Hi everyone. In this video we are going to consider some classical Islamic objections to biblical Christianity.

Bible has been changed
So we'll start directly with the first objection. A common objection that Muslim apologists make is that Christians and Jews have changed the Bible. The Bible consists of two testaments, the Old and the New Testaments, and Muslims say that Christians and Jews have changed both these parts of the Bible. Now, what can we say in response to this? First of all, we immediately see that this objection actually raises more question. For example, if the Bible has been changed, who changed it? When was it changed, where was changed? How much or to what extent was it changed and which parts of the Bible were changed? As far as I know, from the body or from the whole community of Islamic apologists, there is no clear answer to these questions. Okay, so if you claim that a book has been changed, then you need to be able to provide these details.

Then another question is, Did Allah did God give the original Bible? You know, the Bible that was there before these, suppose modifications were done? Well as for the Quran, yes, he gave, he delivered the Bible to the Jews and the Christians, and then comes up comes the question, Did he promise to preserve it? Well, according to the Islamic objection, here, evidently, he did not promise to preserve it. But then that only raises the question that if he did not bother to preserve the Bible, then how do we know whether he is bothering to preserve the Quran? That he changes policy? You know, was it this way that his original policy was that I don't care if people change my message? And then afterwards, he decided that okay, now I'm going to make sure that nobody can change my message? And if not, if not, Can we really trust the Quran? And if yes, does that not indicate that God is fickle? And then this question also arises, if the Bible was changed several centuries before the seventh century AD when the Quran was written, then why did Allah leave humanity with no authentic revelation for all these centuries? These are questions that arise immediately following this Islamic claim. So anyone who makes a claim that the Bible has been changed has to also answer all these questions and we don't find satisfactory answers to these questions coming from the Islamic side, then, of course, there is also this fact that sometimes to prove a point, Muslims will use the Bible. But then if the Bible is corrupted, if the Bible has been changed, then this cannot be done on this should not be done to remain consistent.

Now, this claim of the Bible being changed, at least the claim that the Bible was changed before the advent of Islam, at least that claim disagrees with the Quran. Because the Quran itself refers to the Bible as if it is an authentic book. So for example, in Surah 15, it says, like this, the prophet who can neither read nor write whom they will file, fine described in the Torah and the Gospel which are with them. So Torah and the Gospel are parts of the Bible. And then Allah is speaking to Mohammed and he says that, if you doubt what We have revealed, you ask those who have been reading the book before you. In other words, God is claiming here that the Quran is in is a confirmation or it is something which can be confirmed with the help of the Bible. In surah, two it says that comes to the Jews a scripture that is referring to the Quran now confirming the scriptures in their possession. That means the Quran is supposed to agree with the Bible and to confirm it.

Then here in Surah, five, it is addressed to the People of the Scripture people of the book that means the Jews and the Christians, so they are being told that you don't have any proper guidance unless you observe the Torah and the Gospel and which was revealed unto you from your Lord. So in all these verses, the Quran itself claims that the Bible was a book supplied from God. And the Quran was written in the seventh century AD. And so this implies that the Bible had not been changed at least before seventh century AD. In the Hadith, there is an incident recorded in which the Prophet of Islam was shown a copy of the Torah, and he did not treat it like a book that's been corrupted. He treated it with the utmost respect as the revelation of God ought to be treated, which means he did not think that the Bible has been corrupted. Now, it's true that there are some verses in the Quran, which Muslim apologists sometimes use to imply that the Bible has been changed. But those verses if you read them carefully, they actually speak about the Bible being misinterpreted, not the Bible being changed, or the Bible, being not followed properly. It doesn't speak of the Bible being changed.

This is a quote from an Islamic scholar in the 12th century. He says that the Jews and the early Christians were suspected of altering the text of the Torah and the angel that is the gospel. But in the opinion of the eminent doctors and theologians, it was not feasible for us to corrupt the text because those scriptures were generally known and widely circulated. And this scholar Fakhruddin Razi is actually hitting the nail on the head, when he says that the scriptures were generally known and widely circulated, there simply are too many Bible Manuscripts spread out in too many places, for any one group with any vested interest to change these scriptures. This is, this is a tabulation of the number of Greek manuscripts of the Bible from different centuries. So there are quite a few manuscripts dating from the second century. And then the seventh century is when Islam began. And then after that, you have a huge number of manuscripts. And this is just the Greek manuscripts that are also around five times as many manuscripts in other languages. So the New Testament is the most well preserved ancient texts, the number of manuscripts is more than 25,000. in various languages, it's not possible for any group of people to change the text of such a such a book.

Now, you might, you might have heard people say that there are a lot of variations in the, in the manuscripts of the Bible. Now, if you were a textual editor, or a textual critic, and it was your job to, to note down every change or every variation in the manuscript, then, when you get into the task, you will soon realize that in order to be consistent, or in order to be comprehensive, you will have to jot down every single variation. And if you do that, you will get variation in the hundreds of 1000s. But what we need to realize is that those variations do not have any bearing on the teachings of the Bible. The majority of the variations that are observed in the Greek manuscripts have to do with the spelling of words, have to do with different ways in which Greek can be used. For example, if I'm referring to a particular person, if I'm referring to the apostle Paul, in English, we would just say, Paul, but in Greek, you can also say, The Paul, you can put a definite article in front of the word, it does not make any difference, but it's a variation, you will have to count it if your job is to count variations.

Then there are cases where there are 1000s of manuscript manuscripts which have one particular word and that is one manuscript in which that word is either misspelled or replaced by another word, or it is missing. So when you have 1000s of manuscripts agreeing with each other and one manuscript or a handful of manuscripts disagreeing, then it's obviously a scribal error. So such an error is obvious. And moreover, since it just has to do with one or two words and small phrases, it does not change the import of the text. So if you look at the the main teachings that Christians believe in some of these teachings, we will come across in the subsequent subsequent objections that we are going to consider. We will find that the variations in the manuscripts do not have any bearing on these theological aspects of Christianity. If I believe the way of salvation as given in the Bible, I did not get a different message. I did not get a different road of salvation or a different way of salvation if I consider different Greek manuscripts.

So this claim that the Bible has been changed is not tenable. In fact, if you look into the history, you'll find that around three or four centuries after the time of the Prophet of Islam, Islamic scholars realized that the Bible and Quran do not match. Now the Quran says, as we saw in the previous slide, the Quran says that it matches with the Bible, but it actually does not. So why is that? So Islamic scholars look for an explanation. And this is the explanation that they came about. The Quran says that the Bible matches with it, but actually it does not match. So why could this be this must be because the Bible might have been changed by Jews and Christians. So this is a well known logical fallacy called Special Pleading. Special Pleading means asking people to believe something, or claiming something, just because such a claim is needed to fit with your belief system. So the claim is being made not because of any specific evidence, but because that's the only way all the verses in the Quran can be reconciled with the idea that the Quran is true. So we don't accept such an objection.


One God or Three Gods?
Another objection that Muslims have towards the, towards the Christian is, is that the Christian believes in three gods. In fact, this is a verse in the Quran, where it says like this, and when Allah will say, Oh, Jesus, son of Mary, did you say to the people, take me and my mother as deities beside Allah, He will say Exalted are you it is not for me to say that to which I have no right. So here the there is a implied claim here that people have taken Jesus and Mary, as deities beside God. Now, that is just not true. That is a misrepresentation not only of the Bible, but also of Roman catholicism. It's true that the Bible teaches a trinity. But that Trinity does not mean three gods and decides the persons of the Trinity are not Jesus, Mary and God, the persons of the Trinity are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. So here you have a gross, factual error here, where Mary is being confused with the third person of the Trinity. Now, what does the Bible say? What is the Bible say about the persons of the Trinity here in John chapter 10, verse 30, the Lord Jesus says, I and the Father are one. So which means that the argument of three gods is a strawman argument, that is, it is not correctly representing the Christian position. Before you attack your opponent's opponent's position, you have to first understand what his position is, and attack his true position, rather than creating a distorted or caricatured version of his position and then trying to attack that. So here Jesus does not claim to be a second God here, or Christians do not believe that Jesus is a second God, He and the Father are one.

That is this incident in the life of the Lord Jesus were a one of his disciples, Philip said to Jesus, just so just show us the Father. Jesus replied, have I been so long with you? And yet you have not known me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father, how is it that you say, Show us the Father, don't you believe that I'm in the Father and the Father is in Me, the words that I speak to you, I don't speak of myself but the father who dwells in me, does the deeds believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? Now this is admittedly difficult to understand, you know, how exactly is Jesus in the Father and the Father and him? It's difficult for our human mind to comprehend. But one thing is clear. It's not a case of three different gods. The Trinity is something that Christians believe in but the Trinity is not the idea that there are three different gods God, as presented in the Bible is one being and three persons, yes, three persons, and nevertheless, only one being. So we do not believe in three gods But we believe in a God who is one being and yet three persons.


Trinity is an invention through history
Okay, having sorted out that, then the counterpoint is this that the Trinity is a medieval invention and not the teachings of Jesus and the prophets. So here, the claim is that the Trinity is not there in the Bible. But Christians over the centuries have invented something like this. Now, to be fair, there was a council called a meeting of Christian bishops, which was called the Council of Nicea, which took place around three centuries after the time of Christ. This is the ruins of Nicea in Turkey today. Now, this council was called by the Roman Emperor at that time, his name was Emperor Constantine. And it is true that in this council, the topic of discussion, or at least one of the topics of discussion was whether Jesus is God or not. In other words, is there a trinity or not. But now you need to understand that this council was called not because the Bible had nothing to say about it. This council was called because the Emperor wanted everyone to agree on this point. The Emperor wanted religion to unite his empire. So he want everybody to believe the same thing. So he called a meeting of all the bishops, and he said, you know, you can debate among yourself, you can study the Bible all you want. But after, after doing all that, tell me your final conclusion.

I want only one doctrine for everyone to believe in, because I want to unite my empire using religion. So this was a political strategy. You know, Constantine had his objectives. And he, he tried to fulfill them in the way that he thought best. It's a different matter, that the Trinity is there in the Bible. We don't have to rely on Constantine or the Council of Nicea, to believe in the Trinity. And here is one verse that Muslims like to remind Christians about, which talks about God being one God. It says here, O Israel, Jehovah, our Elohim is one Jehovah, Jehovah, your Elohim, he is Elohim, the faithful God the faithful El. So here I have used the Hebrew words for God. Elohim is the generic Hebrew word for God. Now, the interesting thing here is that in the very verse that Muslims used to find an objection to the Trinity, there is a hint of the Trinity right here itself. The, there are two Hebrew words for one. The one that is used here is a word called a card here, which I have pointed out. In blue. One, Jehovah one God, the word used is a heart. And in Hebrew, this word refers to a composite one. It's like our country is made up of many states, or many ethnic groups, and yet we are one country.

So it is not a indivisible singular one, you know, like an elementary particle, which cannot be split into anything else. But rather, it is a hole that is made up of constituents. It's one, but it's made up of constituents. So this compound word for one has been used to describe God. So that itself suggests that there is a structure or there is a clue plurality in the Godhead, then the words that I've put in read Elohim. Elohim is the word for God, but Elohim is in the plural. The word El is also used for God, and El is singular. Now singular does not mean disrespectful. In Hebrew, you could use the singular also and still be respectful. And so the singular is used for God many times in the Bible, but the plural is also used. So on the one hand, you have the plural. On the other hand, you have the word one. So there is a hint of the Trinity. Right here in this verse. The Bible says that God is love. Love is an intrinsic attribute of God. But we also know that love is transitive, isn't it? You cannot have love just by yourself. Love is always directed to an object of the love. So whom did God love before He created all of us? The obvious answer is that there was love between the persons of the Trinity So the very fact that about Bible says that God is love indicates that there is more than one person in the Godhead. Now this is a verse from the prophet Isaiah. So this is seven centuries before the time of Christ, 14 centuries before Islam began. Here. There is a quote, somebody has been quoted, and he says, like this, from the time it came to be, I have been there. And now Jehovah has sent me and His Spirit.

So here is somebody claiming to be sent by God. And he is claiming that he has been there from the very beginning. And God has sent him and his spirit has also sent him. So here right here in this verse, we have the three persons of the Trinity, the person who is speaking is the eternal Son of God. Jehovah here refers to the person of the father, whom we encountered in the New Testament. And then we also have the Holy Spirit. Now, our purpose is not to give a theological discourse here. If you really want to know what the Bible teaches, you'll have to read it for yourself, you will find many verses which, which which describe the doctrine of the Trinity. If you have no patience to read the whole Bible and find and search out all these verses, then consult, consult, refer to a theology textbook, you will have a compilation of all the verses, which describe the Trinity. So we believe in the Trinity, because that's what the Bible says, We do not believe the Trinity, because three centuries after the time of Christ, you know, a group of people got together and decided it. So that's the answer to this objection, the Trinity is very much found in the Bible. The Trinity does not mean three gods, but it means one God, one being in the form of three persons.


Trinity is absurd
And the next objection is related to this. And that is the Trinity is absurd. It sounds strange that there is one God and three persons here. So let's look at give a closer look at this. What exactly do you mean by absurd? In mathematics, we have proofs and you cannot, cannot disprove a statement, or you cannot prove that a statement is wrong. Just because it sounds absurd to you, you have to reduce that absurdity down to a contradiction. So, if I were to say that one God is three gods, or one person is three persons, or one being his three beings, then that would be a contradiction. But that is not what the doctrine of the Trinity says. It says that there is one being who exists in the form of three persons. So there is no contradiction in the concept of the Trinity. When people say that something is absurd, probably what they mean is, it sounds strange to me, because it is different from our common experience. Actually, it should not surprise us if the nature of God is different from what we encounter in our mundane life. You know, sometimes, there are things that we encounter in our mundane life. And since these experiences are so common, we come to think of them as universal truths. Now, I'll give you an example. Here is here is a part of a railway map of the suburbs of Mumbai. So I've marked I've shown some stations here. Now, suppose there was a train that passed through this station, Jugnendra at 4pm. And suppose it reached Kharbao at 4:30pm. Then, based on a common experience, we can make a prediction, there must have been some time between four o'clock and half past four, at which the train was at common station, there is no branching here. So if it if the train has to go from the first station to the third station, this train has to pass through the second station. It's as simple as that. This is something that is common experience. So you if if someone tells you that you know the object was at location A and it went to C before it passed through B, then that is something which would sound absurd to you.

Well, what is absurd with trains turns out to be true with electrons. So in this diagram, the coloring shows the likelihood of finding an electron in an atom. So you can see that there is a central blue region There is a white gap and after that there is a blue region again, which means that the electron can be found here in the central region, it can also be found here. So, you will find it sometimes here, and you will find it sometimes at the periphery. So, at four o'clock, you will find it in the central region at 4:30, you might make an measurement and find it at the outer region. And you will think that it must have passed from the inner region to the outer region. So it must have crossed through the white region. The fact of the matter is, it never crosses through the white region, it just disappears at one place and appears at the other place. So, it doesn't mean that it has a secret tunnel to pass through. This is just a term for this phenomenon. This diagram is not trying to show us how the particle moves. This diagram is a graph of energy. So, this is a phenomenon which takes place at the atomic level. But it is going contrary to our common experience, and therefore, it might sound absurd, but it is true. So, this example from physics shows that things that sound absurd can still be true. So, just because something does not agree with your common experience, don't dismiss it as false. So don't dismiss it as absurd.

I mean, as human beings, if I'm one being then I'm also obviously one person, we don't have human beings who are one being in three persons. Yeah, but God is different. God is not a human being he is at a higher claim. Now, there are many examples and analogies to help us partially understand the Trinity. And analogies don't prove anything. But analogies illustrate things that are difficult to understand no analogy is perfect. But every analogy has some value. Now, in one dimension, three figures, three lines would imply three figures, three segments, equal three figures in one dimension, you could also say at the human plane, three beings equal three persons. But in two dimensions, you can have three segments making only one figure. So God is at a higher plane than us. And he is one being, although three persons.

In music, we have different notes. And these notes have different names. So all the notes marked here are called C. And those of us who are familiar with the piano will know that the C chord consists of three notes, the C major chord consists of the notes, C, E, and G. So there are three notes that make up a chord, C, E, and G, just like the Trinity that are three persons that make the Godhead in the Trinity. Now, if you've studied if you remember your high school physics, you may be remembering something called overtones and harmonics. So the C note itself has these higher notes embedded inside it in the form of overtones, which means the C note itself also has an E energy in it. And similarly, the G note will also have C and E in it, and so on and so forth. So we can say that the the chord consists of three notes, but each of these notes also has the others embedded in it.

So here, you again have some similarity to the Trinity, where you have three different persons and yet Jesus says that the Father is in Me, and I am in the Father. Now, why is this so interesting? Not just because it is an analogy. It is also interesting, because one expects that the creation should reflect the personality or the characteristics of the Creator. So if I'm an artist, and I have a certain personality, and then that personality of mine is going to come through in my drawings, or in my works of art. So we find this to be strangely true in the created universe. When we look at the universe, we find various structures, which bear some resemblance to the Trinity. So this is exactly what to expect if the universe was created by a triune God.

George Cantor was a mathematician who did work concerning set theory and the theory of infinite numbers. Now, here is a set some of the months of the year are mentioned, there are four months mentioned here. And so we say that the cardinality of the set is four similarly, there are two more sets here, they are cardinality is also four, because each set has got four months. Now, in mathematics, we have something called a union. That is you bring together all these sets and include all the elements. So, this new set, fourth set is the union set of all three sets, and what is its cardinality, its cardinality is three times four. So, each set had four members, four elements, there was no common elements, so, no overlap. So, four plus four plus four gives 12. So, the cardinality of this set is 12. Now, if I construct a set like this 1,4,7,10,13, etc, you can see that every number exceeds the preceding number by three, so, we can go on this way after 13 there are 16 then there is 19 and so on and so forth. How many numbers are there? There are infinitely many numbers. Now, this infinite cardinality can be denoted by n, suppose, we decide to use the symbol N for the cardinality then the cardinality of the other two sets, 2,5,8, etc, 3,6,9, etc is also n. Now take the union of all these, you get one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, etc.

Now, how many elements are there in this set? If I denoted the number of elements in one of these sets is n then what should I use to denote the number of elements in this set and you're going to say it is three times N but that's the wrong answer. Ask any mathematician, the answer is N itself. So, it's very strange that there are three sets of n elements each, but when you take the union, you still have only a cardinality of N. This does not happen for sets with finite number of elements. This happens for sets within finite, number of elements. And so, the properties of infinite sets are different from those of finite sets and we see something similar with God. His characteristics are different from us, he is at a higher plane and so things that are true about him are not true about us. Now related to the concept of the trinity is the concept of Jesus being fully God and fully man. So the Bible not only teaches that God consists of three persons. But the Bible says that one of these persons came down to the earth and was born as a man.


Is Jesus God or Man?
So, here is the Islamic objection how can this person, Jesus, who Muslims acknowledge to be a man, but how can he be God at the same time? And did he ever say that he is God? You know the idea that somebody could be man and somebody could be God, sounds contradictory because man and God don't seem to fit, you know. Man is finite and God is infinite. So how can somebody be both, you know, if I have a stream of particles, which is coming to the barrier, then the particles that hit, the barrier will not be able to cross through and the others will cross through. They will pass by in straight lines. On the other hand, if you have a wave that comes near a barrier, imagine that this side is a lake. And there are water waves, they come, they touch the barrier here. Some of the waves are able to penetrate. Suppose there is water here also then you will find that the waves bend into the shadow of the barrier. They bend sideways as well. They spread out so particles and waves, don't seem to agree with each other. They are behaviours in similar situations are different.

So, what do you think light is? Is it a stream of particles or is it a wave? Many scientists we're trying to answer the question and there were some scientists who felt that. That light is a stream of particles there were others who felt that it's a wave, the final conclusion. Turned out to be. That light has the dual nature as surprising, or contradictory, as it might seem light has a nature of both, a particle and a wave, sometimes, one nature is more prominent. Like this diagram says that it's being a wave, like here and particle-like so sometimes one nature is more prominent than the other, but both natures coexist. And isn't it interesting that light is a metaphor used in the Bible for God? Light is also a metaphor used in the Bible specifically for the Lord Jesus Christ. Jesus is both God and man light also has a dual nature. So this example of light shows that it is possible that there could be two aspects of reality that seem to be contradictory and yet they fit together. So that's exactly what happens with the Lord Jesus Christ. Now did Jesus Christ ever claim to be God? you probably recognize this person.

This is Steve Jobs. The CEO of Apple and suppose you were an employee at an Apple store and Steve Jobs walked into the store. Would you wait for him to say, you know, I am Steve Jobs CEO of Apple. Would you wait for him to say that? Would you engage in a debate with your, your colleagues saying that You know, this person never claimed to be Steve Jobs? This person never claimed to be the CEO of Apple and so I'm not going to accept him as the CEO. Your job might be in danger. If you do that, when Steve Jobs visited Apple stores, he never introduced himself in that way, but he just walked in. And his demeanour has behaviour, his appearance. The way he spoke made it obvious to all the Apple employees there that they are dealing with Steve Jobs himself and it is something similar with the Lord Jesus Christ. Did Jesus say he was God, if you're looking for a quote from Jesus I am God? Those three words do not exist in the Bible as a court of Jesus Christ. But then when you look closely at the things that Jesus said and did the conclusion of his deity becomes inevitable.

For example, here is an incident in which the Lord Jesus healed this man, and while he was healing this man just before he healed this man he said son, be of good, courage your sins are forgiven you. And then there were people there who were knowledgeable people they knew about the law, they knew the scriptures, and the question that they had in their mind, was, who can forgive sins except for one namely God, how is it that you can claim to forgive sins? This is a prerogative that belongs to God alone, and then Jesus responded by saying that the son of man, that is myself, I have the authority on earth to forgive sins. I have the authority on earth to forgive sins, which means that he is indirect, implying here that he is God. Now, when you look at the term, son of man, it might seem a weird term to you. I mean, what exactly do you mean by son of man, any man is a son of some other man. So, it seems obvious. But then if you read the Old Testament, you find that the son man is a character that appears in a vision of the prophet Daniel, and there, the son man is presented as having the same attributes as God himself.

So not only with his claim of forgiving sins but even with this title that he uses for himself, Jesus is indirectly claiming to be God. In this verse here, Jesus is speaking to the Jews and he says, verily verily I say unto you before Abraham was I am. Now He should have said, I was that's past tense but he uses the present tense. That's because as God, he is ever eternal. Now, Jewish people would never say I am. I am an engineer. They would say that, you know, your servant or your friend, your colleague is an engineer in this company they wouldn't say I am the, why is that? In the Old Testament, I am is given as a name of God himself. So, when Jesus uses these words, it is very clear to his Jewish audience that he is implying to be God Himself. In the book of Revelation, this is after the resurrection of Jesus Christ, when he appears to the apostle, John, of course, Muslims don't believe that Jesus rose again from the dead.

But nevertheless, when he appears to John after the resurrection, he says, I am Alpha and Omega the beginning and the ending, says the Lord, which is who was, and who is to come the almighty. So he doesn't say he's God here but he says, he's almighty. Who is all-mighty? Except for God, the implication is obvious. Some people make a distinction between Jesus being the son of God and Jesus being God. But you know if I'm the son of a particular person, if I'm the son of a man, then I'm a human being the same way when Jesus says that he's the son, he is God.

And this was obvious to the Jews. It says, here the Jews sought the more to kill him because he had said, also, that God was his Father making himself equal with God. Jesus spoke about God as if he was his own personal father not father in a generic sense, but a personal father and thus he made himself equal with God. So there are many, many biblical passages like this in which the implication is obvious. Jesus's behaviour and his statements and the things that he did imply that he is God, just like a CEO will walk into one of his stores and his behaviour will make it obvious that he is the CEO. For the record, it's probably worth pointing out that Jesus never said I'm a prophet either. Those three words of four words that I am a prophet did not come out of Jesus's mouth just like, I am God did not come. So if you cannot believe that Jesus is God because he never uttered those three words. You cannot believe that he is a prophet either .


How can God become a Man?
Here is a related objection. How can God become a man here? Here It's not talking about the stress here is not on the apparent absurdity or the contradiction, but the condescension, you know, God is lofty. How will God stoop so low as to become a man? Can God become a dog? Also, how can God have a son? And even if God has a son, do you really think God would send his own son to be humiliated and tortured by his own creatures? Now, let's deal with the third question first. Sorry, the second question can God become a dog? Also, here that objection clearly ignores a fundamental truth that is taught in the Bible and that is man, is made in the image of God, man, is the only creature on which God's redemptive work is aimed at. And therefore there is no question of God becoming a dog.

But God can become a man because man is made in the image of God. But why would God ever bother to do it? You know, will God ever do such a thing like this stoop so low and allow his own son to be humiliated and tortured by his own creatures? I mean, will God stoop so low? And the answer is I don't really think so if I was inventing a religion I would never invent a religion in which the claim is, or the teaching is that God came and died for his own creatures, died at the hands of his own creatures. I wouldn't ever think something like this. Do you really think that one tiny nation can rule half the world? I don't think this is possible, but do I believe that this is true? Yes, I believe it's true. Not because I think it's very likely but because there is historical evidence. We know that England once ruled half the world. So I don't think that one tiny nation ruled half the world because it's a very likely thing I believe it because there is evidence for it and the same applies for the incarnation. I don't think God would ever stoop down to become a man, but the wonder and the amazement that I have is that it is true.

It's remarkable. This is something that I believe, why? Because there is evidence for it. What's the evidence? That's not our subject today but to give the answer in a short way, the evidence is this the Bible says so and there's enough evidence that the Bible is true. So we don't believe in things because they seem plausible to us. Plausability is not the correct test for truth. Evidence is the correct test for truth. This is Richard Feynman one of the world-famous scientists in the field of physics and he says like this do not keep saying to yourself. How can it be like that? Because you will get down the drain into a blind alley from which nobody has yet escaped? Nobody knows how it can be like that. And here, Richard Feynman is talking about various results in quantum mechanics that stretch the imagination. That seems unbelievable. And people feel like asking students feel like asking, how can that be? And the answer is no one knows. How can that be? We believe it not because it seems likely, we believe it because the evidence shows us the evidence, proves it to be. And so, these examples from science, as well as from history show the fallacy in the Islamic objection here. I believe that God came down as a man. I believe that he died for me because there is evidence for the same.


Freedom leads to Immorality
Here is another objection that freedom leads to immorality and probably what Muslims have in mind is the large measure of freedom that is there in countries that are Christian or at least are percieved to be Christian or have a Christian heritage at least in their past. So there are certain things that we could say in response to that, there is a verse in the Bible, where it says like this that what does it profit if a man says certain things about himself, but the reality is different? So here we understand that God is interested in moral realities and not in claims and appearances. Similarly, there's a verse from the book of the prophet, Samuel. Man looks at the outward appearance, but Jehovah looks at the heart, so you probably don't go to a nightclub and you probably don't indulge in alcoholism or sexual promiscuity or something like that. Why, because you live in a country where there is sharia law and there is no freedom to do any of these things. God is not impressed with your morality. God still finds you disgusting because the only reason you don't do those things is that you are not allowed to do those things.

See, freedom does not make people immoral. Freedom only exposes the immortality or the morality that is already there in people. Freedom, brings out people's true colours. Now, you may have a good job of hiding your true colours in front of society, but that doesn't work with God. Then the second point that we can note, is that experience shows that man is incapable of legislating people's conscience. The dictator of the country can tell you that this is such and such things are forbidden, such and such things are wrong. You know he can preach all, he wants the religious leaders or the community, leaders can preach, all, they want and forbid everything that they want. But people's hearts are a different matter. You cannot legislate, people's consciences. To clean up a person's heart or his conscience you have to do something directed at his heart.

We also must note that the Bible never asks you to use your freedom and to go to a nightclub and indulge in immorality. The Bible never asks you to do any of those things. A lot of the immorality that probably offends Muslims, which they see in Western countries is actually because of atheists. Atheists believe that there is no God. They believe that they are just animals. They believe that matter and energy is all there is. Now if that is true, then why not do whatever feels good. There are no rules. That is no morality and you find atheists putting their beliefs into practice. So, you shouldn't be blame the Bible when atheists put their beliefs into practice. Now, William Booth was a Christian and he founded an organization called the Salvation Army which spread all across the world. Now, I was able to do this. He was able to do this because he had freedom, he was living in a country in which there was freedom to form organizations.

There was freedom to engage in activities, which you think are beneficial as long as it does not trample on other people's personal rights. And so William Booth is an example of how Christians have used their freedom to do good things. William Booth founded the salvation army and partly because of the efforts, like him efforts of people like him. You know, if you went to the 20th century to England, you wouldn't see people living on the streets. You wouldn't see orphans moving around helpless, why? Because of people like him. So freedom is morally, neutral freedom can be used to do good things. If I am a Christian I would like to use my freedom to glorify God. If I am an atheist I would like to use my freedom to do, whatever feels good. You need to understand, Muslims need to understand this distinction.


Forgiveness is cheap
Another objection is that forgiveness on confession is cheap. Mean all you have to do is confess your sins, and then you will be forgiven. Sounds very cheap, isn't it? And so is the assurance of salvation. I mean, the Bible says that if a person puts this trust in the Lord, Jesus Christ, he'll be saved. And once God gives salvation to a person, once God makes you his child, the Bible says that even if you miss behave, you still are God's child. You're not going to lose your salvation. Now, if this is what we tell people, then aren't they going to take advantage of this? Aren't they going to miss behave? So that's the Islamic objection.

So we'll address that. But first, let's look at a side issue. If forgiveness should not be based on confession, If forgiveness should not be based on faith, then what should forgiveness be based on? Now, the answer from the Quran is it should be based on good deeds. The Quran prescribes the right belief as well as certain good deeds that have to be done, certain rules, that have to be kept in order to procure Gods approval. But now we have to come face to face with a certain truth. Any good deed that I do is of finite value. And if this good deed helps me to be accepted in God's sight, it means that God is finitely Holy. And such a God is finite, so he would be unworthy of worship. If I have done something wrong, if I have lied or if I have stolen or if I have been disrespectful, then if God is infinitely, holy then the offence that I have committed is infinitely serious. If God is infinitely, good. Then when I say something against God or when I do something against His character, my breach is infinite and therefore it requires infinite restitution. If a finite restitution can make me accepted in the eyes of God, then it means that God is finite and such a God would be unworthy of worship.

So the Bible clearly says that God is infinitely Holy and he requires infinite restitution and God does not forgive people just because they confess their sins. God does not forgive anyone just because they say sorry. Confession is only valid, if it appropriates the work that Jesus has done on the cross. And what did Jesus do on the cross? He took the penalty that was due for us, which means that he accomplished a sacrifice of infinite value and worth. So God can approve of us for God can legally, justly, declare us to be righteous, not just because we confessed to Him but because we are appropriating the perfect work of Jesus Christ. So the Bible presents, a problem and gives a solution, which is commensurate with the problem. If you claim that good deeds are going to, please God, then God is either unjust or he's only finitely holy. So good deeds cannot give salvation. Then the question is, what does? The biblical answer is trust, in the person and the work of Jesus Christ.

So if I just trust Jesus Christ, then I'm saved. And now even if I do wrong things, I'm still saved. Now, that sounds cheap. So let's look at the possibilities here. Is salvation assured and secure? If not, I have to be very careful and have to keep doing good things, just to make sure, I don't go to hell. And I go to heaven. I wouldn't be able to take anything easy. So, in order to avoid people taking things easy, if salvation is not secure, then people would be always on their toes and they would always be trying to do good deeds trying to offer as many prayers as possible as many fastings as many pilgrimages as many alms as possible. But this would mean that God is only hoaxing people or the one hand threatening people. On the other hand, tempting people with goodies. You know, if you do this this this then I'll let you get into heaven, which is a nice place. If you do those things that things, bad things then you go to hell.

So people will then try to do good. Even if people are trying to be good or do good things, it's not because of intrinsic goodness. They are only trying to save their skin and this is hardly worthy of God. I want to tell you this, that God will not delight in you. Even if you're doing all the right things with the wrong motives, God stills finds you disgusting, he cannot delight in you. You're a sinner and even if you're trying your best to do right, You are still obnoxious in the sight of God. What does God want? Now if salvation is secure if salvation is assured, Then the Islamic concern is this that you know, people will take advantage of this and people will just go on doing wrong things. So, we have to ask this question, is God, doing something about man's propensity to sin? Now, if not, if God is just saying that, okay? You know, you believe in me, so you say your prayer, and that's why you have salvation. Now, go ahead, do whatever you want. That would mean such a god, would not be caring for holiness and no doubt, we agree with Muslims that such a God, is hardly worthy of worship. If God just left people to do whatever they like, gave them the assurance of salvation and just let them be.

Didn't care for holiness. That would not be worthy of God but now look at the other possibility. What if God does care about man's propensity to sin, and he has done something about it? Done what? Give him the new nature and work on him through his circumstances through the word of God. Through the fellowship of other disciples of Christ, transforming him and giving him a new nature. Now that is truly worthy of God. And in fact, this is exactly what the Bible says. The apostle Paul asks like this, you know, just because of grace, abounding shall we sin then? Shall we sin more and more? Absolutely not is the answer to that rhetorical question. So the Bible doesn't just say that sinners are forgiven once and for all. The Bible says that God transforms us inner and makes us into someone that God can truly delight. And that is the purpose of God, redeeming man.

So that you can delight in God and God can delight in you. Mean, if you still have your sinful tendencies, you know, you wouldn't find heaven interesting. You would find it boring. And God also wouldn't be able to delight in you. So the Bible speaks of God transforming people and making them into someone that God delights in. So this is the biblical teaching and it is truly worthy of God. The Bible doesn't present God with a carrot and a stick. It presents God as a powerful God, not just powerful to make stars and galaxies, but powerful to transform sinners into people who will avoid evil. Not because they are scared of punishment but because they have developed a love for good and a hatred for evil, just like God.


How can God have a son without a wife?
Now we have an objection. How can God have a son without a wife? Is it possible to have a son without a wife? Explain this with an example? So there was this little boy who had a father who loved him and this boy had a liking for toy cars. So his father used to give him so many toy cars, he would buy the car and his son would unwrap it and he would play with the toy cars and enjoy himself. And after some time his father accumulated enough money to buy a car for himself and guess what, the boy told his father. He said this cannot be a real car, this cannot be a car. And his dad asked him why is it not a car? He said, cars, come wrapped in a cardboard box, cars always come in cardboard boxes. So this car has not come in a cardboard box, so it's not a car. Whatever it is. So then his father explained to him that you know what the cars that you are playing with they're actually toys. Toy cars come in cardboard boxes. Now what is true about the toy car is not necessarily true of the real car. The toy car was made just to give you a feel and just to make you feel good that you are playing with a car because you like cars. So it's just given you to get that feel. It's not a real car. All features of the toy car are not shared by the real car. And the same thing is true with the sonship of the Lord Jesus Christ.

We human beings cannot have a son, unless we also have a wife, if a man has a son, then some woman is involved in a relationship, but this has to do with human sonship and a human relationship between a son and a father. Now, the Bible tells us that God made these relationships to give us an object lesson to give us some picture and some understanding of the relationship between the father and the son, God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. So, every feature of human sonship does not apply to divine sonship and vice versa.


Meaning of ‘Begotten’
One final question, we will address that Muslims often ask and that is, what is the meaning of the word 'begotten'. This word appears several times in the English Bible. Now, as we are going to see there are multiple Hebrew and Greek words that have been translated in our English Bible, as begotten. For example, the English Bible says, Noad begot Shem, Ham and Japheth. So there the Hebrew word used is 'yalad'. In Psalm 2:7, God says, like this to the son. You are my son this day, I have begotten you. The same word yalad is used. So in the first place in the first verse that is Genesis chapter 5 verse 32. The word is used for a father producing children for a father having sons. Okay, so the question arises is the same meaning applicable here in Psalm 2:7. The answer is no, the word 'yalad' literally means to bring forth so it can be used for birth, but that's not the only thing for which it is used. In fact, in the acts of the apostles, Paul clarifies this matter he says that God raised up Jesus as it is written in the second Psalm you are my son this day I have 'gennao' you. So this is the Greek equivalent word which is used, which is translated as begotten.

It's the counterpart to the Hebrew word 'yalad'. Now, from this verse in Acts chapter 13, we understand that when it says that God has begotten, Jesus, it is not referring to his birth, but it is referring to bringing him out of the grave bringing him forth out in resurrection. Regarding the birth of the Lord Jesus Christ, there is a verse in Matthew, which says the one who is 'gennao', the same word, which is translated in English as begotten, the one who is begotten, in her is by the Holy Spirit. So here, the author is stressing. The fact that Jesus is conceived in Mary, that is, there is no male intervention. It's a virgin birth. God has done something supernatural. That's how the conception of Mary has been brought about. So, there is absolutely no question. In fact, it would be blasphemous to suggest anything like sexual encounter between God and Mary, that is blasphemous and that is not what Christians believe that is not what the Bible teaches.

Now there are other places where the English Bible has the word begotten but it's a different Greek word. For example, John 3:16 says God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son. So here, the Greek word is 'monogenes' mono means one or the same. And genes means stock or breed or kind of living thing. So, here, the word begotten does not have anything to do with birth or with resurrection. It means having the same essential nature having the same characteristics. So, Jesus Christ is not just Son of God in a generic sense that you might say, you know, the whole creation is God's children or something like the human race are the sons, and daughters of God, you may say that in a general way, but Jesus is of the same intrinsic nature, the same essence as God, that is what the word begotten means in verses such as John 3:16.

So, with that we conclude this video, hope you found it informative. Hope this will help you in your spiritual journey in your quest to seek and arrive at the truth of the Bible. Thank you very much.