the person she gives birth to is God, according to them.

It's so crystal clear. So why, when man gave birth to a virgin boy as Isaiah says, why can't she believe her son was

God? Does it go together? Why can't nobody believe he was God while he was alive?

If someone is born of a virgin and the Old Testament crystal clearly says it as he says, then why can't they just immediately believe that?

He falls in love. His own mother didn't believe he was God. Why is that?

It doesn't make sense if you think about it. So that's another point. And, again, the disciples, during the lifetime of Jesus, never understood him.

First of all, what I said in regards to Paul was that Paul described

Jesus in words that could never be used of a mere prophet or a Zul. And I simply would ask them, okay, not did

Moses say that, but did anyone who followed Moses describe him as the creator of all things? My point was that these words could not be used of a mere prophet or a

Zul. I never said that Ibn Kathir adopted the viewpoint. I said he recorded the viewpoint of early

Muslims who actually believed that that had to do with Paul. I never said that. Go back and listen to the tape. I never said that, because I read the whole thing.

I read it in context that Ibn Kathir took that position. Isaiah 53 has nothing to do with what

Samuel just said. He was confusing Isaiah 53 with Isaiah 714. Secondly, we don't know what

Mary believed in her heart. We know that she is amongst the believers who worship Jesus Christ as their

Ascended Lord in the Holy Mass. And so how we can come to the conclusion that she didn't believe that what the angel had said to her was true, that he would be

Emmanuel, I do not know. I would like to ask Samuel some questions having responded to everything he just said.

And that is, I would like to understand, since he goes to the Book of John so frequently and hence simply believes in its textual reliability,

John 5 .21, John 5 .21 specifically says, for just as the

Father raises the dead and gives life in the exact same way, kutos, also, the

Son makes alive or gives life to whomever He wills. Now, I would like to ask

Samuel, how can those words, can a mere prophet be described as one who gives life to anyone that he wills?

Is that the kind of description that is consistent with the Islamic position? Because remember, the

Islamic position has to substantiate itself this evening as well in light of that documentation. Okay.

First of all, to Mary, we do know she didn't believe Jesus was God in the beginning of Luke. When Jesus, when they went to Jerusalem, Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem.

He was a kid. Now Mary and Joseph left and they realized that Jesus was left behind, like no one else.

Now Mary and Joseph were very worried. When Mary found

Jesus, he said, why have you done this to me? Why have you caused me so much sorrow? Like a typical mother, when she loses her child, she's going to get scared for him.

But if she believed that Jesus was God, why would she be worried about Him? This is God. It doesn't matter where He is.

So that right there proves Mary didn't believe He was God. And I'm not misunderstanding Isaiah.

Christians use that reference to say a virgin would give birth to God. And she does it.

And they don't believe it. It doesn't go along. And then I'd like to point that Jesus gives life.

Again, the context. In my opening statement, I said Jesus does these things because God gave

Him the power. When He raised Lazarus from the dead, right before He raised

Lazarus, He cried, He prayed. And then after Lazarus rose from the dead, what did

Jesus say? I do this in front of them so that they may know that You are giving me this power.

He prayed in front of them so they know that the one above is giving them the power and it's not from Himself.

Secondly, Jesus doesn't hear who He wants by His own will because He says, I do what the

Father wills. So His will is actually the Father's will. So that's how He gives life. And then again,

Paul describes this and that again. Paul describes it, show me where Jesus said it.

No follower of Moses said that because Moses never claimed it. Jesus never claimed it.

You say, Paul did it, show me where Jesus claimed it. Simple. Well, first of all, it seems that for Sandy, as soon as anyone meets

Jesus, they have to know everything there is to know about Him. No one can grow in their knowledge of who Jesus is. Mary is in the upper room in the book of Acts with the fellow believers in the

Holy Spirit's halls. She is amongst those who call upon the name of her own Son as their Lord and Savior.

So does she know when He's that tall? Well, maybe not, but we've got to give Mary the opportunity of learning just like you all are learning this evening.

The idea that everyone must know that Jesus bore a sign on His chest that said, I am God, and believe in me, just simply is not relevant to a meaningful discussion of the ancient context of the

Scriptures. What I said was, he had the wrong chapter, it's not Isaiah 50, it's Isaiah 7. Isaiah 7 -14 was having immediate fulfillment in the time of Isaiah, and it has a greater fulfillment in the time of Jesus Christ.

He is called Immanuel, God with us. If you don't believe in prophecy, fine, but it is a prophecy.

How is it fulfilled? Tell us how it was fulfilled if it was not fulfilled in Jesus. I go back to John chapter 5.

Notice what was not addressed. Jesus specifically says, so also the

Son gives life to whomever He wishes. Is that a description of the

Islamic Jesus? That He gives life to whomever He wishes? What does the

Quran say about who gives life? I think the Muslims here know. It is Allah that gives life.

Prophets don't give life. Jesus gives life to whom He wishes. I ask the

Muslims in the room, has Jesus given you life? No. There is

John chapter 5. There is the teaching of the Scriptures. So, if Jesus gives life to whom

He wishes, and that is how a person has eternal life, I think we are seeing the importance of this debate right here and right now, because those are the words that were inspired by the

Holy Spirit in the Holy Scriptures. Thank you. Okay folks, notice how weak his argument on Mary is.

The Old Testament clearly says a virgin will give birth and according to them this kid will be

God. It clearly says it's going to happen. It clearly says it's going to happen. And it happens.

Why is there any doubt? Mary was a religious lady by the way. She wasn't just some average

Samantha. She was a religious lady. Okay? So, she knew what the

Old Testament taught. Okay? The Old Testament said a virgin is going to give birth.

Christians believe and they interpret it saying that this kid is God. Do you know

Mary like Mary? It happens word for word and she still doesn't believe He's God. She doesn't have to wait until he's 33.

Just when he's a baby she should know because it's already been foretold. Then he says, someone doesn't need to know

Jesus is God at once. Notice the double standards. When Jesus goes up to the

Pharisees and makes a claim which they misunderstand, they say, look, they accuse

Him of being God. You see, they understood He was making Himself God just from one incident.

But when that happens to other people, they say, well, no, you have to look at it as a context. So why one standard for the evil

Pharisees and one for the others? And John chapter 5, I did answer it. God gave

Jesus the power. In Book of Mormon, Jesus gave life to the clay birds, but how? By Paul's permission, not by His own.

And He says, Jesus heals whoever He wishes. Jesus' wish is the wish of the

Father. It's together. He doesn't do anything outside the Father's will. And He makes that claim

Himself. So you can't ignore the context. So Mary didn't believe

Jesus was God. That takes away the Old Testament prophecies. And just like Jesus raising the dead, healing the meddled, none of that means

He's God, because in John chapter 17, Jesus is a disciple. The clay bird story actually comes from Proto -Gnostic

Gospels. The whole story of Jesus in the crib speaking likewise coming from the infancy gospel of the 2nd and 3rd century.

Actually, when Jesus said the original one was He was the Son of God from the crib, I think it's very, very clear. Mary is in the upper room.

She's amongst the worshipers of Jesus. She comes to understand who Jesus is. I don't think there's any reason to argue anymore as to whether Mary can or cannot grow in her knowledge of who

Jesus Christ is. I would like to ask a question that hasn't been answered in what

I've pointed out. In Mark 14, 62, Jesus specifically said, I am the

Christ, the Son of the Blessed One. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the power and coming with the clouds of heaviness.

The quotation of Daniel chapter 7, verse 13, which reads, I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like the

Son of Man, he came the Ancient of Days, and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion, and glory, and kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him.

His dominion is everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.

So I would like to understand, how is it that a mere Azul, a mere prophet, can be described as coming upon the clouds of heaven, that he is given dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, when the

Bible says, only God is to be glorified? And how is it that all peoples, nations, and languages, especially in light of the fact that Muslims insist that Jesus is only the

Jewish Messiah, despite the many texts in the Gospels that say exactly the opposite of that, and the

A contextual use of one verse in Matthew, it is very clear that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him.

Who are we to serve? Do you serve Muslims? Do you serve prophets? That is the question that I would like to ask

Sammy. How can Jesus apply these words to himself? Yes, you serve prophets, because they're your rulers, and they're your leaders, so you serve them, but in the same way you serve

God. Now again, the Jews believed that the Messiah was a king with a kingdom, so of course they would serve him.

But this Messiah was under God, and in Daniel, which he quotes, God gives the

Messiah a kingdom. Notice that one, God gives Jesus the kingdom, which proves my point.

And again, I'm not going to let him get away with a merry, excessive, crystal clear word.

Excessive word for word. If I say one day a guy is going to have triplets, and these triplets will be divine, and it happens on that exact day, the same way

I said it, and he believes in what I said, he's divine. Is he going to now wait 30 years, till Acts, when she's sitting upstairs or whatever?

No! She would know as soon as it happened. Manny was a religious baby. So no, we can't just ignore that, because this is one of the greatest arguments, that debunks the

Christians trying to use the Old Testament to say Jesus is God. Because if he was, then why did the people simply believe it at the first, if the

Old Testament clearly prophesies word for word as they say? Then he says the clay birds are from the

Gnostic stories. Actually, no they're not. Yes, there are similarities, but the

Gnostics have the wrong version. The Quran, there is a bit of truth in the Gnostics, but they mix it up.

Do you know in the Gnostics, Jesus actually kills other children? Where is this in the

Quran? Number two, your own colleague David Wood said the Prophet Muhammad is sincere.

So if the Prophet Muhammad is sincere, he would have copied the stories from the Gnostics word for word.

Why did he change it? You can have it two ways. If he's sincere, he would take the story from the

Gnostics word for word. But he didn't. You can't have it both ways. So no, the

Quranic story doesn't come from the Gnostics. Go read the Gnostic, and then go read the Quran. The Gnostic has something.

Just like the Quran. Of course, I will speak for David at this point.

The idea of Muhammad being honest or sincere has nothing to do with whether he had actual access to the written records of the

Gnostics. It seems rather obvious that Muhammad's knowledge of the Bible stories and the Gnostic stories was an oral one, and therefore that really is an irrelevant point there.

I don't believe that, again, we've had it in response to the fact that no one near Rasul is given eternal dominion, which will never end.

How can Rasul, a messenger, a prophet, be given an eternal kingdom if he himself is not eternal?

How does that work? We haven't been told that. Well, it's just been given to him. Yes, there's perfect unity between the Father and the

Son. Is there a perfect unity between the Father and every single prophet? Is every single prophet perfect in every single way?

We've already had Samuel saying Jesus wasn't perfect in every single way. Again, I see no consistency here at all.

I would once again ask Samuel to respond to some of the texts that I have presented, and explain to us, for example, how it is that the

Apostle John could say of the Lot of Us, in the beginning was the

Word. Please explain to us where you find the term for knowledge in John 1 .1.

Explain how the Word was with God across Pompeii. Show us another example in the New Testament where cross is used of having mere foreknowledge.

And then please explain how the Apostle could describe the nature of the Lot of Us as God by using a pre -verbal antithesis predicate nominative as he does with Theos in John 1 .1c.

Okay, first of all, you didn't say it was oral at the start. Then you changed your argument when you got to the future.

Now, you asked me to show you something from the New Testament. Show me the names of whom the Prophet got these stories from orally since you made the claim.

Follow your own criteria and standards. Show us the names. Show us where. Show us when. Number two, why do these people have the wrong oral stories if it's already in text?

How can you say he got it from that book or this book when they're completely different? And again, show us the names.

Show us where. Don't just tell us, hey, he got it from somebody. Who's that somebody?

I want to know. That's not our argument. And then, the point about the eternal kingdom.

Easy. If he's eternal, heaven is eternal, we can say that kingdom is in heaven.

Why not? We can't. And again, it doesn't erase the point that God has given

Jesus this kingdom. Eternal, finite, it doesn't matter as long as God has given it to him.

Show me where Jesus has his own kingdom.

Show me where Jesus has his own kingdom. Number two, he brought up a point about the nature of Jesus, yet he ignores my first criteria that the nature of Jesus contradicts the nature of God.

So why don't you address that? How Jesus' nature is different from God. God is all -knowing,

Jesus is ignorant. How can he be God -man? Wait. If I have that nature, how can

I be ignorant? The human nature overtakes my divine nature? How does that work?

Because that's what he's saying. If you're fully God, fully man, you should always be all -knowing. And you can't be ignorant at the same time.

So you have to address the nature, which completely refutes him, by the way.

When they say Jesus is ignorant, he can't be. Number two, they say

Jesus took on the flesh, I would explain this later. Well, we did not get any response whatsoever to John Moore's one, because I don't believe there is one, but hopefully maybe the next time

Sam will respond to the actual question that was asked. No one has a clue of who Muhammad was listening to to get moral stories.

The point is there are many, many scholars, including Muslim scholars, who have recognized the parallels between these stories and had to wrestle with whether these came to Muhammad and how they came to Muhammad and how he understood those things.

It's not really an issue. Could Moses, I ask you, have been given the eternal kingdom? Could Moses have been given the eternal kingdom?

When Jesus identifies himself as the Son of Man coming upon the clouds of glory, is that the

Muslim Jesus? That's the question we have to ask. If it's not, why not? The only way for Muslims who make that case is to simply say,

I reject the New Testament. I reject the very thing that the Aaliyah, where people of the

Gospel are commanded to judge Muhammad by, I reject it. And I consider that to be a very inconsistent position to take.

Instead of answering my question, he came back with another question that again demonstrates that Sam simply refuses to allow the

Christian position to define itself. We say that Jesus Christ took on human flesh.

That's what John 1 .14 says. That's what Philippians chapter 2 says. That's what Hebrews chapter 1 says.

It's stated repeatedly. What is one of the great attributes of Jehovah God in the

Old Testament? Is he not glorious? Is not his glory something that is so great that we cannot even look upon it without dying?

And yet people looked upon Jesus. Why? Because he veiled his glory.

He became the God of man. He had a purpose in walking amongst us and teaching us.

And as such, even his glory is veiled. For one moment it's gone back in the Mount of Transfiguration.

But his glory is veiled. Those self -limitations are purposeful on Jesus' part. Okay. First of all, you have to answer questions as well.

Number two, he makes it seem like if I answer a question with a question, that's a bad thing.

But I learned that from Jesus in the Gospels because that's what he did as well. When they asked him a question, he said,

I'll ask you a question. And when they didn't answer, he said, I'm going to answer you. So you have to answer.

Did he answer us on how can Jesus be fully God, fully man? How can he be fully knowledgeable and ignorant at the same time?

I didn't see an answer there. Then he brings up a point about nature. Let me give you the analogy

I wanted to give you. I'm a man right now. Let's say I go add some female nature to myself.

I'm hermaphrodite, something like that. That's two natures. You're losing part, you're adding to your nature.

If someone adds to your nature, it's no longer the same. It doesn't matter if some of that nature is still there.

You still added to it, didn't you? So the nature is different. And this is again to Malachi 3 .6.

Because if Muslims learn this argument, they can't get away with it. Malachi 3 .6.

God's nature doesn't change. And his response doesn't answer it. Yes, Jesus added to his nature, but when you add to your nature, you're still changing your nature because you have something extra.

Number two, God himself said, I am not a man. Don't forget his criteria, which he hasn't refuted up to this point.

And then he says, just because Moses didn't have an eternal kingdom. Okay, so Jesus has something,

Moses doesn't, therefore Jesus is God. Moses didn't die like a blasphemer.

Jesus died like a blasphemer and was even a curse. So these aren't real arguments comparing them and saying who has which and who has who.

And he didn't show us from where the Prophet Muhammad borrowed those stories.

I'm not going to let him get away with it because that's his criteria. As I pointed out,

God's nature does not change according to Philippians chapter 2. Jesus takes on that human nature.

That does not cause the human nature to cease. The criteria being used to require that God is completely inactive, that he can only do one thing and then he can never do anything else because if he does something, his nature's changed.

That is, in his use of Malachi three years, he was using all those Old Testament texts. And I simply invite you, the audience, to take the time to read those texts in their context and verify whether what

Sam is saying is true or if he is abusing the text of the Bible. I'm going to go back to the question that has yet to be answered in two rounds now.

I would like to ask Sam one more time, please explain to us how the Apostle John says that the

Logos existed in the beginning, that as far back as you push the beginning, the Logos existed.

Where does the term foreknowledge appear in John 1 .1? Please explain where else in the

New Testament cross is used in the way it's used in John 1 .1b and the word was with God, where is that kind of language used of foreknowledge?

And then please explain to us once again John 1 .1c and the word was

God, the word was as to his nature, deity. Please explain how the

Apostle John would describe the Logos as his essential nature, deity, when the whole point of the debate this evening is that the essential nature of Jesus is that of a mere basul.

That is the Quranic claim. If that Quranic claim is contradictory to the New Testament, as it is, this explains why the conflict exists between Christianity and Islam and we have to ask ourselves the question, why do we accept someone who lives 600 years after Jesus rather than someone who walked with Jesus?

These are my questions of Sam, I would like to hear his answers. Ok, notice the double standard,

I showed you people walking with Jesus and they didn't believe he was God. And then, again notice the other double standard, he wants me to show him something specific from the

Bible and he made a claim that he can't show me a specific example of where the prophet bought all the stories, give me who and where.

This is your criteria by the way, I wouldn't really ask for it. And number two, take the time to read what

I say, go read the Gospel where Jesus says, I can do nothing by myself, I rely on the

Father, everything I have is from the Father, I do this well, I have a God, I pray, go read all of this, go read the

Gospels where you will never find Jesus saying, I am God. Go read the Gospels where you find Jesus saying,

I am He and then he clarifies the Christ, the prophet, not what he says God.

So, back to another point, Jesus takes the nature on, that was to refute my point, yeah,

He takes the nature on, so He's adding to His nature, so it's different. That's common sense, so that point there remains.

Now, in the beginning was the world, exactly, in the beginning was the world, that's what we

Muslims believe. The world is God's foreknowledge. Now, he's asking, show me where it's said.

He can't even show you where Jesus ever said, I am God and now he wants to play a game of show me where this is there.

Okay, we all know God is all -knowing. Of course His word is always with Him. His word is

His plan, wisdom and that's part of God's all -knowing knowledge. It doesn't have to be there but we know it because He's all -knowing, right?

God is all -knowing, so His word is always with Him, since the beginning of time, since He doesn't come up on Sunday and all of a sudden think that hey,

I'm going to come up with this new idea and this is completely consistent with the Islamic view, since you want to say

Islamic Jesus, this is completely consistent with it, since God's word is always with Him from the beginning and indeed

Jesus' God's word was with God in His foreknowledge. Just like John. I will stay within my time limits.

I did not get an answer. Now we've been told that the word for John 1 -1 is God's knowledge.

Where does John 1 -1 say this? John 1 -1 says the word eternally existed, but then

John 1 -14 says the word became flesh, so is it the assertion of Samhizakhti that Jesus is

Allah's knowledge? That Allah's knowledge became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld His glory?

The glories of the One God with five? Could you show us where God's knowledge appears in John 1 -1?

Show us how the term wadah in John 1 is defined as God's knowledge just simply by fiat.

That's what fits for me. It's not exegesis and that is not handling the word of right.

Instead, John 1 -1 tells us exactly what is wrong with the Islamic perspective on Jesus and what we're hearing here clearly is an unwillingness to actually engage the text at that point and respond to those things.

Now, I think that point has been established, so I'll ask some other questions. Could Samhizakhti please explain to us how it is that the writers of the epistles of the

Hebrews could take a section that is about the unchanging God Yahweh, the creator of all things, who does not age, who does not get old, and apply those words to Jesus in Hebrews 1 -10 -12?

Explain to us how a monotheistic Jew can take the words about Yahweh from the

Old Testament and apply them to Jesus. What does this tell us about their beliefs?

Please explain to me then how monotheistic

Jews can take words that were originally written about Yahweh and are true only on Yahweh in a unique sense and apply them to Jesus Christ in the

New Testament if they do not, in fact, believe in the deity of Christ and they believe what Sammy believes about who

Jesus was. We have shown that Jesus is not God for two reasons.

They admit that Jesus added to his nature and that's a nature change whether you like it or not.

And the God of the Bible says, my nature does not change. Then we have

Mary. Clearly she didn't believe Jesus was God and he acknowledged it. He knew he couldn't get away with it.

The Old Testament says a virgin will give birth. You say that the one she gives birth to is

God. It happens word for word and she doesn't believe that he's

God. You cannot escape this point. You cannot escape the point that during the notice in tonight's debate,

I've brought in more information from the lips of Jesus from the times of Jesus more than he has.

I'm going to the people who walked with Jesus. I showed you none of them believed he was

God. He keeps going to outside sources after Jesus left. Which I still quote it from Acts.

Peter is saying Jesus is a man. So either way, they still didn't believe it.

And again during his lifetime they did not believe he was God. That point remains.

You cannot refute that fact. During the lifetime of Jesus what did they debate?

God or prophet? Neither. Messiah or prophet? You can't refute that.

Sorry. Then he brings up the point about John 1. Notice we spent half of that time on John 1.

Which isn't even Jesus speaking. Notice that? I'm not saying

John supports his view. But notice the interesting point there. That we spent half of the

Q &A on what John said. And then on what Hebrews said.

And I don't have a problem with Hebrews. I'm not saying they're bad guys. I'm just saying okay they said these things.

Brilliant. Show me where Jesus said these things to back their view up. The Quran says

Jesus is a prophet. He says I don't go to someone 600 years later. True. But if that person 600 years later is making points that are being backed up from the lips of the person himself then he has a point.

You keep quoting. He even admitted when he quoted Colossians 1 he refuted himself by mistake.

He said did Moses ever say such a thing? Did Jesus say such a thing?

No he didn't. Then he changed his argument. And he said well did someone in the time of Moses say such a thing about Moses?

Which proves my point. I have no problem with Hebrews. With Timothy etc.

I repeat quote them. But back them up with the words of Jesus. Notice the circular reasoning.

Jesus is God because the New Testament says so. Where is the proof from?

Jesus himself. You haven't showed it to us. And then the word was

God and it became flesh. Yes. Allah says be and it is. The word manifests itself.

Allah says be. All of this is God's word. He simply said be and it becomes.

That's how you explain it. And then what about all the other Christians who don't interpret

John 1 .1 according to his Trinitarian view. That the definite article is missing. Now he'll argue and they'll argue.

But it doesn't matter because let's just go to Jesus. So the definite article is missing.

Before it says and the word was God. Let us assume that the definite article isn't missing.

Let's assume that the word is called God. Well if anyone studies the Bible they will know that many men are called

God as well. Isn't it strange that in the Bible being called God doesn't make you God in the absolute sense?

Unlike the Quran when you're called when Allah says Allah he only refers to himself. In the

Bible when you're called God it doesn't really mean you're the true absolute God.

And that's how we can easily interpret John 1 .1. Jesus never said I'm God. He said

I'm a prophet, a Messiah. So if he's called God we understand it in the sense of the

Old Testament like when Moses was called God. Basically a servant, a prophet but not the true absolute

God because Jesus fails all the criteria. Would Amir Rasul say this?

Would the almighty God come out of a womb, out of a vagina? I'm sorry

I nor the Muslims will ever accept such a belief. And then a last point.

He says we Muslims do this because the Quran disagrees. Wrong. We do this because it's the truth.

What about all the Christians who aren't Muslims who interpret things like I do? Are they doing it because the

Quran told them? No. Because it's the truth. That's what you get when you read the

Bible. So Dr. White has failed to show us where Jesus says I'm God and he has to show it because the

Old Testament God time and time again says he's God. Dr. White has failed us.

He failed to show us anywhere in the four Gospels where people believed he was

God. He only can show you doubting Thomas. Another Trinitarian says no.

This is even under dispute. He can't show us any of these things. So who does he go to?

Outside the four Gospels. I argue on the lips of Jesus.

And another point. He said the Prophet Muhammad never said I am a prophet. Wrong. Go read the Hadiths.

I'm not a Quranic heretic. I believe in the Hadiths. The Quran says follow the Hadiths. The Hadiths show the

Prophet saying in crystal clear Arabic I am the last prophet. So he does say it.

You can't show us where Jesus said it. So he's been refuted there as well. So yes, go home and examine the facts.

Go to a Christian website named biblicalunitarian .com They have responses to every point he brought.

I can't respond to all of them. But they have it all. On John 1 .1. On Hebrews. On all of it.

Isn't it ironic that in Hebrews which he quotes Jesus is said to have a

God. In Hebrews chapter one I believe. Isn't that interesting? He goes to Hebrews to try to prove that Jesus is

God yet the author of Hebrews says that Jesus has a God. Yeah, I'm going to worship

Jesus as my God and I'm going to worship his God as well. That doesn't make any sense.

It only makes sense if Jesus isn't God which is why he has a God. And thank you.

Once again I thank all of you for being here late into the evening. Thank you for your attention.

I would like to thank Sammy Zottery for being here this evening.

I would like to give him a couple of gifts. There's a book by a friend of mine, Daniel Wallace and some friends called

Reinventing Jesus. A scholarly work on a lot of the attacks upon Jesus these days and a book that I wrote called

The Forgotten Trinity. And I would like to give these to Sammy. I hope you can see through some of the bluster that we've heard this evening.

I don't see any reason to talk about, oh, I've refuted you here and refuted you there.

You're the judges this evening. And it is up to you to determine who is rightly handling the word, who looks at context, who looks at background, and who's using the same standards in applying their arguments to one side or another.

We just heard all sorts of non -Christians say as if they're Christians. Muslims, if a person does not believe

Muhammad's a prophet, is he a Muslim? Okay, so if I start quoting Orientalists who don't believe Muhammad was a prophet and calling them

Muslims, would you be offended? Then why are you quoting Unitarians to me? To redefine

Christianity, all sorts of Christians disagree about these things. Does that provide an answer to what I have pointed out in John 1?

No. I debate those folks and refute them too. You had no response provided to John 1. You had no response provided to the fact that Jesus identified as Yahweh.

And to stand here before you and say, oh, he's never shown you where anybody believed Jesus was God. Well, I just refer you to the opening statements, the opening presentations, texts like Titus 2 .13,

2 Peter 1 .1, Our Great God and Savior Jesus Christ, where that is not the case. I've also pointed you to the words of Jesus.

And I ask you a simple question. Sammy just said, oh, but you see, I go to the words of Jesus and they're consistent with that book that comes 600 years later.

Where in the Quran do you ever find Jesus saying these words? And now glorify me,

Father, together with yourself, with the glory which I had in your presence before the world came into existence.

Which surah is that? A missing ayah perhaps? Maybe Uthman missed that one? No. The fact of the matter is

Jesus spoke those words and no mere would ever dare to claim that in eternity past he was the object of the glory of God.

And then say to God as a man upon earth, glorify me! That's what

Jesus says. And that's why his disciples described him in the way that they did.

That's why Paul describes him in Colossians 2 and 9 as all the fullness of deity dwelling in him in bodily form.

That's why the writer to Hebrews he just mentioned Hebrews chapter 1. I exhort my

Muslim friends take the time to read Hebrews chapter 1. Absorb it.

Look at the Old Testament passages it cites. See the description of Jesus as the final revelation of God.

As the Son of God. Isn't that contradictory to Surah 112? Isn't it?

I think it is. As the Son of God, the creator of all things.

Were all things created by Jesus? The Bible says it clearly in Colossians 1 .15, Hebrews chapter 1.

And then it says all the angels of God worship him. Do all the angels of God worship prophets?

And then those words about the unchanging Yahweh from Psalm 102, 25 -27 are applied by the author to Jesus.

There is only one way my friends that those words could be written. And that is that the person who wrote them believed in the absolute full deity of Jesus Christ.

Making the same distinction we do between the Father and the Son. And that is what I have presented to you this evening.

We have seen if we step aside from the rancor and the claims of, oh

I refute you there and I refute you there. And leave it to you, the audience. Show you the respect to allow you to examine the argumentation.

When you do so, you see from the beginning and end of the New Testament that in every single book

Jesus either says and does things in the Gospels or is described by his followers in what follows.

In ways that could never fit the Muslim Jesus. That's why when

I debate, for example, Shabir Ali, as I have debated him before, he simply dismisses these

New Testament texts. They're not inspired. They're later corruptions.

They have to because they recognize that there is no possible way for there to be harmony between this text and the text of the

Quran. They contradict each other. I submit to you that the writer of the Quran did not know that.

And only later generations came to realize it and therefore as a result began to attack the validity and text of the

New Testament. And so I say to you this evening when we look at the sources that have any meaningful claim as having anything to do with Jesus.

What do we discover? We discover that they uniformly, without question, testify that Jesus Christ was not a mere

Rasul. Yes, he was a prophet, Lamb of God, King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

But he was not the Muslim Jesus. He was the Jesus of the New Testament.

The Alpha and Omega. The beginning and the end. The first and the last. And he is the one who says he gives life to whom he will.

If you're a Muslim here this evening I want you to understand the reason that we do all of this is our prayer that in his mercy and his grace this great savior, your creator would be pleased to give you life.

We give ourselves in service to him so that we might see that blessed event.