Second Rebuttal, First Audience Questions, Shamsi Ali Debate

Dr. James White, in his 10 minutes rebuttal, basically tried his best to respond to some of my presentations but unfortunately, probably because of the time, he didn't respond to many many points that I raised.

But let me just go directly to his presentations. The first one he raises is that Muslims believe in the Qutub, that we do believe in the books.

Yes, as I mentioned that Muslims will not be Muslims unless they believe in the Torah, in the

Gospel, and of course in the Holy Qur 'an. But never we find anywhere in the Holy Qur 'an God says, وَآمِنُوا بِالإِنجِيلِ

And believe in the Gospel. The Qur 'an always says وَآمِنُوا بِالْقُطُبِ And believe in the books which were given to the prophets.

Why the Qur 'an doesn't say وَآمِنُوا بِالإِنجِيلِ And believe in the Gospel? Because Gospels have been corrupted in many ways throughout the history.

We cannot believe in the Gospels that you have in your hands right now. Though we do believe that it may contain some truth from God.

This is number one. Another important point that he raised is about government control of the

Qur 'an because of Uthman. Don't forget that before Uthman, Abu Bakr also compiled the

Qur 'an and he was not the person who compiled the Holy Qur 'an. He was a government and he assigned the job to Zayd ibn

Thabit and later on Uthman also ordered to compile or basically to copy the

Qur 'an that had been compiled previously. Copied, I say copied because there is no copy machine at the time so you have to write it again.

And he appointed four people headed by Zayd ibn Thabit. It is not controlled by Uthman.

It is given assignment to certain people, to certain Muslims. Four of those memorize the

Holy Qur 'an, the best writers among the companions of the Prophet Muhammad. So he didn't control, basically he didn't say do this, do that.

Show me of the four Bible books of the New Testament today. Who basically dictated during the conference of Nisya?

Don't you know this is a king? Read the history.

There are many non -Muslims who have written about this issue. Now, Dr.

James, in many of his debates because I have, to be honest with you, I have opened some YouTube debates of his.

He mentioned a lot about Ibn Mas 'ud, Ibn Mas 'ud that he rejected as he mentioned in one of the hadith that he rejected.

But basically he failed to understand that Ibn Mas 'ud initially rejected to hand over his copy.

Why is that? He rejected in the beginning because that copy is beloved to him.

It doesn't mean that he has different Qur 'an or different versions. It is beloved to him and he had some notes on it.

Now my point to you, if the Qur 'an has many versions before Uthman, do you think

Uthman had control over all houses? Why we cannot find any different version of Qur 'an today?

When the four Bibles were imposed on the Christian people, later on we found many, many new

Bibles including that sea scroll that you find later on. Because you cannot control all this. Uthman cannot control every household.

And that's why we didn't find any version because it was not versions. It was different dialects of the people to read it.

So Uthman wanted, right now you have to unify the way you recite the Holy Qur 'an, not different dialects.

Let me just give you one example. I'm from Indonesia. When I say I eat, it means I makan in Indonesian language.

If you go to Malaysia, the Malaysian people say makan. That's the way, but they write it the same thing, the same words basically, but you pronounce different.

So this is the issue of Uthman's compilation of the Holy Qur 'an. It's not different versions of the

Holy Qur 'an. We never found any different version in the history of the Holy Qur 'an. Now coming to the ayah that la ila, la ila.

It is not true that la ila Allahi tuhsharun. Never anywhere in the

Holy Qur 'an any word la, and then directly come huruf up to the ila. There is no

Arabic language that says la ila. It is wrong dramatically. So it is impossible that the

Qur 'an is different between la ila, la ila Allah, and la ila Allah. It's wrong.

We cannot understand it. I think Dr. James is studying Arabic language. I don't know what kind of Arabic language he understands.

There is no. It is quite possible, but la ila Allah is not accepted at all in Arabic language.

Ask any Arabic people here today. Coming to another issue. About the suhruf and tahab that he mentioned.

Please do tell me, show me, that where is that Qur 'an right now?

I know that today my brothers and sisters, my friends including Christians, I have to let you know. That there is a

Christian evangelist named Anis Shosh. Tried to write a book and say that this is the challenge to the

Holy Qur 'an. I call it al -furqan al -haqqa. But even my kid, my kid can read

Arabic Qur 'an. Who is only 7 years old. I keep both Qur 'an and the book of Anis Shosh written.

I say to my kid, which one is the Holy Qur 'an? And he really says, this is not the Holy Qur 'an. I can say bismillahirrahmanirrahim in a beautiful tone.

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim. I can say, bismillahirrahmanirrahim. I cannot simply, the taste of the language is simply crazy.

Just the sense of linguistic cannot be accepted. So no one can challenge the Holy Qur 'an in Arabic language, my brothers and sisters.

Now, you are talking that from the beginning, The Holy Bible has been recorded.

Show me right now, where is that original Bible that you are talking about? Where is this?

Now you see different Bibles. But show me where is that original Bible? Because I am in need of that.

The Qur 'an says, God gave Jesus a book. So where is that book? I wanted to find that because that is mine too.

If you can show me that original book that has been given to Jesus, I will follow that because that is also what the

Qur 'an says. Follow Jesus, follow his book. But unfortunately, the book that you presented to us, is not that book that you are talking about.

The original revelation that has been given to Jesus Christ. Where it is today? Let me know where. Then you talk about version and translation.

When you say about translation of the Holy Qur 'an, these are similar to the Holy Bibles. You know my friends, when you talk about translation, you are talking about human products.

If I am strong in Arabic language, I can have my own Qur 'anic translation. And I translate the

Holy Qur 'an according to my capacity, according to the brain that I have, according to the level of knowledge.

And so tell me right now, where is that original Bible in original language, that has been revealed to Jesus Christ?

Because that is my need as well to know, and to see, and to read it, and to follow it. The Qur 'an says,

Injil and Torah is the guidance for people. So I consider Torah as the guidance, but we want the original

Torah. We want original Injil to follow as the guidance for me. Because if you read in many verses of the

Bible itself, there are many verses in the Bible that talk about how Jesus prayed.

How Jesus bowed. How Jesus prostrated. How Jesus prayed to God. And those are verses from God, because we believe in that.

Now, when you talk about Son, Jesus as the Son of God, you are trying to give different interpretations.

The Christians believe in one God, but in three personalities. Up to date, let me just assure you, no one among Christian scholars can give us a definite definition about Trinity today.

Some people just give examples, examples, examples. But let me just tell you, the one

Bible says begotten Son, begotten Son. In some versions they say unique Son. There's a difference between begotten

Son and unique Son. Everybody is unique in relation to God. For Muslims, everyone has unique relation to God.

You are all unique sons of God. But begotten, what is the meaning of begotten? Have been hired, sired, sired by God.

Can you say God sired? So give me just a translation of the begotten Son that mentioned in the

Holy Quran, in the Holy Bible. Now, you are talking a lot about crucifixion, incarnation, etc.,

etc. Let me just tell you this one point. If you just understand the stand of Islam, the concept of Islam about Jesus, the whole idea that had been innovated later on into Christian belief, basically, is rejected.

Why? We share that Adam committed wrong in Paradise by eating the forbidden fruit.

But let me just tell you the difference between Muslims and Christians. In the Holy Bible it says, the devil came to Adam, he could not tempt

Adam, and then he tempted his wife, and his wife was tempted, and then she tempted the husband, because of that woman.

So who is to be blamed? That woman. The Quran doesn't say it that way. The Quran says, the devil tempted them both equally, equal temptations.

So they made mistakes, according to the Quran and the Bible. But according to the

Holy Quran, he asked for forgiveness, and God forgave him before he was descended, when he was sent down here to this world.

But my friends, let me just assume, that he was not forgiven. Doesn't God give us rationality to think?

If my father kills someone, should I be punished because of that? Those born kids who are babies, die without being baptized.

What will happen to them? The Christian people say, there is a place between the fire and the heavens, so they are in between.

Some people say that. But my question is, what happens if they are not baptized then? Let me be very clear, that when we do believe that there is no original sin at all, there is no son of God, no crucifixion, nothing.

Why? Because Jesus was born in a virgin birth by his mother.

He was created in a miracle way by Allah subhanahu wa ta 'ala, He was a servant, He was a messenger,

He was a noble, He was given many, many miracles, and Muslims believe that Jesus had been and is

God of God, son of God. He is always man, human beings, a noble man, a messenger, having given revelation by the almighty

God. Thank you so much. Boy, I wish

I had a rebuttal period. I wish we had cross -examinations. We should.

Okay, this is just a little bit of the pile we have, so I don't think we're going to get through all these.

We'll try to get through as many as possible. I'll pick out two questions, one for Imam Ali, and while I'm doing that, our

Muslim moderator can do the same, and then he'll read two questions. What we're going to do is we're going to ask our speakers to be as brief as possible, a minute, a minute and a half maybe, and then we'll have a brief, say 45 seconds or so, response.

So I'll begin with Dr. White. Dr. White, you have up to 90 seconds or so to respond to this. Sorry, we have to keep it short, but we want to try and get to the point that Jesus was the

God -man. What is the Hebrew or Greek term used for this in the Bible? There is no single

Greek term that is translated God -man, and I think the closest would be Benagoniste Theos of John 118, which is translated in a number of versions as the only son who is

God. Jesus is described clearly as man. There is no question that he entered into flesh. In John 114, the word became flesh and dwelt amongst us.

He truly was flesh, but he's also described clearly as God. Not just a son of God, but the son of God.

Benagoniste does not mean begotten. That was just represented to you in Arabic. Benagoniste means unique or one of a kind in the original

Greek language. He is described as God in John 1. The beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was

God. He is described as our great God and Savior in Titus 2 .13 and 2 Peter 1 .1. He is said to be the one through whom all things were made, whether in heaven and earth, or in the description of Erazul.

So clearly the New Testament from beginning to end describes Jesus in terms that can only be used of God himself.

In fact, passages about Yahweh in the Old Testament are applied to Jesus in the

New in unique ways. And so the question asked for a specific term.

I did not say that there is a word translated God -man, but when you have one who is called the Son of Man, believe that this is what the scriptures teach.