Why Didn't Jesus say I am God? He Did!
By Quennel Gale
In
this article we will respond to Sami Zaatari’s non-challenge of “Prove to me if
Jesus said he was God”. Before we do this, we must remind our readers that
Muslim propagandists like Zaatari are liars and wouldn’t accept Jesus being God
even if it were shown that Christ explicitly said he was in the Bible. A
perfect example illustrating this point is the crucifixion of Christ. Notice in
the following passages that Jesus predicts his crucifixion and death:
From that time Jesus began to
show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem
and SUFFER MANY THINGS, from the elders and chief priests and scribes, AND BE
KILLED AND ON THE THIRD DAY BE RAISED. Matt. 16:21
As they were gathering in Galilee, JESUS SAID TO THEM, 'The Son of Man is to
be delivered unto the hands of men, AND THEY WILL KILL HIM, and He will be
raised on the third day.' And they were greatly distressed, Matt. 17:22
When Jesus had finished all these
sayings, He said to His disciples, 'You know that after two days the
Passover is coming, and THE SON OF MAN WILL BE DELIVERED UP TO BE CRUCIFIED.
Matt. 26:1-2
HE BEGAN TO TEACH THEM that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be
rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, AND BE KILLED, and
after three days rise again. Mark 8:31
For He was TEACHING HIS
DISCIPLES and saying to them, 'The Son of
Man will be delivered into the hands of men, and they will KILL HIM, and
when HE IS KILLED, after three days He will rise.” Mark 9:31
And they were on the road going up
to Jerusalem,
and Jesus was walking ahead of them, and they were amazed and those who
followed were afraid. And taking the twelve again He began to tell them what
was to happen to Him, saying, 'Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the
Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they will
condemn Him to death, and deliver Him to the Gentiles, and they will mock Him
and spit upon Him and scourge Him AND KILL HIM; and after three days He will
rise.' Mark 10:32-34
The Son of Man must suffer many
things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes and be
KILLED and on the third day be raised." Luke 9:22
In
all of the above passages Jesus explicitly stated that “he would die and be
crucified and be raised on the third day”. However neither Muslims nor the
Quran believe this very clear statement. If Muslims don’t believe what Jesus
says regarding his crucifixion and subsequent resurrection then what makes them
think that they can lie to us and perpetrate the idea that they would believe
that Jesus claimed to be God if he explicitly said “I AM GOD”? They won’t.
Hence,
Sami Zaatari’s challenge is nothing more than a big waste of time; it is cheap
debate tricks used to score points. In fact, we are so convinced that Zaatari
isn’t serious about this challenge that we doubt that he would believe that
Jesus was God even if Jesus personally appeared to him and said that he was!
With
that in mind let’s answer his challenge.
Missionary Sam
Shamoun has tried to respond to this common question which is often posed to
Christians, which is "Why didn't Jesus ever say I Am God?" if he was
God?!
Shamoun has come
out with the worst reasons as to why Jesus said no such
thing, and it is that to which I shall be refuting.
Response:
Actually
Sami Zaatari believes that Shamoun’s reasoning isn’t good simply because he
refuses to believe the contextual meaning as to what “GOD” would mean to the
Jews in Jesus’ time. This is why Sam used these scholars to say:
The simple answer as to why Jesus
didn’t simply come out and say, "I am God" is because of the
confusion this would have caused the Jews living at that time. Noted New
Testament Scholar and Catholic Theologian Raymond E. Brown states it best:
"The question concerns Jesus
a Galilean Jew of the first third of the first century, for whom ‘God’ would
have a meaning specified by his background and the theological language of the
time. By way of simplification (and perhaps oversimplification) let me say that
I think by a Jew of that period ‘God’ would have been thought of as One
dwelling in the heavens - among many attributes. Therefore, a question posed to
Jesus on earth, ‘Do you think you are God?’ WOULD MEAN DID HE THINK HE WAS THE
ONE DWELLING IN HEAVEN. And you can see that would have been an
inappropriate question, since Jesus was visibly on earth. As a
matter of fact the question was never asked of him; at most he was asked about
his relationship to God." (Brown, Responses to 101 Questions on the
Bible [Paulist Press, Mahwah, N.J., 1990], p. 98)
Another NT scholar, this time an
evangelical one, concurs with Brown. Former atheist turned Christian apologist
Lee Strobel interviewed Ben Witherington and asked him basically the same
question, namely, why did Jesus never come out and say he was God. Here is
Witherington’s response:
"The truth is that Jesus was
a bit mysterious about his identity, wasn’t he?" I asked as Witherington
pulled up a chair across from me. "He tended to shy away from forthrightly
proclaiming himself to be the Messiah or Son of God. Was that because he didn’t
think of himself in those terms or because he had other reasons?"
"No, it’s not because he
didn’t think of himself in those terms," Witherington said as he settled
into his chair and crossed his legs. "If he had simply announced, ‘Hi,
folks; I’m God,’ that would have been heard as ‘I’m Yahweh,’ because the Jews
of his day didn’t have any concept of the Trinity. They only knew of God the
Father–whom they called Yahweh–and not God the Son or God the Holy Spirit.
"So if someone were to say he
was God, that wouldn’t have made any sense to them and would have been seen as
clear-cut blasphemy. And it would have been counterproductive to Jesus in his
efforts to get people to listen to his message.
"Besides, there were already
a host of expectations about what the Messiah would look like, and Jesus didn’t
want to be pigeonholed into somebody else’s categories. Consequently, he was
very careful about what he said publicly. In private with his disciples–that
was a different story, but the gospels primarily tell us about what he did in
public." (Strobel, The Case For Christ [Zondervan Publishing House;
Grand Rapids, MI, 1998 - Pocket Size Edition], pp. 178-179)
Therefore, for Jesus to say that
he was God without qualification would have meant that he was claiming to be
the same Person commonly referred to by both Jews and Christians as the Father. Yet Jesus was not the same Person as the Father, but was
personally distinct from him, although sharing the same essence and nature with
him. (http://answeringislam.net/Shamoun/q_jesus_claiming_deity.htm,
Added Emphasis ours)
Sami
Zaatari wants Jesus to ignore his historical and cultural context and not to
take into consideration how his audience in the first century would have
reacted and understood his claim if he simply came out and said he was God in
those precise words. Zaatari presumes that Jesus is speaking to a 21st
century biblically literate Christian audience who would understand the use of
such language and not assume that Jesus was claiming to be God the Father. How
foolish can this guy be? He wants Jesus to speak to a 1st century
Jewish audience in the same way that he would speak to a literate Christian
group who have come to understand the intricacies of the doctrine of the
blessed and holy Trinity.
A
sign of a great communicator is the ability to explain complex truths in a
manner that would not confuse the audience but help them grasp the point being
made, irrespective of whether they accept that point or not. And since Jesus is
the greatest communicator that ever walked this earth, we would expect that he
would not use language that would confuse his audience into thinking that he
was claiming to be the same Person as the Father, which is what they would have
understood from his simply saying that he was God in those exact words. We would expect Christ to speak in the
language and thought patterns that the people of his day would clearly
recognize, which is precisely what he did.
This
is why Jesus used language that drove his point home more clearly,
specifically, that he is God even though he is not the Father. One of the ways that
Jesus communicated this Divine truth is by calling himself the Son of God in a
unique and special way:
And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who
sees THE SON AND BELIEVES IN HIM may have everlasting life; and I WILL
RAISE HIM UP AT THE LAST DAY." John 6:40
"Moreover, the Father judges
no one, but has entrusted all judgment to THE SON, that all may HONOR
THE SON JUST AS they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does
not honor the Father, who sent him." John 5:22-23
For God so loved the world that He
gave HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, that WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM should
not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send HIS SON into
the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be
saved. John 3:16-17
"He who believes in Him is not
condemned; but HE WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE is condemned already, because he has
not believed in THE NAME OF THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD. John 3:18
Thus,
Jesus knew that the best way to identify himself as God without the people assuming
that he was claming to be the Father was to say that he was the unique Son of
God. He knew that this would avoid any confusion that the words “I am God” would
have caused in their minds.
And
this is precisely what his audience understood him to be saying, namely, that
by calling himself God’s Son Jesus was claiming to be God without this making
him the Father:
"And this was why the Jews
persecuted Jesus, because he did this on the sabbath. But Jesus answered them,
‘My Father is working still, AND I AM WORKING.’ This was why the
Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath but
also called God his Father, making himself equal (ison) with God."
John 5:16-18
We read in Scoffield’s notes on the Greek text that:
Literally, “His own Father”-Greek- patera
idion. It is clear that the Jews understood that Jesus was claiming to
be God.’” (Scoffield NKJV, footnote on John 5:18; pg 843; 1989)
Jesus by his own admission is claiming to be God here! As
Scoffield’s notes imply, the words “patera idion” indicates that God was
Jesus’ Father in a unique and different way which made him equal with God. Just
as the late, world-renowned Greek NT scholar A.T.
Robertson noted:
But also called God his own Father (alla kai patera idion elege ton qeon). "His own" (idion) IN A SENSE NOT TRUE
OF OTHERS. That is precisely what Jesus meant by "My Father." See
Romans
8:32 for o idioß
uioß,
"his own Son." Making himself equal with God (ison eauton poiwn twi qewi). Isoß is an old common
adjective (in papyri also) and means equal. In Philippians
2:6 Paul calls the Pre-incarnate Christ isa qewi, "equal to God" (plural isa, attributes of God).
Bernard thinks that Jesus would not claim to be isoß qewi because in John
14:28 he says: "The Father is greater than I." And yet he says in
John
14:7 that the one who sees him sees in him the Father. Certainly the
Jews understood Jesus to claim equality with the Father in nature and privilege
and power as also in John
10:33; John
19:7. Besides, if the Jews misunderstood Jesus on this point, it was
open and easy for him to deny it and to clear up the misapprehension. This is
precisely what he does not do. On the contrary Jesus gives a powerful
apologetic in defence of his claim to equality with the Father (verses John
19-47). (Source)
Jesus was essentially saying that
because God was his spiritual (not physical) Father in a special manner he had
the right to perform certain functions and to act in certain ways that no other
child of God could. Thus, by making such an assertion Jesus was expressly
claming to have THE VERY SAME NATURE OF GOD HIMSELF.
To illustrate the point further,
just as human fathers have children that share their same nature, God the
Father likewise has a Divine Son who has his very own essence and nature in all
its fullness. Moreover, just as human sons are personally distinct from their
fathers, even though they share the same essence, in a similar manner the
Divine Son is personally distinct from his Divine Father even though both have
the very same exact nature.
Interestingly, even the Old
Testament writers knew that God has a Divine Son who was equal with him in
nature:
"Who has gone up to heaven and
come down? Who has gathered up the wind in the hollow of his hands? Who has
wrapped up the waters in his cloak? Who has established all the ends of the
earth? What is his name, AND THE NAME OF HIS SON? Tell me if you
know!" Proverbs 30:4
According to the Jewish OT the One
who established the earth is none other than Yahweh God:
For thus says the LORD, WHO CREATED THE HEAVENS, WHO IS
GOD, Who formed the earth and made it, WHO HAS ESTABLISHED IT, Who
did not create it in vain, Who formed it to be inhabited: "I am the
LORD, and there is no other. Isaiah 45:18
Agur is asking about the name of the Son of God, with name
here signifying the nature and essence of the subject. What Agur was basically
saying is that not only are God’s nature and ways incomprehensible to man, the
nature and acts of the Son are just as incomprehensible as well. This is
similar to what Jesus himself said:
“All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one
knows who the Son is except the Father, and no one knows who the Father is
except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.” Luke 10:22
Just as the Father is
incomprehensible so is his Son, and just as no one completely knows the Son
except the Father in a similar manner no one comprehensively knows the Father
except his Son!
Because we know that Jesus claimed
to be THE Son of God the OT tells us how to treat him:
Serve the LORD with fear, And
rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, And you perish
in the way, When His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all those who
put their trust in Him. Psalms 2:11-12
In Psalm 2 we have a prophetic picture which should be read
in its entirety. In vv. 2-3 it describes the time when the nations will stand
against God and against his Anointed One (Mashiho, from which our
English word Messiah comes). God says in verse 6 that he will nevertheless
establish this Messiah as his King on Zion,
his holy hill:
Why have nations tumultuously assembled? And do peoples
meditate vanity? Station themselves do kings of the earth, And princes have
been united together, Against Jehovah, AND AGAINST HIS MESSIAH (Mashiho): `Let us draw off Their cords, And
cast from us Their thick bands.' He who is sitting in the heavens doth laugh,
The Lord doth mock at them. Then doth He speak unto them in His anger, And in
His wrath He doth trouble them: `And I -- I have anointed My King, Upon Zion -- My holy hill.' I
declare concerning a statute: Jehovah said unto me, `My Son Thou [art], I
to-day have brought thee forth. Ask of Me and I give nations -- thy
inheritance, And thy possession -- the ends of earth. Psalms 2:1-88
YLT
In verse 7 Messiah steps forward to declare the
decree by which his coronation shall be accomplished, saying: "I will
proclaim the decree of the Lord: ‘He said to me, “You are my Son; today I have
become your Father. Ask of me, and I will make the nations (goyim) your
inheritance.”’”
Furthermore, in Psalm 2:11-12 we are solemnly instructed
to:
Serve the LORD with fear, And rejoice
with trembling. KISS THE SON (nashqu bar), lest He be angry,
And you perish in the way, When His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are
all those who put their trust in Him. Psalms 2:11-12
The Hebrew for "kiss the Son" is nashqu bar. Even
if this is translated, as some would have it, "Do homage in purity,"
the homage is to the Lord of verse 2 and to the Son of verse 7. The Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) clearly indicates that
there is a Divine personality who is called the Son of God!
Some Muslims have attempted to link this passage, particularly
Psalms 2:7, to David; however this is easily refuted since neither the Holy
Bible nor the Quran calls David the Messiah nor does either one claim that one
must put their trust in David. Hence, to call David “the Son” in this verse
would refute all of Islam and the Quran because this passage explicitly refers
to THE MESSIAH, who is Jesus according to Islam!
Hence, both the NT data and the clear evidence from the OT
show that Christ is Divine and that he made explicit claims to Deity. That’s
why the Jews wanted to have him killed:
"The Jews answered him, ‘We
have a law, and by that law he ought to die, because he has made himself
THE SON OF GOD.’" John 19:7
"And the high priest stood up
in the midst, and asked Jesus, ‘Have you no answer to make? What is it that
these men testify against you?’ But he was silent and made no answer. Again the
high priest asked him, ‘Are you THE CHRIST, THE SON OF THE BLESSED?’
And Jesus said, ‘I AM; and you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand
of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.’ And the high priest tore his
garments, and said, ‘Why do we still need witnesses? You have heard
his blasphemy. What is your decision?’ And they all
condemned him as deserving death." Mark 14:60-64
Claiming to be the literal (albeit spiritual) Son of God
himself was equivalent to claiming to be God which would be blasphemy if the
person wasn’t who he claimed to be. Yet if a person is indeed the actual,
unique Son of God then such a person must be worshiped as Deity.
Another line of evidence supporting the Deity of Christ is
the fact that the Bible says that God has never been seen, specifically God the
Father. Yet both the Old and New Testaments refer to God appearing to people on
more than one occasion.
When we piece all of this together then the meaning is that
whenever God appeared in the OT that this was GOD THE SON:
"No one has ever seen God. It
is GOD THE ONLY SON, who is close to the Father's heart, who has made him
known." John 1:18 NRSV
Note, once again, how this reaffirms the point of Jesus
being God’s Son in a unique manner. Jesus is the Son who has the very nature of
God and could therefore make God known to man.
When you take this in light of the fact that even Muhammad,
Zaatari’s own false prophet, recognized what “Son of God” meant it becomes
strikingly clear that Jesus did explicitly claim to be God himself! For
instance, the Quran says that to believe that Jesus is the Son of God is to
believe that he is God and is to commit the sin of associating others with
Allah (called shirk):
The Jews say, 'Ezra is the Son of God'; the Christians say, 'The
Messiah is the Son of God.' That is the utterance of their mouths,
conforming with the unbelievers before them. God assail them! How they are
perverted! They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords apart from
God, and
the Messiah, Mary's son -- and they were commanded to serve but One
God; there is no god but He; glory be to Him, above that they associate
--S. 9:30-31 Arberry
Muhammad
further reason (correctly I might add) that God’s unique Son must be worshiped:
Say: "If the Lord of Mercy had a son, I WOULD BE THE
FIRST TO WORSHIP HIM". S. 43:82
Ibn Kathir comments:
Allah has no Offspring Allah says:
[قُلْ]
(Say)
-- `O Muhammad' --
[إِن
كَانَ
لِلرَّحْمَـنِ
وَلَدٌ
فَأَنَاْ أَوَّلُ
الْعَـبِدِينَ]
(If the Most Gracious had
a son, then I am the first of the worshippers.) meaning, `if this were so, then
I would worship Him on that basis, because I am one of His servants; I obey all
that He commands me and I am not too arrogant or proud to worship Him.' This conditional
phrase does not mean that what is described could happen nor that is possible
as Allah says:
[لَّوْ
أَرَادَ
اللَّهُ أَن
يَتَّخِذَ
وَلَداً
لاَّصْطَفَى
مِمَّا
يَخْلُقُ مَا
يَشَآءُ
سُبْحَـنَهُ
هُوَ اللَّهُ
الْوَحِدُ الْقَهَّارُ
]
(Had Allah willed to take a son, He
could have chosen whom He willed out of those whom He created. But glory be to
Him! He is Allah, the One, the Irresistible.) (39:4). Allah says here:
[سُبْحَـنَ
رَبِّ
السَّمَـوَتِ
وَالاٌّرْضِ
رَبِّ
الْعَرْشِ
عَمَّا
يَصِفُونَ ]
(Glorified is the Lord of the heavens
and the earth, the Lord of the Throne! Exalted be He from all that they ascribe
(to Him).) meaning, exalted and sanctified and glorified be the Creator of all
things far above having any offspring,
for He is Unique, One and Eternally Self-Sufficient. There is NONE EQUAL TO HIM
OR LIKE HIM, and He does not have ANY OFFSPRING.
[فَذَرْهُمْ
يَخُوضُواْ]
(So leave them (alone) to speak
nonsense) means, in their ignorance and misguidance,
[وَيَلْعَبُواْ]
(and play) in their world,
[حَتَّى
يُلَـقُواْ
يَوْمَهُمُ
الَّذِى يُوعَدُونَ]
(until they meet the Day of theirs
which they have been promised.) which is the Day of Resurrection, i.e., then
they will come to know what their end and destination will be on that Day. (Source; Tafsir
Ibn Kathir; S. 43:82 emphasis ours)
The
hadith provides further support that Muhammad believed that the title Son of
God implied Deity:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
During the lifetime of the Prophet some people
said, : O Allah's Apostle! Shall we see our Lord on the Day of Resurrection?"
The Prophet said, "Yes; do you have any difficulty in seeing the sun at
midday when it is bright and there is no cloud in the sky?" They replied,
"No." He said, "Do you have any difficulty in seeing the moon on
a full moon night when it is bright and there is no cloud in the sky?" They
replied, "No." The Prophet said, "(Similarly) you will have no
difficulty in seeing Allah on the Day of Resurrection as you have no difficulty
in seeing either of them. On the Day of Resurrection, a call-maker will
announce, "Let every nation follow that which they used to
worship." THEN NONE OF THOSE WHO USED TO WORSHIP ANYTHING OTHER THAN ALLAH
like idols AND OTHER DEITIES but will fall in Hell (Fire), till there
will remain none but those who used to worship Allah, both those who were
obedient (i.e. good) and those who were disobedient (i.e. bad) and the
remaining party of the people of the Scripture. THEN THE JEWS will be called
upon and it will be said to them, 'Who do you use to worship?' They will say,
'We used to worship Ezra, the son of Allah.' It will be said to them, 'YOU ARE
LIARS, FOR ALLAH HAS NEVER TAKEN ANYONE AS A WIFE OR A SON. What do you
want now?' They will say, 'O our Lord! We are thirsty, so give us something to
drink.' They will be directed and addressed thus, 'Will you drink,' whereupon
THEY WILL BE GATHERED UNTO HELL (FIRE) which will look like a mirage whose
different sides will be destroying each other. Then they will fall into the
Fire. AFTERWARDS THE CHRISTIANS WILL BE CALLED upon and it will be said to
them, 'Who do you use to worship?' THEY WILL SAY, 'WE USED TO WORSHIP JESUS,
THE SON OF ALLAH.' It will be said to them, 'YOU ARE LIARS, for Allah has never
taken anyone as a wife or a son,' Then it will be SAID TO THEM, 'What do
you want?' They will say what the FORMER PEOPLE have said. Then, when there
remain (in the gathering) NONE BUT THOSE WHO USED TO WORSHIP ALLAH (ALONE, the
real Lord of the Worlds) WHETHER THEY WERE OBEDIENT OR DISOBEDIENT. Then
(Allah) the Lord of the worlds will come to them in a shape nearest to the picture
they had in their minds about Him. It will be said, 'What are you waiting for?'
Every nation have followed what they used to worship.' They will reply, 'We
left the people in the world when we were in great need of them and we did not
take them as friends. Now we are waiting for our Lord Whom we used to worship.'
Allah will say, 'I am your Lord.' They will say twice or thrice, 'We do not
worship any besides Allah.'" (Sahih Bukhari, Volume
6, Book 60, Number 105)
Hence,
Zaatari can continue to play stupid all he wants. The Jewish understanding of
Jesus’ claims to Sonship, the NT Scriptures, and his own false prophet all
serve to refute him in his quest to deny that Jesus claimed to be God. After
all, saying that you are God’s unique Son is not only blasphemous in the
religion of Judaism (since it denies that God has such a Son), but it is also
considered to be shirk in Islam. The reason? Because such an assertion means
that the person is basically claiming to be God, that’s why!
Challenge refuted.
For starters this
article proves Shamoun is a liar, because if you listen to our debate
you will see that I asked this exact same question to Shamoun, rather than
admitting it during the debate that no such verse existed, he went on for 2
hours non stop saying he will bring me the verse! You can hear it for yourself,
in fact I had to remind him to bring me this verse since the debate kept going
on and I was still waiting for this challenge to be met and it never was! Hence
thank you Sam, thanks for showing everyone that you are a liar, and that you
lied in the debate to deceive Muslims and Christians who don't know the Bible,
because by Shamoun saying I will bring the verse this may have made a few
Muslims and Christians who don't know the Bible actually believe that such a
verse exists, they will simply take Shamoun's word for it and Shamoun knew
this, this is what you call missionary tactics, they are liars by nature and
all they do is put on a show for you.
Shamoun's very own
colleague wrote a review of our debate, and concerning this point this is what
he wrote:
Nevertheless,
Shamoun did say that he would answer Zaatari's challenge to bring forth an
explicit reference of Jesus, but never got around to it. Thus I gave Zaatari a
pearl for that. (http://answeringislam.net/Authors/Wildcat/shamoun_zaatari_debate.htm)
So notice, even
Shamoun's own friend admits that Shamoun said he would meet my challenge of
EXPLICITLY bringing a verse where Jesus says I am God, but now in this new
article Shamoun is arguing as to why Jesus never said such a thing! Hence Sam
was lying, thank you.
Response:
Here is where Zaatari exposes that he is a liar and is
following in the footsteps of his false prophet. Since Zaatari is appealing to
Wildcat’s assessment then he surely must have read the following note:
Addendum:
Some of the points which Sam Shamoun didn't address
due to time constraints are carefully discussed elsewhere. Is the
Prophet Daniel Worshiped as God? deals with the issue of King
Nebuchadnezzar bowing to Daniel, and the so-called unanswered challenge IS
ANSWERED in an endnote of the article Jesus,
the Lord of the Sabbath.
The article clearly says that Shamoun DID ADDRESS Zaatari’s
challenge to show him where Jesus said he is God. And to further prove that
this liar knows that Shamoun addressed his challenge, Zaatari wrote an article
to refute Shamoun’s answer to his challenge! See, for instance, the following: http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/counter_rebuttal_to_sam_shamoun_6.htm
How can this liar therefore have the audacity to claim that
Shamoun NEVER answered his challenge but ran from it when he is written an
answer to Shamoun’s response and even has a link to it in his article?
Furthermore, Zaatari not only has no problems lying to
people, much like his false god and dead prophet, but he also suffers from a
lack of reading comprehension. He makes the assertion that Shamoun admits in
his recent article that there is no verse where Jesus claimed to be God in
those exact words, when this is not what Shamoun said. Here is what he wrote
for the readers to see:
This doesn’t mean, however, that Jesus in his earthly ministry never told his
disciples that he was God in those precise words. He may have revealed
to them that he was God in the flesh, but only after the idea had been
ingrained in their mind that he wasn’t claiming to be the Father.
And:
The only problem is that we do not have a record of him
actually saying it, at least during his earthly ministry.
But not having a written record of Christ telling his followers that he is God
exactly in those words is not the same as saying that he never made this
assertion, since the Gospel writers did not set out to give us an exhaustive
list of everything Jesus said or did:
Again:
Thus, to argue, as some do, that Jesus never said he was God
in those exact words while on earth solely because there is
no record within the NT that he did is nothing more than an argument from
silence, which is a logical fallacy. After all, absence of evidence is not
evidence of absence, i.e. just because the NT doesn't record Jesus claiming to
be God precisely in that manner doesn’t mean that he never did say it,
specifically to his followers who believed in him.
Shamoun never claimed that there was no verse where Jesus
said he was God in those exact words. Rather, he plainly says that there is no
recorded statement of Jesus saying this DURING HIS EARTHLY MINISTRY, while he
was on earth! That is why Shamoun went on to quote Revelation 21:6-7 in his
other article since these words were uttered by Christ WHILE HE WAS IN HEAVEN,
not on earth!
So you can see that this guy is lying through his teeth,
like his prophet, and thinks he can get away with it.
Moreover, in trying to refute Sam Shamoun on the issue of
Jesus’ claim to Deity in the book of Revelation Zaatari claimed that:
My Response
I must say this is very funny, why? Because I
SPECIFICALLY ADRESSED THESE VERSES IN THE DEBATE!!!!!!!!
So Shamoun is LYING, these verses were brought up in
the debate and he was REFUTED ON IT, so once again this missionary gets exposed
for what he is.
Here is the response I gave which was basically from a
previous article of mine:
Revelations
21: 1-8
1 And I saw
a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were
passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy city, new
Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for
her husband. 3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the
tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his
people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. 4 And God shall
wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither
sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things
are passed away. 5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all
things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the
end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life
freely. 7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God,
and he shall be my son. 8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable,
and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars,
shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which
is the second death.
This is not Jesus speaking but rather the Father. As it says I will be his God
and he will be my son. Or does Jesus have a son now? (Source)
Zaatari’s article was very amusing to say the least! In the
book of Revelation we see that both God the Father and the Lamb share the same
divine throne:
"To him who overcomes, I will
give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I overcame and sat down
with my Father ON HIS THRONE." Revelation 3:21
"Therefore, 'they are
before THE THRONE OF GOD and serve him day and night in his temple; and he
who sits on the throne will spread his tent over them. Never again will they
hunger; never again will they thirst. The sun will not beat upon them, nor any
scorching heat. For the Lamb AT THE CENTER OF THE THRONE
will be their shepherd; he will lead them to springs of living water. And
God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.'" Revelation 7:15-17
The references do not speak of the thrones of God and of the
Lamb, but rather of their throne (singular). What makes this even more
interesting is that John was given a vision where he saw all creation, not just
the angels, worshiping the Lord Jesus:
"And I saw in the right hand
of him who was seated on the throne a scroll written within and on the back,
sealed with seven seals; and I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud
voice, ‘Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?’ And no
one in heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or to
look into it, and I wept much that no one was found worthy to open
the scroll or to look into it. Then one of the elders said to me, ‘Weep not; lo,
the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he
can open the scroll and its seven seals.’ And between the throne
and the four living creatures and among the elders, I saw a Lamb standing, as
though it had been slain, with seven horns and with seven eyes, which are the
seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth; and he went and took
the scroll from the right hand of him who was seated on the throne. And when he
had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell
down BEFORE THE LAMB, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls
full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints; and they sang a new song,
saying, ‘Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were
slain and by your blood did ransom men for God from every tribe and tongue and
people and nation, and have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and
they shall reign on earth.’ Then I looked, and I heard around the
throne and the living creatures and the elders the voice of many angels,
numbering myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud
voice, ‘Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and
wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!’ And I heard
EVERY CREATURE in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and
all therein, saying, ‘To him who sits upon the throne AND TO THE
LAMB be blessing and honor and glory and might for ever and ever!’ And
the four living creatures said, ‘Amen!’ and the elders fell down and
worshiped." Revelation 5:1-14
Notice here that although God is
explicitly shown sitting on the throne, the Lamb IS ALSO WITH GOD AT THE CENTER
OF THE THRONE AND RECEIVES WORSHIP FROM ALL CREATION!
More importantly, notice that in
this text Jesus receives the very same exact honor that God receives. This
proves that what Jesus meant in John 5:23 was that everyone must give Christ
the very same exact worship that the Father receives.
In light of the above let us look at
Revelation 21 once again:
THEN HE WHO SAT ON THE THRONE said, "Behold, I make all things new." And He
said to me, "Write, for these words are true and faithful." And He
said to me, "It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and
the End. I will give of the fountain of the water of life freely to him who
thirsts. He who overcomes shall inherit all things, AND I WILL BE HIS
GOD and he shall be My son. Rev. 21:5-8
According to Revelation the One “WHO SAT ON THE THRONE” is
- THE FATHER (Rev. 3:21)
- THE LAMB Jesus (Rev.
3:21, 5:1-14, 7:15-17)
That Jesus also sits on the throne shows just how little
merit Zaatari’s argument holds since he must be able to prove, not simply
assume, that it is the Father, not the Son, who is speaking at this point. In
fact, since both the Father and the Son are sitting on the same throne it may
even be that both are speaking in Revelation 21:5-8 which means that both of
them are identifying themselves as the one God of all believers!
Now with all of
this said, let us respond to Shamoun's ?reasons' as to why Jesus never said I
am God (which proves he is not God!):
The simple answer
as to why Jesus didn't simply come out and say, "I am God" is because
of the confusion this would have caused the Jews living at that time.
This is perhaps
the worst answer Shamoun could have though off, little does he know that by
giving such a response he is simply causing more problems for his own
non-existent faith! Shamoun claims Jesus said no such thing because the Jews
would be confused, however so people to this day are still confused if we want
to use Shamoun's criteria! According to Shamoun, he believes I alongside every
other Muslim and Jew are confused lost souls, hence what was the point of Jesus
sparing a few Jews at his time which meant that he would confuse billions of
other people in the next generations which comes all the way down to 2007!
People to this day
say Jesus is not God because he never claimed it, hence if Jesus didn't want to
create confusion then it seems that tactic backfired really badly because there
seems to be more confused people today than there were in his time! This alone
proves Jesus is not God, since he would've known this fact in his time since
God is all-knowing, so thank you Sam your reason is actually a refutation to
your own belief!
Secondly notice
Shamoun says the Jews would have been confused, now we must ask ourselves why
would the Jews become confused? Well, the thought that God becomes a man is
just absurd! So why would God ever even think of making things so complicating
and confusing for them?! This sounds like a strange God to me, God knows his
people, so will God do the most confusing thing for them, or will he do
something simple and easy for them to understand? The answer is very clear, it
seems Christians have the most confusing and complicated beliefs and the reason
why its so complicating and confusing is because its all blasphemy and made up!
Christians say 3=1, they say the all powerful becomes a baby, they say God dies
for our sin, and on it goes, everything is confusing, everything makes no sense
with rationality, and how does the Christian respond? It's all a mystery!
Response:
Just because people today claim that Jesus isn’t God
doesn’t mean it is correct. We don’t base our beliefs on what people say, but on
what the NT teaches. The language of the NT itself clearly shows that Jesus
claimed to be God.
Also Zaatari seems to get stuck in trying to explain why he
believes the Jews would be confused. It was shown very clearly that for Jesus
to claim to be God he wouldn’t have to necessarily say “I AM GOD,” since this
may have been misunderstood to mean that he was the Father. By saying that he
was the Son of God Jesus would have been communicating the fact that he is God
without being the Father.
For example, if I were to say I am the son of a human, this
would mean that I am fully human though different from my father.
If I were to say I am the son of an animal, this would mean
that I am an animal though different from my father.
Likewise, if I were to claim to be the unique Son of God,
this would mean that I am God though different from THE FATHER.
As we saw earlier, even Muhammad and Allah recognized the
ramifications of this. Yet Zaatari wants us to believe that Jesus never
specifically claimed to be God solely because he didn’t say so in those precise
words. How hilarious!
The only problem is
that we do not have a record of him actually saying it, at least during his
earthly ministry. But not having a written record of Christ telling his
followers that he is God exactly in those words is not the same as saying that
he never made this assertion,
This is too funny,
I really am laughing, I seek refuge from the shaytan from his blasphemy!
Shamoun, if no such statement exists why did you lie to me and the audience
then that such a verse exists and that you would bring it?
Secondly, notice
how silly Shamoun's argument is, he claims ah yes maybe Jesus did say I am God,
but his disciples just didn't feel like recording it or didn't bother writing
it down!!!!! Are we really to believe such junk? That such a powerful statement
by Jesus would not be recorded down by his most loved and followed disciples?!
Thirdly, we can
very easily use Shamoun's evidence against him, I can clearly make arguments
saying Jesus said the prophet Muhammad will be after me, that Islam will be the
true religion, I can make all these arguments, and a Christian cant say that's
false because the Bible says no such thing, I will simply say hey just because
its not recorded down doesn't mean it wasn't said! I am using the missionaries
own weak argument against him! Indeed it is amazing as to how far a blasphemous
idolater will go to defend such corrupt beliefs.
Response:
Actually Jesus did explicitly claim to be God in
the Gospels; it is found in the story of the Gadarene demoniac:
Then they sailed to the country of
the Gadarenes, which is opposite Galilee. And
when He stepped out on the land, there met Him a certain man from the city
who had demons for a long time. And he wore no clothes, nor did he live in a
house but in the tombs. WHEN HE SAW JESUS, he cried out, fell down before
Him, and with a loud voice said, "What have I to do with You, Jesus, Son
of the Most High God? I beg You, do not torment me!" FOR HE HAD COMMANDED
THE UNCLEAN SPIRIT TO COME OUT OF THE MAN. For it had often seized him, and
he was kept under guard, bound with chains and shackles; and he broke the bonds
and was driven by the demon into the wilderness. JESUS ASKED HIM, saying,
"What is your name?" And he said, "Legion," because
many demons had entered him. And they begged Him that He would not command
them to go out into the abyss. Now a herd of many swine was feeding there
on the mountain. So they begged Him that He would permit them to enter them.
And He permitted them. THEN THE DEMONS WENT OUT OF THE MAN and entered
the swine, and the herd ran violently down the steep place into the lake and
drowned. When those who fed them saw what had happened, they fled and told it
in the city and in the country. Then they went out to see what had happened, and
came to Jesus, and found the man from whom the demons had departed, sitting at
the feet of Jesus, clothed and in his right mind. And they were afraid.
They also who had seen it told them by what means he who had been
demon-possessed was healed. Then the whole multitude of the surrounding
region of the Gadarenes asked Him to depart from them, for they were seized
with great fear. And He got into the boat and returned. Now the man from
whom the demons had departed begged Him that he might be with Him. BUT JESUS
SENT HIM AWAY, SAYING, "RETURN TO YOUR OWN HOUSE AND TELL WHAT GREAT
THINGS GOD HAS DONE FOR YOU." And he went his way and PROCLAIMED
THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE CITY WHAT GREAT THINGS JESUS HAD DONE FOR HIM. (Luke
8:26-39)
We see that after Jesus healed the demon possessed man he
explicitly tells him to:
"Return
to your own house and tell what great things GOD HAS DONE FOR YOU."
And yet the man,
“went his
way and proclaimed throughout the whole city what great things JESUS HAD
DONE FOR HIM.”
The man understood that Jesus was identifying himself as
God since he obeyed Christ’s orders to proclaim the great things God had done
for him by going around telling the people all the great things Jesus had done!
Note that:
-
The man was commanded
to proclaim the great things God had done.
-
The man goes around
telling the people the great things Jesus had done.
-
This, therefore, shows
that Jesus is the God who had done these great things for the man!
At the very least, this shows that Luke understood that
Jesus was identifying himself as God.
If Jesus didn't want the person to confuse him with God he could
have told him to, "Proclaim the great things God has done for you through me", just like in the
following examples:
This is the same Moses whom they
had rejected with the words, 'Who made you ruler and judge?' He was sent to be
their ruler and DELIVER BY GOD HIMSELF, THROUGH THE ANGEL who appeared to
him in the bush. Acts 7:35
On arriving there, they gathered
the church together and reported all that God had done through them and
how he had opened the door of faith to the Gentiles. Acts 14:27
When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church
and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done
through them. Acts 15:4
The whole assembly became silent as
they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and
wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. Acts 15:12
God did extraordinary miracles through Paul.
Acts 19:11
In Jesus’ case he didn’t say this to the man, which would
have insured that the reader would not have mistakenly assumed that Christ was
claming to be the God who was doing these great things for him. At the very
least, Luke could have avoided any confusion by not mentioning the fact that
the man went around telling people all the great things Jesus had done right
after the latter had plainly told him to proclaim the great things God had done
for him.
If Zaatari tries to use verses where God is said to be doing
things through Jesus we need to remind him of this:
When he heard this, Jesus said,
"This sickness will not end in death. No, it is for God's glory so that
God's Son may be glorified through it." John 11:4
Challenge met once again.
What makes this
more amazing is Shamoun actually twists his own Bible to back this statement
up, he quotes these two verses:
"Jesus
did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which
are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may
believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may
have life in his name." John 20:30-31
"Jesus
did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down,
I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that
would be written." John 21:25
Anyone
who knows how to read will clearly see the verses are saying that Jesus
PERFORMED MANY THINGS AND MIRACLES which aren't recorded, it says nothing about
making statements! So Shamoun is guilty of twisting his own Bible, since the
verses don't say many statements were made by Jesus which we left out, rather
they say miracles and deeds were left out!
And lets
not play games please, Shamoun himself knows that Jesus NEVER uttered any
statement, he himself knows that had Jesus ever said such a thing every single
Gospel writer would record it, he knows this, I know this, and so does everyone
else, let us not play games please.
Response:
In light of the NT teaching that “Son
of God” is a phrase which equates Jesus
with God note that this verse itself claims that it was written for people to
believe that Jesus is the Messiah THE SON OF GOD, which is another way of
saying that people must believe that Jesus is God in the flesh. There is no
need to elaborate on this any further when we have proven that even the Quran
and Hadith recognize that claiming to be the Son of God means that one is
claiming to be God, or at least a divine being in place of Allah.
Shamoun
then writes:
More
importantly, this erroneously assumes that the only way that the Lord Jesus, or
even the NT writers for that matter, could ever identify himself as God is by
using this exact phrase. We say this is erroneous since Christ's Divinity is
not based on him having to say, "I am God."
When
they can't answer, they go off topic, what is more amazing is that Shamoun is
committing a red-herring to his own topic and article! Shamoun is now saying
just because Jesus never said such a statement doesn't mean he can't prove he
is God by other ways! Yet that's a different topic altogether! And even if we
did want to go to that topic you would still lose, because I would refute every
argument you have from Jesus saying I AM to John 1:1!
Response:
Actually Shamoun is correct, there are many different ways one could claim
to be God. However, dealing with the I AM argument we present this for Zaatari:
“Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM.” (John
8:58)
Robertson, Word Pictures In The New Testament, says:
{Before Abraham was} (prin
abraam genesqai). Usual idiom with prin in positive sentence with
infinitive (second aorist middle of ginomai) and the accusative of
general reference, "before coming as to Abraham," "before
Abraham came into existence or was born." {I am} (egw eimi). Undoubtedly
here Jesus claims eternal existence with the absolute phrase used of God.
The contrast between genesqai (entrance into existence of Abraham)
and eimi (timeless being) is complete. See the same contrast
between en in # 1:1 and egeneto in # 1:14. See the contrast also
in # Ps 90:2 between God (ei, art) and the mountains (genhqhnai).
See the same use of eimi in # Joh 6:20; 9:9; 8:24, 28; 18:6.
The
late A.T. Robertson was one of the greatest Greek scholars and linguists of all
time, and any study of the Greek would lead to the same conclusion given above.
The Greek text of the NT thoroughly refutes anything Zaatari can come up with.
Just like Muslims can turn to the Arabic text of the Quran to prove or disprove
an argument, can Christians can also turn to the Greek NT to establish their
case.
An
examination of the Greek of John 8:58 conclusively proves that Jesus used the
same absolute phrase used of God’s timelessness! Jesus literally claims eternal
existence, which is only applicable to God himself. Angels definitely cannot
make such a claim since they were created before the world (cf. Genesis 2:1-3;
Nehemiah 9:6; Job 38:4-7). Hence, even though Jesus may not be referring to
Exodus 3:14, he is claiming to be God since he claims to possess one of the
very essential attributes of Deity, specifically eternal existence, having no
beginning or end!
To,
therefore, claim that Jesus’ I AM statements merely implies that he existed
before Abraham like the angels is desperate in light of the fact that Jesus
used the present tense verb, eimi,
which in this context implies pure existence without any beginning, as opposed
to the imperfect tense which Christ could have used. The use of the imperfect
would have denoted that Jesus’ existence goes back into the past prior to
Abraham without implying that such an existence was eternal. As one scholar put
it:
The most emphatic claim of Jesus to deity is the
statement in His discussion with the Jews, "Before Abraham was born, I
am" (John 8:58, A.S.V.) The Jews brought the name of Abraham, their
physical and spiritual father, into the conversation (vss. 52-53). Jesus seized
upon it to lead on to His final claim in the verse already quoted, startling
the Jews by saying: "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he
saw it, and was glad" (vs. 56). When the Jews responded with a question as
to how a man as young as Jesus could have seen Abraham, "Jesus claims eternal
existence with the absolute phrase used of God." [Archibald Thomas
Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, V, 158-59.]
Jesus did not claim mere pre-existence to Abraham, which
would have been expressed by the imperfect tense of the verb used concerning
Abraham, but eternal existence, the self-existence that belongs to God
alone. (John A. Witmer, Did Jesus Claim to be God, Bibliotheca Sacra,
January 1961, pp.152-153; bold emphasis ours)
Many
Christians who study Christianity already know this and such foolish Muslim
propaganda only makes the denizens of Allah look like ill prepared amateurs!
How would it look like if I made a claim from the English translation of the
Quran and then what I claimed was disproved by the Arabic text? Foolish!
Shamoun
ends his article by saying:
Hopefully, this sufficiently answers the question for all those
honestly seeking the truth by God's grace.
I am
afraid you have not sufficiently answered the question at all, and it is you
who is not an honest seeker because we have seen that you are a liar! You now
claim no verse exists, yet in our debate you say it does and you will bring it,
hence you're a liar. Not only that, you had to twist your own Bible! So let's
not kid ourselves, you're just a missionary, making propaganda work, and you
have nothing with the truth, you are like a salesman trying to sell a product
and a very bad product, and it must be said you are a very bad salesman and I
would like to speak with your manager Jochen Katz and file a complaint!
And
Allah Knows Best!
www.muslim-responses.com
Response:
As
we showed earlier, Shamoun didn’t claim that such a verse doesn’t exist in the
Bible. Rather, he said that we have no recorded statement of Jesus making this
claim during his earthly ministry.
Shamoun
further said that for Jesus to have just come and said he was God in those
exact words without first qualifying his statement or insuring that the people
knew that he wasn’t claming to be the Father would have simply confused not
just his opponents, but his own followers as well.
Yet
as we have shown in this paper, there are verses where Jesus applies the word
God to his own Person, to himself.
More
importantly, why does Zaatari insist on only accepting a statement from Jesus
claiming to be God in those precise words when we have God himself calling
Jesus God as recorded in the book of Hebrews?
"BUT OF THE SON he (God) says, 'THY THRONE O GOD, is
for ever and ever, the righteous scepter is the scepter of thy kingdom.
Thou hast loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; THEREFORE GOD, thy God,
has anointed thee with the oil of gladness beyond thy comrades.'"
Hebrews 1:8-9 RSV
Here, the Father calls Jesus God and says that his throne or
reign lasts forever and ever!
Why won’t Zaatari accept the fact that Jesus claimed to be
God when he applied Divine titles and functions to himself such as in the
following example:
“Look,
he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him;
and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be!
Amen. ‘I am the Alpha and the
Omega, the Beginning and
the End,’ says the Lord God, ‘The Being/ Existing One (Greek- HO ON) who is and who
was and who is to come, THE ALMIGHTY (pantokrator)." Rev.
1:7-8
The One who is coming is the One that was pierced, i.e. the
Lord Jesus Christ. Christ not only identifies himself as the Almighty, a
rather explicit claim to Deity, but also as the Being/Existing One who is, who
was and who is to come, a phrase which refers to God’s eternal nature.
In fact, this phrase is actually an expanded interpretation
of the meaning of God’s name that is found in Exodus 3:14, specifically, ehyeh asher ehyeh, translated either as “I
am who I am” or “I will be what I will be.”
The Greek version of the Hebrew Bible known as the Septuagint
(LXX) rendered the Hebrew as ego eimi ho
on, “I am the Being/the Existing One”, a translation which denotes God’s
timeless existence.
Here is a comparison of the Greek Septuagint and New
Testament:
|
I AM THAT I AM = EGO EIMI O ON
Greek symbol =>egw eimi o wn
|
THE BEING (HO
ON) = O ON
Greek symbol =>o wn
|
Exodus 3:14: kai eipen o qeoV proV
mwushn egw eimi o wn kai eipen outwV ereiV toiV uioiV israhl o wn
apestalken me proV umaV
(LXX)
Exodus 3:14: kai eipen o theos pros mousen EGO EIMI O ON kai eipen
outos ereis tois yiois israel
o on apestalken me pros ymas (LXX TRANSLITERATION)
Hence, Jesus Christ is claiming to be Yahweh God Almighty,
the eternally Existing One! As the Open Companion Bible says in
reference to Revelation 1:8:
I am
A trademark of the book of John which records the
self-identification of Jesus using this phrase. Jesus said unless you believe “I am” (John 8:24), you will die in your sins. He
said that before Abraham “I am”
(John 8:58), an
intentional reference to the self-existent One of Exodus (Ex. 3:6, 14) for which the Jews
attempted to stone Him.1 It was before the power of this declaration of deity that those who came
to arrest Jesus fell back: “Now when he said to them “I
am,” they drew back and fell to the ground” (John 18:6).
the Alpha and
the Omega, the Beginning and the End
This complete title is applied both to the Father (Rev. 21:6+)
and to the Son (Rev. 22:13+).
The phrase is also applied to the Son in two parts (Rev. 1:11+;
2:8+).
It is clear that the title can apply to both Father and Son and is therefore
yet another clear indication of the deity of the Son.
The use of a very similar phrase by Isaiah underscores the
uniqueness of God: “Besides Me there is no God” (Isa. 44:6). Alpha,
being the first letter of the Greek alphabet (as our “A”) stands for the
“beginning.” Omega, being the last letter of the Greek alphabet (as our “Z”)
stands for the “end.” Because God existed from before all time and will exist
beyond all time, there is no room for another God (Isa. 43:10). Throughout the Father’s
preexistence, the Son was with Him (John 1:1-3; 8:54; Col. 1:17).
the Lord
Designating someone as “Lord,” especially in John’s day,
could have serious implications. It was a title which Christians did not use
lightly: “ ‘Lord’ (kyrios) means that the bearer was worthy of divine recognition and honor. The apostolic writers and early believers were
well aware of this meaning. Polycarp,
for example, died as a martyr rather than call
Caesar kyrios.”2
who is and who was and who is to come
See commentary on Revelation
1:4. Some see grammatical evidence identifying the speaker here as the
Father.3 Yet the switch to the Father
here after the Son has just been the subject (Rev. 1:7+)
and prior to similar statements by the Son (Rev. 1:11+,
17+)
seems too abrupt.4 Elsewhere we discuss the role of
the Antichrist,
empowered by Satan, as the Master
Imitator. Pink notes the correlation between this phrase describing
God’s self-existence and the phrase applied to Antichrist: “Christ
is referred to as Him ‘which was, and is, and is to come’ (Rev. 4:8+);
the Antichrist is referred to as him that ‘was, and is not; and shall ascend
out of the bottomless pit’ (Rev. 17:8+).”5
the Almighty
Ὁ
παντοκράτωρ
[Ho pantokratōr] (“the Almighty”) is derived
from ὁ πάντων
κρατῶν [ho pantōn kratōn] (“the one who holds all”)
and is rendered in the LXX
for שַׁדַּי [shadday] in the book of Job and צְבָאּות
[tsebā`ōt] (“hosts”)
elsewhere.6 It is a reference to God’s sovereignty and might, His command
of powerful force.
Here are some of the notes to the above:
Notes
1 It was the Angel
of the Lord who met Moses in the burning bush (Ex. 3:2) and who made claims that no ordinary
angel dare make (Ex. 3:14).
Indeed, it was no ordinary Angel, but the preincarnate Messiah
(John 1:14, 18).
2 Harold D. Foos, “Christology
in the Book of Revelation,” in Mal Couch, ed., A
Bible Handbook to Revelation (Grand
Rapids, MI: Kregel
Publications, 2001), 107.
3 Robert L. Thomas, Revelation
1-7 (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1992), 11.
4 John F. Walvoord, The
Revelation of Jesus Christ (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1966), 40.
5 Arthur Walkington Pink, The
Antichrist (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, 1999, 1923), s.v.
“Comparisons between Christ and the Antichrist.”
6 Thomas, Revelation
1-7, 81. (Source)
Another author, a biblical scholar with over 40 years of
experience, Clarence Larkin says this in his theological book,
"Dispensational Truth":
JESUS SAID OF HIMSELF "I am
'Alpha' and 'Omega', the 'Beginning' and
the 'Ending' the 'First' and the 'Last', which IS, and which WAS, and which is
TO COME, THE ALMIGHTY. REV. 1:8, 11. JESUS THUS IDENTIFIES HIMSELF WITH GOD
AND CONFIRMS HIS EARTHLY STATEMENT- "I and my Father are One". John
10:30. (Dispensational Truth, Clarence Larkin, 1920, pg. 31)
And to further demonstrate that the title Almighty
is a term used specifically for God alone note what the following
anti-Christian Jewish missionaries from the Jews for Judaism wrote in response
to my question on this issue:
MY QUESTIONS
1. Hi I noticed that the term THE
ALMIGHTY or ALMIGHTY is used for God alone. This is true right?
2. Also if a person claimed to be the Almighty that would mean that they were
claiming to be God since God is only described as the Almighty in the Bible?
Can you just answer these simple questions. God Bless.
THEIR RESPONSE
YES, the expression in Hebrew is Kel (E-l) which we take to
mean, almighty G-d.
Rabbi Joel Finkelstein-----
It seems so.
LAGIS-----
I cannot imagine another usage
for this term. Of course, ancient kings
and rulers considered themselves powerful like God. However, I am not aware
of a single specific passage in the Bible where "THE ALMIGHTY" can be
used for anything (or one) - else. thank you for your question hope all is
well,
Rabbi Aaron Parry-----
Quennel Gale wrote:
> Hi I noticed that the term THE
ALMIGHTY or ALMIGHTY is used for God alone. This is true right?
CORRECT.
> Also if a person claimed to be
the Almighty that would mean that they were claiming to be God since God is
only described as the Almighty in the Bible?
CORRECT, but obviously they
would be incorrect, AS ONLY G-D IS G-D, AND CERTAINLY NO PERSON CAN BE G-D.
> Can you just answer these
simple questions. God Bless.
You too.
Mark Powers- Jews for Judaism-----
Now what do these responses show
us?
They show that:
1. Only God is called THE ALMIGHTY.
2. That if a man claimed to be THE ALMIGHTY, he would clearly be saying that he
is God, the Creator of the universe.
Hence, in Jewish rabbinic understanding THE ALMIGHTY can be
used only in reference to the true God. If a prophet claimed to be "THE
ALMIGHTY" he would clearly be saying that he is God.
In light of the foregoing, why doesn’t Zaatari simply
accept the fact that Jesus does claim to be God, even though he may have not
said it in exactly those words?
We already know the answer… he is not interested in the
truth but only in attacking it anyway he can in order to deceive himself and
others into thinking that what the Quran says about Jesus is true. Sadly for
him and the rest who swallow his lies, the Quran has deceived him into
believing a falsehood about Jesus which will only end up damning his soul to
hell where his prophet is.
We now issue some challenges of our own.
Challenge to Zaatari: Show us where the
Quran explicitly says “God is not a Trinity”
Sami Zaatari is good in demanding
evidence from others even though he believes in certain Islamic beliefs which
aren’t explicitly stated in the Quran and which he cannot prove. For example, Zaatari
fails to tell his the readers that the word "Trinity" does not even
appear in the Arabic text of the Quran. Remember Zaatari believes that the
Bible must show where Jesus claimed that he is God or he won’t believe it!
Since he believes that the Trinity is refuted in the Quran THEN BY HIS OWN
CRITERIA HE MUST SHOW US WHERE THE WORD IS PRESENT IN THE QURAN! If Allah or
Muhammad wanted to refute Trinitarianism they could have clearly mentioned the
word itself in the Quran. But they do not mention it.
Thus, even though the word Trinity was used from at least the
second century it doesn’t appear in the Quran at all, despite the fact that
Muslims tell me that their scripture clearly refutes this doctrine because it
allegedly inspired error!
Zaatari may try to claim that the Quran commands people to believe
in ONE God as a way of addressing our challenge. The problem with this response
is that the Quran never states that God is ONE PERSON. Zaatari needs to prove
from the Quran that by one the Quran means that Allah is only a single person,
not just a single essence.
So
here is our challenge to Zaatari:
SHOW US WHERE THE QURAN EXPLICITLY
MENTIONS THE WORD TRINITY AND ATTACKS IT.
Lest
Zaatari try to bring up Q. 4:171 or 5:73 we need to remind him that neither
text uses the Arabic word for the Trinity, which is al-thaaluuth al-aqdas. This phrase doesn’t appear in the Quran at all even
though it was known in Arabia long
before the time of Muhammad and Islam.
The
word used in 4:171 is thalaath, more specifically thalaathatun,
which literally means “three”. And Q. 5:73 uses thalithu thalathatin which means “the
third of three”.
In fact, this is how the word "thalaathatun" is used all throughout the Quran, as a reference
to three of something with at least one of the three being of the masculine
gender:
Divorced women shall wait
concerning themselves for THREE (Waalmutallaqatu
yatarabbasna bi-anfusihinna THALATHATA) monthly periods. Nor is it
lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have
faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to
take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall
have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable;
but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power,
Wise. S. 2:228
He said: "O my Lord! Give
me a Sign!" "Thy Sign," was the answer, "Shall be that thou
shalt speak to no man for THREE (Qala
rabbi ijAAal lee ayatan qala ayatuka alla tukallima alnnasa THALATHATA)
days but with signals. Then celebrate the praises of thy Lord again and again,
and glorify Him in the evening and in the morning." S. 3:41
Remember thou saidst to the
faithful: "Is it not enough for you that Allah should help you with THREE (Ith taqoolu lilmu/mineena alan yakfiyakum an
yumiddakum rabbukum BITHALATHATI) thousand angels (Specially) sent
down?" S. 3:124
If ye fear that ye shall not be
able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or THREE (Wa-in khiftum alla tuqsitoo fee alyatama fainkihoo ma
taba lakum mina alnnisa-i mathna WATHULATHA) or four; but if ye fear that
ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive)
that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from
doing injustice. S. 4:3
Allah will not call you to
account for what is void in your oaths, but He will call you to account for
your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed ten indigent persons, on a scale of
the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or give a slave his
freedom. If that is beyond your means, fast for THREE (La yu-akhithukumu Allahu biallaghwi fee aymanikum
walakin yu-akhithukum bima AAaqqadtumu al-aymana fakaffaratuhu itAAamu
AAasharati masakeena min awsati ma tutAAimoona ahleekum aw kiswatuhum aw
tahreeru raqabatin faman lam yajid fasiyamu THALATHATI) days. That
is the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth
Allah make clear to you His signs, that ye may be grateful. S. 5:89
If
you look at the above verses you will see that the Arabic for three (thalaathatun) doesn't mean Trinity at
all. After all, here is what happens when we translate the word as Trinity:
Divorced women shall wait
concerning themselves for TRINITY monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for
them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in
Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them
back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have
rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but
men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power,
Wise. S. 2:228
He said: "O my Lord! Give me a
Sign!" "Thy Sign," was the answer, "Shall be that thou
shalt speak to no man for TRINITY days but with signals. Then celebrate
the praises of thy Lord again and again, and glorify Him in the evening and in
the morning." S. 3:41
Remember thou saidst to the
faithful: "Is it not enough for you that Allah should help you with TRINITY
thousand angels (Specially) sent down?" S. 3:124.
If ye fear that ye shall not be
able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or TRINITY
or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them),
then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more
suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. S. 4:3.
Allah will not call you to account
for what is void in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your
deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed ten indigent persons, on a scale of the
average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or give a slave his
freedom. If that is beyond your means, fast for TRINITY days. That is
the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth
Allah make clear to you His signs, that ye may be grateful. S. 5:89
Hence,
based on modern Islamic thinking that the word three in the Quran actually
refers to the Trinity this implies that every time three appears in the Quran
this must be a reference to the Trinity. So if your kid turns three years
old he is Trinity years of age or if you have three kids or three of something
it is a trinity according to modern Muslim apologists!
The foregoing further shows that if the Arabic word for three
refers to the Trinity then this means that the Quran is accusing Christians of believing
that Allah is the third god among three other gods. Interestingly, the Quran
tells us who the other two gods are:
And
when Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take
me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he saith: Be glorified! It
was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then
Thou knewest it. Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I know not what is in Thy
Mind. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Knower of Things Hidden? S. 5:116 Pickthall
But this is not what Christians believe, that God is the third
of three, with Jesus and Mary being the other two. Rather we believe that God
is one IN three, that God is one eternal Being who eternally exists as three
Persons.
Moreover, in Trinitarian vocabulary God either denotes the Father
or the Trinity which means that the Quran is wrong on any account.
For instance, if God refers to the Father then the Quran is
accusing Christians of believing that the Father is the third of three, which
is not what we believe. Rather, we believe that the Father is the first of
three Persons that exist as one God.
On the other hand, if the term God refers to the Trinity then
the Quran is blaming Christians for believing that the entire Trinity itself is
the third of three, which is also blatantly wrong!
We break this down so as to highlight this huge blunder
committed by Allah:
-
God in Trinitarian thought refers to the Father.
-
The Quran accuses Christians of believing that
God is the third of three.
-
This means that the Quran blames Christians for
believing that the Father is the third of three!
Or:
-
God in Trinitarian
thought also refers to the Trinity.
-
The Quran accuses Christians
of believing that God is the third of three.
-
This means that the Quran blames Christians for
believing that the Trinity is the third of three!
The
foregoing shows that neither Muhammad nor Allah attacked the Trinity as defined
and understood by orthodox Christianity. They only attacked a distortion of
this doctrine, whether falsely accusing Christians of believing in three gods
consisting of the Father, Mary his wife, and Jesus their Son, or of believing
that either the Father or the Trinity is the third of three.
In
fact, a Muslim cannot produce any verse where Muhammad or Allah attacked the
Trinity either by name or by what this name refers to, namely, that there are
three eternally distinct Persons who exist as one God, specifically the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
In light of this, would Zaatari consider that to disbelieve in
the Trinity is wrong since the Quran doesn’t attack it by name? Hardly! Zaatari
still believes that the Quran denies it despite the fact that neither the word
nor the precise formulation of the doctrine ever appears in the Muslim
scripture.
We also ask Zaatari to answer the following:
Show us a single verse in the Quran where Jesus is quoted
as saying in these exact words,
-
"I am not God, do not worship Me."
-
"I
am not the Son of God."
-
"I
didn't come to die for your sins or lay my life as a ransom for many.”
He might quote Q. 5:117 where God asks Jesus if he taught
people if whether he claimed that he
and his mother were TWO GODS apart God. Notice that this is not what we are
asking him to show since we don't claim that Jesus is A GOD apart from the One
God.
If Zaatari says that “it doesn’t have to be present in the
Quran in order for it to reject it” then he has to be consistent and admit that
the Bible doesn’t have to use a precise word or formulation in order for that
particular doctrine to be a truth revealed in it, whether it is Jesus being God
or God being a Trinity.
The
purpose of raising these challenges and examples is to show you the hypocrisy
of Zaatari who claims that something must be present explicitly in the Bible
for him to believe it, and yet he rejects the Trinity even though this never
appears in the Quran! He also denies the crucifixion of Christ despite the fact
that Jesus does explicitly refer to his death and resurrection! His lies and
hypocrisy are truly amazing to say the least.
We will keep you posted whether Zaatari was able to meet
our challenges.
Zaatari’s article can be found here.
God bless All.
- Home Back Home
- New
Articles Back to New Section