https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYL5TZ9jJqg
On March 3, 2018, David Wood and Shabir Ally debated on the topic Did Jesus Rise From the Dead? For those who don’t know, Shabir Ally takes a very unorthodox position on this issue. It’s a very modern position not found in the classical Islamic period. While most Muslims would say that someone else was made to look like Jesus, Shabir Ally has another theory. Jesus was placed on the cross, left to die, taken down, received no medical attention, then is assumed into heaven from the tomb. Apologists such as Yusuf Ismail, Sami Zaatari, and Zakir Hussain have all debated this topic and do not accept this theory. Instead they go with a more traditional substitution theory.
So that is what Ally argued. David Wood argued for the traditional belief of the resurrection. Shabir Ally has debated this subject quite a bit. He’s debated William Lane Craig, Mike Licona, and James White on this topic. His arguments are nothing new. Basically all of his debates on the subject come to one final point – did Jesus die on the cross?
I’m going to say that David Wood got the win on this one. Shabir Ally said some pretty weird things. He said that the Muslim Jesus fits Isaiah 53 better than the Christian Jesus. Wood pointed out that it says that the servant will be “cut off from the land of the living”. Ally said that means he’s still alive to which Wood responded that if you say that, words no longer have meaning.
Shabir Ally naturally chopped the Biblical text into pieces. He took the theoretical Q gospel and put it against the other Gospels and said that there were two competing traditions. He even brought up the sign of Jonah to supposedly show that Jesus didn’t die but remained alive. David Wood never brought up Jonah 2:2 which says:
I called out of my distress to the Lord,
And He answered me.
I cried for help from the depth of Sheol;
You heard my voice.
Sheol, being the realm of the dead, shows that Jonah was dead, just like Jesus was. Wood never brought this up unfortunately.
James White pointed out in his review of the debate that Shabir Ally seems to not even care about trying to be the least bit consistent. A good example of this was his quotation of Robert Price. A fringe scholar who believes that Jesus didn’t exist.
If I were Shabir Ally, I would give this idea up and adopt the traditional arguments. While I don’t think they’re great arguments, they’re better than Ally’s hypothesis. Personally I don’t think Ally should debate this subject again unless its with another Muslim. If he does I don’t think that I’ll watch it. He’s said all that is needed to say and most Christians and Muslims aren’t convinced.
David Wood did a pretty good job. He was weak on a couple points but overall he performed adequately. It’s time for Shabir Ally to move on from this argument. Not even Muslims are buying into this theory. The next debate between these two should be on a completely different topic.
Shabir Ally still brings up his old “Q did not contain story of the death and resurrection of Jesus!”. Which is begging the question. First, the existence of Q has been seriously challenged recently (Dr. Mark Goodacre’s anti-Q books). Second, Ehrman remarks in “Did Jesus Exist?” that we don’t really know whether the alleged Q contained a Resurrection narrative or not- it possibly did, we just don’t know if it was St. Matthew’s or St. Luke’s version of the event. So Shabir pretty much flopped on that one.
I think that David missed an excellent opportunity to adduce as an argument the fact that Muhammad never says anything about Jesus’ alleged evasion of death (instead, he told his companions a story about the Prophet Moses running naked after a magic stone that ran off with his clothes. Just don’t ask, ok?)
What’s even worse, Shabir promoted an explanation of the event that contradicts the opinions of all great commentators of the Quran (Ibn Kathir, Al-Tabari, Al-Qurtubi, Al-Jalalayn, Ar-Razi, etc.), thus neglecting Muhammad’s words that “the virtue of the scholar over the worshipper is like the virtue of the moon on the night of Al-Badr over all of the stars. Indeed, the scholars are the inheritors of the prophets….”. Ooops, someone’s being a bad Muslim!
Hi OrangeHunter
Good points. Shabir Ally is a very westernized Muslim in many ways. This is but one of many examples where he takes an unorthodox view of things. He also has a somewhat low view of Hadith. He’s willing to chuck Hadiths if they’re not conforming to Western culture or Muhammads image. Even those from respected collections like Bukhari.
You are correct, David Wood missed a few opportunities. He wasn’t his best, though I still think he got the win in the end.
I’ve never read Goodacre but perhaps I should to know the other side of the Q argument. I usually like to point out that Q has never existed apart from the Synoptic tradition. Your mention of Ehrman’s argument of what Q contained. We actually discussed the other day what books of Ehrman the Muslims don’t like. Did Jesus Exist is one of them for this reason and for many others.
On the issue of the stance and significance of the Hadith collections in Islam I would highly recommend you Jonathan A.C. Brown’s book “Misquoting Muhammad”. It’s very thinly veiled polemic in defense of the Hadith, enlisting various notable Hadith-rejecters through the ages and the fate of their legacy (spoiler- they have all fallen into obscurity).
I’ll have to pick it up. I so have huge pile of books that I need to read though.
It is very interesting to read other’s opinions on events like this and it helps one to mull over what was said and to gain understanding.
The thing about a debate between a Christian and a Muslim is that really they ought to pit the views of those religions against one another. Shabir Ally dodges this as usual and we have Christianitiy versus one particular Muslim’s unorthodox view (which also contradict the Koran.
The thought struck me too that Shabir Ally ought to debate this matter with some of his fellow Muslims. I would certainly be interested to see how the unpleasant Sami Zaatari would be to his co-religionist on this subject. In some ways both are unscrupulous and it might be entertaining to observe.
Same old, same old from Shabir Ally. I don’t know why he bothers. Liberal scholar after liberal scholar. So-and-so says this – yeah Shabir but it’s just clutching at straws. This apprarently polite man has a considerable breadth of knowledge of Holy Scripture and also the Islamic scriptures, and after all these years I wonder if he realises the peril that he is placing himself in for when the time comes for judgement.
David Wood was not at his best in this debate, in fact I thought he was poor once or twice. He is still one of the most formidable apologists and debaters, and has a particular talent when it comes to focus on key issues and to express ideas with simplicity and clarity. He is always dignified and a good representative for the Christian position. I always look forward to listening to his podcasts and debates.
Hi,
Last night I thought of a great idea for a post. You somewhat touched on it when you said “The thought struck me too that Shabir Ally ought to debate this matter with some of his fellow Muslims.” I don’t want to elaborate too much here, but you’ll see it soon.
I agree, Wood was not as his best. He made some good points but had a couple chances to completely bury Ally and didn’t. An okay performance in my opinion. I still give him the win though, mostly because of Ally’s extremely bad arguments.
Can someone help me understand this puzzle. It is actually regarding the underlying subject of the debate.
If all four gospels agree that Jesus was crucified on a Friday (Matt. 27:62, Mark 15:42; Luke23:54; John 19:42), just before a Sabbath, which was just before the first day of the week (Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:2, Luke 24:1, John 20:1).
This simply means that Jesus was crucified on Friday (Good Friday as we all know) afternoon and was declared dead after just few hours. The tomb was discovered empty early morning Sunday (around 5 or 6AM) so how can this be calculated being 3 days and 3 nights??
Matthew 12:38–40
The Sign of Jonah
38 Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered him, saying, “Teacher, wwe wish to see a sign from you.” 39 But he answered them, x“An evil and yadulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. 40 For zjust as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, aso will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
If it is not the time factor Jesus was talking about so what else? knowing that Jonah’s miracle was in fact that he did not die in the belly of the great fish and he stayed alive all along the 3 days and 3 nights.
Hello Hisham,
Thank you for taking an interest in this blog. I can help you with both of your points.
Regarding the three days and three nights. This is just how they talked back then. I know what you’re going to ask: How do I know this and am not just saying this? Because when the disciples went to the empty tomb they saw an angel. Remember, angels are messengers from God so they carry God’s message. What message from God was delivered to the women?
Matthew 28 verse 5 and 6 read:
The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay.
He is risen just as he said. God, who sent the angel, knew about the three days and three nights quote so God is giving His stamp of approval on the three days and three nights quote from Jesus Christ. Anyone who disagrees with Jesus is disagreeing with the Prophet and Messiah Jesus, and God Himself.
Now, regarding Jonah not dying. Where does it say that Jonah didn’t die in the belly of the whale? In fact, it says that he did die. In Jonah 2:2 says:
I called to the Lord out of my distress,
and he answered me;
out of the belly of Sheol I cried,
and you heard my voice.
Sheol is the realm of the dead. If Jonah was in the realm of the dead, he was dead. God brought him back to life just as he brought Jesus back to life.
Thanks again for commenting and God Bless,
Allan