The Hagia Sophia
A Christian Church turned into a Mosque by Muslims, then turned into a Museum by Masons.
Muslims and Christians both believe in Jesus Christ. We both believe He is the Messiah and born of the Virgin Mary. The two biggest differences are his divinity and the crucifixion. Muslims claim that he didn’t die based on the Quran.
The Christian traditionally argues that Jesus taught that he was going to die. He also taught that His death would be efficacious to those who believe in Him. This is most clearly stated in Mark 10:45 which reads:
For the Son of man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
There you go. Islam is falsified by the words of Jesus Christ.
Not so fast says the modern Islamic apologist. At this point the Muslim will most likely quote a liberal scholar of scripture who denies or questions that statement from Jesus. This isn’t the reason why he disbelieves it. He disbelieves in this statement because it contradicts the Jesus of the Quran, not because a liberal scholar says so. The Muslim is more than happy to throw that same liberal scholar’s view out the window when they contradict the Quran.
Either way, here is where the problem becomes apparent.
Surah 61:6 in the Yusuf Ali translation states:
And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: “O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad.” But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, “this is evident sorcery!”
Well there you go, Jesus predicts Muhammad by name! This is hands down the clearest prophecy in the history of humanity. It makes Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 look shabby. However, we have absolute proof that Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53 were written before Christ. We don’t have any proof that this statement comes before the time of Muhammad in the sixth and seventh century.
Now, if a Muslims tries to defend this statement, they will simply rely upon the authority of the Quran since no liberal scholar or historical Jesus scholar believes that He uttered these words. These scholars would rank Mark 10:45 as a thousand times more probably than this verse. Regardless, a Muslim believes these words and not Mark 10:45.
Is the Muslim engaging in double standards? On the surface, he is since I already pointed out that his true authority is the Quran.
Here is a challenge to all Muslims. Tell us why Surah 61:6 comes from the historical Jesus and Mark 10:45 does not, using the same standards. The only possible answer is the authority of the Quran. I personally don’t mind that answer since it is consistent but then the more important question comes. Why quote ultra-liberal scholars who would laugh at your view of the Quran?
You write:
Either way, here is THE where the problem becomes apparent.
Omit THE.
It gets even more comical when they turn around and quote Jesus’ Paraclete predictions in John 14-16 to prove that Jesus mentioned Muhammad by name since they are constantly appealing to liberals to bash John’s testimony to the Lord Jesus.
Thanks for the grammar tip. I agree with you on John 14-16. It shows a huge double standard. To the Islamic apologist, the four gospels are good enough to prove Islam but not sufficient to prove it false.
Hi Allan,
It was just a couple of days ago that I happened upon your blog. Still scrolling through your posts (many of which are quite good), but thought I would take a break and comment on the issue of the death of Jesus Christ and the Qur’an. Though the vast majority of Muslims throughout their history have denied that Jesus died on the Cross, a small minority has affirmed it. In fact, the minority interpretation may be the earliest.
I have devoted a few threads on this subject which can be accessed via the following link:
Surah 4.157
I would be very interested in hearing from you on this important topic.
Back to your blog…
Grace and peace,
David
Hello David,
Thank you for the compliments. I will definitely look at what you have posted on this Quranic verse. It certainly is the most intriguing verse in the entire Quran. I will look into the research that you’ve done. I’ve only been blogging for a little over a year. It seems that you’ve been doing it for a while and have a great deal of very good content.
If you want, you can subscribe to get updates of when I publish new posts.
In Christ,
Allan
Hello again Allan,
Thanks much for taking the time to respond to my post. Looking forward to hearing from you once you have had a chance to review my posts on Surah 4.157—either here, in the appropriate threads at AF, or via email.
Further, while looking through older posts on your blog, I see that you have had some dealings with “Dr.” James White (in case you did not already know, his self proclaimed 3 doctorates are unaccredited). I too have had a number of encounters with the “Doctor” in the past, and totally agree with you that he embraces double-standards in his apologetic method. If you do not mind, I would like to share a few of my own reflections on Mr. White in the germane threads that you have posted.
Grace and peace,
David
Hi David,
I have a lot on my plate right now, both on this blog and in my personal life but I will get to your posts on the Surah sooner or later.
I’m well aware of James White’s unaccredited doctorate. Personally, I don’t think people on our side should make a big deal out of it. It’s the same way I deal with Islam. I don’t talk about violence in Islam because that is not what makes it false. I only attack White on his errors, not his title. I will admit that the man has some impressive scholarship but that’s only in the area of textual criticism, dealing with homosexuality and a bit of his anti-Islamic apologetics. When he tries to tackle subjects like Church history, he goes off the rail. If you watch his debate with Robert Sungenis and Papal Infallibility, you’ll see what I mean. He was way out of his league.
Feel free to share any reflections on White on this thread.
In Christ,
Allan