Is Jesus Christ God?, Part 2

Repeatedly stating your own personal beliefs in light of contrary evidence without providing any meaningful argumentation is the clearest definition of losing a debate.

A large amount of information has been presented this evening, and the attempted responses to the few passages that I actually covered, and there are many more that I didn't even begin to get to, has been anything but compelling from a scholarly perspective.

My opponent came up and then misquoted 1 Corinthians 8, 6 again. It doesn't say, but to us there is but one

God, period. It says, but to us there is but one God, the Father, and then one

Lord, Jesus Christ. Is God not Lord? Is Lord not God? The term Lord used of Jesus there is the same term used of Yahweh in the

Old Testament. This is abusing the text of the New Testament in a way that I would hope that because of my belief in my following Christ as He who is true,

I would never do to the Koran. I would never want to be able to abuse the text of the

Koran the way that the Bible has been abused this evening. We had Galatians 4, 4 mentioned to us, but we only had a part of it, again, really presented to us because it pointed out when the fullness of time came,

God sent forth His Son made of a woman.

Please notice one phrase, sent forth His Son made of a woman, exactly parallel to what we have in Isaiah 9, 6.

Unto us a child is born. Unto us a Son is given. Jesus is the divine

Son from all eternity and He becomes truly man. He does not cease being the

Logos. He does not cease being the eternal word, but He takes on that human flesh.

That is what is being referred to there again. I do not begin to understand why

Islamic apologists choose to take a text from the Synoptic Gospels and talk about zombies.

Again, it just demonstrates that there seems to be no interest whatsoever in reading the New Testament in such a way that is at all accurate or truthful.

We are talking about people who clearly had died recently because they were recognized by people in the city who were resurrected and went back to their families.

What is wrong with this? Is this not just a demonstration of God's power over the dead? Don't you believe in the resurrection?

Don't you believe God can do this? What is the basis upon which there is mockery of this taking place?

He talks about the Only Begotten Son reading in the King James Version. Well, there is a textual variant in John 1, 18, if you would like to look at it.

Monogenes Theos is found in P66, P75, Oliph and Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, and it is in the earliest manuscripts of the

Greek New Testament that we have. And I would think that it would be important to at least, if you are going to address it, make sure that you are aware of those particular facts.

Jesus' prayer on the cross, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthanai, is a quotation from Psalm 22. Read the rest of the psalm.

It is a messianic psalm proclaiming the ultimate victory of the Messiah after his period of suffering.

We have the text of Jesus as the Alpha and Omega, the beginning, the end, the first and last. I did not quote

Revelation 21, I quote Revelation 22, 13. Go read it. The person speaking says, Behold, I am coming quickly.

Who might that be in the book of Revelation? Then we had the good master text, as if Jesus was denying his own deity.

There is no one good but God. The whole point was to show this man who he was dealing with. Jesus was not saying,

I am not God, I am some sinner. He was trying to reveal this man who he was actually dealing with, and that would have helped the man to understand

Jesus' interpretation of the law. He mentions, All authority has been given to me. This is true.

Jesus Christ laid aside his heavenly prerogatives. That is what it says. He humbled himself.

Tapanasafrune is the term in Philippians chapter 2. He had humility of mind.

He humbled himself. That means he voluntarily veiled his glory, and yes, he likewise voluntarily veiled that relationship that would have given him divine knowledge of certain events for what purpose?

So that he might be completely dependent upon the Spirit of God for his source and sustenance and hence be the example to his people.

If we just would allow all the New Testament to speak, rather than just picking out bits and pieces of it.

He keeps quoting from the King James Version of the Bible. I am a critical consultant for the Lockman Foundation on the New American Standard Bible.

I am sorry I did not bring one with me this evening, but I will send you one, sir, so that you can start reading a translation that does not have these and thous in them.

That will help a lot, I think, in debates because you can go a lot faster without trying to muddle through these and thous. He says,

Scholars dispute this and scholars dispute that. Well, scholars dispute everything about the Koran too, at least in Western countries.

They are not really allowed the freedom to do that in other places. But yes, there are scholars who dispute things. So what?

Are you saying that you agree with the Jesus Seminar? This is one of the things that has been amazing to me in my encounters with Islamic apologists, is

Islamic apologists will be willing to use scholarship against the New Testament when that same scholarship thinks the

Koran is ridiculous. Why are you quoting atheists and agnostics and people and liberals who don't believe in divine revelation when you believe in it?

Shouldn't we be using consistent scholarship in these situations? If you have to use arguments that would refute your own position, may

I suggest to you your arguments aren't very good? That's what we are encountering this evening.

He said that I couldn't prove a single word in the Old Testament that says otherwise and God is one. What did

I start off with in defining the Trinity? Absolute monotheism.

Christians believe that God is one. Shema Yisrael Yahweh Eloheinu Yahweh Echad.

Echad is the same Semitic root that you have in Arabic when it says that God is one.

We believe God is one. The question, my friends, is that a oneness of being and person or is it a oneness of being and the divine revelation tells us not a oneness of person?

That's the question between us this evening and I honestly submit to you that question has not even been touched by my opponent this evening as long as he refuses to at least allow us to define the doctrine of the

Trinity. As I said in my opening statement, I've never seen. I have no reason to believe that Muhammad understood what the Trinity was.

I see no evidence in the Quran when in Surah 5, 116 to 117, did you say, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of the law?

Christians don't believe that. So who's he talking about? Don't know. Certainly not the Christian doctrine of the Trinity.

And if it is, then the person who wrote the Quran was ignorant of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. And think about it for just one moment.

Even if you reject the Trinity, didn't Allah at least know what it was in 632?

Most assuredly, he did. Now, so much of the

New Testament text has not even been touched this evening. We've been told, well, you know, there's all these disputes and we just, we don't know who wrote any of these things as if you'd, an assumption that everything that you've received was written by the people that said it.

We have chains of narration. The whole reason for collecting them at the time they were collected was that they all had chains of narration.

They were making them up right and left and claiming chains of narration. I can slap a chain of narration on anything.

Does that make it true? Of course not. The fact of the matter is that when we look at the earliest writings outside the

New Testament, what do they teach? They teach the Islamic Jesus who didn't die, who didn't resurrect, who was just a

Rasul. All of the first century evidence, all the evidence that comes in the first century after the death of Christ demonstrates not only that he gave his life on Calvary's cross, but that he rose from the dead and that his followers proclaimed him to be divine.

Even the Quran says that the true followers of Jesus would be victorious until the day of judgment. What happened to them?

How did they lose so easily to this Apostle Paul? The fact is they didn't.

They were victorious because the early Christians, like Thomas, confessed that Jesus Christ is my

Lord and my God. And they recognized that the confession of faith,

Jesus is Lord. Rome demanded that you say Caesar is

Lord. The Christians wouldn't do that and for 250 years they shed their blood because they believed

Jesus was Lord. They refused to give in. So the idea that Constantine comes along only 10 years, 13 years after the peace of the church at 313 and says, hey,

I'm going to give you a new God and all the Christians went, hey, cool, that's all right. These people who had been willing to die for their faith in Christ just said, ah, that's fine.

No, my friends, the consistent testimony of all the scriptures, the consistent testimony of the prophetic word, the consistent testimony of history, the earliest writings after the

New Testament is that Christians believed in the deity of Christ. They believed in the crucifixion, the resurrection, and they prayed to Jesus Christ.

And 2 ,000 years later, on the other side of the world, by the work of his spirit, we continue to believe and confess as they did then.

Thank you very much. Lord doesn't mean

God. Adonai, Adonai, Adonais doesn't mean

God. If it were, then we have a problem. We have

Jesus, the Holy Ghost, God, Yahweh, the Son, the

Father. Adonai, Lord, come on. How many names for God?

How many persons that you have to add to this trinity that never existed? He keeps saying,

I didn't prove that these texts are not authentic. I don't have to.

It's your job to come and say, here is the text, here is the proof, here is when it was written.

Him standing here telling you that that's what I say, no.

I can give you so many references because today is not the time to give those references about the authenticity of the

Bible. It's not even in the topic itself. I was told that we should talk about the topic. But the validity of the

Bible itself, come on. People who wrote these things, the Christians, don't know.

They have a dispute that's been going on for close to 2 ,000 years about who wrote these things.

He can't erase that by saying some Shia, some Sunni, some... That's not relevant here.

You people come and tell us, this is the Christian creed. You have so many disputes with each other about every single text.

Who wrote what? What time frame? What language? Who edited what? Who translated what? This is the issue.

The evidence they have, they can't prove. And all of it is not in the language

Jesus spoke. The New Testament is in Greek. He couldn't prove today that Jesus spoke

Greek. Don't tell me because he's God he would have known it. That's because that's not relevant because we're telling you he's not

God. Listen. Jesus being the Lord, Lord means a teacher. And it's your job to come in here today and say,

John was written by John somebody. This year, this is the language.

This is who edited it. You found books that say a lot of stuff. You discarded most of them and said, we like this one.

Why? Because it confirms to your creed. You chose the creed and then you found the text that supports it.

You discarded everything else. I tell you here today, the challenge I pose to my opponent here is to disprove, to prove that John was written by somebody at what time frame?

Prove the evidence. Don't tell me what you think because of this and that and this and that. Because that's not relevant to me.

Who's John? Who's Matthew? The Christian scholars of all times is asking me for a list.

You want the list? Islamlife .com. Give me ten days. I'll give you a list of a huge number of scholars from old and new who disprove what this gentleman said today about proving the authenticity of whatever in the

Bible. I'll tell you about the dispute and you can read those names who said what about what chapter, what verse in what chapter, who said this and that.

No, Titus wasn't even written by Paul. And now he comes and puts it there on the screen like it is a revelation from God.

No, it isn't. You see, look here about the zombie story. I got it from your book. I swear by Allah from the

KGV. I didn't get it from my book. I don't believe in the Bible. It's the KGV. About those saints who've been dead, he says for a short period of time,

God could have done it. Why didn't the other three Gospels report the same thing? Just one

Gospel, he gives no information about Trinity for thousands of years except to John.

We don't know who John is. And he gives no information about the saints who rose up from the dead except to just one

Gospel. What about the other Gospels? Why can't they report the same thing? Isn't the Holy Spirit supposed to be filling them when they were writing it?

How come they have inconsistencies with each other? Talks about the Quran. You don't know what your creed is.

Three gods, not one. It's polytheism, not one. One means one the whole way.

One decision. One existence. One substance. You have three.

One of them created something in addition to him and he died. The Holy Ghost keeps coming up and down and he's not mentioned in so many of these texts that he came here to prove the divinity of Jesus.

Doesn't talk even about the Holy Ghost, about being the only begotten son in the

KJV. Here is a sect, a minor sect of today, that talks about the book that is the

Word of God to the very vast majority of Christians almost throughout the history. He's telling me the

Christians don't believe this, don't believe that. Your brand of Christianity doesn't believe that maybe

Mary is the mother of Jesus, the mother of the

Rosary. What do they do in those Rosaries, those Catholic Christians?

The majority of Christians are Catholic, not you. I'm sorry to say. You may claim that you're wrong. They're wrong. Most Christians throughout history are

Catholic. The book they use is the book that has this begotten in it, not yours.

Yours, according to them, is a deviation. Your sect is a deviant sect according to the

Pope. He reiterated again that the only true church is the Catholic Church. And these are the vast majority of Christians.

So you come and tell me now, oh no, don't talk about the KJV. Why shouldn't I? It says begotten and you belong to that.

You don't belong to the KJV. The one I have in my house, I don't see your picture in it. You're not in it.

It's been written before you were born, years and centuries before you were born. It has begotten. Why did you change it into unique?

Because they play games with the translations. This is capitalized. This is this. We end up with nothing.

Tons of sons of gods exist in the Old Testament. Tons. Why did you choose this one to make it a capital?

Because you see, Thomas said this. Paul said that. My Lord and the

Lord. Lord doesn't mean God. Prove it to me that it means God from the words of Jesus.

In the end, I'm going to ask my opponent here today, instead of coming here and saying, he's denying this and that.

Where are these scholars? You're supposed to affirm. I'm supposed to negate.

Okay? You're supposed to come here and say, here is a list of thousands of scholars. I'll give you a few.

I have the rest on my website. Who agree with my version of Christianity? Who agree about these books saying like,

John wrote this, but don't ask me about his father, because we don't know his father. But John wrote it.

What John? Who knows? Is he from the disciples? No. This book, what? When it was written.

The oldest one he's talking about. Which year? Who proved it was that year?

What witnesses? John, when he reported what happened to Jesus and all four

Gospels. Where are the chain of narration? Who told them the stories? They were not eyewitnesses.

They were not there to prove anything about crucifixion. You know, there are no records of a

Jesus person, a man called Jesus even existed. And this is, you know, they go and say of the

Roman, we found this, we found that. It's a deduction. Key word. You know the other key word?

Trinity. Many of those quotes, the Holy Ghost is not there. Another key word? Deduction.

They bring text. They interpret the text and they say, this is the fact. No, it isn't.

This is your interpretation. This is your explanation, translation, editing and changing the

Bible. You're telling me out of all these copies, your copy is the only original one and what you say about Christianity is true?

No. What he said today has been disproved or at least disputed by the

Christians throughout history and he will have to come here and say, no, Jalal, you're wrong.

Look at all these names and their date of births and who, because I can bring him that list.

I can bring a much bigger list where people dispute everything he says and anything he says.

So people, I want you to understand and you are my people. We are all the children of Adam. There is nothing in the

Old Testament that says anything about three. It says God is one. If you come and divide them into three, then you have made a mistake.

The Rosary, they pray to the mother of God. They pray to her. They made her a

God. Act of worship. You do it. You make it a God. You say that this man is my

God. You pray to him. This is an act of worship. You make him a God. You don't have to say he's a God. So when they worship

Mary, it means that to them the Quran said the truth and here's

Christianity. Here is Protestantism. You're telling me

Christians don't say, say the truth. Say, my section doesn't say because the other sections, huger, bigger than you, the bestest, the biggest

Christians in the world are Catholics. They say otherwise. And you come and tell me here it's my, no,

Christianity is not your preferences. Christianity is what you think there are there and the test without your interpretation, please.

No interpretation. It is unfortunate this evening that it has become very, very clear that Christianity is not allowed to define

Christianity. We don't get to define what the Trinity is. If the Quran says Mary is a part of the

Trinity, well then that must be the case. I'm the last one here to defend Roman Catholicism and their abuses of Mary since I've debated their leading proponents on those very topics.

But I have to, for the sake of honesty, point out, Rome very, very clearly denies that the privileges they give to Mary make her divine in any way, shape or form.

Surah 5, 116 through 117, if that's supposed to be the Trinity, just simply isn't the doctrine of the

Trinity in any way. He told us that Adonai doesn't mean that, but it didn't tell us what it's supposed to mean. Adonai means

Lord and that is the one being addressed by Yahweh in Psalm 110. It's a messianic psalm and that's how

Christians have always understood it. We heard a whole lot about disputes, about who wrote what, what has been disproven, disputed, and if you'll just give him ten days he'll give you some references.

That's not how you do a scholarly debate. If you're going to make the assertion, be prepared to back it up.

It's just that simple. And if he does provide a list, I can guarantee you, it will be of theological liberals, people who if their consistent position was applied would mock the

Koran as well. You will not find those who are consistent in their worldview joining him in these things.

He seems to assume that we must know authorship and date of writing for something to be scripture. The Old Testament didn't require that, did it?

There are entire books in the Old Testament, we don't know who wrote it. And yet Jesus viewed it as scripture, did he not? There's no question of that.

So where's this artificial kind of concept coming from? It's being enforced from an Islamic perspective, anachronistically it has no real meaning when it comes to the subject of serious dialogue on the teaching of what the

New Testament says. So what have we seen this evening? I would like to remind you of the words of the

Lord Jesus Christ himself recorded for us in the scripture that Christians have always believed to be scripture,

John chapter 17. And Jesus there said, this is life eternal, that they might know you, the only true

God. And many people stop there but listen to what Jesus actually said, that they might know you, the only true

God, and he whom you sent, Jesus Christ. If you want to have life eternal, you can't just know the

Father, you need to know the Son. And what mere creature could ever make that statement about himself?

Because that same Lord Jesus, after saying those words, said these in verse 5 of John 17, and now glorify me together with yourself,

Father, with the glory which I had in your presence before the world was.

What Rasul is going to say, what apostle is going to say in a prayer, glorify me with the glory which

I had in your presence before the world was? The thesis statement is, does the

Bible teach the deity of Christ? We have seen that the Bible clearly teaches the deity of Christ.

Many of the texts I present were not even addressed with, well, we don't know who wrote Titus. Well, we don't know who wrote

Peter. Well, we don't know who wrote John. In other words, why bother debating whether the

Bible teaches the deity of Christ when your fundamental argument is going to be, well, I just don't trust the Bible. The fact of the matter is, the

Bible does teach the deity of Christ. Now if you want to say, well, and that's why I reject it, I would like to suggest to you that if you do so, you do so grossly inconsistently if you're a

Muslim this evening, because I believe any fair reading of the Quran proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that the author of that book thought he stood in harmony with the

Old and New Testaments and with the prophets who spoke in the Old and New Testaments, and that he himself never took the position, well, you know, it's just all been corrupted anyways.

If that's what you have to do this evening as a Muslim, then I suggest to you that that is a very dangerous road, because the scholarship you're going to have to use to do that will lead you inevitably to atheism.

There's a better place to go. Realize that Jesus Christ is your Creator, your

God, and your Savior, and that you need his atoning sacrifice to have eternal life.

Turn to him. He is always there for those who turn to him in faith. Thank you very much.

Before Jael comes up to speak, I want to remind you we're giving you a chance now to fill out some questions on the question cards.

So go ahead and fill those out, and now we'll hear Jael's closing remarks. Does the

Bible teach that Jesus is God? Our debate today wasn't about the

Bible, okay? Of course I came unprepared. What do you think? I was talking about this topic.

This is what I prepared for. I'm not going to come here with lists behind my back. Here's what the scholar said and this and that.

But I gave you a promise. Did he give you a promise to prove that he has evidence to support what he said about the authenticity of the book itself?

He only said that he didn't bring the proof, so it must be true. Maybe he didn't say that.

That's what it means. Because he has no proof, no list of anybody from before the early

Christian people who say, I saw John. He used to be my neighbor. He rented a house from me.

His father is such and such. He has the siblings. He has this. They have no information about who wrote these books.

Of course you need information, because here contradicts the Old Testament. Nothing in the

Old Testament that confirms to your creed. Then you have books written by unknowns, authors anonymous that come.

You have no idea who wrote anything. You took the creed. These books we don't like, because they don't confirm to my idea.

Instead of looking at all of them and looking for the truth, they discarded most of these. And they come today and claim that it's my man.

I'm not here to discuss the authenticity of the Bible. You're supposed to come here to prove the authenticity of your idea that Jesus is divine.

Where is your list of people who say, John was written and I have all these people who agree with me and those who just don't agree, they have no idea what's going on.

You see when he talks about the Quran, we don't believe in the Bible. Because if you look at the

Bible, it has horrific contradictions in it. So many contradictions that some of them would say 50 ,000.

I don't agree with 50 ,000. There are less. But so many contradictions there that you can't come and tell me that I'm going to rely on this when you have four

Gospels. Two of them have no genealogies of Jesus. One of them has, which is completely different from the other one that has.

What happened to the Holy Ghost here? He was telling just two of them and the other people were doing what? How come they have no, they don't have the same information?

What proof do you have John wrote John? Who's John? Who's his father? Who's Habakkuk? Who's Habakkuk? Who's Thomas?

You have no idea. Why do you pick up a creed written by unknowns, disputed by so many people throughout history, and then come here and say, ah,

Jalal didn't bring his list. It must be true. No, it's not. I've been truthful to you.

I can't memorize the hundreds of scholars who dispute just about everything he said about these texts.

But I promise you a concrete thing. 10 days. Can he promise in 10 days to disprove what

I'm going to prove, which is what? That these people disprove much of what he says.

Can he give that promise? Listen, I'm going to tell you something. You have to wake up the

Christians of the world today. You took a creed that the man you claim came with it, never said it.

He never said, I am God. I created you. I am divine. The Holy Ghost is divine.

You brought sentences written by a language Jesus did not speak, and he didn't bring proof that Jesus spoke

Greek other than a few words. He spoke a few words maybe, but you brought a creed.

The man you stuck it to him never said it. Wake up. It's not in the

Old Testament. Did Abraham ever give a lecture like my opponent did today? Abraham must have known less about God than modern day

Christians. 1 in 3, 3 in 1 doesn't make any sense. Never did make any sense. This is why they need all these lists of quotes here and there to bring you proof about what they can never prove, but you have to understand.

This is why you need Muhammad. He came to tell you mother of Mary was honorable.

Jesus was born miraculously as the Quran says. Jesus said in his cradle, and this is the story you don't have in your books.

My God, my Lord and your Lord is Allah. Worship him. And Jesus will say on the day of judgment,

I never said to these people worship me. They worship me on their own. The same statement you have in the

Bible when people come to say, we used to prophesy in your name. Get away from me. I don't know you.

Okay, we're going to do some question and answer. And this question is for Jael. Why is violence a characteristic of Islam?

Those on the timer, it's two minute response, and then the other opponent gets a one minute response. Why is violence a part of Islam?

Because we don't believe in that stuff that you have. Somebody strikes you on your right cheek, give them the left one.

You never did it. You Christians never did it with each other. When you fought with the Catholics before, you don't do it now.

And how come you didn't do the same when you went to Iraq? It must be a long cheek, from here to Iraq.

Very long. You attacked a country that never attacked you. So you're asking me about Islam and violence?

Well, we have violence in Islam. Sure. If you see good for us, you're peaceful with us, you're respectful, you allow us to practice our religion, you have no fear.

If you want to attack me, and you smack me here, you're going to get something nice on this one.

Or I'll forgive you. Because my religion tells you I can either give you the same or forgive you.

Of course we have violence. You mean jihad, okay? I know the word. It's jihad. Of course we have jihad to protect our lives, our countries, our religion, to protect non -Muslims who live in Muslim countries.

This is our protection against your aggression, against the aggression of other people. You want peace? We'll give you peace.

You want war? We'll give you war. So if you give us war, we give you war. You say, why are you violent? Huh? You started it, man.

You see? And don't come and tell me about all this violence, because there has to be a comparison. I have to jump from here to the

Old Testament. Look at all these commandments there about killing men, women, children, entire towns.

Compare the jihad of Muhammad to that. This is a valid question to you. Read my book. You have books outside there.

You can have copies on your way out. Please, the Muslims, don't take any copies. Let our guests take the copies.

Actually, we are the guests. Let our Christians and other religions who are here today take their copies.

Read about the jihad of Muhammad. Without the jihad of Muhammad, they would love it. Without jihad, because they can crush us quickly and then we don't have to defend ourselves.

We can defend ourselves. You see? One of the saddest, most frightening things to me is that anyone thinks that Christianity invaded

Iraq. It wasn't Christianity that invaded Iraq. And if you think the

United States of America is somehow definitional of Christianity, you've missed the boat big time. Muslims believe that it is

Allah's will to establish Sharia all over the world and that will bring in the Dar al -Islam, the world of Islam.

Christians believe that Jesus Christ will subject all things unto himself. Does that make them equal?

No, because the means by which Jesus Christ will subject all things unto himself is by changing hearts and by changing minds and never through the use of external compulsion.

That is the fundamental difference. Thank you. This question is for James.

If you don't know who wrote your scripture, why do you gamble your eternal soul on it?

Because you're making a grave mistake to think that I don't know who wrote my scriptures. All scripture is Theanostos.

It is God breathed. The mistake that you're making is assuming that the human individual involved in doing so has to provide me with a social security number before it can be scripture.

The Lord Jesus Christ very clearly accepted the Old Testament scriptures, all of them, as God breathed.

And he held men accountable to exactly what those scriptures said. And yet never did he tell us who wrote 2

Kings. So what you're telling me is if you're basing your objection upon that, then the

Lord Jesus Christ himself, who you confess to be a Rasul, and even on the most liberal standards of examination of his words, clearly did hold the highest view of the inspiration of the

Old Testament, that he was gambling his soul on something he shouldn't have gambled on. I see absolutely no reason to believe that logically, historically, and I see no reason from the

Koran to believe that. I have no reason to believe that the author of the

Koran had that view of the Old and New Testaments either. Instead, you are commanded as Muslims to believe what had been

Natsal, what had been sent down. Well, if it was gone by the time Muhammad came along, how do you do that?

I would like Jalal, maybe he can help me out. Please explain to me how you as a

Muslim fulfill those many commands in the Koran to believe what has been sent down if you don't have what had been sent down.

I'm told as a person who is in the Al -Kitab, the people of the book, I'm told to judge by what

God has given me in my scriptures. How am I supposed to do that when you turn around and say that everything

I quote is just corrupt anyways? How does that work? I really would like to understand how that works.

Thank you. So Christianity did not invade

Iraq. It must be that sin and the sinner. We must run after the sinner.

What religion do they have? The sin. Of course

Christianity invaded Iraq. They brought all these flocks of preachers to go preach to the

Iraqis, the Shiites and the Sunni their gospel. Behind the forces, the armed forces, they tell me my religion is violent.

No. Listen. The Torah is a book revealed to Moses, not about Moses, not by Moses.

The Injil is a book revealed to Jesus, not by Jesus or about Jesus. Old Testament uh -uh.

New Testament uh -uh. There is nothing there written from Allah to Moses. These are what you people wrote there, your ancestors.

I'm not saying you. You know that. The ancestors you know they wrote them there. The Torah that we are supposed to believe in was revealed to Moses, not about him or by him.

This question is for Jalal. Why in your first debate did you criticize people who comment on Quranic passages without knowing the original language, but in your second debate you freely comment on the

Bible without a knowledge of the original Greek language? Because Jesus didn't speak

Greek. Moses didn't speak Greek. He didn't speak German. Maybe Arabic, the ancestor of the

Hebrew. He didn't speak Greek. He didn't speak German. I'm defending the original copy of the

Quran that Muhammad gave in Arabic. You're defending a translation of something that came from somebody.

And then you tell me you don't need proof as to who wrote these things? How can you believe in this life, in something written by people you don't know?

Maybe they're liars. Maybe they're the enemies of Jesus. You have no idea who wrote them. Of course you need to know who said what, because you need to hear it from the truthful, who says it to the truthful, so that it's preserved.

Otherwise you have the mess you have in your books with those thousands of corruptions, that additions and deletions and translations and versions.

Why do you have those versions? Because you don't have the original. So I was not attacking the original, what came to Moses from Allah.

I believe in it. It's not found anymore because addition and deletion, same thing that happened to Jesus.

Addition of a man, deletion of a man. Also, I believe in what came to Jesus, the

Injil. Perfect. It's perfect. It's like my Quran. You don't have it. Open the

New Testament, attest the New Testament from beginning to end. See if there is anything there written by Jesus.

It's all about Jesus. So he's telling us that the Quran tells us to follow these books. No. The Quran says follow the

Torah. Torah was revealed, how can I say it, to Jesus. Not about Jesus, not by Jesus, not the count of how many sheep and camels and chickens the

Israelis took with them out of Egypt. It's a book of guidance to Moses. A book of guidance to Jesus, which you don't have.

None of the New Testament books was written by Jesus, not in his native language, and everything can be translated the way people wish.

I have heard no answer to the question how I can be commanded to judge Muhammad on the basis of what

I have been given, if what I have been given is completely corrupt. But I think there is a very clear demonstration this evening, in light of the question that was asked, that we have very different standards when we engage in apologetics.

It is my experience now over a number of debates that Muslim apologists are willing to use one standard to attack the

Christian faith and a completely different standard to defend Islam. You heard in the first debate the criticism of anyone who would say anything about the

Quran without knowing Arabic. And yet, my opponent has even stood and defended basic, fundamental, first -year errors in the

Greek language and says, it doesn't matter. The double standard is very, very clear, and I think it's very, very telling.

This question is for James. Do the teachings of the Bible apply to our modern world? If so, why are there so many different versions of it?

I'm not sure what the question is asking. Versions of it as in the Christian teachings or versions of the

Bible? There's a little ambiguity in the grammar at that point. Yes, the teachings of the Bible apply to us today, as was explained by my brother

David Wood. We have the new covenant. We have the church and the law of Christ that has been given to the church, which precludes the use of the sword, for example, and so on and so forth, hence making the repeated references to Old Testament laws of the military conquest of Canaan complete canards that have really nothing to do with helping to move along the dialogue and debate between Muslims and Christians.

The whole goal of the Christian life is to grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ, to present a heart of knowledge before him.

And so we take God's word, we take the principles of God's word, and instead of having very strict rules that tell us exactly what to wear and exactly when to pray, the reason

Christianity is for the whole world is that it makes any person in any land a

Christian without having to change that culture to match some sort of Christian culture.

So in other words, you can be a Christian who's a German or a Christian who is an Arab or a Christian who is an

African or whatever. The principles of the faith then influence all of your life within that culture.

You don't change the culture into a Muslim culture, for example. And that's one of the major differences between the two.

And that is why I say, as long as people continue to believe that it was Christianity that invaded

Iraq, that this world is in grave danger, because that was not Christianity.

The Christian Bible had nothing to do with political decisions to engage in that kind of invasion.

And I plead with you, please open your minds to recognize that that kind of thinking is dangerous and circular and utterly irrational.

Thank you. It's $10. I'm not a rich man. For anyone who sincerely says he understood the answer that my opponent gave tonight, really, from his heart, and God is his witness here,

I don't understand what he said. You have so many different versions of the Bible. You have so many different versions of the

Bible in conflict with each other. Why? He gave the answer he gave.

You say you understood it? You have to deal with your God. Listen, give me the original

Torah, the original Injil, I'll tell you I love it. I believe in it.

Don't give me a translation of it and then argue with me about what it means. Because if we bring the original

Torah, the original Injil, in their original language, he can't read it.

So we'll be the same. Because it's not in the language that he's disputing with me about, because that is an addition to the

Bible. Jesus never said anything in Greek. He didn't prove anything otherwise.

Let's give a special welcome to both of our opponents. Special thanks. And I want to thank you on behalf of Arabic Christian Perspective for coming tonight.