Crucifixion or Crucifiction?
Date:
Channel: Adnan Rashid
File Size: 94.98MB
Episode Notes
vs. David McCay
AI Generated Summary ©
The Galway discusses the history and significance of the Bible, highlighting its weight and connection to Christ's weight. They stress the importance of finding the right books and faith in the Bible, while criticizing the use of "has" and "has" in various language and historical events. They also explore the lost of Christ's acceptance and the importance of the Bible in shaping our world, citing examples of inaccurate references.AI Generated Transcript ©
offers. God willing, we'll have lively an interesting debate. We have two great speakers tonight at non Rashid and Dave Mackay. And without any further ado, I'll hand you over to our fantastic Chairman, President Andrews. introduce them to you. Thank you very much.
Good evening and thank you all so very much for coming to tonight's today's which has been organized by the Islamic Society anyway, go away, and the covenant fellowship, Galway, and particularly thanks to Bill Hamilton and covenant fellowship, Galway, and Shahid haseen of Islamic Society anyway, go away for tonight's debate. Now, my name is Kevin Andrews, and I'm the political correspondent of the Galway advertiser, and I'd be the chairperson for tonight's meeting. And just to attend him, just to introduce the talk, first, and tonight's debate will look at whether or not Jesus Christ was crucified.
Whether or not Jesus Christ was crucified, the for us here in the West, the image of Christ crucified is one of the defining images of our culture and one of the most powerful symbols and emblems of our culture. It can be understood in many ways, whether that be of a man prepared to live and die by the ideals of values that he espoused, or whether as the great great act of redemptive sacrifice to redeem the sins of humanity.
For its reference to all four of the canonical gospels, and there's also independent cooperation of that in the works of Roman historians like tacitus and Josephus. However, in the ancient world, in Asia, it's very, very it's a scene is very differently for us here in the West is in established historical fact. But in Asia, it is, is the idea of Jesus being crucified is very much questioned. And many people who don't, many widows in Islam argues that no, Jesus was not crucified. And if I don't have the audience, for mine, I just read a small section from from the Quran, which, which sums this up, they declared, we have put to death, the Messiah, Jesus says, marry the apostle of
God, they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but they thought they did.
And as well, so for many, so for the Muslim world, Jesus was certainly not crucified, punished is very much something which is not a historical fact. But the historical fact would be that Jesus actually what did Jesus was not crucified. And then there are also in two places which claim to be his actual burial site. One is shrinker, and India, and there is also a place in Japan, which claims to be a very incise of his as well. So the question that our speakers deal with tonight is one that is theological, historical, and archaeological, which makes an incredibly fascinating prospect for that will be discussed about a figure who is so central to Christianity and so important to Islam.
Our two speakers tonight, are Adnan Rashid, who is the Islamic speaker and activist and historian and senior researcher at the ivy are a hidden Institute in London, and other speakers, David Mackay, a pastor and Professor of systematic theology, ethics and apologetics at the reformed theological College in Belfast.
Just to give you an idea of the format for tonight's debate, and now the opening statement by our two speakers,
then each speaker will respond to the others opening statements. They will then question each other, and some of and after that they will hopefully be time for questions from the audience. So you're so without further further ado, I would like to introduce you to a nanosheet who will make his opening statement on tonight's debate.
Thank you so much, I find that I am also not often our law firm.
Ladies and gentlemen, well, sisters, thank you all for attending this interesting debate. And the Christian Christian Christians have
believed that their salvation depends on this very sacrifice, which Jesus willingly gave on the cross. He gave His life on the cross and He freed mankind from a sin which mankind has carried since the day of Adam.
Adam and his wife, Eve St. And that symbol then transferred to every single child they had and the skin was carried
all the way in
In the time of Jesus Christ, and when he was put on the cross, and gave his life willingly, that sin was wiped away because of that sacrifice. So now mankind is free.
This is what the Christian view is, of course, based upon the Bible, with the Christian belief, today comes from the Bible. Every single argument Christians will make in this regard, is based upon
a text,
which is a collection of books written in the first and second century CD.
And the entire faith is based upon this tradition.
Before I go into my contentions, and my argument, I would like to clarify that I am Muslim, and I
am not here to hurt or upset anyone's feelings, or to insult anyone's religion or to belittle anyone's faith. Rather, my presence here is an evidence of my commitment to a friendly, and a very, very sincere relationship with the Christians here in this audience, and in the world, at large.
My view is that I love Christians are my brothers and sisters in humanity. And I believe that they have misunderstood God, and what he seeks to do with mankind, because of the text the Christians Read, read Scripture. And I will share my views openly.
And I request that you do not take any offense from my
contentions and arguments because I will not meet any events whatsoever. I simply want to put the truth as I see it.
So please take it
in a spirit of love, compassion, and
the entire case of crucifixion and resurrection is based upon the biblical text.
Without the Bible, there is no crucifixion. There is no resurrection. There is nothing about Jesus Christ which we can ever say, except if you're a Muslim, because Lacan
holds Jesus in a very high regard. Jesus is one who is one of the mightiest messengers of Islam. A Muslim is not a Muslim, unless he loves Jesus Christ, more than himself. Every Muslim has to love Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad, who are a profit in the line of profits.
So because I believe that peace be upon him was a true, true messenger of God.
And because I believe that Jesus was also a true messenger of God, so what Moses has ever had, then reveals the difference, while the Christian and Muslim different disregard occur and say that Jesus was not crucified in chapter four, verse 157, and 58. Quran simply denies
that any such event took place. On the other hand, we have the Gospels, insisting that he won't crucify, the sacrifice did take place, and he paid for our sins.
So let's see whether the Bible can reject him at face value. My faith is based upon the Quran, and I believe the Quran to be the Word of God. And if I had any doubts whatsoever about the
validity in this regard regard, I will simply not believe anything the Quran has to say. Because the Quran is not the word of God, if it's not valid, if it's not authentic, if it doesn't stand, stand the test of scrutiny. And we apply the same criteria to the Bible, the Bible, the New Testament, in particular claim to be from God. Or at least the Christians claim that the New Testament is from God is inspired, inspired Word of God. All the New Testament authors are inspired, we have to see well that is the case. If the New Testament can be shown
to be a man made text, a text which didn't come from God, not divine in a region, then I believe my case has been made, then we don't have to believe in the crucifixion and resurrection when and then we don't have to take everything. The Gospels and other documents have to say at face value.
So are the Gospels the Word of God? The first question I asked Ladies and gentlemen, is that who wrote the Gospels?
There are four gospels which are attributed to authors and the first century
There is
the Gospel of Mark, which was written somewhere between 60 to 70. To see, according to most commonly opinions,
and to this day, the Christians
are not sure about the exact locality, the exact date, and the exact personality of the person who wrote the Gospel of Mark. And that was the first gospel which consists of 16,000 words, then we'll move we'll move on to the Gospel of Luke, or Matthew.
Both both of them were written after Mark, Mark, and they borrowed heavily from Mark, whatever Mark had written, the Gospel of Matthew and Luke heavily borrowed the story from Mark, and then they expanded and expanded on mark. So we find the Gospel of Matthew, which is 23,000 words, and then the Gospel of Luke is 26,000 words. Then we come to the gospel of john, which makes a major break from the Synoptic tradition. The synoptic tradition is the tradition which comes from the three gospels, the Gospel of Matthew, Matthew, and Luke, that is called the Synoptic. Tradition, the story we find in these three Gospel, the gospel of john as an entirely different Christ. scholars believe today,
and David is a professor, he knows exactly what I'm talking about. scholars believe that john has a high Christology.
In the Gospel of Luke, Matthew and Mark, we see a different Jesus than the one we see in the Gospel of john. And these authors are writing for different audiences different times in different places. They're not the same objectives in mind.
And the different details specifically about this event, the event of crucifixion, which is a topic which I will address in due course. But the first question is who wrote these gospels? If we claim that these gospels were inspired by God Almighty, we have to first determine as to who wrote his gospel, about the gospel of john, there are three candidates.
There is john, the son of Zebedee, john of Ephesus. And then we have john the presbytery.
And the Christian scholars to this day are debating as to which john wrote the gospel. There is no unanimous, there is no consensus in this regard. In fact, the Jerome's commentary, new Jerome's commentary on the Bible,
which is a collection of scholarly articles, written by many Christian scholars, clearly states that there is a big difference among the Christian scholars about the authorship of the gospel of john, there are other documents, such as Second Peter, the Epistle of Hebrews or to Hebrews, which is attributed to Paul, then we are the official of James Jude, to this day, Christian looking at the history in the first three centuries, don't know as to who wrote these gospels in these documents. So how can we even claim that they were inspired? That's the first question and we don't know what the authors are. And we cannot, we cannot be certain. How can we claim that these authors were
inspired? Number one, number two, even if we believe that they were inspired, and what they wrote was from God, for argument's sake, for argument's sake, even if we were to believe what the road was directly inspired by God, the question is, do we have what they wrote?
Today?
In front of us, the Bible which is there in front of David, on David's table?
Is that the same Bible? or Are those the same documents written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and, john, the first question is about the author to the second question is, do we have on the road? Absolutely not. It is impossible, ladies and gentlemen, to know what Matthew, Mark, sorry. Thank you. What Matthew, Mark, Luke and john might have written, it is impossible to note that, because we have almost 6000, Greek manuscripts, and all of those manuscripts differ in every single sentence, and all the particulars. There is not a sentence in the New Testament, which is wholly uniform, in the New Testament tradition. And the book in front of David on the table there. The Greek New Testament
is a testament to that fact. Thank you very much for listening. I will leave David to respond to the points.
Thank you very much. It's an open opening statement. And I'd like to now introduce David Mackay, please to make his opening statement for tonight's debate. Thank you very much.
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. It's I think, tremendously encouraging to see so many here this evening. We do appreciate your coming along to hear this too.
Let me just upload the profitable time of exchange together.
It is a privilege to address the particular subject of the crucifixion.
And for a number of reasons.
First, and I suppose, right, obviously, it is the heart of the Christian faith
at the core of what we believe, and our Christian hope and life and death, is what took place in the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. So it's the heart of the Christian faith.
Not only that, but also it deals with the person who is most precious to Christians. You see, ultimately, Christianity is not a religion.
It's a relationship
with a loving Lord,
with a relationship of love with God.
And so when I speak about Jesus this evening, I'm not simply speaking with a finger from history, someone in the pages of a book, I'm talking about one I love.
When I know when I walk with everyday
woman whom I am putting my trust, for eternity,
my salvation depends upon him. The eternal welfare of every Christian depends on what Jesus has done in the cross under the eternal and that's fine. It is a privilege to speak about these things this evening.
Less can never be simply an academic exercise. If we are to believe in crucifixion of Jesus Christ, then we must substantiate His crucifixion through the Word of God, or solid historical evidence. David instead mentioned tacitus and Josephus, tacitus, and josefus cannot be taken as authorities and disregard because the scholarly opinion suggests that the texts were Josephus mentions the crucifixion of Jesus Christ and His writing on the third day, is an interpretation of Christian and later on, and added this information in to the text of God. First, this is a well established scholarly opinion among scholars. And during the q&a, I welcome all of you to take me on this point,
and I will give you my evidence where I'm coming from. So Joseph was the text of geographers the earliest copies we have, they come from the eighth century, from Arabic manuscripts, okay, written by Christians, in most cases, okay? Those manuscripts do not have these passages. Okay. Joseph was, as David knows, himself was a fantasy. He was a Jew who did not believe in Jesus Christ. In fact, in the third century, church father named Origen clearly won't and josefus did not consider Jesus Christ to be the Messiah. Okay, so there are two passages in the text of Joseph as with regard to Jesus Christ and His crucifixion, one states that Jesus Christ was the so called Christ, which is
very clear that God was to not take Jesus to be the Christ. The other passages where the crucifixion and resurrection is mentioned, and it is taken to be a forgery, and interpolation added by a Christian hand, centuries later by all scholars. This is a unanimous, unanimous opinion, as called a unanimous from this point tacitus. The earliest evidence we have for tacitus is again from the ninth century the earliest manuscript, although the historian was writing in the second century, early second century, but the first manuscript we have is from the ninth century and all the manuscript we get are from Christian hands copied by Christians, Christians, interpolated not only the Gospels,
they also interpolated all other texts at will. And what's my evidence for that, if you pick up that Greek New Testament, which is on the table in front of David, and see what the Greek text is like? That text is manmade, there are 5700, to 6000 Greek manuscripts between 5700 to 6000 Greek manuscripts in the world, all of them, all of them differ in every single verse. There is not a verse in the New Testament, which is wholly uniform in the manuscripts. My question is, which one was written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and john, if they were inspired? Do we have the rope and it is impossible for Christians today to prove that they have Matthew, Mark, Luke and john wrote, and if
that's the case, then why should we believe the doctrine of crucifixion and resurrection it has been changed so many times? The reason why I don't believe in the crucifixion, ladies and gentlemen, is because of the Quran.
crucifixion as a fact or fiction doesn't really make a difference to the Quran is the word of God and Prophet Muhammad indeed was a true messenger of God. He was not a liar. He doesn't have a profile of the lie of an eye and he was offered all the glory, power, influence and pleasure
This world he refused, his children suffered. His wife died because of the boycott we just inflicted upon him by his own people because he was preaching Islam.
He himself suffered severely. He was almost assassinated a number of times he was stoned. In the city of five, we always talk about the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which is a very attractive idea. But we have a reality similar to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ in the life of Muhammad, he was stoned in the city of five, just calling people just because the calling people for Islam to Allah to one God, which is what Jesus Moses and Abraham taught.
So Quran the Quran can be shown to be authentically transmitted from the prophet of Islam, in word and meaning, and the Quran can be shown to be the Word of God. There are realities within the Quran, which couldn't have come from a seventh century Arabian shepherd. It is impossible Ladies and gentlemen, to imagine that an Arabian Shepherd in the middle of the Arabian Desert would be thinking about the heavens expanded. astrophysicist recently came to realize in the 1940s, that the heavens are continuously expanding, and this fact was documented in the Quran 14 centuries ago. Then we have the issue of embryology child taking forms and shapes in a mother's womb.
And the Quran describes these forms and shapes absolutely accurately. And some people assert that Mohammed was copying from Galen, Aristotle and Socrates, the Greek authors on this topic, but when you regain an apocryphal story, you come to realize that they made major mistakes. For example, I start to believe that a child a fetus is formed by a mixture of menstrual blood and semen which is not true. And making the Quran and coffee and if the mistakes the Quranic description is absolutely accurate in the light of modern science, then the Quran talks about watercycle Quran talks about geometry the Quran talks about isostatically the Quran talks about
solar system talks about astronomy.
How on Thursday, a man living in the middle of the seventh century Arabian Desert come up with all of this. We believe that for our is definitely the Word of God. There's no doubt about that. In fact, non Muslim scholars such as Montgomery Ward, who is a Christian from the University of Edinburgh, here in the UK, stated clearly that Muhammad cannot be accused of imposter, anything but imposter. He was definitely inspired. Because of all these facts, this is too much for one man to put in one book accurately.
So because of that, I believe the crucifixion didn't take place because the Quran is the word of God and the Quran tells me that crucifixion did not happen. And the Christians do not follow anything but conjecture. This is clearly stated in the Quran Chapter Four, verse 158. How do we know this is conjecture, because the gospel even if we consider them to be from God, even if we were to accept that what is there was actually written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and john, and you have everything the road, even then we are facing big problems, big problems. Because if the same God was inspiring these four gospels, why the differences? Why so many different stories? If the same God is buying
all these for office? And if they were copying from each other? Why did they add details and subtract details? For example? Did Jesus died or the curtain of the temple was torn? According to Matthew 27 5051? Yes, according to Luke 2345 46, no. Where was Jesus at the sixth hour? On the day of the crucifixion? According to Mark 1523, on the cross, according to john 1940, in pilotes code, Did Jesus ascend to paradise the same day of the crucifixion? Yes, according to Luke 2343. Now, according to john 2017, what Jesus body wrapped in spies before burial, according to in accordance with Jewish burial customs, yes, according to john 1939. Know according to Mark 61, when did the
woman buy the spices? after the service was passed, according to Mark 61, or before the seventh according to Luke 2355. At what time of the day did the woman visit the tomb towards the door towards the door, according to Matthew 21, or when the sun had written according to Mark 16, to what was the purpose of for which the woman went to the tomb to anoint Jesus body with spices according to Mark 61, or to see the tomb.
According to Matthew 28, one will move on a large stone was placed at the entrance of the tomb. Wherever the stone when the woman arrived, they saw according to Mark 16, for the saw that the stone was rolled back
and, according to Matthew 28, wants to six and dome approaching the edge of the center from our road
way the stone? Why so many divergence differences in these stories if they were inspired by the same God
inspiring all four authors? Did anyone tell a woman that happened? What happened to Jesus this morning? Yes, according to Mark 16, five. Now, according to john 22, when did Mary Magdalene first meet this resurrected Jesus? And how did he How did you react? This is another question, what would Jesus Jesus instruction for his disciples tell my brother to go to Galilee? And there they will see me according to Matthew 2810, or go to my growth rate and say to them, I am ascending to my father, and to your father, to my God, and to go to john 2017.
And the list goes on and on and on. There are so many problems, ladies and gentlemen, so many differences and divergence divergences in the Gospel records about the incident of crucifixion, that we cannot simply take it at face value.
What was the actual reality of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ? Was he put on a tree, according to x 1328 2930. And first Peter, chapter two, verse 24, or was he put on the cross according to Matthew 27, Mar, 15, Luke 23, and all the rest? Why so many differences? If the same God was inspiring the same story? Why are people changing story again and again, and for what purpose? Thank you very much for listening and
I will now respond to Adnan Rashid.
And evidently, we come to the issue of the reliability of the Scriptures.
analysis was less than many suppose divergences in the right chords.
These are part and parcel of criticisms of Christianity that have been leveled for many years
have been answered many times that I guess we could spend the rest of this evening. And tomorrow morning serially working through every one of them, but there are bigger issues that have been raised, that we need to address. The first was authorship, we're told that because they do not necessarily know the authors of particular books, therefore they cannot be inspired.
has a complete non sequitur that does not follow. We do not need to know the authors of the books, to be able to say they're inspired.
As far as the gospels are concerned, it's well established. Matthew wrote, first the Gospels, Mark drew on the reminiscences of Peter the apostle. Look, I had the opportunity to speak with many of the eyewitnesses, while he was with Paul and his imprisonment assessor here, and a witness testimony from Rockford area, and others, and john the apostle, late, but that's only as far as the gospels are concerned. Whether we know the particular author or not,
is not a test of whether the books are inspired or not, we indeed believe the Holy Spirit of God guided the church to recognize the stamp of inspiration that he had put on these books, and others the source ultimately, of our confidence in them.
the mindset of the manuscripts has been raised as inevitably, that was going to be
and it appears that because there are so many different manuscripts of the New Testament, I also made to be ashamed and fearful of that, that this is a disadvantage to the Christian faith.
In fact, it does a great blessing for the Christian faith, that we have such a bundled testimony, the Bible is far and away the best attested ancient book far ahead of any classical Greek, Latin, or other trusted word of history.
The evidence for the text of the New Testament is abundant, it is widespread, and is unparalleled. There are as was mentioned, something approaching those 6000 Greek manuscripts, or a part of the New Testament. There are in addition, some 14,000 versions in other languages. There simply is no parallel with regard to any other ancient document.
are we left with total uncertainty with every sentence of the New Testament Far from it?
We are left in virtually no date of it. The overwhelming majority of the
New Testament gospels, and all the rest of the books.
Most of the variations in the manuscripts are matters of briefings and accents in Greek. They are tiny, they're utterly insignificant, they do not affect the meaning of the text at all.
There are meaning variations in the manuscripts, none of them raises a question of any doctrine of the Christian faith. Nothing I believe depends on any variety in manuscripts of the documents. I have been a preacher for almost 30 years, every week working with the Greek and Hebrew of the Scriptures.
I've taught theology for 17 years, on a teaching theology constantly with our students, we go back to their original documents. I'm never in that time of education to say we don't really know what the Bible says, actually. Because the readings of the manuscripts aren't certain.
No doctrine of the Christian faith is in question. On the basis of some variations, in the manuscripts, we have abundant evidence. And I can take the Greek New Testament on say to you that says the word of God.
This is what God gave to the writers of the Gospels. We're not in any date of it up the road, we have quite clear that we have abundant evidence for that.
It's interesting that the Quran exhorts us to pay attention to the previous revelations that God had given.
For example, we region Surah 61, six, Jesus son of nearly said, children of Israel, I'm sent to you by God confirming the Torah of him before me, I'm bringing good news of a messenger of the following whose name will be Alma.
We read elsewhere and the Quran
surah three, verse 84. Say, we believe in God, and what has been sent down to us, of Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the tribes. We believe in what has been given to Moses, Jesus and the prophets from their Lord, we do not make a distinction between any of them. It is to him that we devote ourselves that people have the book, what book, what book was the previous revelations mentioned? It is the New Testament, as we have arrived. In the seventh century, the book to the Christians had spoken over the Quran is the New Testament that we have in the Greek text today.
It is very interesting in Surah, town, verse 94, address comes to Muhammad. So if you are indict by copy revealed to you ask those who have been reading the scriptures before you. He is sent to Christians to the people of the book, that he's in date about what he has been given from God.
What book the People of the Book have, it is a New Testament, exactly as we have today, in the Greek manuscripts. And so it is the best attested of any old document and a classical an ancient manuscript, we can have confidence that we pick up a Greek New Testament, we can say this is the word of God. We know what we have confidence in it. And here is the parameter itself, pointing Muslims to the book. And that was the book that was our Mohammed space and century.
And so if you will follow the word that you have in the Quran, you're charged with confidence to the Greek New Testament. And we know that that is God's revelation to us. You believe a subsequent revelation has come.
As Christians, we believe that's the final revelation that God has given to us.
The next part of our discussion will see both speakers questioning each other. And both speakers would like to discuss these
in check for microphones around please.
Very good here to me. Excellent. So I would ask first of all for a number of sheep to ask questions of Dr. McBride on this issue.
Okay.
Thank you, David, for your presentation. You said that the New Testament is as it was revealed, my God, my research states or just otherwise because we have one of the authorities as you are
I'm aware, I'm very sure because he will the people involved in this very important. Bruce Metzger, you are aware of him. Okay. Bruce Metzger. In his book, a textual commentary of the Greek New Testament second edition, page 11. stated,
of the approximately 5000 Greek manuscripts of all a part of the New Testament that unknown today, no to the Greek exactly in all particulars, confronted by a mass of conflicting readings, and teachers must decide which variants deserved to be included in the text, and which should be relegated to the practice. Although at first, it may seem to be a hopeless task amid so many 1000s of various readings to sort out those that should be regarded as original textual scholars have developed certain certain generally acknowledged criteria of evaluation, these considerations dependent will be seen upon probabilities. And sometimes the textual critics must weigh one set of
probabilities against another. The range and complexity of text and data are so great that no neatly arranged or mechanically contrived set of rules can be applied with mathematical decision. Each and every variant reading needs to be considered in itself and not just merely according to a rule of thumb, here Metzger is saying effectively, that editors, not Matthew, Mark, Luke, and john and God, decide what goes in the Bible editors decide. So if editors meant people like Bruce Metzger and Nestle and out and other people
are deciding what goes in the Bible and you read it as the Word of God. My question is, what has got to do with this?
God has everything to do with it. Because scholars are usually well tested means of textual criticism, to arraign, but the best reader it's recognized academic procedure, significant part of my undergraduate work was done in medieval literature. These are citing scientific disciplines.
It is not speculation that is good academic procedure. And at the end of the process, I believe we do have a clear text of the New Testament. So you're saying we can be 100% sure that what editors decide is the original reading is the original read, I think we can have a high degree of certainty. None of the barriers, were there any remaining questions affect that area of doctrine? Right? If that's the case, then why do we have different editors different with each other? Because we haven't we even in the Greek New Testament, we have different versions, we have the West context, we have the message and add in text and all of these editors differ from each other about the text of the
New Testament. So if that's the case, then which one do we know is the actual original reading?
One you mentioned, Westcott, for example,
couple centuries ago, 19. Yeah. And so scholarship has moved on, tactics have been honed a number of manuscripts has increased the evidence as much more than ever was the Westcott and Hort
in their own presuppositions as to which direction they went on. So in that sense, I think ultimately, what we have today said the one fundamentally recognized, but this is not the only one. To me. This is not the only green text we have in recent history. methylene Allen is not the only text. I know that for a fact.
There are other Greek manuscripts also in Greek New Testament collections, then next Island over here and I can I can pull them out. Okay. Okay, we can move on to another question is, did you continue asking questions or? Yes, there's a there's another two minutes. Okay. That's for me. Okay. So this is the point here.
One of the arguments, which is really disturbing for your view on crucifixion. And the confirmation of the Quranic view and crucifixion, can be found in the Bible, according to Matthew for chapter four, verse five to 10.
We are told that Satan is trying to attempt to Jesus Christ.
And
he tells you this Christ that if you listen to me, if you follow me, and jump off the cliff, Satan takes him to a high plane to a mountain, and attempts to convince Jesus Christ to jump off the cliff and tell them that God will send his angels to protect you, and they will hold you up with their hands so you won't even hurt your foot on a stone. quoting from the book of Psalms, Chapter 91. And Jesus doesn't actually rebuke him for quoting that passage. In fact, Satan suggests that this passage refers to the first view applies to you. You're the only hand here and we saved this passage.
And farm 91 applies to Jesus Christ. What's your response to that?
It's very interesting that Satan was very selective in this quotation from Psalm 81. Okay, if he had gone on another lane or two, he would have said, also you will trail upon the circuit. You're not going to quote that Jesus crushes the head of the serpent, okay? Satan is very selective in this quoting from Scripture, but may
not answer.
context, Jesus responds to Satan, you shall not put your guard to the test. issue is a testing Jesus, willing to walk the land obedience, day in day out trusting God until his mission is fulfilled at the cross, or what he asks us father, to one spectacular evidence of his father's wisdom, rather than trusting him day in day night, no test dog jump off, prove that he's really worth You know,
he walks a path of obedience step by step, so fearful some
goal of his mission, which is the cross, and then he lays down his life according to the plan for knowledge of God. Can I
have to move on? Okay. Thank you.
Thank you. So is it my turn to answer?
Those one, I would ask first of all, why should it be essential to belief and inspiration that we know the authorship of books? Okay, that's a very good question. It is absolutely crucial to know the author to know whether the author was inspired or not due to the Christian history itself, because when we see the early church fathers and their debates about the canonicity, of some of the books of the New Testament, some of them actually argue that john was a gnostic document. It is a heretical document, it shouldn't be added. This is not alive. By the way, those of you who want to study the subject, there is a book written by Martin MacDonald, on the canon of the New Testament,
you can go and see for yourselves. So it is absolutely important know who the authors are, to know their status to know what affiliate affiliation they belong to what doctrine Well, the following, for example, James, or the book of James was considered to be a dubious book.
for almost three centuries, it only emerged and the final canon as a canonical canonical book, the book of Jude was contested. The Book of Second Peter was highly contested. The book of revelation was considered to be very, very dubious to such an extent that Martin Luther, during the Reformation was arguing that we should pull this book out the book of James in the book of Revelation, because of a dubious nature. And Martin Luther debate was and his views were based upon the early church fathers and their writings. So we have to know who these authors are in order to know who they represent. Who were they writing for that? Where did they come from? If we don't know who they are?
Why should we even take this writing seriously, then we can read it properly and take you know, fate from from Harry Potter.
I think it's a little bit more concerned with the doctor of James especially understanding of jams and what the early church fathers, that's why you call them if this was strong, rather than hearkened. Back to modern the Church Fathers might have said Luther was no probable anyone any other theologians was
the question I'm
attempting.
I struggle with the whole idea of forgiveness. The problem with the process changes and forgiveness. back the court in Hebrews, are they the sharing of love, there is no forgiveness. That's the Christian perspective. That is the depth of sin. That's the nature of it. That's an offense, the Holy God offense is very nature, it must be dealt with by death. The only
punishment for sin it's a couple of answers, and that's okay. Right. Now, it seems that Muslim theology, it's easy for God to forget, right? I mean, may or he may not Can I read in
another hobby? Are your problems I traveled to try to call them but can I call one Akari has record please, quote, others are a part of my Arabic reported that the Messenger of God said forgiveness was granted a prostitute who came on a dog counting at almost dead from thirst, the life of a well, she took off her shoe tied up with her head covering and drew some water formed. On another account, she was forgiven.
very slender basis, the forgiveness of the sin of prostitution. Yes,
I might make. Another Prophet said any two Muslims who meet and greet each other, or have their sins forgiven became a separate
one. I mean to me as a Christian
don't seem to take the seriousness of sin seriously. Okay, thank you for that question, David. First of all, our view on Goro. It is, of course, MIT's absolutely forgiving and merciful and loving. Okay. Look around clearly states that God is loving, who will move forward, he's loving and forgiving. It's very clearly stated in the Quran, and his love overpowers or suits, his love overcomes his anger. And this is why, when a good deed is done by someone that good deed due to his or her sincerity can cause a person to go to Paradise to have salvation. However, salvation cannot be attained without the true concept of God. If one believes in 33 million gods or two gods or three
gods or one God in three persons, we believe that person would never have salvation, because the concept of God is very much 4g. This is what Jesus was doing in the in the New Testament. Our view on the New Testament is that the New Testament consists of
truth as well as sponsored. It has the word of God in The Guardian, and they have the word of men in it. And certain passages in the New Testament may originate from God Almighty or from the mouth of Jesus. If certain passages actually came from Jesus Christ, that means they are from God. This is what our view is. And it is very possible the certain passages such as the Gospel of Mark chapter 12, verse 29, when a Jewish man asks Jesus, what is the first commandment and he says,
The Lord our God is One Lord, and onwards. So forgiveness can be attained. As long as we have the true concept of God.
Anyone who is involved in polytheism, or worshipping other gods, then true God, are in danger of having no forgiveness and salvation. On top of that, even in the Bible, we have passages which suggest that blood sacrifice is not necessary. For example, in the book of Numbers, 3150, we see the Jews are accepted as sacrifice flour in the book of Leviticus 511, or is accepted. Okay? In Deuteronomy 918. Moses simply depends for the people and God forgives. In the book of Jonah three, chapter three, verse five to 10. People simply ask for forgiveness, and God forgives them. So we don't need to have blood sacrifice. We don't need to kill someone on the cross to be forgiven, as
long as you believe in God is one and absolute and alone, and doesn't share his divinity with anyone.
Any man or any spirit or anyone. He alone deserves to be worshipped just like Jesus worship one God. And so did Moses and Abraham, as long as we have that belief, and believe all the prophets of God, we have salvation and we can hope we can hope to be forgiven, God will forgive all people so long as they do not commit polytheism
or repentance committed? Yes, absolutely. One has to be repenting.
Sorry, 30 seconds. 32nd. One has to be one has to be repenting. And repentance doesn't
have to contain order. It doesn't have to contain blood sacrifice, someone doesn't have to die for us to repent.
I think you'll find though the offerings of foreigners or complements our sacrifices, like the shedding of blood and the medicus, there was no forget the book of Jonah is quite clear.
We come to the final part of our evening now before we open up the questions to the house. And this will involve both speakers making their closing statement. So the first first main closing statement will be anon Rafi, and David McKay will follow. Thank you very much.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for attending today's debate again, it would have been an interesting debate, we can see that the foundations of Christian religion, not to offend anyone, or hurt anyone's feelings are quite shaky. They are very weak. We don't know who the authors are, we can never know. David Kinsey said, The Gospel of Mark was written by a disciple of Peter. And the Gospel of Luke was written by a disciple of Paul, he was the physician. All of the details are simply playing. If I was to ask David to tell, tell us where did these details come from? Who told you that these gospels were written by these people, even those testimonies are quite dubious.
So even if we were to accept that the gospels are true, and we have what was written by those authors, which is not the case, and I have debated this topic many times with other Christian theologians, and to this day, no one has shown me any evidence
As to whether we can accept the current New Testament as the works of Matthew, Mark, Luke and john.
But even if we were to accept that is the case, we have problems in the book of Matthew, chapter 21, verse 22, we are told that you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer, God talking to Jesus, or Jesus talking on party on behalf of God, okay? This is very, very clear those as long as you believe in God, and you pray to Him, you will be given, you will be given that. Now, see this. In the Gulf of Oman, Chapter 14, verse 36, we are told Jesus all these days in the Garden of Gethsemane, and cried and prays to the Father, take his cup from me. If it's possible, everything is possible for you take this cup from me, yet not what I will, but what you will maybe, again, in the Gospel of
Matthew, we are told, Chapter 26, verse 31st 39, my father, if it is possible, may this can be taken from me. Again, in
the book of Psalms 3739 40, we are told about the salvation of the righteous is of the Lord is their strength in the time of trouble, and the Lord shall help them and deliver them, he should deliver them from the wicked, and save them because we trust in Him. So we have now a number of problems in Jesus, or we are taught in the Gospel of Matthew that so long as the believers pray to God sincerely, they will be rescued, they will be held. Jesus prays to God, to avert the incident of the crucifixion.
Take this couple went from the Father, if it's possible, he's crying. This is not a willing sacrifice. If anything, this is a forceful sacrifice. He doesn't want to die on the cross. This is very clear. And he prayed to God, but the gospel records suggest that he was crucified and God simply
simply left him to die.
And even on the cross, we are told that Jesus Christ Illa ii ilahi llama Saba, oh,
my God, my God, why have you forsaken me? If this was a willing sacrifice, which is not the case is on the cross, Jesus would have been rescued by God because God itself tells us in the book of Psalm as well, that he will deliver his people on the weekend, and who will crucifying him, the most wicked people if we were to accept it. So ladies and gentlemen, if the Quran is the word of God, and if the prophet of Islam is a true prophet of God, then crucifixion didn't take place. And that's another debate in itself. I as a Muslim, believe firmly that the Quran is definitely the Word of God and the Quran doesn't have the history of the Bible or the New Testament. The Quran was transmitted
by the prophet of Islam, in His entirety to His disciples. And these disciples without adding a word or subtracting a word from the Quran, delivered the Quran as they received it from the prophet to us, and we can train back on
to the Prophet peace be upon him without any alterations. And when we do read the problem, we come to realize that there is information there in which couldn't have come from a shepherd who never went to school and Academy or a university to learn these things. This is why some of the modern scholars believe that it is very difficult to suggest that Mohammed was an imposter. He couldn't have been an imposter. There is too much in his life for us to simply reject him as a liar, as an imposter or a warmonger. In fact, we believe is prophesied in the Bible. I already clarified the Bible, we believe, may contain the word of God, and it does contain the word of God, because the
Word of God and confirm some of the information in the Bible. We believe that God was given to Moses, we believe the gospel was given to Jesus, which was one gospel. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and john, were not writing with Jesus Christ. They were writing for their audiences. They wrote, their thought was the reality. But Jesus received one gospel, one good news, which will last forever. We don't have it. We don't have the gospel of Jesus Christ. We have the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke and john, but not the gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, there were other gospels in circulation, which Paul condemned. Paul said, those were preaching of the gospel.
They are condemned, which other gospel is being preached. That's the question. Which other gospel and why were those gospels rejected, rejected, there are so many books, which were circulating in the early church such as DDT, and the Gospel of Thomas, by the way, is thought to have come from an earlier tradition from the Synoptic tradition and this is a controversial issue. I do accept that because the Gospel of Thomas in his current form is a gnostic document is supported or not
to document but its original form scholars assert,
which we don't find today was did originate from an earlier tradition than the Synoptic tradition. So ladies and gentlemen, the Koran gives us certain realities which couldn't have come from a man in the middle of seventh century Arabian desert and the Quran criticizes the Jews for claiming that we killed the Messiah. Because the Jews were claiming that to prove that Jesus was a liar. He was not a true prophet of God. He was not the Messiah, he was a liar. How do we know he was the Messiah because he died a disgraceful death. He was killed on the cross. Hence he was alive because the Messiah couldn't have died like that. Messiah would have been victorious, as the Bible clearly
prophesized. So if that's the case, the Quran is accurate. The Quran defends the mother of Jesus Christ in an entire chapter, chapter 19, talks about Mary and defends her as one of the best woman to walk the face of this earth because the Jews claimed that she was an adulterous and she slept with a Roman soldier, known as Pandora and she beget Jesus Christ. Quran defends Mary from states No, that's a lie. That's a lie. mirroring was a good woman. She was a poor woman, she gave birth to Jesus as a miracle.
And Jesus was a great messenger of God, and He will condemn those people who took it as God instead of the Father, who alone deserved to be worshipped, who alone is the only true God.
So ladies and gentlemen, the point is, that if
the Quran is true,
and if the prophet of Islam Prophet Muhammad was truly a prophet of God, then the Christians are in big trouble if the rejection if the rejection but if he was indeed a true prophet of God, and the Quran is indeed the Word of God, then what is the best thing to do? What is the right thing to do to accept the truth, and in the gospels are indeed the Word of God Biola by God, I want to be a Christian today. But I am not convinced I've been studying for years, I have been spending for years, I have systematically scrutinized the Christian texts, and I've come to realize that this is not God working in these books. This is simply man working. This is the work of men, not God. The
Koran, I don't find that problem. I'm very satisfied as a believer, and I continue to believe in this life. So ladies and gentlemen, I invite you all to think hard about your salvation. You cannot rest your foundation upon shaky grounds, if the if the crucifixion is the base for your salvation, if resurrection is something which you put your trust in, let's scrutinize the sources when the information is coming from, and if the information is not from God, it was written by men, for a specific audience for to serve a specific purpose. Then question your idea of salvation. Because there is another prophet who came after Jesus Christ in Arabia, was praying for told in the Bible.
In the book of Isaiah, chapter 42. We are told about a prophet who will emerge from Arabia, how do we know that he will come for Gentiles, he will spread justice on earth. He will take people out of darkness, take them to light, he will find the idol worshippers, he will have something to do with Arabia, the town, the villages of Qaeda, Al Qaeda was the second son of Ishmael, according to the book of Genesis, chapter 25, verse 13. And if a man is coming from Arabia at a message from God, then we cannot simply afford rejection, just because we are from Europe, and he was from the east. Doesn't make sense because Jesus also was from the east. Jesus was closer to Mohammed than he was to
you. Thank you very much.
Issues of text and manuscripts, reliability of the New Testament, I guess, we could go round and round volume
on I was going around right but others on other occasions in some fashion,
we arrived at an interesting position, in fact that the end of there and that we're starting to talk about books that don't exist. The original Gospel of Thomas and we don't have a Gospel of Thomas we do have, as he says, as a gnostic book. Neither he nor I would give anyone a
salt the truth clearly isn't.
hypothetical original versions are only a waste of time.
It isn't the one gospel that was given to Jesus. We're told
The gospel is lost.
seems hard to believe that God would allow that revelation to become lost. God looks after his word doesn't.
He supervises, the lie that revelations be lost. I struggled to accept that
the gospel as we heard from the Quran
is confirmed by the Quran. gospel must have existed. And Muhammad state was the People of the Book. So the gospel was a book.
Where was
where
nobody can say, God watches over his work. He doesn't let His revelation disappear.
Reference was made to Jesus in the garden of disharmony.
I think one of the most profound, most amazing parts of the Bible
as the Messiah, would you like to suffer? Would he be treated in this way? Surely, the Messiah would be a glorious figure.
That's exactly what the Jews expected.
That's what the disciples expect. That's why they struggled with Jesus he dented
conceptions of what Messiah should be like, whereas the woman to lead our armies to push the Romans into the Mediterranean, give us our dignity and give us our freedom once again, a Messiah is going to
suffer.
Die.
Peter, Did Jesus. Not so Lord, this'll never happen to you. He couldn't take it. No, it was so utterly amazing, a dying Messiah.
And yet that is exactly what
purpose it was coming was to die. A willing sacrifice.
And john 12, verse 27, will be read no is my soul troubled? That's a strong word.
Unfortunately, say, Father, save me from this are
up for this purpose. I have come to us our
Father, glorify Your name.
That voice came from heaven, I have glorify that and will glorify it again.
Jesus understood why he had come.
He understood the purpose was to die. That was the kind of Messiah ship
that he was called to fulfill.
And Father definitely can't
declare to be the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead. All councils and rooms Well, there's the vindication of a messiah crucified on resume on what we see in guest seminars, he struggles of the burden of sin there is human nature, he knows the cost. He knows what it will mean not simply that suffering was by emotional suffering to bear some holy one.
Also, if it was possible,
but he didn't stop there.
Nevertheless,
not what I will overdo, well, there's the willing sacrifice.
There's the laying down of the life of the Lamb of God, for the sins of all who trust
anonymous exhorted you to consider as long as
I exhort you to consider Christ, crucified and risen Messiah. There's a sacrifice of the dresses the conscience of the heart. You see, the blood sacrifices in the Vegas in the Old Testament couldn't deal with the heart.
ritual cleansing, yes, but no more or pictures of the sacrifice that would truly take away sin.
The sacrifice of Christ. One is born the burden of sin and provided salvation.
So I would encourage you in closing consider Christ.
Think about Christ. There are books available. I know that bookstores eight site globally fellowship has also provided some books. If I may mention just one uncovered.
Look at Luke's Gospel just for yourself.
See what it says.
Read about Jesus. uncover your own conclusions.
He's the one who might put my hope. I will be able to share
that will never disappoint.
Because you'll never disappoint.
You're back to where I started. Christianity is not a religion.
It's a relationship. It's a relationship that's there for whoever trusts in Christ and receive the salvation that he offers.
Fans consider Christ
as one
person
cleansing of your conscience to be fine.
Whereas eternal life and salvation to be fine.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Ladies and gentlemen, both our speakers have given us an absolute tour de force growth in a discussion of an incredibly important issue. And ladies and gentlemen, I would like to ask you to please show your appreciation for both our speakers.
Ladies and gentlemen, we've got 14 minutes before we wrap up with me, we'll be calling colleagues today at 10 o'clock. over these next 40 minutes, there's a chance for anyone who would would like to ask questions are two speakers. I just have some ground rules on I'm sure there's a number of people who want to have a chance to ask a question. Therefore, please keep the questions short and concise. If you could state your name, which speaker you're wishing to address the question to or if you'd like to address it to both of them. And then ask your question. If there's anybody who has statements to make, could I ask them, please, then it may be time after the meeting is over to maybe
speak with with with our with our two guests. And that'll be fine, but refrain from making statements please. And let me just be questions so that everyone or as many people as we possibly can have a chance to have to question our two speakers, it's an opportunity to have to have a chance to speak with two excellent speakers on this issue. And we take that transforming. So I'm now going to open up questions to the floor. Is there anyone who would like to ask a question? Yes, sir. And my name is James, I'm an English which proceeded to tell you
this, there's a lot of discrepancies, we've listed a lot of differences.
And they gave us the point, you know, why is the author matter? I think that when you were saying about
you know, whether you like it or not discrepancies in one story will actually bring the overall kind of chronology into some sort of distortion. So my question is this, and now I'm either Christian, or Muslim. And what my point is, if a god whatever you believe a God to be, would have seen this literature coming, surely he would have gotten rid of these discrepancies.
And now has this whole
can of worms.
Be careful, usually a term like discrepancies exactly what we mean by in many alleged conflicts we mentioned tonight, I believe that by careful study, comparison of accounts, both can be resolved. personally.
I think it's a challenge to current study. It's a challenge to look at their traits. develop good exegetical process. You're an English student, you know,
looking at documents, testing them, examine them, but no, have no fear of Scripture is being tested not my that was my first degree so far.
So in that sense, I think that's the message to careful study.
God could have given us one gospel
which he did. I don't believe he did. And it seems to me I've been giving us four accounts we're getting four perspectives
on Jesus, which give us bring out different aspects that was ministry it was person so I don't believe ultimately conflict. I was it wrong I'm sorry terms of looking at. That's a diamond fatigue bargain, different facets, and they're all part of the bone.
Each one will bring different dimensions out.
And I don't believe for example, the jars are different Christology for the rest of the Gospels. He takes another perspective on Jesus see begins over from heavenly perspective, the synoptics from earthly but ultimately they don't conflict.
I'll be my response to
with regard to this Kennedy's the Koran was a challenge to mankind of Alliance
devoted to faith alone cathedra that do you not even ponder upon the Quran talking to mankind God is talking to mankind if they were, if this book was from another source and God, you would have found many discrepancies in it. So the Quran puts out that challenge to mankind to show any discrepancies in this book. And because there are no discrepancies in this book, it is from God is consistent, and because we find these discrepancies
In the Gospel records, we know that it cannot be coming from the same source. That much is clear. Four Gospels are written in different places by different people. And they're not saying the same thing. This was his claim, they differ and giving detail about the same event. an amazingly scholarly opinion is that they copied from each other. The Gospel of Mark was the first gospel. And scholars are unanimous on this point that Luke and Matthew actually heavily borrowed from statements verbatim quote from Mark. And if they did not, why could they not put the details down, down in a similar fashion? On top of that, this one, this problem was pointed out in the early church.
Yes, sure. I'm sure. David want to come back, no problem.
This problem was actually picked by the early church, there was a man called Massey on in the second century. And he just saw the problem of these discrepancies. And that's why he proposed one gospel, he said, we only read the Gospel of Luke, forget the rest. We don't need to read the gospel of john and Matthew and Mark, Luke on its own is enough, because it goes with the theology of Paul, because he was a physician. And Paul also did masculine thing, but masculine was rejected. In fact, the first time we find these four gospels mentioned together and the entire history of Christianity was in the year 200.
In the year 200, a man called Irenaeus, one of the early church fathers, he mentioned the four gospels together before that the Christians are reading different gospels in different places at different times. Okay, so my question is, why did Iranians who gave him the authority to choose these gospels that lead the other route? Number one, then when he was writing before the gospels are written very quickly, in general, this is a this is a lecture in itself, by the way. So the writing is a puzzle because there's a piece of the written before the gospels are written, all refer to one gospel, every time Paul mentioned, gospel, he said, gospel, not gospels, Paul was simply unaware of
what what would be written afterwards. And the descriptor discrepancies, those later documents will have that's all I have to say. Thank you. That's a good question. By the way, a
couple of things, Marcy, and one gospel because he didn't make Jews to discard the old testament. It discard Matthew, another gospel developer, Jewish. And some are saying there's no same guy to be able to have in our Bible. Ultimately, Marcin was condemned as a heretic. He picked them chillums. That's sort of his anti semitic perspective. So we were marcian.
By 284, gospels were stringing together they were written in different places, for example, it took time for the four to come together.
They are the gospel according to Don't forget, there is one gospel.
And here are the four perspectives on that one gospel that God has given. It's not the gospel of john. It's According to him, according to Matthew, and so on. So these are perspectives on the one gospel. We're talking about the Gospel of Matthew, for example, many others use the words but gospel as a book of gospel is the message go against Jesus, the one gospel, only four perspectives on it. And again, the Quran was written, as permitted to be recited in different dialects, as we mentioned, over coffee, there were different versions of the Koran available.
Well, it would seem, you know, Calico with
all the documents, and the automatic perception destroyed and how to respond to this one
question another dimension. This is another
comment.
I mean, from the early commentators, there's evidence of different readings haven't been 18 the essence of three religions Islam, and others the essence of tribulation as monotheism seems to be a significant difference that's not negligible. It's as big of a difference as you're arranging and the New Testament
has gone on to become checked passwords the New Testament you can go to Dublin and go to Chester beacon library here. You can look at the documents you can start them for yourselves with your favorite media. The evidence is is freely available
not only finding topics
brief response and I'm going to go to the floor this issue of man has been blown out of proportions there was no conspiracy was man didn't do anything in secret. He did publicly talk or arm was recited in different dialects by the by the Arabs in exactly the same language. They were no different verses. Nothing added. Nothing subtracted. This is a challenge open challenge to the whole of mankind. I've been studying the Quran for part plus 10 years. Okay.
I haven't found any differences. But when you come to the Bible we come to realize that entire chunks are added in later on which cannot be found in the early Greek manuscripts. For example, the gospel of john chapter seven, verse 53, to 811, the entire story of the adulterous taken in the act was added by a later hand cannot be found in any of the early manuscripts, such as Codex and articles replicons and I challenge you produce any compiling with that content, I will give you 10
such different translations showing that that's the case. The point is that stuff was added in the name of God and it's still there in your Bible. It's it's still being read today by Christians and the Word of God while we know it's not okay. Okay, blown out of proportion. And normally, the Bible says your Bible is mighty.
Gentlemen, sorry, sorry, I, as Chairman, I have to decide to ask the question, please, I will come to you. But there is a young man who is just in front of me, there has been going for quite some time to get in for a question, please. Hi. My name is Dino Park.
Students are also in departments. And I have two questions. And the first there is some representative. I'm a believer. So I'm a Christian. And I fully believe the Bible venerate and so on. First of all, he talked to us about the discrepancies in the New Testament. And we all agreed that it looks like there are some, but I believe they can be reconciled. But I asked you, we can talk about discrepancies in the New Testament because there's different paths parallel. There's Matthew, Mark, Luke and john are talking about the same story. And also there's prophecies. If you go back to my 553 guys will say it's a phenomenal prophecy. It talks about Jesus death in clear
details century before
Will you acknowledge that the Quran is discrepancy proof? That there's no way we can falsify it because there's no prophecy? And because we were part of the postures and this another question, still be very quick. And that is that God is merciful and loving.
Now, if I'm a judge, and I try to use case comes before me, I have to sentence
and ask you to say, What does Islam do with justice? And it's not why justice is not something we really associated with the Middle East rather with the West.
Okay.
That's okay. That's that's 10 questions.
The Middle East and justice and justice in the West. We can talk about this to the cows come home. Okay. Sorry.
issue of God. In fairness, sir, we're here to ask about the issues of crucifixion departure asking although a fascinating question is getting someone else to point
out if I can just guys please if we can just keep questions to discussing the topic, I found that our two speakers have been invited here to to address.
Okay, the first question will walk you through this why I wanted to ask you a question first and then go to the next question. What was the first question?
The granite discrepancy proof? There's no promise? Yes. Well, there are prophecies in the Quran. And I agree with the first point that is this is discrepancy proof because that's what it is. The Quran doesn't have any discrepancies. But there are prophecies for example, I'll give you a prophecy you can go and check on chapter 24 verse 455. The Quran clearly states that it is a promise of Allah to those who believe among you and do righteous deeds that he will grant you succession over the president who is in the land, you the Bedouins or the yellow zone, do not have the capacity to do so. You will overpower this plant. Okay. And this verse was revealed when the observe themselves
under attack by other Arabian tribes, like Karl Popper would say that sorry, bastard we can respond. Let me explain. Let me explain. I haven't finished. Well, probably mama died in the year 630. To see, within 50 years of his death, the Muslims had caught the largest empire the world had ever known. Okay, bigger than the Roman Empire bigger than the Empire when exactly the great and the Babylonian Assyrian Empire, there was no precedents to this empire. So Quranic prophecy was referring to the letter, and we have manuscripts before the conquest took place. So no one can say that the code these these differences was added later on, when the conquest had taken place. We have
manuscript before the conquest took place. This is a claim of prophecy, which cannot be denied. That's, that's my view.
Okay, now, this couple of people have already put up their hands and this gentleman here and this gentleman on the other side, and also the gentleman at the back was trying to get
And earlier, so if I can just take you first sir. My name is attire Mahmoud. My question is about classification. There are two views. One Muslim view is that he, Jesus did put on the cross. And he somebody is given his shape. And he went to the Heaven's Gate assembly. He was put in the cross, He died and resurrected. And then he began to have, what do you think if you see the Bible and the Quran, it is possibility that Jesus was put on cross, he survived there for a steady couple of hours. And then he was taken down. And then he went, then he was he is he is he. Because if you see different accounts, like he says, I came for the lost tribe of Israel. And at that time, only the
two tribes living there and all the tribes are spread on the peninsula and Kashmir understand what both of the speakers think there's a possibility that he was saved. And it has a lot of account on the Bible. You can say I can go, but I don't want to quote your scholar, you know, that he was he's a is an invisible heat. And he was seen legally. And then he moved on to the last tribal style. And he was he was accepted there. Do you think there's a possibility of that? Please, bought any bottle. I
mean, I know some of them
are dire.
There's a possibility I can say,
personally change for me, the Romans are experts in math.
The Romans, you hate to crucify someone and make sure that every day I
make mistakes to the Romans. Usually they are from shot supplication didn't hold themselves up any longer. And the growing rate the legs of Christianity, couldn't hold themselves up, dispatch them more quickly. And the gospel records the background, check the alert ticket, and then Jesus was already there,
on the sphere of Call Center site,
educate them about what was separating the cleaner and life.
To be under any staff, I ever deal with that. And then take down the body, put it in a court.
I don't think any medic would try to argue that someone survives that is able to convince his disciples, he's resonant with power, and the man would be on the brink of death about point.
A doctor doesn't personally seem to me until I can add the image. I don't want to make a my person so big. So because there's evidence there, when did he disappear? To the Jesus the blood in the water comes kinetically spoon that if somebody that lived, His heart is still pumping, this blood is coming out. So it's not blood, the blood is separate. And that sort of blood in the water comes in there is in the Bible. I don't want to monitor because, you know,
that was one of the reasons why. Because if we, if we believe on that mission was for the lost tribe of Israel. So it's mean his mission was not successful, because he didn't make the other tribes another dish.
Thank you very much for that question. First of all, to me, the Quran is very, very clear. It's very explicit. Omar Kakadu, Omar sallahu, Docker on takes two possibilities and rolls them out very clearly. They killed him not. They crucified Him not. He wasn't killed. He was important across the Quran deal with these two possibilities separately, and rules them out. And the Quran can be shown to me, it can be shown to be the Word of God. That's another debate. And if is the word of God and is true, then what the Quran is saying is true. Okay. So the issue of him surviving and going somewhere else, and, you know, dying in this media, there's no evidence for that there is possibly
there is no physical evidence for this session. Okay, it is, to me, it's not possible, unless you can produce some document from the ancient world, which mentioned mentioned the place and his death, and he survived. But that's not the case. On top of that, in the Gospel of Matthew, I mean, the reason why we can't trust the gospel records because they give different versions in different times. For example, Gospel of Matthew is alone in telling us that many saints rose, and they walked around, and many saw them in the passage. Okay. But amazingly, other three gospels failed to mention that no one thinks that that was a significant event. But it shouldn't be a significant for the
miracle, with a great miracle if it happened. It was a great miracle. many saints rose from the grave and they walked around, and many
of those who saw them were the testimonies. That's the question. Why do I mention that one? Mark mentioned it while in john mentioned that. So like what I mean had my point was clear that we cannot trust the gospel records at face value. We cannot take them
Okay, because the gentleman went very bad was trying to get into here your sir, would you like to just get this very bad
for the sake of everyone?
The Quran was written 600 years after Jesus's crucifixion. Sure. And in that amount of time, it took
a lot of folklore and everything out of the tribes.
My question would be in connection with that, who is the next most important prophet in the Quran next to Muhammad? Who does the Quran say, is the second most important prophet in his lab next to mark?
Thank you very much for that question. There is no folklore in the Quran has facts Simply stated, and we can scrutinize them today. And even though it was meant to take somebody laughter doesn't make a difference if it's from God is the true? That's the question. With regards to who is the closest prophet to Lord, the Koran very clearly stated that we do not make any difference in any of the prophets of God, they will all brothers in one faith, they all preached one religion, one way, one relationship, as you put it, and that relationship was La Ilaha Illa. Allah there is no one worthy of worship except Allah alone. dilatory worship. Now the question is, who is Allah? Is this
an alien God? Is this moon God? Or is it like another god who emerged from nowhere? Allah is the same God, which was worshipped by Abraham, Moses and Jesus. Why? How do we know that? Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic are sister languages, these are symmetric languages, which originate from the same source, the word Elohim, which is in the Old Testament,
and word ilahi, which is in the New Testament, and the word Allah, which is exactly the same word coming from the same root word Ilaha.
Illa, Allah is exactly the same God, which was worshipped, worshiped by Abraham, Moses, David Solomon, Jesus, so all prophets are brothers in faith. And all of them are important. The Quran doesn't make any distinction between them. Thank you very much for your question.
Sorry, my name is, Dennis, here's your question. And then
in the short answer of five talks about those who are on the right course, who obey the law and the gospel, the revelations that were given to them by the Lord.
Now, you you believe that there was no crucifixion. And yet the Christians that lived in the time of Muhammad, believed in crucifixion. And Muhammad says, if there's anybody you need to listen to our go for wisdom or understanding go to the people of the book, which are the Jews and Christians. So if Muhammad believed in the crucifixion, and said that those people were on the right course, why can't you believe that?
Jesus died on the cross for your sins, rose again from the dead? And is, as you believe, seated at the right hand of God, and it's coming back to judge the world? That's a very good question. And interesting question. Thank you very much for that question. The Koran nowhere
in any shape or form,
supports, or
suggests that the current Bible is the real Bible, which was given by those authors. Koran doesn't even entertain the idea of four Gospels. The Quran simply mentioned, one gospel NGO, is a singular term is the good news, the good news, the good news about Jesus Christ came into the world to not too sure what to do. Let me finish you will understand where I'm coming from.
When the Quran mentions the people of Scripture, for example, there is a big misconception among Christians that the Quran actually supports the Bible and the biblical text to the contrary. On the contrary, in fact, the Quran in chapter two, verse 79, clearly says, and I quote, therefore, we want to those who write the book with their own hands, and then say this is from Allah, that they may purchase a small game they will walk on to them for what they have written and hold on to them, but that they, thereby the Quran is very clear and explicit in this regard. The Bible, in its current form is corrupted is changed is altered. We finished, we finish. How do we know that this is exactly
how the disciples of Prophet Muhammad were taught by this verse of the Quran. For example, Abdullah bin Abbas, a cousin of the prophet or the direct disciple, stated in a report narrated by Mr. Chari volume nine book 93
Least number 613.
Even above set, how can you ask the people of Scripture about the books? While you have a last book the Quran, which is the most recent of the books revealed by a lion, you read it in its
pure undistorted form, move on volume nine, book nine, at least six one for the next one is trying to respond to your point. How can you ask the people or scriptures about anything while your book which Allah has revealed to you to your prophet contains the most recent news from Allah, and it's pure and not distorted. Allah told you that the people or the scriptures have changed some of Allah books and restore to him and or something in their own hands and said, this is from Allah. So all of the other passages you mentioned, they are they be quoted out of context for what we're talking about the crucifix is
against a small word in believing
Christians
is running ssms innopolis.
We appreciate your question very much.
directed at now, is there a question for David McKay, please?
Question for David McKay. You sir?
My name is
the crucifixion is the call, I mean, the beings
of pain. So it like Satan and for my salvation, right? So I just and these writers and authors if, if they are the one, telling me and showing me the wave of myself, don't I have the right to know who they are? What are the mother's name?
I mean, the last names we were they born? And what they did? Are they trustworthy? To save me. So I just like to know these things. If they are trustworthy, to save, I have the right to know who they are, don't I
ultimately decides what information he gives us.
Any other anchors
in the scriptures.
Ultimately, it doesn't seem to me that having information like that
enables us some way to judge or trustworthiness. Suppose it were Matthew and they gave us a lineage and so on, had obviously to me that that tells us he was inspired by God. We're dealing really with this, you know, canonization of Scripture, the books came to be part of the canon of Scripture, and our various criteria that were used.
In putting the example New Testament together, where authors apostles are really close to the circle of apostles, and so on ultimately,
argumentation unlikely in our minds and our hearts, and brains to see the marks of inspiration and the book that are there, not our rational argument, we can produce memes, biographies, etc. But adult is a spiritual issue.
That we could argue back and forward, back and forward ascent endlessly. But
the point has to come that we accept the scriptures as the Word of God, resulting in Divine work, it's a vertical of golf, unlike the normal humans cannot suddenly have a rational process of argumentation, unlikely in our minds and our hearts on rails to see the marks of inspiration and the book that are there, not our rational argument, we can produce VMs, biographies, etc. But the dome is a spiritual issue,
that we could argue back and forward, back and forward ascent endlessly. But the end point has to come that we accept the scriptures as the Word of God, that result in Divine work in some vertical golf, unlike the normal humans cannot suddenly have a rational process of argumentation.
The lady there who has been trying to get in for some time.
But just wanted to put this to perhaps both I don't mind who answers this question. But I really felt that tacitus and Josephus were kind of brushed over because I was offering opinion, or certainly I had been led to believe in my readings and so forth, that many non believers in either in Islam or Christianity absolutely believed the tacitus, who was a historian at the time of Nero, and josefus, who was indeed a piracy and a Jew, were very legitimate outside of Scripture, witnesses and certainly had made very legitimate documentation of what happened at the time. And I know as I said, again, there are folks who believe, who don't have, as most of us in this room have an agenda
or a belief. Would our speakers care to comment on that just a little further.
Perhaps just one comment. The various
factor two secrets to the pharmacy. If it makes up Jesus as the Messiah, strengthens his testimony, he had every reason though an agenda to deny it,
which will give more confidence. I think it's very interesting to
look at some very radical new testament scholars one for example, a few years ago, the Robert
Jesus seminar, the most skeptical of scholars who produced a so called New Testament, which contained what they believed was what Jesus really said. It wasn't a paperback through virtually everything. But even a radical critic like Robert folk,
believe that the one indisputable fact with Jesus was he died in the cross, managed by a Christian, who would do a laugh at the idea of a divine revelation, who threw out most of the New Testament those on arrival and even be recognized. That's one thing historically. Hold on to.
Thank you for that question. First of all, because josefus was a fallacy, and couldn't have believed that Jesus was not the Messiah.
That alone is enough to suggest that he didn't write the passage is attributed to him. Because what is the passage? He died on? A cross rose the third day and he was a good man. Okay, this is the scholars are saying this. I'm not saying this. Quote, the scholars who study the text are unanimous in this point that this particular passage is a later calculated session. If the capitalist or the gospel author the copy is for adding stuff into the bottles, why wouldn't they add to do this? We don't have an actual document written by God because we don't have the original document. The earliest the Josephus wrote in the early second century, in fact, named first century about 90, C,
and 70. c, when he wrote about the Antiquities of the Jews. And there's another book, which he wrote the war of Jews. Okay. Both of these documents were written within the first century. But the first manuscript we have is seven centuries later, seven centuries later, we have only just a ministry. josefus.
origin is one of them, who was writing in the third century, not long after Josephus, he clearly states the josefus, it doesn't mention that passage, you know, where you're there was literally written that he died on the cross and rose on the third day, this is clearly Catholic, a Catholic and at work. Okay. So I'm simply telling you, the, the scholars are of this opinion, that this was a later addition. Okay, the first document of Joseph once we find is from the 12th century in Russian language, and Russian, okay. And that's the only document we have, which contains this passage, the earliest document,
the text of Europe is in Arabic doesn't contain this passage. Okay. So it's a later religion live about about that. I mean, if you study this very subject, and study it thoroughly, I am very sure you will reach the same conclusion. With tacitus, we have the same problem, who wrote the book of tacitus. Otherwise, you know, apart from testimonies about Jesus Christ, tacitus, and josefus are trustworthy. I'm not saying they're not trustworthy. I'm saying these very passages are interpolated, they were added by the Christians to support the claims to support the view of Jesus Christ. Okay, so these because these documents were copied by Christians and Catholics, and they
were changing books at will, on an industrial scale, the Christian scribes were changing books at will, on an industrial scale. This is a known fact. And this is not what I'm saying is what the scholars have to say. So that's why most color don't take these testimonies seriously. So the only source we have on the Gospels for the life of Jesus Christ. Most scholars take them to be very, very dubious, because they are
saying things like the stranger walls and walked around the city of Jerusalem. And many people call them a known act known as testifies to these things, things like that. There are many reasons it's a deep subject historical Jesus is a very, very deep subject. It will take you some time to understand all these things we're saying today, but once you do study, you will come to realize exactly what I'm talking about. Can I just make one comment, in response, most scars in the New Testament, the cutting edge of New Testament studies that they are not saying these things, there is a vast amount of good sound, New Testament scholarship, conservative scholarship, that has every confidence in the
historicity of the New Testament. The amount of Catholic Ooh, and Aberdeen, Washington in the United States Marine Corps in the United States. We could list a long number of highly qualified New Testament scholars who are very confident interested in the New Testament of Josephus passages an interpretive and tribulation my Christians didn't make a very good job of dimensionless theatre and everything else. Good man.
Okay, we have about just under 15 minutes, and I know I can see, don't worry, I can see every single hands going up.
I am going to strangle as many people as possible, but time is very much against us. So I'm going to try and go in the order of people who have an in terms of how long they've been waiting.
I'm just going to name the next three. And if there's time after that, I will come to speak as well see for further up.
yourself, sir. And then you said and then you start the check. Yes, sir. So can we begin? Me? Yes, sir. Some little more speakers. And my name is use of I'm a convert to Islam. I'm a member of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community. And as Mr. Adnan Rashid knows, we are Muslims who believe in the second coming of Jesus has physical damage, who came into power Spirit of Jesus. And I wanted to ask about one verse, which Dan mentioned about Surah Nisa, verse 1571, mercato Allahu wa sallahu, who were lucky enough to be Hello that Jesus was not killed or crucified, but he was made, it was made to appear. So isn't it true that perhaps another reason would be, you know, one more Cthulhu he was not
killed, or masala, boohoo. salagou comes from root word salad, which means something hard like iron, or wood or concrete, but when it's used for a person that means killed in a well known manner. And then so it could say he was not killed. He was not he did not die on the cross with Well, again, should we Hello, Who should we hire means he began he he looked like it. And that's a pronoun. So to know what that word means. You have to go to the word before. So let's say he was not killed. He did not die upon the cross. But he was made to look as if you died upon the cross. And that's why the Quran says there's so much doubt. And also, as Mr. McKay said that the Romans were experts in
crucifying people. And this is why punches pilots in I think it Matthew marveled at how Jesus could be dead after just three hours when you know, the rune of dead, you had your legs broken. And Jesus had died so quickly. And there was evidence as well that the Jews wanted his body because it didn't believe he was dead. And just your thoughts about this first possibility? Thank you for the question. Again, this is stretching the words from this meeting, okay. And we don't find any precedents of this meaning or this interpretation. In the classical division, the prophet explained this, companions understood it, and the later generations also understood it that way that he was
not killed, and he was not crucified. This is a major understanding, literal meaning, okay, that he was put on the cross but didn't die. We can never be certain. Okay, this is a stretch. Apparently, what we see in the Quran is that he was not killed and he was not crucified. The standard meaning of Malibu is that you will not crucified, okay? So that would mean that he wasn't putting across the substitution theory. The substitution theory doesn't come from the Prophet. There is nothing authentic from the prophet to suggest that there was another man put on the cross. Okay. This actually comes from this idea comes from Christians, that were early Christians who believe that it
wasn't Jesus who was put on the cross. It was Simon of Savino from the cross. And these are heretics. Of course, later Christians. They took them to be heretics. These people are known as facilities, followers of a man called facility.