America’s Famine by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=3766

America’s Famine

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Unlike many nations in human history, America has never really known want. Even the Great Depression of the 1930s does not begin to compare with the famines of antiquity that devastated entire civilizations and resulted in the starvation of millions of people. With such extreme prosperity dominating the United States, the average American cannot even begin to imagine the kind of hunger that has characterized large segments of humanity throughout history. Who can even conceptualize eating one’s own children? Yet such has not been uncommon in world history (cf. 2 Kings 6:28-29). In an article that appeared in National Geographic magazine in 1917, Ralph Graves surveyed historical occurrences of famine all the way back to the Egyptian pharaohs. The portrait is horrifying. For example, Graves observed:

Probably in no other country in the world has a people been brought to such a low ebb of morality or become so completely lost to all semblance of rational humanity as in the series of famines which swept over Egypt during the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries, under Mohammedan rule (p. 75).

Cats, dogs, and horses were extremely expensive, women abandoned their jewels as worthless, and desperate people resorted to cannibalism—even selling human flesh in the market place. Babies were kidnapped for food, if not eaten by their own parents. Even the graves were ransacked for food (p. 79). Savagery and moral degradation were the order of the day. A famine in 1069 in England was so severe that peasants, no longer able to find dogs and horses to eat, sold themselves into slavery in hopes of being fed by the master (p. 81). In 1314, a famine in England brought such misery and suffering that bodies lined the roadsides, everything imaginable was eaten (including dogs, cats, horses, and babies), and when new felons were cast into prison, starving inmates would tear them to pieces for food (p. 82). France was plagued with devastating famines from the Middle Ages to the Revolution resulting in the death of millions. Staple fare included grass, roots, white clay, and exhumed bodies. The potato famines of Ireland in 1822 and again in 1845 resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands.

“The pages of India’s history are black with the blotches of famine” (p. 86). From 1770 to 1900, 22 famines resulted in the death of 15 million. Likewise, China has been particularly susceptible to famine, with 45 million dying during four famines from 1810 to 1849. Russian peasants died by the thousands in famines of the late 19th and early 20th centuries (p. 89). During the 20th century, some 70 million people died from famines worldwide, including 30 million dying in China in the 1958 famine. Several famines afflicted the Soviet Union, including the Holodomor, a famine inflicted on Ukraine in 1932–33 by Stalin. Famine disaster struck both China and Bengal during World War II, while more recent famines include the Biafran famine in the 1960s, the disaster in Cambodia in the 1970s, the Ethiopian famine of 1984, and the North Korean famine of the 1990s.

Americans can hardly even contemplate the possibility that America could ever be subjected to such circumstances. Yet, the Bible teaches that when people reject God and His Word, they set themselves up for disaster. In contrast to these shocking accounts of a lack of minimal sustenance to maintain human life, consider the far more catastrophic effect of a famine of spiritual sustenance: the Word of God. When any civilization lacks access and attachment to God’s thinking and God’s directives, a truly severe famine will ensue. This dearth will, in turn, merit a corresponding physical famine. As God declared to the population of Amos’ day:

“Behold, the days are coming,” says the Lord God, “That I will send a famine on the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD. They shall wander from sea to sea, and from north to east; They shall run to and fro, seeking the word of the LORD, but shall not find it” (Amos 8:11-12, emp. added).

This description bears a striking similarity to the conditions now plaguing America. While Americans wallow in their plenty, a vast plague of spiritual starvation has swept across the land. Hear the words of God through Jeremiah warning another nation 2,700 years ago:

The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it…. “Thus says the LORD: ‘Behold, I am fashioning a disaster and devising a plan against you. Return now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good’” (Jeremiah 18:7-12, emp. added).

And hear the words of God through Moses to another nation 3,500 years ago: “I will heap disasters on them; I will spend My arrows upon them. They shall be wasted with hunger, devoured by pestilence and bitter destruction” (Deuteronomy 32:23-24). We must ask this sobering question: Will America’s spiritual famine facilitate national disaster?
 

REFERENCES

“Famine,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine#cite_note-44.

Graves, Ralph (1917), “Fearful Famines of the Past,” National Geographic, 32[1]:69-90, July, http://books.google.com/books?id= dqt-AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA69&dq=fearful+famines+of+the+past&hl= en&ei=1oqTTJmPAcaAlAfM9YCrCg&sa=X&oi= book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved= 0CC4Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=fearful%20famines%20of% 20the%20past&f=false.

Contents of the Ark of the Covenant by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=2851&b=1%20Kings

Contents of the Ark of the Covenant

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Following Israel’s exodus from Egypt, God instructed them to make a small wooden ark (box) overlaid with gold. The ark was 2.5 cubits long, 1.5 cubits wide, and 1.5 cubits high (or about 3.75 x 2.25 x 2.25 feet) and was called the “Ark of the Testimony” or the “Ark of the Covenant” because it contained the tablets of stone whereon the Ten Commandments were written (Exodus 25:16). According to 1 Kings 8:9, “Nothing was in the ark except the two tablets of stone” (emp. added; cf. 2 Chronicles 5:10). The writer of Hebrews, however, indicated that the ark contained “the golden pot that had the manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tablets of the covenant” (9:4). How can both of these passages be correct?

First, it may be that the Hebrews writer was indicating that the pot of manna, Aaron’s rod, and the tablets were in close proximity to the ark, but not necessarily that all three were “in” the ark. Although most English translations refer to what was “in” (NKJV; Greek en) the ark or what the ark “contained” (NIV, RSV), the uses of the Greek preposition en “are so many and various, and oft. so easily confused, that a strictly systematic treatment is impossible” (Danker, 2000, p. 326). Greek lexicographers give numerous definitions for this word, including: among, within the range of, near, before, in the presence of, etc. (Danker, pp. 326-330). Perhaps the writer of Hebrews only intended to communicate that Aaron’s rod, the container of manna, and the tablets of stone were all in close proximity to the ark in the Most Holy Place (the tablets being in the ark, while the manna and rod were “before” the ark; cf. Exodus 16:33-34; Numbers 17:10).

Second, it is also very possible that all three items were literally inside of the ark at one time, but not all of the time. Whenever comparing two or more Bible passages that might initially appear contradictory, one must be sure that the same time frame is under discussion. Such is not the case with Hebrews 9:4 and 1 Kings 8:9. In Hebrews 9, the inspired writer refers to the time of Moses, when “a tabernacle was prepared” (vs. 2; cf. Exodus 25-40). The statement in 1 Kings 8:9 (as well as 2 Chronicles 5:10) is from the time of Solomon, when he built the Temple, approximately 500 years after the tabernacle was constructed. Is it possible that the Ark of the Covenant once contained the tablets of stone, the pot of manna, and Aaron’s rod, while at another time (i.e., five centuries later) the ark contained only the tablets of stone? Most certainly (cf. 1 Samuel 4-5).

What about the allegation that “Aaron’s staff could hardly have fit anyway, since the ark was a box only 2.5 x 1.5 x 1.5 cubits” (Wells, 2009)? The fact is, no one knows the length of Aaron’s rod. Rods served many purposes (e.g., for support, for administering punishment, as a symbol of authority, etc.; see Allen, 1996, p. 1022) and came in various sizes. In Aaron’s case, it appears that his rod was more of a symbol of his God-given authority than just a mere walking stick. What’s more, even if Aaron had used his rod for support, he may have only been five feet tall and needed a walking stick that was just 3½ feet long. Considering that an average walking cane today is only about three feet long, it should not be surprising that Aaron’s rod could have fit into a box that was nearly four feet long.

Indeed, the wording of 1 Kings 8:9 and Hebrews 9:4 are different. But reasonable explanations exist for the variation. There is no doubt that two different time periods are under discussion. Furthermore, as with many Hebrew and Greek words, it may be that the Greek en (in Hebrews 9:4) should be understood in a broader sense. Whatever the precise contents of the Ark of the Covenant at any given time in history, rest assured, 1 Kings 8:9 and Hebrews 9:4 are not contradictory.

REFERENCES

Allen, L.C. (1996), “Rod,” New Bible Dictionary, ed. J.D. Douglas (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press), third edition.

Danker, Fredrick William (2000), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago), third edition.

Wells, Steve (2009), Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, [On-line], URL: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/.

From T. Pierce Brown... The Baby and the Wash

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Brown/T/Pierce/1923/baby.html

The Baby and the Wash

Some have coined such expressions as, "Throw the baby out with the wash," "Lean over backwards to stand up straight," and various other ones to describe what is conceived as an over reaction to a situation or philosophy. Perhaps in the church those who practice that phenomenon may be called "ultra-conservative." At any rate, although labels such as "liberal" and "conservative" may be dangerous, deceitful and divisive, there is little doubt that most of us use various labels to identify things and persons in some fashion. Without trying to attach an opprobrious label to anyone, I think it might be helpful to suggest one or more areas where it seems that some brethren have done disservice to "the baby," and perhaps not even eliminated the dirty wash.

Since there has arisen in the church various aspects of the "Pentecostal movement," such as tongue speaking, direct operation of the Holy Spirit in conversion, there are those who have taken the position that if God does anything in answer to prayer, this would be a direct operation of the Holy Spirit and the idea must be condemned as false doctrine. Some attempt to modify that idea by saying, "God may providentially do some things," but they seem unable to explain exactly what they mean by that.

There should be a clear distinction between a miracle that was apparent to all who saw it that it was a miracle, and God acting directly on a situation and causing something to happen that would not otherwise have happened. For example, when I pray for a sick person, I see nothing strange or wrong with praying that God heal the sick person. If God does it, I have no way of knowing that He did, so it is not a miracle in the Bible sense. However, it does not solve the problem to pray that God will bless the doctor, the nurse, the medicine, and all means that are used and still deny that God does anything. It is no more a miracle for God to heal the sick person than it is to bless the doctor's hands that they may do something that they would not have done otherwise.

When God "providentially" got Moses' mother to put him in the ark and got Pharaoh's daughter to come down to the river at the same time Moses drifted to the spot, He was acting, just as surely as He was acting when He turned the river into blood. However, the first was not a miracle as the second was, for no one could tell that God had anything to do with the first situation. How He got Moses down there at the right moment without anyone seeing His hand in it, or without overruling the will of anyone, we do not know. This is why we have used the term, "providence." However, by the use of that term, we do not have to deny that God is still active in the affairs of men. To do so would, in terms of this article, be throwing the baby out with the wash.

There is another area where it is possible that some of us are trying to throw the baby out with the wash. We have a group in the church who see nothing wrong with accepting as a Christian brother anyone who claims to accept Jesus as Lord. It matters not that they have neither understood nor obeyed the gospel. This ungodly, unscriptural practice has led some brethren to so react as to stigmatize and ostracize any who would say a good word about some denominational preacher or practice, or even be courteous to their members. To them, the expression, "Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them" means that you sin even if you play golf with a denominational preacher. If you do not call a specific denomination by name when you point out some false doctrine, you are presumed to be a liberal, compromising the truth.

The baby still needs to be washed, and the dirt eradicated. We just need to be careful that we do not do more harm than good by the way we respond to situations. Jesus was teaching approximately the same thing when he gave the parable of the tares and the wheat. He did not mean that we are to disregard the tares and pretend that they are not there, or that they are as good as the wheat. He did include the idea that we are to be careful that we do not root out or trample down the wheat as we get rid of the tares. We are not to get rid of them in the sense that the Roman church got rid of heretics -- by burning them at stake, or otherwise killing or persecuting them. We are to have no fellowship with them as brothers in Christ, but we are not to take vengeance on them or punish them as God alone has the right to do, and will do in the judgment day.

T. Pierce Brown

Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

From Gary... Power is nice, but don't overdo it!

Today, as my wife left for the gym, she came over to me while I happened to be looking at this picture. She was amazed at the musculature of the dog, but simply said "WOW". Now, I had heard that animals were being bred to achieve greater muscle mass (for butchering) and told her about it. "They eat dogs"? was her reply. "In some places"- was my reply. Honestly, I don't if this animal fits into this category, but it appears to be overly endowed. Curious, I did a google search and found the following video. Click on the following link, or paste the address into your browser to view.

Muscular Animals

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sneg5jPKwgg

And then there is this passage from the book of Genesis...

Genesis, Chapter 1 (WEB)

 26  God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the sky, and over the livestock, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”  27 God created man in his own image. In God’s image he created him; male and female he created them. 28 God blessed them. God said to them, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” 

If man has dominion over all animals, then I guess he can breed muscular ones. However, I wonder, why would he want to? More muscle mass at butchering might be one answer, but another could be that people want animals that resemble them.

Hummm....

I can just picture hearing.... Nice puppy, come to daddy!!!

From Mark Copeland... "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS" Chapter Four

                  "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS"

                               Chapter Four

OBJECTIVES IN STUDYING THIS CHAPTER

1) To learn further how we should regard preachers and teachers

2) To learn a lesson in humility by observing the examples of the
   apostles

SUMMARY

With this chapter Paul brings to a conclusion his treatment of the 
problem of division as it existed in the church at Corinth.  He 
describes the proper estimate one should have of those who serve God, 
and why we should leave the ultimate evaluation of such men to God 
(1-5).  Having already used himself and Apollos as examples to help 
them see the errors of their arrogance (cf. "puffed up"), Paul also 
uses the example of the apostles in a passage filled with irony (6-13).  
His purpose is not to shame them, but to warn them, for he is sending 
Timothy to remind them of what is proper, and he himself is coming to 
deal with those who are "puffed up", if necessary (14-21).

OUTLINE

I. THE PROPER ESTIMATE OF PAUL & OTHERS (1-5)

   A. SERVANTS & STEWARDS (1-2)
      1. Servants of Christ, stewards of the mysteries of God (1)
      2. Their chief responsibility:  faithfulness (2)

   B. THE PROPER JUDGE OF SUCH THINGS (3-5)
      1. Not Christians, or any human court (3a)
      2. Not even one's own self, but rather, the Lord (3b-4)
      3. Therefore leave it up to Him  (5)

II. LESSONS IN HUMILITY (6-13)

   A. PAUL & APOLLOS ALREADY USED AS EXAMPLES (6)
      1. To learn in them not to think beyond what is written (6a)
      2. That none be "puffed up" on behalf of one against the other
         (6b)

   B. REBUKE IN THE FORM OF IRONY (7-8)
      1. For they act as though they were the source of what they have
         (7)
      2. With irony, Paul rebukes them (8)

   C. THE EXAMPLE OF THE APOSTLES (9-13)
      1. Made a "spectacle" to the world (9)
      2. Contrasted with the pride of the Corinthians, using more irony
         (10)
      3. The plight of the apostles (11-13)

III. PAUL'S PURPOSE IN WRITING THESE THINGS (14-21)

   A. NOT TO SHAME, BUT TO WARN (14-16)
      1. Those whom he considers as beloved children (14)
      2. Those whom he has begotten through the gospel (15)
      3. Those whom he charges to imitate him (16)

   B. TO COMPLEMENT VISITS BY TIMOTHY AND HIMSELF (17-21)
      1. He is sending Timothy to remind them (17)
      2. He himself will soon come, Lord willing, to deal with those who
         are "puffed up" (18-21)

REVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE CHAPTER

1) List the main points of this chapter
   - The Proper Estimate Of Paul And Others (1-5)
   - Lessons In Humility (6-13)
   - Paul's Purpose In Writing (14-21)

2) What two terms properly describe preachers of the gospel? (1)
   - Servants of Christ
   - Stewards of the mysteries of God

3) Who is to be the judge of those who serve the Lord? (3-5)
   - The Lord

4) Why was Paul writing these things? (6)
   - That none be "puffed up" on behalf of one against the other

5) What technique did Paul use in teaching lessons about humility?
   (8,10)
   - Irony

6) Who did Paul use as an example of humility? (9-13)
   - The apostles

7) Why was Paul writing these things to them? (14)
   - To warn those he loved

8) How had Paul become like a "father" to them? (15)
   - Through teaching them the gospel by which they had been "begotten"
     in Christ Jesus

9) Why was he sending Timothy to them? (17)
   - To remind them of Paul's ways in Christ

10) What one phrase is used repeatedly in this chapter to describe some
    at Corinth? (6,18,19)
   - "puffed up"

11) What choices did Paul leave them as to how he might come to them?
    (21)
   - With a rod
   - In love and a spirit of gentleness

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2015

 

From Mark Copeland... "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS" Chapter Three

                "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS"

                             Chapter Three

OBJECTIVES IN STUDYING THIS CHAPTER

1) To see the proper place of preachers and teachers in relation to
   their work

2) To appreciate God's view of the church as the temple of God

SUMMARY

Paul continues to deal with the problem of division in this chapter.
Its seriousness is seen in its carnality, which prevented Paul from
being able to speak as to spiritually mature people (1-4).   To help
them see the folly of exalting preachers over each another, Paul shows
their relation to one other and to their work, which is building the
temple of God (5-17).  To the warning not to defile the temple of God,
Paul adds another not to glory in the wisdom of this world nor in men
(18-23).

OUTLINE

I. THE CARNAL NATURE OF DIVISION (1-4)

   A. CARNAL CHRISTIANS AT CORINTH (1-2)
      1. Prevented Paul from speaking to them as to spiritual people
         (1a)
      2. Their carnality indicated that they were still babes in 
         Christ, unable to receive solid food (1b-2)

   B. EVIDENCE OF THEIR CARNALITY (3-4)
      1. The envy, strife, and divisions among them (3)
      2. As expressed in their calling themselves after men (4)

II. RELATION OF PREACHERS TO THEIR WORK (5-17)

   A. PREACHERS ARE SERVANTS, USED BY GOD (5-7)
      1. Ministers given the opportunity to serve God in various ways
         (5-6a)
      2. But it is God who gives the increase (6b-7)

   B. THEIR RELATION TO ONE ANOTHER AND THEIR WORK (8-17)
      1. United in their  work, though their labor and rewards may
         differ (8)
      2. Fellow workers with God, they work on God's building (9)
         a. Laying the foundation (as Paul did) of Jesus Christ (10-11)
         b. Building upon the foundation, using various materials to be
            tested at the Last Day (12-15)
      3. A strong warning, since this building is the temple of God and
         indwelt by the Spirit (16-17)

III. AVOID GLORYING IN WORLDLY WISDOM OR MEN (18-23)

   A. REASONS NOT TO GLORY IN WORLDLY WISDOM (18-20)
      1. You will only deceive yourself (18)
      2. The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God (19-20)

   B. REASONS NOT TO GLORY IN MEN (21-23)
      1. All things (including men) are yours (21-22)
      2. You are Christ's, and Christ is God's (23)

REVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE CHAPTER

1) List the main points of this chapter
   - The Carnal Nature Of Division (1-4)
   - Relation Of Preachers To Their Work (5-17)
   - Avoid Glorying In Worldly Wisdom Or Men (18-23)

2) What prevented Paul from speaking to the Corinthians as unto
   spiritual people? (1-3)
   - They were carnal, still babes in Christ

3) What manifested their carnality? (3-4)
   - Their envy, strife, and divisions, as manifested in calling
     themselves after men

4) Who was more important, he that planted, or the one that watered?
   (6-7)
   - Neither, it was God who gave the increase

5) Upon what foundation is the church built? (11)
   - Jesus Christ

6) When will the work of ministers be fully made manifest? (13)
   - At the last Day

7) If those converted by preachers are lost, will the preachers be
   lost? (14-15)
   - No, but their reward will not be as great

8) What sort of building is the church? (16)
   - The temple of God, indwelt by His Spirit

9) What is the wisdom of this world to God? (19)
   - Foolishness

10) Why should we not glory in men? (21-22)
   - Because they are but instruments of God used to benefit us

11) And to whom do we belong? (23)
   - Christ

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2015

 

The Quran and the Person of Jesus by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=8&article=1083

The Quran and the Person of Jesus

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Christianity and Islam are in hopeless contradiction with each other regarding several significant concepts and core doctrines—contradictions that strike at the very heart of their respective approaches to religion, life, spirituality, and human existence. The most crucial contention—the greatest tension between the two religions—pertains to the person of Christ. On this solitary point, Islam and Christianity, the Bible and the Quran, can never agree. This disagreement is of such momentous import, and of such great magnitude, as to make the inexorable incompatibility permanent.

Observe a few of the Quran’s declarations concerning the person of Jesus (taken from the translation by Muslim scholar Mohammed Pickthall [n.d.]):

Say: O People of the Scripture! Come to an agreement between us and you: that we shall worship none but Allah, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside Allah (Surah 3:64).

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. I spake unto them only that which Thou commandedst me, (saying): Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. I was a witness of them while I dwelt among them, and when Thou tookest me Thou wast the Watcher over them. Thou art Witness over all things (Surah5:116-117).

Praise be to Allah Who hath revealed the Scripture unto His slave…to give warning of stern punishment from Him…and to warn those who say: Allah hath chosen a son, (A thing) whereof they have no knowledge, nor (had) their fathers. Dreadful is the word that cometh out of their mouths. They speak naught but a lie (Surah 18:1-5).

And they say: The Beneficent hath taken unto Himself a son. Assuredly ye utter a disastrous thing, whereby almost the heavens are torn, and the earth is split asunder and the mountains fall in ruins, that ye ascribe unto the Beneficent a son, when it is not meet for (the Majesty of) the Beneficent that He should choose a son. There is none in the heavens and the earth but cometh unto the Beneficient as a slave (Surah 19:88-93).

Allah hath not chosen any son, nor is there any God along with Him; else would each God have assuredly championed that which he created, and some of them would assuredly have overcome others. Glorified be Allah above all that they allege (Surah 23:91).

He unto Whom belongeth the sovereignty of the heavens and the earth, He hath chosen no son nor hath He any partner in the sovereignty. He hath created everything and hath meted out for it a measure (Surah 25:2).

These references, and others (e.g., 2:116; 6:101; 17:111; 19:35; 39:3-6; 43:14,59,81; 72:3-4), demonstrate that the Quran depicts Jesus as a mere man—a prophet like Muhammad—who was created by God like all other created beings: “The Messiah, son of Mary, was no other than a messenger, messengers (the like of whom) had passed away before him” (Surah 5:75; cf. 42:9,13,21). Indeed, when Jesus is compared to any of the prophets (listed as Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, and Jacob), Allah is represented as stating: “We make no distinction between any of them” (Surah 2:136; 3:84). Though the Quran seems to accept the notion of the virgin conception (Surah 21:91), to attribute divinity to Jesus, or to assign to Jesus equal rank with God, is to utter a “dreadful” and “disastrous” thing—to formulate “nothing but a lie”!

Here, indeed, is the number one conflict between Islam and Christianity—–the deity, person, and redemptive role of Christ. If Christ is Who the Bible represents Him to be, then Islam and the Quran are completely fictitious. If Jesus Christ is Who the Quran represents Him to be, then Christianity is baseless and blasphemous. On this point alone, these two religions can never achieve harmony. But the New Testament is very, very clear: the heart, core, and soul of the Christian religion is allegiance to Jesus Christ as God, Lord, and Savior.

To exhaust what the New Testament has to say on this subject would require volumes (cf. John 21:25). However, it takes only a few verses to establish the clarity with which the New Testament affirms the divine nature of Jesus. The entire book of John is devoted to defending the divine identity of Christ, articulated in its thematic statement: “And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name” (20:30-31, emp. added). The book of John pinpoints seven “signs,” i.e., miraculous acts, performed by Jesus while He was on Earth that proved His divine person—beginning with the very first verse that forthrightly affirms: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men” (1:1-4). The “Word” is Jesus (1:14). This thesis reaches its climactic pinnacle when Thomas was forced to arrive at the only possible conclusion regarding the person of Jesus, when he exclaimed: “My Lord and My God!” (20:28). To the Muslim and the Quran, such a declaration is preposterous, horrifying, blasphemous, and absolutely unacceptable. But it is the clear teaching of the New Testament.

In the Old Testament, when Moses encountered God at the burning bush, he asked God to clarify His name so that Moses would be able to respond appropriately to the Israelites when he went to them in Egypt on God’s mission. God answered: “ ‘I AM WHO I AM.’ And He said, ‘Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, I AM has sent me to you’ ” (Exodus 3:14). “I AM” is a reference to the eternality of God. Being God, He is eternal with no beginning and no end. He is self-existent and has always existed. Yet in the book of John, Jesus repeatedly identifies His own person with this same appellation (4:26; 8:24,28,58; 13:19). For example, when Jesus explained to the hostile Jews that Abraham had rejoiced to see His day, they responded, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” Jesus retorted: “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM” (8:58). The Jews unquestionably understood Jesus’ remark to be a claim to divinity, and promptly took up stones to kill Him (vs. 59).

Another Bible text where the deity of Jesus is set forth in unmistakable terms is the book of Colossians. Paul forcefully affirmed regarding Jesus: “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist” (1:15-17). “For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” (2:9).

Such depictions of Jesus are frequent in the New Testament. Jesus was certainly a prophet, as the Quran itself affirms (Surah 4:163); but Jesus was not just a prophet. He was God in the flesh. In fact, oral confession of the deity of Christ is prerequisite to becoming a Christian (Romans 10:9-10). This singular point makes Christianity and Islam forever incompatible. One must be a Christian to be saved (John 14:6; Acts 4:12), and yet one cannot be a Christian without believing in, and verbally confessing, the deity of Christ. The Bible declares that Jesus was the final revelation of God to man (Hebrews 1:1-3). There have been no others.

REFERENCES

Pickthall, Mohammed M. (n.d.), The Meaning of the Glorious Koran (New York: Mentor).