The Bible & the Quran

The Meaning of Original Sin and Jesus’ Voluntary Death

Pattern. I would like to start with a question for Dr. White. If God is divine, if God is eternal, how would you justify God defining for the sins of these creations? If everyone is responsible for their own sins, then what is the original sin?

I'm going to assume that it wasn't defining, it was dying. So I see two questions here in essence. If God is eternal, how would you justify God dying for the sins of the creation? Remember, Jesus is the God-man.

He voluntarily gave his life. Remember, all the Old Testament sacrifices were pointing forward to Jesus Christ's fulfillment of them. And Jesus said, no one takes my life from me. I give it of my own accord.

He said it was necessary that I go to Jerusalem to give my life. And so he does so from the very past of eternity. The Father, Son, and Spirit together chose the roles that they would take in the eternal covenant of redemption.

It was not the Father who became flesh. It was not the Spirit who became flesh. It was the Son who became flesh. And he gave his life as a sacrifice for sins. A perfect substitutionary atonement. Those whom God chooses unto himself, he unites to his Son so that his death becomes my death.

The Apostle Paul said, I have been crucified with Christ. Nevertheless, I live. Yet not I, but Christ lives in me. And the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me.

The Bible teaches the original sin of Adam. The Bible teaches that we were in Adam so that his sin becomes that which has caused our fall. That's why, my friends, you never have to teach your children to lie.

You never have to teach them to say no to you and rebel against you. You have to teach them to be good. You don't have to teach them how to do wrong. That's original sin.

The Begotten Son, John 3:16, and Translation Questions

Here's the fact tonight. Dr. James White has said that Jesus has never been mentioned as begotten Son. But you read that in John 3, 16, that for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life.

He is mentioned. And that is, of course, taken out in the Revised Tonder Rations. And this is another fact. The Bible changes from time to time based on the interest, based on circumstances. And how are you going to preserve the Word of God if from time to time you change it?

One, you say you need the Son of God. One, you say begotten Son of God. Now you say he gave his only Son. This question is for Imam. Actually, the question that I was referring to has already been answered by Shamsi Ali, which is, to be fair to the questioner, as a Christian, I believe that Jesus Christ is God.

And, quote, I and the Father are one. You see me, you see the Father. The Muslims do not believe this, do they? This is for Imam Ali. You will never see God unless you see me. That's basically the meaning of what the Bible says.

It does mean, my friends, that Jesus Christ was sent by God to teach the people about God. And to teach the people about how to worship God. Muhammad, in the Holy Quran, is mentioned in this way. If you don't want to obey God, then obey me.

Because you will never obey God unless you follow the way Prophet Muhammad showed you how you should obey Prophet Muhammad. All Prophets of God, Abraham, Moses, David, and so on, have come to show us the way to God.

And that's why if you have seen him, you will see the way. If you follow the way Prophet Muhammad teaches you about Islam, you will see the way to God. And this is similar to Jesus Christ. So we don't believe that if we know Jesus Christ as Jesus Christ, as the Prophet of God, that is the way to God.

And that's why Muslims believe in Jesus Christ. We don't deny him as the way, as the Prophet. But he is not the Divine. He is not the Son of God. He is not Incarnate God. He has never been God and will never be God.

He is a servant of God, given the revelation to teach us how to go to God. So he is the way.

I want you to consider the actual context of the text that was just cited, which is John chapter 10, verse 30. Jesus is talking about the fact that he and the Father are one in providing salvation for God's people.

So when Jesus says, the Father and I are one, notice what happens in the very next verse. The Jewish leaders picked up rocks again to stone him to death. Why do Jews stone people? For saying that they're just a prophet and if you follow me, then you'll get to heaven?

No, they stone people for blasphemy. And if they just read on, it says, they themselves said, we are not going to stone you for a good work, but for blasphemy, because you as a man are claiming to be God.

The Jews fully understood what Jesus was saying in John chapter 10, verse 30. Dr. James White, if Jesus is God, how come he can eat, drink and sleep? If Jesus is God, how come he can die? Because the question only assumes half of what Christians believe.

Yes, Jesus is truly God, but the Bible says, the law boss who created all things, sarks, again, a top became flesh. He entered into his own creation. Is it beyond Allah's power to enter into that which he created?

If he created it, can he not, if he chooses to do so, enter into it? That's what the incarnation is. So why can he eat and drink and give his life? Because he's truly man. God did not cease to exist because remember, we believe in one being of God shared by not three personalities, but three persons, the father, the son, the spirit.

It was the son who gave his life upon Calvary's crops. He didn't cease to exist. We don't believe that men cease to exist when they die. His spirit continues to exist, but he gave his life as a sacrifice for sins.

And may I clarify something? I did not say that some Bible translations do not use the term begotten of Jesus. What I'm saying is it's a misunderstanding. You see, I can look at my translation of the Quran in English and his translation of the Quran in English and they will translate Arabic words with different English words.

That's the process of translation. The Greek term used in John 3 .16, the Greek term used in John 1 .18 is monoghanies. Monoghanies does not come from genato, which means to beget. It comes from genies, which means kind or type.

That's why monoghanies means unique. That's the same term used in John 3 .16 as well. Thank you.

The Incarnation and the Limits of Divine Action

Dr. James White mentioned a very interesting point. That if God does want to do something, He can do it, including enter into the flesh body, into His servant. There are two things here. Number one, possibility and impossibility, of course, is in the hands of God.

But let me just tell you that it is impossible for God to do something that contradicts Himself. God is so unique. God is so powerful. God is not limited. Now enter into human flesh that He is not unique anymore.

Jesus eating, He was circumcised, He was in the wombs of the mother, He was running away from His enemies. He is not unique anymore. Do you think God the unique becomes not unique anymore? So the impossibility is clearly that God is impossible to enter into human flesh because that is contradicting to God Himself.

Please explain the scheme of the corruption of every copy of the Bible without the knowledge of all who owned a copy of the texts in the original languages. So please explain how all copies of the Bible were corrupted without someone knowing who had all the various copies.

Is it clear? Do you want me to clarify? They are asking how all the Bibles could be corrupted when there are many copies of the Bible. Yes, if there are copies of the Bible all over the place, how are all of them corrupted?

You have to take 90 seconds to answer this one. The existence of different Bibles itself is a very direct indication or sign or fact that the Bibles are corrupted because you have different versions. From time to time, I think there are six Bibles now.

Inside of those Bibles, there are new international versions, new King James versions, King James versions, revised standard versions. And on those versions, basically, some verses are taken out and the latter are inserted again.

Now, what do you do with the books of God? Do you have that right to insert and take out, insert and take out? This itself, the different version itself, basically, is the representation that Bibles have been corrupted throughout the history.

Is it very clear? Language changes.

In the current edition of the Quran in Arabic, many of you have seen this edition. You will notice there are no notes at the bottom of the page giving you the various readings of the following palimpsests.

Manuscript 328, any of those other places that I showed you on the screen where they have varied readings from what you have here. However, if you look at my Greek New Testament, you will find all sorts of notes giving you all the readings of all the manuscripts so you can examine them yourself.

If you want to talk about corruption, the point of fact is that we as Christians put forward all the information and we are confident that in that manuscript tradition, the original readings have been preserved for us to this day.

That's why I brought up the Othmanic revision. That's where we really have to be discussing this subject this evening. Thank you.

The Virgin Birth, Adam, and the Son of God

Reversing the norm, this question is for Imam Shamshi Ali. If Mary was a virgin, where did the baby come from? If Jesus is not the son of God, then how are our sins atoned for? Jesus clearly stated that he is the son of man, the son of God, John 8 .58.

He says he was, he has before John 5 .18 and Luke 2 .49 confirmed that Jesus was without a father. He was born to a virgin Mary, a virgin woman, Mary. And Mary is so respectful. She is the master of women in paradise, in our belief.

But there is a beautiful verse in the Holy Quran that says, that the examples of Jesus in the sight of God is like Adam. And he said, be, and he is. So my question to you, my Christian friends, if it is easy for God to create someone from nothing, from clay, and suddenly into it, and exist, Adam.

Difficult for God, of course the concept of difficult and easy in our minds. Nothing is difficult in God. Is it more difficult for God to create someone through a mother without a father? So do you want to say that this is the reason why Jesus Christ is God, because he doesn't have a father?

How about Adam? How about Eve? No father, no mother. Eve, no mother, from a father. Adam, peace be upon him. So I think let's use our rationality. Let's think. The Holy Quran challenged the Muslims. Don't you think, don't you reflect, don't just follow blindly.

I think the Bible also teaches us that use your rationality. Don't follow the Bible just blindly. Learn it, study it. Question your priests and your pastors in the churches.

We most certainly do question everyone who teaches. I do it all the time, and all Christians do. The question asked, is Jesus truly the son of God or not? Now, the virgin birth is not the evidence of the deity of Christ.

But when Jesus identifies himself as the son of God, it has been said that, well, lots of people identify as the son of God. Not as Jesus did. In John chapter 5, which was cited, Jesus says, my father is working until now, and I am working.

He was referring to working on the Sabbath. The Jews understood what he was saying, and John 5 .18 specifically tells us, for this reason the Jewish leaders are trying even harder to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own father.

Peculiar formation there in the Greek. Thus, making himself equal with God. Jesus is unique as the son of God.

Scientific Miracles in the Quran and the Problem of Interpretation

My question is a little bit getting better.

It's more about scientific. This is for Dr. White. How do you explain all the scientific miracles in the Quran? I .e. the sun and the moon's orbit, how the mountains go down the ground, how there is a barrier between sweet and salt water.

The list goes on.

There are similar books that are written by Christians that sometimes are embarrassing to me, because they do not interpret an ancient text in the context of the ancient text. I think one of the clearest examples of this is the allegation that the Quran somehow contains miracles of embryology.

To say that this is stretching things far beyond what the original language will allow is really to understate the issue. I think we need to be very careful that we do not insert our modern understandings into an ancient text and make those ancient texts say things that the ancient authors never intended them to say.

There are all sorts of things. We can point to the hydrological cycle in the Bible and all the rest of these things, and I could say, well, how do you explain that if it's all been corrupted? I don't think that that is a meaningful direction to go.

I think the fact of the matter is we have two texts here that we call Scripture. One makes reference to the other. One comes after the other. Which one is consistent in teaching what the other has said?

And if we're going to allege corruption and things like that, have we really had proof of that offer? Looking at various versions of the Bible is not, from a scholarly perspective, evidence of the corruption of the text of Scripture any more than different versions and translations of the Qur 'an are.

And I have given evidence that there was the Ibn Masud reading. It wasn't just his notes. We've clearly seen evidence of the continuation of his readings. That's the scholarly level that we need to be focusing on this evening, I believe.

If the Bible doesn't move into the modern time, that is an indication that the Bible is the past. The Holy Qur 'an is talking about modern, scientific-proof doctrine. And I can give you a lot in the Holy Qur 'an.

Dr. James talked about genealogy. One of Canadian genealogists, his name is Professor Keith Moore, became Muslim because of what he found in the Holy Qur 'an. He's one of the best genealogists in the modern time.

He became Muslim because of the fact that he found in the Holy Qur 'an. He did say, if this is produced by Muhammad, it is impossible. This is 14 centuries ago in the desert. Now I have done my research for more than 20 years.

I came to a conclusion just part of what the Qur 'an talked about genealogy. The Bible, it says about... I want Dr. James to respond to this basically. That the mother's birth to female is unclean twice than to a male child.

This is Leviticus 12, 15.

Regeneration, New Birth, and the Limits of Mere Profession

This one is especially for Dr. White. If I believe in Jesus now, and I kill somebody, should I go to heaven now just because of my belief in Jesus? The scriptures teach us that when God saves a person, He causes that person to be regenerated, to be raised out of spiritual death, spiritual life.

And that is the entire purpose of the triune God. That those who are born again are to be conformed to the image of Christ and made to be like Him. That means we are given a new nature and a new set of desires.

Now, Christians still sin. They have abiding sin within them. But it is something that they should hate. It is something that they should be warring against out of love for God. And because their new nature makes them to desire to be like Jesus Christ.

And so when... I will admit that there are some who call themselves Christians who go around and who teach that all you have to do is tip your hat toward Jesus. And you will go to heaven no matter what you do.

You can become an atheist, you can become an axe murderer. It doesn't make any difference. And that is a perspective that I call absolute heresy. It is wrong. It is not what the Bible teaches in any way, shape or form.

God is glorifying Himself in conforming a people to the image of Jesus Christ. And so He changes their hearts and He changes their desires. And so the idea that a person can become a Christian and then just live as they will is not what the biblical teaching is.

Instead, the Bible teaches that when God saves a man or a woman He saves them from the inside out by changing their heart and making them a new creature in Jesus Christ.

Christians, including Catholics today, are all wonderful people because of that faith. Because you said that the moment you said you believe in Jesus Christ He changed you from your inside to become a better person.

So no more killings, no more discriminations, no more spittings, no more corruptions. But my friends, when God created us, He gave us freedom. And then He helped us to follow that freedom by sending prophets and sent down guidance.

So our salvation is in God through our efforts. Even Prophet Muhammad, let me end with this. Prophet Muhammad said to his daughter, my daughter, do something to save yourself because I cannot save you in the Day of Judgment.

I can only show you the way. Thank you.

Muhammad’s Marriages, Seventh-Century Context, and Zaynab

I have a lot of questions addressing the issue of, well, pointing out Imam Shamsi Ali attacked the morality of prophets in the Bible and then giving long lists of things Muhammad did. Many of these are very mean-spirited.

So I'm going to try to bring up one of the nicer ones. Why did Muhammad have more than four wives? And did he trade mankind and captive women? Did he fall in love with his adopted son's wife?

My friend, we are talking about an issue in the 7th century. And I hope when you talk about an issue in the 7th century, you use the mind of the 7th century. You cannot use your mind in the 21st century to talk about an issue that takes place in the 7th century.

Prophet Muhammad married more than one wife. You are talking about David. What does the Holy Book talk about David? So please be fair when you judge about the practices of the past. Because this is the reality in the Holy Books.

Secondly, about the treatments of the wives. I think he is talking specifically about his adopted son's wife. My friend, there is an issue mentioned in the Quran to show decency to the people because Islam has come as a law to tell the people that it is not wrong for the father, the so-called adopted father, to marry the former wife of his adopted son.

This is a law that basically God wanted to deliver. And many of those wives of the Prophet Muhammad were married for many, many other reasons. If Prophet Muhammad wanted to marry many wives just simply because of his human desires, his sexual desires, then he could have married her before he moved to Medina.

He was young at the time. You know what? He married the first wife when he was 25 and his wife was 40 years. She married three times before, had six kids. Do you think Muhammad is so sexually inclined to marry more than one wife?

So my friend, please do use the 7th century mind in talking about this.

Well, I am not sure how we can use the 7th century mind to talk about that and use the 21st century mind to find genetics and embryology in the Quran. Amen. I would simply suggest something to you. And to suggest this to the Muslims who have access to this, this information is available online.

Take the time to read Ibn Kathir and Al-Khutabi on the subject of Zaynab and the relationship that developed there. I think it is, I mentioned in my presentation, it is very troubling to me. From the Tafsir sources and Hadith sources themselves, it strikes me that there is a problem there.

But I do not believe, in the Islamic perspective, the saying that prophets somehow have to be sinless. Because clearly, I have already addressed that in the previous question.

Who Wrote the Quran? Muhammad, Revelation, and Testing Prophets

Following the pattern to Imam Shamsi Ali, why should I accept the claim of... As long as we get both of them, I guess it does not matter. All right. Go ahead. Okay. All right then. This is a question to the priest, as the note says.

Who do you think wrote Al-Quran?

I would like to correct the address. Christians believe that all of us are believer priests. But we do not use the term priest in that sense. At least, I do not. We believe that Jesus Christ is one high priest.

So I would like to correct that. I do not... No problem. There are all sorts of theories amongst orientalists about compilations of the Quran over time. There are some very interesting questions, especially about the change in regards to the direction between Mecca and Jerusalem and the Qibla angle.

There are a number of things like that. But I do not have any problem debating the subject on the assumption that there was a man in 7th century Arabia named Muhammad who wrote this book. Now, the question then becomes, why do I believe...

Why must I believe this man was a prophet? Especially when he says things like Surah 4, verse 157 that go against every bit of factual history concerning the crucifixion of Jesus Christ from the 1st century, 700 miles away, in a different language, when he never read my book in its original tongue.

I don't understand why I should accept that. Would you accept someone who came along 7th centuries after Muhammad, never read the Quran, but then just says, I'm a prophet and the Hijra never took place, don't face Mecca, just because he claims to be a prophet?

No, you would test him. And that's what I think we need to do in regards to Muhammad as well.

The Quran, the Bible, and the Crucifixion of Jesus

Dr. James White, basically your point, pointed out clearly that the Holy Quran is an inspiration from God. Muhammad never read the Bible, never read the Torah, but yet the Quran talked a lot about them.

So who taught him? Muhammad never went out to see the sea, the Quran talked about sea. Muhammad never went up to the sky, talked about the skies. So who taught Muhammad? God Almighty. That's why the Quran is تَنْزِلُ الْعَزِزِ الْحَكِيمِ.

The Quran had been revealed from the God, the Noble One, because Muhammad never altered it. He's not the author of the Holy Quran. Back to the questions for Imam Shamsi Ali. Why should I accept the claim of the Quran of Jesus not being crucified, when the Bible predicted it in Messiah 53, 700 years before Jesus was born?

The Bible has the proof and it seems like the Quran has none. Even Jesus admitted in the Talmud he died on the eve of the Passover. The issue, first of all, the issue of crucifixion goes back to the issue of original sin.

Why do they only use the word unique? The unique Son of God has to be sent down, enter into the flesh of human body, to be crucified, because of the original sin. Now the Holy Quran refutes about the original sin.

The original sin is non-existent. So if the Holy Quran affirms that he was crucified, then you will find the Holy Quran contradicting. So what the Holy Quran says, وَمَا قَتَلُهُ وَمَا صَلَهُ. They didn't kill him, they didn't crucify him, but son was made similar to him.

Similar to him. So who was the similar to him? We can discuss that in the mighty, we can find that many verses in the Bible, explaining who that person was, basically. But unfortunately it's not the issue tonight, it's not the subject tonight.

I can do some research, if one day we really want to discuss about the issue. But my point is, that since the Holy Quran doesn't believe in the original sin, that what is the necessity for, let's say the Son of God to be crucified?

Of course for Christian friends, to save us. But now if there is no original sin, in fact all people are born pure. Everybody is born pure. And then the circumstances surrounding you, my friend, who make you evil.

They make you evil. So we see people from a positive perspective. Everyone, regardless of the mothers, that is from Christian mothers, Jewish mothers, Hindu mothers, Buddhist mothers, every single born child born pure.

That is how we believe as Muslims.

Here is the text of Isaiah chapter 53, written in Hebrew language 700 years before Christ. And it prophesies one who gives his life, so that many can be justified. He is poured out. Look at Psalm 22. Look at Psalm 2.

Isaiah 53. It is the prophecy of the Messiah who will suffer for the sins of God's people. This is what has been written 1300 years before Muhammad. And 40 Arabic words in Surah 4, verse 157, that many people disagree with.

Look at Asad's translation of the Quran and his commentary. He disagrees with what Imam Shamsi Ali just said. He said there is no basis for every believing that someone was made to look like Jesus. In fact, Shabiha Lehem does not mean he was made to look like him.

It was made to look like him. So we need to be very careful how we take that verse. It is 10 o 'clock and we need to give both our participants time to have a five minute conclusion. Of course, everyone is free to stay around afterwards.

If we didn't get to your... And to ask more questions afterwards. If we didn't get to your questions, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I didn't even finish looking through the pile of questions. I think we need to have both of these men in another exchange very soon so that we can get to more of these issues.

The Trinity, the Shema, and Biblical Monotheism

For Dr. Dwight, you mentioned the Trinity. Is the Trinity original to Christianity? If so, then what about the trinities of the Sumerians, the Mesopotamians, the Babylonians, thousands of years before Christianity?

I love set up questions. There is absolutely positively no parallel whatsoever between the paganism and its triads of gods and the belief of Christians that there is one eternal God who created all things, who is manifested in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Anyone who studies any ancient triads and then looks at the basic affirmation of Christians that from the beginning there is one true and eternal God. We say the shema that goes back to Deuteronomy 6 .4.

There is one God. There is no parallel in any monotheistic religion where you have God revealing himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All those religions were polytheistic religions that believed their gods came out of the creation itself.

One God cut another God in half, and now you've got two gods and all the rest of this kind of silliness that you have in the various Mesopotamian religions and things like that. Christianity comes from Judaism and its absolute affirmation in the shema.

Shema yisrael yahweh eloheinu, yahweh echad. Here in Israel, Yahweh is one. Yahweh is our God. And we continue to believe that. We simply believe what the New Testament teaches when it tells us that the Father is identified as Yahweh, the Son is identified as Yahweh by quotations from Psalm 102, Psalm 110, Isaiah 6.

The Spirit is the Spirit of Yahweh. One divine name, the being of God, shared by three persons who are distinguished from one another. We believe in the doctrine of the Trinity and can define it because the Bible teaches it.

Let me just take the last point that the being of God, being of God, is shared by the three. And let me ask questions here. When he was in the stomach, in the wombs of his mother, was this shared by the three?

When he was born, was this shared by the three? When he was crucified, was this shared by the three? When he died, was this shared by the three? When God was crucified, and is shared by the three, who was controlling the world at the time?

Thank you.

Variant Readings in the Quran and the Preservation of Scripture

Shamsi Ali, can you answer Dr. White's comparison of the differences in the texts of the Qur 'an, not just that there are different translations of the Greek and Hebrew texts? Could you answer Dr. White's comparison of the differences in the texts of the Qur 'an?

I really wanted to see the different versions of the Qur 'an that Dr. James White has, to see that we have different versions, because that's what he claimed. But show us, where are those different versions of the Holy Qur 'an?

And my response to you, that many people claim around, that there are versions of the Holy Qur 'an, but yet, we never found that. We have some kids probably here memorize the Holy Qur 'an from the beginning to the end.

Millions of Muslim kids today memorize the Holy Qur 'an. And everywhere you go, go to India, go to Pakistan, go to Bangladesh, anywhere, you will find when the kids memorize the Holy Qur 'an, the same word, no different at all.

When you open different printings, let's say printings in different countries, you'll find difference. We don't find versions of the Holy Qur 'an. Yeah, Dr. James claimed that there are versions of the Holy Qur 'an, but if you ask me where are the versions of the Bible, I can give you.

Different printings, different contents. Taken out, inserted in. So what kind of the Holy Books are you talking about? If you took out, inserted again, took out, inserted again, so what kind of Holy Books?

The Holy Qur 'an guaranteed the preservation of the Holy Qur 'an. The Holy Qur 'an says itself, إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَسْدَلْنَا الْقُرْآنَ وَإِنَّا لَهُمْ لَحَافِظُونَ. Verily, we have indeed revealed the Holy Qur 'an unto you, Muhammad.

God says, unto you. We reveal it unto you, Muhammad. And certainly, we will take the guarantee. We will be responsible to protect it. So Qur 'an is being protected by God Himself through the efforts of Muslims, of course.

Thank you.

I wondered why Muslims believe the Qur 'an is protected when God failed to protect the books He sent down in the Torah and the Injil. The reality is, I never said there are different versions. I gave you photographic evidence on the screen of variant readings, and I demonstrated to you that the early Muslim writers themselves speak of the Ibn Masud readings.

I gave you specific references to these. I gave you examples of these. I don't know how much more I can do than to document it for you. Now maybe you've not seen those things before, but this information is generally available within scholarly realms and is available, as I showed you, an entire page of variations published by Muslims from Turkey.

So I would suggest to you that you do what I've done, that is, go buy the books. Unfortunately, they're very expensive, but go buy them anyways and take a look at them. At this point, we're going to have a five-minute closing statement from each side, beginning with Dr. White.

And again, afterwards, if you'd like to ask a question of either participant, you're welcome to do that. So five minutes, Dr. White. I wish to thank all of you very much for being here this evening, sticking around through the heat.

Wasn't it great to have the first day of summer today? I want to especially thank my Muslim friends for being here, and I hope some of you have listened and heard. It's become a tradition of mine in my debates with Muslims to present gifts to my opponent.

I gave Imam Shamsi Ali a copy of the scholarly work on the New Testament. I have over here a New American Standard Bible, two of my books, Scripture Alone, and my book on the Trinity, where I do actually define the Trinity very clearly.

And I would like to give those to Imam Shamsi Ali. We'll close by reading one text from the Quran and asking some simple questions based upon it. Surah 5, verse 46 says,. And we sent Jesus, the son of Mary, after those prophets, confirming the truth of whatever there still remained of the Torah.

Now that's an interesting translation in this English version, which is very different from other English versions, I point out. And we gave him the Gospel, wherein is guidance and light, and which confirms the truth of whatever there still remained of the Torah, and a guidance and admonition for the God-fearing.

Listen to verse 47. Let the followers of the Gospel, the Al-Walijil, the people of the Gospel, judge by what Allah has revealed therein. May I ask you a question? In fact, it goes on to say,. And those who do not judge by what Allah has revealed are the transgressors.

How could anyone in the days of Muhammad have judged by what was in the Injil if the Injil did not exist? I need an answer to that. I've asked many Muslims, and I've got some amazing answers. But I need to know, how could the people of the Gospel in the days of Muhammad judge, how could Allah hold them accountable to what was in the Injil if the Injil did not exist?

I submit to you that your own revelation puts you in a quandary. I was trying to explain this in my rebuttal, but most of you left. So let me just very briefly summarize it. If you look at the preceding ayahs, the Quran actually in one of only two places actually quotes from the Torah.

And it's the exact citation we have today. He is the one who put it on a pillow and said, I believe everything in this book. We know what that Torah was. We have versions of that earlier than that. So the question is, if you're going to believe the Quran, then how can you believe this allegation of wholesale corruption that stands against the greatest manuscript tradition of any ancient work of antiquity?