Friday, December 28, 2007

The Bible and Islam: Posted Comments
(that weren't posted) Part 2

It was two days ago that I posted the first part of this apologetic. It was in response to a couple of spam comments that two individuals from Oman submitted for posting at this blog. Essentially, as best I can tell, the wannabe comments were nothing more than plugs for a pro-Islam, anti Christian apologetics website. And while it is certainly not my desire to squelch any discussion with those who may disagree with me theologically, I see no need to publish a link to a website which does nothing more than promote the error of Islam. Especially, of course, if publishing it will not lead to any discussion.

But I do think it the better part of wisdom to address the core of their message, which has to do with various key doctrines involving Christ and the Bible, among others. Last time, I dealt, however briefly, with the first message. As you will recall, one large problem with their argument is that they directly contradict the claims of their own Quran. This had to do specifically with the charge that the Bible is corrupted; a claim that is commonly made by Muslims. However, we found that by saying this, they must either be at odds with the claims of the Quran, (and/or Muhammed whom they claim was infallible) or they must concede that the Quran must be false in this regard. They can't have it both ways. The Quran, which claims to be infallibly provided through Muhammad by Allah claims that the scriptures are reliable.

Now, they want to say that our Scriptures are now corrupt, but they ignore vital evidence -- that we have 24,000 manuscripts and fragments which prove that our Scriptures have been faithfully preserved. So, objective evidence apparently means nothing to them.

This time, I'll repost the second message and at least get a start on dealing with some of the points the commenter ("Islam") included in his message.

Here is the second of the two comments I received from the reader in Oman:

From "Islam", also from Masqat Oman:

"Jesus? - Did He Really Die on the Cross? (Evidence says, NO!.)
Bible - Is It the Word of God? (Experts say, NO!.)
Trinity- Did Jesus or anyone teach this? (Bible says, NO!.)
"Only Begotten Son of God"? Was this Jesus? (Bible, says - NO!).
Are children born in original sin? (Bible says, "Yes!" - but Jesus says, "NO!")

Regarding the second claim in the list, "Is the Bible the Word of God", I think we've already dealt with this. The poster of the comment doesn't even understand his own Quran! So, I suppose they would be forced to either change their argument or face the reality that the Quran isn't accurate (not "Expert"). And since they don't list other "experts", the onus, I believe, is on them to provide the evidence.

The first claim I will deal with (however imperfectly) is "Did Jesus really die on the cross?". And of course they say the evidence says "no". Of course, this is no new argument. Even secularists have attacked the veracity of the scriptures on this. They want to say He passed out, or others will admit He died but they want to explain the empty tomb by saying his body was left on the cross and picked apart by birds.

The evidence for this particular person's argument, I presume, would be the text of the Quran, which states that Jesus was raised to heaven, having put His likeness on another whom died on the cross instead. I quote the following from "Answering Islam":

"What does the Qur'an say about the crucifixion of Jesus?

  • And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger
    - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those
    who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit
    of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain. S. 4:157 Pickthall
  • That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Apostle of God";
    - but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them,
    and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge,
    but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:- S. 4:157 Yusuf Ali
  • And because of their saying (in boast), "We killed Messiah 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah," - but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of 'Iesa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man), and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)]: S. 4:157 Al-Hilali & Khan"
I think it interesting to point out that if we assume the previous claims to be true, then the Quran (which holds Jesus Christ to be a prophet of God) also implies he is a false prophet, for Christ Himself said He would die and be resurrected. Additionally, assuming this allegation to be true, the impersonator would also have had to fulfill the prophecies that Christ fulfilled as He died on the cross. Rather incredible, no? And of course, all this is based on the claim that the Quran is reliable, but we'll get to that later. Suffice it to say that the Quran holds Jesus in high regard (even though they deny his deity). Yet it would make Him out to be a false prophet Whom, according to O.T. law, is worthy of death by stoning. So, to my two commenters, I say "you can't have it both ways...which is it?"

No, it's kind of like saying "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist". I don't have enough faith to believe that a false god gave Jesus his likeness and had someone else die in His place. I think it takes less faith to simply take the Bible at it's Word and say "Jesus died, just as He said He would (Matthew 16:21) and that He was raised from the dead on the third day (ibid), again, just as He said He would." No, I wasn't there. I didn't see it for myself. Even if I had been there, according to the Quran, it would have done me no good because they allege that Jesus and Allah pulled a sleight of hand. This, of course, is pure mysticism. But I trust the Bible which has time and again shown itself to be reliable. . .contrary to the false god of Islam.

For further study on the historicity of the death and resurrection of Christ, check out this link.

Ok. I think I'll pause there. But what have we learned? Simply this: Those who would use the Quran to discredit the Bible and the deity of Christ ultimately have a dilemma, namely, the very document which they want to use as evidence either contradicts what they claim, or it discredits itself. They contradict their own book and contradict what it says. Or, they affirm what it teaches (such as Jesus as a prophet and the accuracy of the Scriptures), without realizing that in the process they contradict themselves (a Jesus that falsely predicted His own death and resurrection and thus a false prophet).

Is it just me, or does this make one's head spin?

Until next time....

No comments: