Rebuttal to
Sam Shamoun’s article
A Series of Answers to Common
Questions
By
He wrote:
Muslim Argument:
God
cannot die. But according to Christians, Jesus died on the cross. If this is so, how can
God die and who was running the universe when Jesus was dead?
Christian
Response:
This
question commits several fallacies. First, the questioner assumes that when Christians say
that Christ died this is intended to mean that Jesus ceased to exist for the three days he
was in the tomb. This assumes "soul-sleep," i.e. that after death there is no
more conscious existence until the body is resurrected. This is not what the Bible
teaches.
Biblical death
means separation, not annihilation. In fact, Scripture indicates that there are two types
of separation. The first is the soul separating from the body at death, with the other
referring to eternal separation from God in hell. (Cf. Luke
16:19-31; Philippians 1:23; Revelation 6:9-11,
Jesus did not
cease to exist when he died but rather his divine nature along with his human soul
departed from his body at the point of death. (Cf. Luke 23:46)
The fact that Jesus was still consciously existing at the same
time his body lay in the tomb becomes evident in that Christ claimed that he would
personally resurrect himself from the grave on the third day:
"Jesus
answered them, `Destroy this temple AND I WILL
RAISE IT AGAIN IN THREE DAYS.' The Jews
replied, `It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it
in three days?' But the temple he had spoken of WAS
HIS BODY. After He was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had
said." John 2:19-22 NIV
"The
reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my
life-only to take it up again. NO ONE TAKES IT
FROM ME, BUT I LAY IT DOWN OF MY OWN ACCORD. I have authority to lay it down AND AUTHORITY
TO TAKE IT UP AGAIN. This command I received from my Father." John 10:17-18 NIV
These passages
affirm that Jesus is God since only God can raise the dead, and that Jesus was consciously existing since had he been asleep he could not have
raised himself from the tomb.
The second
fallacy relates to the questioner asking who was running the universe during the time that
Jesus had died. This assumes the belief in modalism, i.e. that there are not three
distinct Persons who are God, but one Person who assumes three different roles. Christians
do not believe that Jesus is the only Person within the Godhead, since both the Father and
the Holy Spirit are fully God as well. Hence, even if death
meant that Jesus ceased to exist for the three days his body lay in the tomb, the Father
and the Holy Spirit were still active at this point since it was the Son alone who became
man and died.
My response:
This has already been dealt with in
this rebuttal (*).
He wrote:
Muslim
Argument:
If Jesus is God, who was praying to in the Garden and while on the cross (Cf. Mat. 26:39, 27:45-46)? Was he praying to himself? Besides,
how can God pray?
Christian
Response:
This question once again assumes modalism, the belief that Jesus is the
only person within the Godhead. Yet, the fact is, Trinitarians do not believe that Jesus
is the only Person within the Being of God, but that the Father and Holy Spirit are God as
well. Therefore, Jesus was not praying to himself but to the Father.
Furthermore,
prayer is intimate communion and fellowship with God. Hence, the three Persons of the
Godhead have always had intimate communion among themselves. This is precisely why God
does not need anyone outside of his own Being in order to have fellowship.
Since God is
tri-Personal, all three Persons become the object of interpersonal communion and love.
Additionally,
Jesus is Man as God intended man to be. Therefore, Jesus came to show us by example how we
should live in accordance to the will of God, he being the perfect role model:
"To
this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example that you
should follow in his steps." 1 Pet.
Hence, Jesus not
only prayed in order to be in constant communion with the Father, but also to teach us how
we should pray.
Finally, Jesus as
the God-Man both prayed to the Father and commanded believers to pray directly to himself:
"I
tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do
greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. AND I WILL DO
WHATEVER YOU ASK IN MY NAME, so that the Son may
bring glory to the Father. YOU MAY ASK ME FOR ANYTHING IN MY NAME, AND I WILL DO IT." John
14:12-14 NIV
In order for
Jesus to be able to both hear and answer prayer he must be omnipotent (Almighty) since
only an all-powerful Being can grant the requests of all who pray to him. He must also be
both omniscient (all-knowing) and omnipresent (present everywhere) in order to know and
hear the needs of all who call upon him. These qualities affirm that Jesus is God, since
only God is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient as well as the Hearer of prayer.
Therefore, the
fact that Jesus both prays and hears prayer affirms that he is one Divine Person who is
both God and Man at the same time.
(Note: According
to Quran 33:56 Allah prays for Muhammad:
"Lo!
Allah and his angels pray [Arabic - yasalluuna] for the
Prophet. O ye that believe! Pray for him [salluu alayhi],
and salute him with all respect [sallimuu tasliimaa]."
Most translations
of the Quran mistranslate the words yasalluuna and salluu as blessings, when in fact it
literally means prayers. In fact, a devout Muslim will always recite the following prayer
when mentioning Muhammad's name, sallullahu alahyi wa salaam- "the prayers of Allah be for him and his
peace." Another time where the Quran indicates that
Allah prays is found in S. 33:43:
"He
it is Who send prayers
upon you [yusalliii `alaykum], as do His
angels..."
A Trinitarian can
understand and accept the fact that because there are three Persons within the unity of
God, it becomes natural for them to have communion among themselves in prayer. But for a
singular Deity, having no plurality, to pray for Muhammad is inconceivable since who would
Allah be praying to when praying for Muhammad?)
My Response:
This also has already been dealt with
along with Shamoun's argument of Allah praying in this
rebuttal. However for the benefit of the reader I will post part of that rebuttal that
deals with Shamoun's argument that Allah prays. From one of
the previous rebuttals:
He wrote:
Question for Muslims:
The Quran says
that Allah prays:
Upon them shall be prayers (salawatun) from their Lord and mercy,
and they are the rightly directed. S. 2:157
He it
is who sends PRAYERS on you (Arabic- yusallii alaykum), as do His
angels ... S. 33:43
Allah
and His angels PRAY for the Prophet (Arabic- yasalluuna alan-Nabiyy): O ye that
believe PRAY for him (salluu `alayhi), and salute him with all respect. S. 33:56
Allah prays for believers and Muhammad, as
Muhammad prays for believers:
Take alms of their wealth, wherewith thou mayst purify them and mayst make them
grow, and pray for them (wa salli alayhim). Lo! thy prayer (salataka) is an assuagement for them.
Allah is Hearer, Knower. S. 9:103 Pickthall
Since these verses all clearly say that
Allah literally prays, and since prayer requires an object, we must therefore ask to whom
does Allah pray? Muslims claim that Allah is a singular entity,
there being no plurality of persons within his Being, which means that Allah cannot be
praying to himself. Or is he? Maybe Allah does in fact pray to himself.
Some Muslims try to redefine words by saying
that prayer here doesn't literally mean prayer, but actually means blessings, that Allah
is sending down his blessings. The problem with this explanation is that there is an
Arabic word for blessing, baraka, which does not appear in the
above citations. Rather, the passages use the words salawatun, yusallii, yasalluuna and salluu, all of which are derivatives of the
word salah.
Muslim writer Moiz
Amjad of "Understanding Islam" provides the lexical
meaning of salah in
response to a reader's question:
Ibn Al-Atheer in his highly acknowledged dictionary of
the Arabic language, 'Al-Nihaayah
fi Ghareeb al-Athar'
has explained "Sala'h"
as follows:
'Al-Sala'h' and 'Al-Salawaat': used for a
particular kind of worship. Its literal
origin is supplication (prayer). Sometimes, 'Sala'h' is referred to by mentioning any one or more of its
parts. It is also said that the literal origin of
the word is 'to glorify' and the particular worship is called 'Sala'h', because it entails the glorification of the Lord.
(Source
http://www.understanding-islam.org/related/text.asp?type=question&qid=780; bold emphasis ours)
On this same site, a question was asked
regarding the literal meaning of the word salah to which the
writer responded:
Title:
The Meaning of the Word "Salah"
Question:
What is the English word that we can use for
the word "Salah" ? Is it
true that the word "Prayer" is not even close to the meaning of the word "Salah"?
Please explain.....
Answer:
Salah (????) literally means one's calling upon one's God
(in a respectful and humble way). It is very much the same as the word Du'a (???).
In the
"Prayer: a request for help or
expression of thanks addressed to God or another deity".
I think the above can be seen as a
reasonable and literal translation of the word Salah. One might argue that the content of Salah is not excluded to
requesting for help or expression of thanks and that other things
like uttering God's attributes, glorifying God, etc...can also
be included in the meaning of the word Salah. I am, however, sure that this is
also true in the case of the word "prayer." (Source
http://understanding-islam.org/related/text.asp?type=question&qid=3315; bold and underline emphasis ours)
Noted Muslim commentator, Ibn Kathir, defines the word as:
The
Meaning of Salah
In the Arabic language, the basic meaning of
Salah is supplication. In religious terminology, Salah is used to refer to the acts of bowing and prostration,
the remaining specified acts associated with it, specified at certain times, with those
known conditions, and the characteristics, and requirements that are well-known about it.
(Source
<http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=2&tid=835>; underline emphasis ours)
Muhammad's own first cousin, and renowned
Muslim scholar, Ibn 'Abbas
admitted that Allah prays:
"The tribe of
Another Muslim scholar made the following
comments about surah 33:56 and Allah praying:
Allah makes the merit of His Prophet clear
by first praying blessing on Himself, and then by the prayer of the angels, and then by
commanding His slaves to pray blessing and peace on him as well. Abu Bakr
ibn Furak related that one of the 'ulama interpreted the
words of the Prophet, "The coolness of my eye is in the prayer," as meaning Allah's prayer, that of the angels and
that of his community in response to Allah's command until the Day of Rising. The prayer
of angels and men is supplication for him and that
of Allah is mercy.
It is said that "they pray" means
they invoke blessing (baraka). However, when the Prophet
taught people the prayer on himself, he made a distinction between the word salat (prayer) and baraka (blessing). We
will return to the meaning of the prayer on him later. (Muhammad Messenger of Allah (Ash-Shifa
of Qadi 'Iyad), Qadi 'Iyad Musa
al-Yahsubi, translated by Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley [Madinah
Press, Inverness, Scotland, U.K. 1991; third reprint, paperback], p. 25; bold emphasis
ours)
And:
The Prophet made a distinction between salat (prayer) and baraka
(blessing) in the hadith
in which he taught about making the prayer on him. This
indicates that they have two separate meanings. (Ibid., p. 250; bold emphasis ours)
Perhaps there is a Muslim out there who can
explain to us how can Allah pray if he is a singularity-within-unity Deity?
My Response:
There are several Muslims who could respond to that, it is just Shamoun’s misunderstanding of what is meant, and I would like
to thank him for teaching us Arabic.
First let us make it clear, almost every Muslim and I say almost
because I don’t want to be arrogant, but almost every Muslim would know that those
verses actually mean Allah is sending blessings and his mercy, contrary to the Arabic
meanings for each, which Shamoun presented in order to show a
distinction between sending blessings and prayers.
Do you want proof? Sure, before I show the proof I must say Shamoun is indeed a deceiver, he quotes what Ibn
Katheer had to say about Salah,
and used what Ibn Abbas said about
verse 33:56 quoted by Ibn Katheer.
I must ask Shamoun why did he not post
the tafsir of Ibn Katheer on Surah 33 Al-Azhab. The reason he did no post it is because it basically crushes
his argument on Allah praying, it is common sense when you quote someone,
you also quote what they have to say on the same issue you are talking about, why
didn’t Shamoun do so? I’ll leave that for him to
answer. Anyway lets see what Ibn Katheer said
The Meaning of Salah
Allah's Salah
means that He praises His servant before the angels, as Al-Bukhari
recorded from Abu Al-`Aliyah. This was recorded by Abu Ja`far Ar-Razi
from Ar-Rabi` bin Anas from Anas. Others said: "Allah's Salah
means mercy.'' It may be said that there is no contradiction between these two views. And
Allah knows best. Salah from the angels means their
supplication and seeking forgiveness for people, as Allah says:
(Those who bear the Throne and those around it glorify the praises of
their Lord, and believe in Him, and ask forgiveness for those who believe (saying):
"Our Lord! You comprehend all things in mercy and knowledge, so forgive those who
repent and follow Your way, and save them from the torment of
the blazing Fire! Our Lord! And make them enter the `
http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=33&tid=41852
So as we see it is crystal clear what is meant by the salah of Allah, Ibn Katheer
makes it crystal clear, Allah's Salah means
that He praises His servant before the angels
So now we know exactly why missionary Sam Shamoun
did not post that, because it would have ruined his whole argument and he did not expect
anyone to go and do research and discover the truth. He expected everyone to just simply
take his word for it. So lets
look at what Ibn Abbas said again
about Allah praying:
The tribe of
Shamoun posted that, sure Ibn Abbas said that Allah prays, but we
have established what is meant by Allah ‘praying’, it is him simply praising his
servant before the angels, sending his mercy and blessing, as Ibn
Katheer stated. So when it is said Allah prays, it does not
mean the same praying or salah as us humans do, or the same
way Jesus prayed to God, which is in the sense to worship, to prostrate, and glorify and
ask for forgiveness and help. SO THERE IS THE ANSWER TO SAM SHAMOUN, how about Sam
answering us for once. The question remains ‘ IF JESUS IS
GOD, THEN TO WHOM WAS HE PRAYING, WAS HE PRAYING TO HIMSELF?’
He wrote:
Muslim Argument:
According to Matthew 28:18, all authority was given to Jesus. If authority
had to be given to Christ, that means that there is One greater
than him who is doing the giving.
Furthermore, this
means that Jesus cannot be God since he did not always have authority.
Christian
Reponse:
According to the Holy Bible Jesus relinquished his authority in order to become man:
"Your
attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus, who being (Gr.- huperchon) in very nature (morphe) God, did not consider equality with
God something to be grasped, but made himself
nothing, taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man - he humbled himself and became obedient to
death-even death on a cross." Phillippians
2:5-8 NIV
This passage is
instructive since it affirms that Jesus willingly
made himself nothing. This was not something forced upon him, but something that both
he and the Father decided together.
When Jesus became
a slave of both God and man, Christ subjected all his authority to the Father without
ceasing to be God. The fact that Jesus still remained fully divine is seen by Paul's usage
of the Greek huperchon
(being) which is in the present participle
tense. This Greek tense implies a continuous state of being or existence, implying that
Jesus continued to exist in God's form even while becoming man on earth.
Therefore, Jesus
did not cease to be God but ceased from exercising his authority as God. At his
resurrection, Christ received back the authority he had before the Incarnation. He
regained an authority which had always been his in the first place; he did not receive an
authority which he did not have to begin with.
My response:
This subject has already been dealt
with in this rebuttal (*).
He wrote:
Muslim Argument:
In Mark 10:35-40, James, John and their mother requested
that Jesus would grant the two disciples to sit on his right and left. Yet, Jesus replied
that he could not grant such a request, since it had already been determined. How could
Jesus be God if he was unable to even grant a request by his disciples?
Christian
Reponse:
As we have
already noted, Jesus refused to exercise his divine authority since he allowed himself to
be a slave. And because he was God's servant, he became completely subject to the Father's
will in every aspect of his existence on earth. And as the Father's slave, he could make
no decisions until he fulfilled the will of the One who had sent him. (See above)
My response:
Several of what Shamoun
has said has already been dealt with in these rebuttals (*)(*)(*)(*). However so let me give a quick short response to what Shamoun said.
Shamoun
claims that: Jesus refused to exercise his
divine authority since he allowed himself to be a slave.
If this is
true then what is so special about Jesus performing great miracles? If this is true then
the fact that Jesus was able to forgive sins was nothing special but something granted to
him. However so Shamoun believes Jesus being able to remove
sins makes him God, which goes against Shamoun's very own
words that Jesus refused to exercise any divine authority. Hence if Jesus refused to
exercise any divine authority then the fact that he is able to forgive sins and do several
other great things means nothing special at all and does not make him God because he is
able to do these great things.
If
we take Shamoun's words literally then I would want to know
what is so special about Jesus forgiving sins? Is this not a
divine power that he has which is the reason to why he is able to do such a thing? The
answer according to you is no it is not, so then what is so special about it that it makes
Jesus God if it is not a divine power that he possesses that able him to do such a thing?
I will leave that for Shamoun and the Christians to
answer.
He wrote:
Muslim Argument:
God cannot be tempted. (Cf. James 1:13) Yet, Jesus was
tempted by the devil. (Cf. Mat. 4:1) Jesus, therefore,
cannot be God.
Christian
Reponse:
It must be remembered that although Jesus was tempted he was still without sin. (Cf. Heb. 4:15)
Furthermore,
James' meaning is not that no one can try to tempt God since many have tried (Cf. Deut.
My response:
This has already been dealt with in
this rebuttal (*).
He wrote:
Muslim Argument:
According to the Bible when a young man came to Jesus calling him good, Jesus responded,
"Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone." (Mark 10:18) How can Jesus be God if he is not even as good as
God?
Christian
Reponse:
Jesus did not say that he was not good, but asked the rich man why does
he call Jesus good. Jesus was trying to
lead the man into questioning whether he really believed Jesus was absolutely good in the
same sense that God is. If the rich man really believed Jesus was good, he should then
give up everything for Christ. Being God, Jesus deserved unconditional love and
self-sacrifice. This is precisely what Jesus demands the rich man to do:
"Jesus,
looking at him, loved him and said, `You lack one thing; go, sell what you own, and give
the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me." Mark
10:21 NRSV
The rich man must
give up everything for Jesus if he wants to be perfect before God. Only God can demand
this kind of devotion, a devotion which Jesus arrogates to himself. This point is brought
out more clearly in Matthew 10:37-39:
"Whoever
loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever loves son or
daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever does not take up
the cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Those who find their life will
lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake
will find it." NRSV
Again in Luke 14:26-27, 33:
"Whoever
comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, yes, even life itself,
cannot be my disciple. Whoever does not carry
the cross and follow me cannot be my disciple...
So therefore, none of you can be my disciple if you
do not give up all your possessions." NRSV
No Israelite
prophet ever pointed others to himself, but pointed men to God. For Jesus to demand this
kind of devotion affirms that he is God; otherwise this would be blasphemous for Jesus to
say if he were only a prophet.
To solidify the
point that Jesus was not denying that he was absolutely good in the same sense that God
is, we quote the following passages:
"I am the GOOD Shepherd. The good shepherd lays his life down for the
sheep... I am the GOOD Shepherd. I know my own
and my own know me." John 10:11, 14 NRSV
Not only is Jesus
affirming his absolute goodness, but also applies a title of Yahweh God to himself:
"Yahweh
is my Shepherd, I shall not want." Psalm 23:1
"Give
ear, O Shepherd of Israel, you who lead Joseph
like a flock!" Psalm 80:1 NRSV
Jesus also claims
to be absolutely sinless, having no unrighteousness within him whatsoever:
"Those
who speak on their own seek their own glory; but the one who seeks the glory of him who
sent him is true, and there is nothing false in
him." John 7:18 NRSV
"And
the one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what is pleasing to him." John 8:29 NRSV
"Which
of you convicts me of sin?..." John
No one was able
to point to even one sin which Jesus committed. For Jesus to be absolutely good strongly
argues the case that he is God. Note the following syllogism:
A-Only God is
absolutely good
B-Jesus is
absolutely good
C-Therefore, Jesus
is God.
My Response:
This
has already been dealt with in this rebuttal (*).
He wrote:
Muslim Argument:
Christians often use Jesus' I AM statements in John, most notably John
According to most
biblical scholars the Hebrew phrase, ehyeh asher ehyeh, is more accurately translated as "I WILL BE WHAT I
WILL BE." This is due to the verb from which the phrase stems, hayah, which means "to be."
Therefore, Jesus'
words have no connection with this passage.
Furthermore, the
Greek translation of the Old Testament (called the Septuagint) renders Exodus 3:14 as Ego Eimi Ho On- "I Am The Being."
Jesus in the Johanine gospel uses the term Ego Eimi, "I AM." He is never called
Christian
Reponse:
In response to Christ never being addressed as
"Look!
He is coming with the clouds; every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and on his account all
the tribes of the earth will wail. So it is to be. Amen.
"`
I am the Alpha and Omega', says the Lord God, `The
Being (Greek-
Jesus Christ, the
coming pierced One, identifies himself as both The
Being (HO ON) and as the Almighty. The
phrase "who is and who was" refers to the eternal nature of God:
"And
the angels of the waters say, `You are just, O Holy One, who are and who were, for you have judged these
things; because they shed the blood of saints and prophets, you have given them blood to
drink. It is what they deserve!' And I heard the altar respond, `Yes, O Lord, the ALMIGHTY (pantokrator), your judgements are true and
just!'" Rev. 16:5-7 NRSV
Hence, Jesus in Revelation 1:8 is claiming to be the eternal God.
Secondly, Jesus'
I AM passages tie in with the Hebrew ANI HU references
of Isaiah:
"Listen
to me, O Jacob, and
That the phrase I
AM implies Deity is clearly seen in the following verses:
"Now
then, listen, you wanton creature (i.e.
God rebukes
Compare Yahweh's
words with Jesus:
"Then
Jesus, knowing all that was to happen to him, came forward and asked them,
`Whom are you looking for?' They answered, `Jesus of Nazareth.' Jesus
replied, `I AM HE'... When Jesus said to them,
`I am he,' they stepped back and fell to ground."
John 18:4-6 NRSV
The fact that the
soldiers fell back when Jesus uttered the words "I AM" affirms that the phrase
served to identify Christ as Yahweh. Otherwise, there would be no reason for the soldiers'
falling down to the ground.
"When
I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he placed his right hand on me, saying,
`Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living one. I WAS DEAD, and see I am alive forever and ever,
and I have the keys of Death and Hades'." Rev. 1:17-18 NRSV
No matter from
what perspective we look at it, there is no escaping the fact that Jesus does identify
himself as Yahweh God.
My Response:
Jesus
never identified himself as God. Bring me the verse where Jesus said I AM GOD WORSHIP ME.
Either directly or indirectly, but it must be clear! The verse will never be found because
the fact is Jesus never claimed to be God and never did anything that qualified him as a
God. As for Revelations, I call on the readers to read Revelations 1:1 which shows that
Jesus in fact is not God, so any text later on that supposedly shows Jesus as being God is
blasphemy. As for the soldiers falling, let me ask Shamoun
this, why indeed they fall down? Did they fall down because they believed he was God? If
so does that make Jesus God? Secondly did the men even know Jesus? They were asking if he
was Jesus of Nazareth and Jesus replied that he is and they fell down. Why did they fall
down? Did they know Jesus or see him do anything special for them to fall down? The
soldiers were simply asking if he was Jesus of Nazareth and Jesus answered them saying yes
I AM HE, so does anyone else when asked if he is a certain person says I AM HE, does that
make that person God? However so, let us look at the context of John 18:4-6 and every one
will see for themselves how Shamoun tries to make something up
from nothing even with his own book, and how he tries to deceive people into believing
something when the actual context doesn’t support his argument at all. Let us start
from John 18 verse 1 all the way to verse 12:
1
When
Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his disciples over the brook Cedron, where was a garden, into the which
he entered, and his disciples. 2 And Judas also,
which betrayed him, knew the place: for Jesus ofttimes
resorted thither with his disciples. 3 Judas then, having
received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither
with lanterns and torches and weapons. 4 Jesus therefore,
knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom
seek ye? 5 They answered him,
Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas
also, which betrayed him, stood with them. 6 As soon then as he
had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground. 7
Then
asked he them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. 8
Jesus
answered, I have told you
that I am he: if therefore ye seek me, let these go their way: 9
That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake,
Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none. 10
Then
Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his
right ear. The servant's name was Malchus. 11
Then
said Jesus unto Peter, Put
up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?
12 Then the band and
the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him,
Ah yes so
when the soldiers fell to the ground when Jesus said I AM HE, it was because they fell
down in worship to him because they thought he is God! Hilarious indeed I must say as the
context and situation does not even support that or show such a thing happening. The very
same soldiers who fell were the very same soldiers sent to capture Jesus for execution. Very funny that for no apparent reason they fall to the ground in worship
for Jesus. However so just say they did, then why did they still arrest Jesus and
took him to the people who wanted him dead? Why didn’t they just let Jesus escape
since they fell down for Jesus when he said I AM HE apparently because they believed he
was God. So they knew he was God and yet they still took him as
a prisoner and beat him and so on. Very bizarre indeed. That is
the first flaw in Shamoun's silly argument, it is
INCONSISTENT.
Secondly
having read the context it is apparent they did not fall to the ground for worship or
respect, but they were stunned and amazed that they had gotten Jesus, the man they wanted
right there in front of them so when Jesus affirmed who he was they walked a bit backward
excited and so on and tripped or something like that. Or the verse is not a literal fall.
However so the fact is that they did NOT fall down to the ground in worship and respect
for Jesus because they believed he was God. So the verse in no way shows that they
believed Jesus is God. Nor does it show Jesus claiming to be God. Visit all these
rebuttals to see for yourself that Jesus without a doubt is not God [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [11.b] [12].
He wrote:
Muslim Argument:
Jesus commanded his disciples to baptize "in the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Spirit." (Cf. Mat. 28:19) Yet, the
disciples baptized in Jesus' name instead. (Cf. Acts
Christian
Reponse:
There is a confusion between the method of baptism, with the authority given to baptize. Jesus is prescribing
the method by which believers are to baptized, whereas the
disciples were pointing to the authority they received from Jesus to perform this method
of baptism:
"And
he said to them, `Thus it is written, that the Messiah is to suffer and to rise from the
dead on the third day, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins is to be proclaimed in his name to all nations..." Luke 24:46-47 NRSV
"And
a man lame from birth was being carried in... But Peter said, `I have no silver or gold,
but what I have I give you; in the name of Jesus
Christ of
My Response:
Nothing of much importance to respond here. I don’t really base
my arguments against Christianity on the way the disciples baptized people.
He wrote:
Muslim Argument:
According to Christians, Jesus is the Father's Son. Yet, according to both Matthew 1:20 and Luke 1:35
Jesus was conceived supernaturally to the virgin Mary by the
Holy Spirit. This makes the Holy Spirit Jesus' father.
Christian
Reponse:
This question assumes that Christians believe that Jesus became God's Son at the virgin
conception. This is not what Christians believe. Jesus is the eternal Son of God:
"...
I am the bread that came down from heaven."
John
"I came from the Father and entered the world; now I
am leaving the world and going back to the Father."
John
"So
now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory that I had in your presence before the world existed... Father I desire that
those also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to see my glory, which you
have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world." John 17:5, 24 NRSV
Therefore, the
Holy Spirit conceived the human nature of Christ; he did not conceive the eternal Person
of Christ.
My Response:
Nothing much to
respond to here. That is very
touching, however so Jesus is not God.
That
shall conclude the second part of the rebuttal to Shamoun's
article to continue with part 3 click here.
My Rebuttals, and exposing the lies of the Answering Islam team section.
Rebuttals to Sam Shamoun's Articles section.
Sami Zaatari's Rebuttals section.