Mohamed Ghounem's
The Gospel of John
As a Muslim, we believe in the Gospel of Jesus, Jesus lived on this earth for over thirty years and Muslims believe in every word he preached.
Response:
Actually, Ghounem does not believe in the Gospel of the historical Jesus who is the Christ of biblical faith. Rather, he believes in the Gospel of Jesus according to Muhammad, which is another Gospel and hence a false Gospel.
Although when Jesus left the earth, if a person waited a year and than tried to recall what events or words were spoken, it would be difficult, furthermore, it would be even more difficult to record with accuracy what events really happened if it was written 5 or 10 years after the events took place.
Response:
We are amazed that Ghounem would even question the ability of Jesus' followers to accurately memorize and recall their beloved Master's words seeing that this is how he believes that the Quran was preserved, namely through memorization! Hence, if Jesus' followers could not accurately recall their Master's words what makes Ghounem think that Muhammad's followers could?
Secondly, we believe that the disciples were inspired by God, and thus were empowered by the Holy Spirit to accurately recall the words of Jesus:
"But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things AND WILL REMIND YOU OF EVERYTHING I HAVE SAID TO YOU." John 14:26
Now the four canonized Gospels we have with us today (Matthew, Luke, Mark, and John) are estimated to have been written 60 to 200 years after Jesus departed the earth, out of these four Gospels, the Gospel of John was writen the very last one, all of the Gospels were writen before the Gospel of John which leaves the Gospel of John with a greater burden than the others to accurately recall the specific events that took place.
Response:
First, no modern biblical scholar that we know of dates the writings of the four canonical Gospels between 60 to 200 years after Jesus departed from the earth. The consensus of biblical scholarship date the Synoptic Gospels anywhere from the years 60-90 AD. with most scholars agreeing that John's Gospel was written no later than AD. 90-100.
In fact, one Muslim apologist is well aware of these dates and even encourages Muslims to highlight this point when debating with Christians:
Selected Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary
This may be printed on a transparency for overhead projection and use in a public lecture. (see the following link. Despite the fact that we clearly disagree with some of these dates, especially the assertion that some books of the NT were written around AD. 150, this outline refutes Ghounem's point above.
Finally, Ghounem is seemingly unaware that his argument on the Gospels' late dating backfires on him. This is due to the fact that the Quran was compiled in its present form only in the late seventh century (if that!), nearly 700 years after the birth of Christ! Hence, for Ghounem to try and reject the Gospels because of their alleged late composition means that he must also toss out the Quran which came over 600 years after Christ's ascension.
Here is a list which does not intend to attack the Bible of God, but rather shows why God sent a more authentic Scripture, the Holy Qur'an.
This list below shows how humans were headed in a direction of adding to Scripture and adding to the status of Jesus which did not appear in such magnitude in previous Gospels.
Here we now see the differences between the later writen Gospel of John mostly compared to the earlier written Gospels;
2KI 2:11 Elijah went up to heaven.
JN 3:13 Only the Son of Man (Jesus) has ever ascended to heaven.
Response:
Let us read the context and see what Jesus actually meant:
"Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. He came to Jesus at night and said, 'Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him.' In reply Jesus declared, 'I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.' 'How can a man be born when he is old?" Nicodemus asked. 'Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born!' Jesus answered, 'I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, "You must be born again." The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.' 'How can this be?' Nicodemus asked. 'You are Israel's teacher', said Jesus, 'and do you not understand these things? I tell you the truth, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven-the Son of Man.'" John 3:1-13
We see that Jesus' whole point is that no man has ever ascended into heaven and came back down with the revelation of the glorious mysteries of the kingdom. Christ is the only person who came down from heaven in order to reveal God's glorious and mysterious riches and manifold wisdom. This is something neither Elijah nor Enoch did since neither of them came back down from heaven after ascending.
IS 44:24 God created heaven and earth alone.
JN 1:1-3 Jesus took part in creation
Response:
This is perhaps the weirdest objection that Ghounem presents. When these passages are taken together it serves to affirm the whole point Christians have been trying to make to Muslims, namely that Jesus is the Creator of the heavens and the earth. Furthermore, although Isaiah clearly teaches that Yahweh alone created the heavens and the earth, the OT also teaches that Yahweh used both his eternal Wisdom/Word and his Holy Spirit in creating the universe:
"By the WORD of the LORD were the heavens made, their starry host by the breath (ruach- Spirit) of his mouth." Psalm 33:6
"How many are your works, O LORD! In WISDOM you made them all; the earth is full of your creatures…
"By WISDOM the LORD laid the earth's foundations, by understanding he set the heavens in place; by his knowledge the deeps were divided, and the clouds let drop the dew." Proverbs 3:19-20
"Does not WISDOM call out? Does not understanding raise her voice? On the heights along the way, where the paths meet, she takes her stand… I, WISDOM, dwell together with prudence; I possess knowledge and discretion. The LORD brought me forth as the first of his works, before his deeds of old; I was appointed from eternity, from the beginning, before the world began. When there were no oceans, I was given birth, when there were no springs abounding with water; before the mountains were settled in place, before the hills, I was given birth, before he made the earth or its fields or any of the dust of the world. I was there when he set the heavens in place, when he marked out the horizon on the face of the deep, when he established the clouds above and fixed securely the fountains of the deep, when he gave the sea its boundary so the waters would not overstep his command, and when he marked out the foundations of the earth. Then I was the craftsman at his side. I was filled
with delight day after day, rejoicing always in his presence, rejoicing in his whole world and delighting in mankind. Now then, my sons, listen to me; blessed are those who keep my ways. Listen to my instruction and be wise; do not ignore it. Blessed is the man who listens to me, watching daily at my doors, waiting at my doorway. For whoever finds me finds life and receives favor from the LORD. But whoever fails to find me harms himself; all who hate me love death." Proverbs 8:1-2, 12, 22-36
Interestingly, Isaiah speaks of God's Word as a messenger sent forth to accomplish a task on behalf of God:
"As the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return to it without watering the earth and making it bud and flourish, so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater, so is my WORD that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it." Isaiah 55:10-11
Now let us compare the New Testament teaching on the Lord Jesus and see how the inspired authors of the Holy Bible clearly taught that Christ was God's eternal Word/Wisdom in the flesh:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men." John 1:1-4
"And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began." John 17:5
"…but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the WISDOM of God… But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us WISDOM from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption." 1 Corinthians 1:24, 30 NASB
"My purpose is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of WISDOM and knowledge." Colossians 2:2-3
Interestingly Jesus applies a function of Wisdom to himself, implicitly affirming that Jesus believed he was the Wisdom of God:
"Therefore I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town. And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. I tell you the truth, all this will come upon this generation." Matthew 23:34-36
Compare,
"Therefore also the Wisdom of God said, 'I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and persecute,' that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechari'ah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it shall be required of this generation." Luke 11:49-51 RSV
In light of the preceding passages, there is no contradiction on who created the universe. Yahweh alone created all things through his own personal Word/Wisdom and Spirit. The NT teaches that Jesus Christ is the eternal Word/Wisdom of God Incarnate.
IS 53:9 Usually taken to be a prophecy re: Jesus, mentions burial with others.
JN 19:38-42 Jesus was buried by himself.
Response:
Again, Ghounem has misinterpreted the passage since it does not say that Christ would be buried with others, but would be assigned a grave with the wicked. Yet, it goes on to say that Christ would also be buried with the rich:
"He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth." Isaiah 53:9
This is precisely what happened to Jesus since he had been crucified with criminals and would have suffered the same fate as they. After being put to death on a cross, the Romans would then dump the bodies of the criminals in the valley of Hinnom, the perpetual waste dump of that particular vicinity. Yet, in fulfillment of Isaiah 53 God intervened by preventing the body of Christ from being tossed into the valley to be burned. Instead, God supernaturally moved upon Joseph of Arimathea to bury Christ in his own new tomb. Hence, although Christ was assigned a grave with the criminals he was buried in a rich man's tomb instead, in precise fulfillment of this passage!
Second, Ghounem seemingly is trying to have his cake and eat it too. Here, he implicitly acknowledges that Isaiah 53 is a prophecy of the death and resurrection of the Messiah. Yet, in another article he argues tooth and nail that Isaiah 53 is not a prophecy of the sufferings of the Messiah! (see this article).
Hence, we would like to ask Ghounem to clearly define his position on Isaiah 53. Does he believe Isaiah 53 refers to the Messiah, and if so why does argue elsewhere that Isaiah 53 is not a messianic passage? If he does not believe that Isaiah 53 is a prophecy of the Messiah, then why does he accuse John of a contradiction seeing that Isaiah 53 does not refer to the Messiah's sufferings, death and burial?
MT 3:16, MK 1:10 It was Jesus who saw the Spirit descending.
JN 1:32 It was John who saw the Spirit descending.
Response:
We really do not see how these accounts contradict. Seeing that none of the accounts ever state that only Jesus or only John saw the Spirit descending upon Christ, there is no contradiction between the reports. Rather, they are complementary accounts of the same event since both Jesus and John saw the Spirit descend upon Christ in the form of a dove.
MT 4:1-11, MK 1:12-13 Immediately following his Baptism,
Jesus spent forty days in the wilderness resisting temptation by the Devil.
JN 2:1-11 Three days after the Baptism, Jesus was at the wedding in Cana.
Response:
Ghounem misquotes the passages since nowhere in John does it say that Jesus
went straight away to Cana after being baptized. In fact, when the passages are
cited in context the impression that is given is that it is only after Jesus' baptism
and return from the temptation in the desert that John identifies Jesus as the Lamb
of God:
Hence, it wasn't until Christ had returned from the desert, having already been
baptized by John, that Jesus went to the wedding banquet in Cana.
MT 10:34, LK 12:49-53 Jesus has come to bring a sword, fire, and division--not peace.
JN 16:33 Jesus says: "In me you have peace."
Response:
Ghounem is picking at straws here since he needs to misquote the intended context to arrive at his alleged contradiction. Here is the context of both Matthew 10:34 and Luke 12:49-53:
"I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is completed! Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law." Luke 12:49-53
The point in these passages is that belief in Christ inevitably leads to the division of family members and friends seeing that not all will believe. Christ is clearly stating that believers will face trials and tribulations on account of him and therefore must be willing to suffer the consequences if they are to wholeheartedly follow Jesus.
John is in agreement with both Matthew and Luke since he affirms that believers shall face trials and tribulations in this world:
"I have told you these things, so that IN ME you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world." John 16:33
Hence, despite the trials Christians may face the union that believers have with and in Christ gives them a peace that transcends all understanding:
Christ gives believers the power to cope with all of life's difficulties, assuring them peace in spite of tribulation.
MT 11:7-15, 17:12-13 Jesus says that John the Baptist was a prophet, and more.
JN 1:21 John himself says that he is not a prophet, nor is he Elijah.
Response:
Correction. John the Baptist does not deny that he is A prophet, but rather denies being THE prophet that was to come into the world:
This is a clear allusion to the prophecy made by Moses that God would send to Israel a prophet like him:
According to the NT Jesus was that prophet:
"On hearing his words, some of the people said, 'Surely this man is THE Prophet.'" John 7:40
MT 12:39, MK 8:12, LK 11:29 Jesus says that he will give no "sign."
JN 3:2, 20:30, Jesus proceeds to give many such "signs."
Response:
Actually, Jesus never denied that he would perform signs and wonders. Rather, Jesus refused to grant a sign to the Pharisees and Scribes in order to prove to them his divine authority. In fact, in Mark 8:12 the Jews asked specifically for a sign from heaven, a request that Christ refused to grant.
MT 13:34, MK 4:34 Jesus addresses the crowds only in parables, so that they would not fully understand. He explains the meaning only to his disciples.
JN 1:1 - 21:25 (Throughout the book of John, unlike the other Gospels, Jesus addresses the crowds in a very straightforward manner. He does not employ parables.)
Response:
It is simply not true that Jesus always spoke in parables in the Synoptics. The Synoptics furnish plenty examples of Christ speaking in a straightforward manner.
It is also not true that in John Jesus never employs parables or figurative language in speaking to the crowds and the disciples. The Gospel provides examples of Jesus speaking parabolically and figuratively, some of which include the following:
"'Though I have been speaking figuratively, a time is coming when I will no longer use this kind of language but will tell you plainly about my Father. In that day you will ask in my name. I am not saying that I will ask the Father on your behalf. No, the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God. I came from the Father and entered the world; now I am leaving the world and going back to the Father.' Then Jesus' disciples said, 'Now you are speaking clearly and without figures of speech. Now we can see that you know all things and that you do not even need to have anyone ask you questions. This makes us believe that you came from God.' 'You believe at last!' Jesus answered." John 16:25-31
MT 21:2-6, MK 11:2-7, LK 19:30-35 The disciples follow Jesus instructions and bring him the animal (or animals, in the case of MT).
JN 12:14 Jesus finds the animal himself.
Response:
There is no contradiction here since John is summarizing the event of Christ finding the donkey to ride on. John does not say that Jesus personally went looking for the donkey, but that Jesus found the donkey. It is the Synoptics that tell us that Jesus found the donkey through the agency of his disciples. In Jewish culture, a person's representative or messenger speaks and acts with the same authority of the one that sent him. Hence, the actions and words of a person's agent are considered as if the person himself had acted or spoken.
MT 21:12-13 The cleansing of the temple occurs at the end of Jesus' career.
JN 2:13-16 It occurs near the beginning of his career.
Response:
This is really a strange objection. The simple answer is that Jesus performed two temple cleansings, one at the beginning of his ministry and the other at the end of his career.
If Ghounem objects to this solution, then he must also affirm that the Quran itself contains contradictions. The Quran claims that the Pharaoh tried killing all male Israelite infants when Moses himself was still a suckling babe:
"Truly Pharaoh elated himself in the land and broke up its people into sections, depressing a small group among them: their sons he slew, but he kept alive their females: for he was indeed a maker of mischief. And We wished to be Gracious to those who were being depressed in the land, to make them leaders (in Faith) and make them heirs, To establish a firm place for them in the land, and to show Pharaoh, Haman, and their hosts, at their hands, the very things against which they were taking precautions. So We sent this inspiration to the mother of Moses: "Suckle (thy child), but when thou hast fears about him, cast him into the river, but fear not nor grieve: for We shall restore him to thee, and We shall make him one of Our messengers." Then the people of Pharaoh picked him up (from the river): (It was intended) that (Moses) should be to them an adversary and a cause of sorrow: for Pharaoh and Haman and (all) their hosts were men of sin. The wife of Pharaoh said: "(Here is) joy of the eye, for me and for thee: slay him not. It may be that he will be use to us, or we may adopt him as a son." And they perceived not (what they were doing)! But there came to be a void in the heart of the mother of Moses: She was going almost to disclose his (case), had We not strengthened her heart (with faith), so that she might remain a (firm) believer. S. 28:4-10
So, the Pharaoh issued the first decree of killing all the male infants when Moses was still a baby. Yet, elsewhere the Quran claims that the Pharaoh tried to kill all the male Israelite infants only after God had sent Moses to Egypt as a prophet:
Of old We sent Moses, with Our Signs and an authority manifest, To Pharaoh, Haman, and Qarun; but they called (him)" a sorcerer telling lies!"..Now, when he came to them in Truth, from Us, they said, "Slay the sons of those who believe with him, and keep alive their females," but the plots of Unbelievers (end) in nothing but errors (and delusions)!... Said Pharaoh: "Leave me to slay Moses; and let him call on his Lord! What I fear is lest he should change your religion, or lest he should cause mischief to appear in the land!" S. 40:23-26
Hence, Ghounem must remain consistent and apply the same criteria he uses against the Bible to the Quran. By so doing, he must now admit that the Quran clearly contradicts itself. Or he must allow for the possibility that both the Holy Bible and the Quran contain similar episodes that are repeated in the lives of specific individuals without this implying a contradiction.
MT 25:34 Heaven was prepared before the Ascension of Jesus.
JN 14:2-3 It was prepared after the Ascension of Jesus.
Response:
In actuality, John agrees with Matthew that the kingdom has already been prepared prior to Jesus' ascension:
"'Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me. In my Father's house ARE many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going.'" John 14:1-4
Jesus does not say that there will be rooms, but that there ARE many rooms already present in his Father's house. Jesus is using simile here to describe himself as one who makes preparations for his followers in his Father's abode. The allusion here is to a Jewish bridegroom who, after making a marriage contract with his bride-to-be, returns to his father's house in order to make room for her. Hence, Jesus is the Bridegroom who has gone into heaven to make room for his Bride, the Church.
Hence, Ghounem has failed to take into consideration that Jesus is using simile here and was not intending that his words be pushed to the point of hyper-literalism.
MT 26:7, MK 14:3 The oil is poured on Jesus' head.
JN 12:3 On his feet.
Response:
It is both. The woman anointed Jesus' head and feet. In order for this to be a bonafide
contradiction, Ghounem must show where either passage claims that the woman ONLY
anointed either Jesus' head or feet.
MT 26:7, MK 14:3, LK 7:37 An unnamed woman does the anointing.
JN 12:3 It is Mary.
Response:
We fail to see how this implies a contradiction. First, the event in Luke 7:37 refers to a different episode, and is not the same anointing referred in Matthew 26:7, Mark 14:3 and John 12:3. This is supported by the fact that in Matthew and Mark Jesus' anointing took place at Simon the Leper's house. Yet, in Luke it was the home of Simon the Pharisee. Lepers could not hold a ruling position and hence the accounts are referring to two different Simons. It should be noted that Simon was a common Jewish name at the time. See also our response above to the two temple cleansings reported in the Gospels.
Second, John makes explicit what Matthew and Mark affirm, namely that the woman who had anointed Jesus was Mary the sister of Lazarus. If the silence by Matthew and Mark on the woman's name implies a contradiction, then again Ghounem must be consistent and admit that the Quran also contradicts itself.
According to the Quran, when God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah he saved Lot and his family with the exception of an old woman:
He [Lot] said [to the evil people around him]: "I do detest your doings." "Oh my Lord! deliver me and my family from such things as they do!" So we delivered him and his family, - all except an old woman who lingered behind. S. 26:168-171
Yet, elsewhere the Quran claims that Lot's wife perished during the destruction of the two sinful cities:
But we saved him and his family, except his wife: she was of those who lagged behind. S. 7:83
This means that either the Quran contradicts itself since in one place it states
that an old woman perished, while in another place it is Lot's wife that dies.
Or the Quran is making explicit what it had already implied elsewhere.
Now, this is assuming, of course, that John 12 is referring to the same event recorded in both Matthew and Mark.
In reality, a careful reading of the accounts actually show that these are two different episodes which transpired
within a two-week period. Note, carefully, what these references say:
"Six days before the Passover, Jesus arrived at Bethany, where Lazarus lived,
whom Jesus had raised from the dead. Here a dinner was given in Jesus' honor. Martha served,
while Lazarus was among those reclining at the table with him. Then Mary took about a pint of
pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus' feet and wiped his feet with her hair.
And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume. But one of his disciples,
Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, ‘Why wasn't this perfume sold
and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year's wages.’ He did not say this because
he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help
himself to what was put into it. ‘Leave her alone,’ Jesus replied. ‘It was intended
that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial. ou will always have the poor among you,
but you will not always have me.’" John 12:1-8
Mark indicates that the washing of Jesus' feet in Simon's house occurred two days before the Passover,
and that some persons (identified as the disciples, not just Judas, in Matthew 26:8-10) complained
of what the woman had done. John, on the other hand, mentions that Jesus was with Lazarus (presumably
in his house) six days before the Passover, and that this time around it was Judas who complained.
Thus, within a two-week period, two different women at two different times anointed the Lord Jesus
in preparation for his burial. Either way, there is simply no contradiction between these reports.
MT 28:6-8 The women ran from the tomb "with great joy."
JN 20:1-2 Mary told Peter and the other disciple that the body had been stolen. (Would she feel "great joy" if she thought the body had been stolen?)
Response:
There is a rather simple solution to this alleged problem. Mary did not stick around long enough to hear the angel's announcement that Christ had been raised. Instead, she ran off immediately to the disciples after seeing that the stone had been moved and that the body was gone. Hence, Mary was not with the group at the moment the angel announced the good news that Christ was risen from the dead. This is another example where one reporter supplies additional information that the other writer did not mention. Again, these are complementary accounts, not contradictory.
MT 26:14-25, MK 14:10-11, LK 22:3-23 Judas made his bargain with the chief priests before the meal.
JN 13:21-30 After the meal.
Response:
We challenge Ghounem to show us anywhere in John 13:21-30 where the Evangelist claims that Judas bargained with the chief priests after the meal. In fact, John 13:21-30 begins where the Synoptics basically end, proceeding to report what happened to Judas after Jesus had just identified him as his betrayer.
Therefore, when we take into consideration all the accounts we discover that Judas had bargained with the chief priests to betray Jesus before the meal. It wasn't until after his participation in the meal did Judas then leave to bring the chief priests and the guards to arrest Jesus.
JN 13:21-30 Jesus forecasts his betrayal prior to the communion portion of the supper.
LK 22:14-23 After the communion portion.
Response:
Had Ghounem read John 13 carefully he would have discovered that John is in agreement with Luke:
"The evening meal WAS BEING SERVED, and the devil had already prompted Judas Iscariot, son of Simon, to betray Jesus… so he got up FROM THE MEAL, took off his outer clothing, and wrapped a towel around his waist… 'I am not referring to all of you: I know those I have chosen. But this is to fulfill the scripture: "He who shares MY BREAD has lifted his heel against me"'… After he had said this, Jesus was troubled in spirit and testified, 'I tell you the truth, one of you is going to betray me.' His disciples stared at one another, at a loss to know which of them he meant. One of them, the disciple whom Jesus loved, was reclining next to him. Simon Peter motioned to this disciple and said, 'Ask him which one he means.' Leaning back against Jesus, he asked him, 'Lord, who is it?' Jesus answered, 'It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish.' Then, dipping the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, son of Si
mon. As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. 'What you are about to do, do it quickly,' Jesus told him, but no one at the meal understood why Jesus said this to him. Since Judas had charge of the money, some thought Jesus was telling him to buy what was needed for the Feast, or to give something to the poor. As soon as Judas had taken the bread, he went out. And it was night." John 13:2, 4, 18, 21-30
John clearly states that Jesus identified his betrayer only after the communion meal had been served. Hence, there is no contradiction between the two reports.
JN 13:38 Peter was to deny Jesus before the cock crowed.
MK 14:66-72 The cock crows after both the first and second denials.
(Note: These discrepancies have been "translated out" in some Bible versions.)
Response:
The following response is taken from the booklet, 101 Cleared Up Contradictions In the Bible:
This accusation is that Jesus says to Peter "the cock will not crow till you have denied me three times" (John 13:38) and also "Before the cock crows twice you will deny me three times" (Mark 14:30). However, as the King James translation has it the cock crowed prior to Peter's third denial in Mark, while the prediction in John failed. This problem is one of manuscript evidence.
Matthew 26:33-35, 74-75 "before the cock crows you will disown me three times"
Luke 22:31-34, 60-62 "before the cock crows today, you will deny three times that you know me"
John 13:38 "before the cock crows, you will disown me three times"
Mark is therefore the odd one out. This is probably due to the second crow being a later addition to the original Gospel for some unknown reason. Some early manuscripts of Mark do not have the words "a second time" and "twice" in 14:72, nor the word "twice" in 14:30, or the cock crowing a first time in verse 14:68 as in the King James translation. Therefore an erroneous addition is spotted by the clarity of having 4 accounts of the event and many early manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark.
However, another explanation is plausible if the first crow verse (68 in the King James) was not in the original but the others ("twice" in 30 and 72) were, as in the New International translation. For as a cock can (and often does) crow more than once in a row, there would be no contradiction (the first and second crows being together, with Peter remembering Jesus' prediction on the second crow), for since we may be very sure that if a rooster crows twice, he has at least crowed once. Mark therefore just included more information in his account than the other gospel writers.
Although I am not an expert on the manuscripts used for the King James translation and do not know a great deal about why later, more accurate translators had enough manuscript evidence to omit verse 68 but not the others, I think that the first reason is more likely. (see this related link.)
MT 26:49-50, MK 14:44-46 Jesus is betrayed by Judas with a kiss, then seized.
LK 22:47-48 Jesus anticipates Judas' kiss. No actual kiss is mentioned.
JN 18:2-9 Jesus voluntarily steps forward to identify himself making it completely unnecessary for Judas to point him out. No kiss is mentioned.
Response:
Again, Ghounem forces a contradiction upon the Gospels when none actually exists. The plausible solution is that as the soldiers stood back, Judas proceeded forward to kiss Jesus. After addressing Judas' treacherous act, Christ then turned to the soldiers who had been standing back waiting for Judas' signal and proceeded to ask them whom they were seeking. They replied "Jesus of Nazareth," to which Christ replied that he was the one they were seeking.
As far as Luke 22:47-48 is concerned, nowhere in the context does it even deny that Judas kissed Jesus. Ghounem is therefore committing the logical fallacy of arguing from silence. In light of this, there are no real contradictions but rather Ghounem's illogical methodology that he imposes upon the text of Scripture in order to arrive at alleged contradictions.
MT 26:57, MK 14:53, LK 22:54 After his arrest Jesus is first taken to Caiphas, the high priest.
JN 18:13-24 First to Annas, the son-in-law of Caiphas, then to Caiphas.
Response:
In none of the Synoptics does it even say that Jesus was first taken to Caiaphas after being arrested. Ghounem must insert the word first in order to force a contradiction upon the Gospels. John gives additional details that the others omit. Hence, when the accounts are taken together we discover that Jesus was first taken to see Annas and only after that was he taken to Caiaphas.
MT 26:18-20, 57-68, 27:1-2, MK 14:16-18, 53-72, 15:1 Jesus' initial hearing was at night on Passover. In the morning he was taken to Pilate.
LK 22:13-15, 54-66 The initial hearing took place in the morning on Passover.
JN 18:28, 19:14 It took place the day before Passover, on the Day of Preparation.
Response:
First, Luke does not deny that there was a hearing at night. In fact, he implicitly affirms that there was one since he records Peter denying Christ while the former was in the High Priest's courtyard:
The fact that Peter was in the courtyard of the High Priest presumes that Jesus was being questioned that very night. This means that either Ghounem did not read carefully or tries to impose contradictions upon the Gospels when none actually exist. Sadly, this seems to be Ghounem's consistent habit.
As far as whether it was before or during the day of Passover, we again quote from 101 Cleared Up Contradictions In The Bible:
Jesus was crucified on the daytime before the Passover meal. The reason why Mark seems to say it was after is one of culture and contextualising.
The evidence from the Gospels that Jesus died on the eve of the Passover, when the Passover meal would be eaten after sunset, is very solid. Before we delve (albeit briefly) into this issue, it is worth noting that Mark 14 records that Jesus does not eat the Passover with his disciples.
Luke 14:12 says it was "the Feast of Unleavened Bread", which is also called "Passover". As the name suggest states, part of the Passover meal was to eat bread without yeast. It is a commandment which Jewish people keep even today for the meal, for God makes it extremely clear, "eat bread without yeast And whoever eats bread with yeast in it must be cut off from the community of Israel. Eat nothing made with yeast. Wherever you live, you must eat unleavened bread ". See also Exodus 12:1-20.
The Greek word for "unleavened bread" is 'azymos'. This is the word used by Mark in "the Feast of Unleavened Bread", chapter 14 verse 12. The Greek word for normal bread (with yeast) is 'artos'. All the Gospel writers, including Mark, agree that in this last meal with his disciples the bread they ate was artos, in other words a bread with yeast. "While they were eating, Jesus took bread [artos], gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying Take it; this is my body." Mark 14:22. It is highly probably therefore that this meal was not a Passover meal. The use of the different words in the same passage strongly suggests this. For it would be unthinkable to them to eat something that God had commanded them not to eat (bread with yeast - artos), and not to eat something that they were commanded to eat (unleavened bread - azymos).
Therefore, as this is true, what does Mark mean in verses 12-17? Firstly, we read, "when it was customary to sacrifice the Passover lamb". Exodus 20:1-8 says that this must happen on the 14th day of the Jewish month of Nisan. However, there was dispute as to when this day was, due to the debate on separate calendars which were used for calculating feast-days. It is possible that separate traditions were in vogue in Jesus life. So, indeed it may have been "customary" to sacrifice the lamb on that day for some, although many, probably most, recognized the Passover as being the next evening.
Secondly, the disciples ask Jesus "Where do you want us to go and make preparations for you to eat the Passover?" They had no idea that Jesus was going to give his life for the sins of the world like the Passover lamb of Exodus 20 did to save the Israelites from God's wrath upon Egypt. Jesus had explained to them, but they did not grasp it for many reasons, including the hailing of Jesus by the people as Messiah in the Triumphal Entry, which was still 'ringing in their ears'. He does not state that he would eat it with them. He wanted to, but he knew he would not. There is no room for any dogmatic statement that the Passover must be eaten on the same day the room was hired or prepared. Indeed, Jewish people, because of Exodus 12, thoroughly prepared their houses for the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
Thirdly, in some ways the Gospels couch the last supper in terms of fulfillment. i.e. Luke 22 records Jesus saying that he had longed to eat "this" Passover meal with them. So, does Luke say it was the Passover meal? It is doubtful, due to the same use of artos and azymos, amongst other reasons. Jesus did make this last supper a sort of Passover meal (but not the real one). He wanted to have this special fellowship with his disciples, his friends, being painfully aware of the agony he would go through, only a few hours later. He also wanted to show his disciples that the Passover spoke of him; that he was the sacrifice that would bring in the New Covenant God promised (see questions #64 and #34) just like the lambs that was killed 1500 years earlier to save the people if Israel from God's wrath. He illustrated through the meal that he is the "Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world" as John the Baptist called Jesus (John 1:29). He wanted to eat it with them for he says, "I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the Kingdom of God" (Luke 22:16). His coming death was its fulfillment, "For Christ, our Passover Lamb, has been sacrificed" (1 Corinthians 5:7).
If this understanding is correct (one of two feasible explanations I opted for due to my current research), then there is no contradiction. Jesus died before the Passover meal.
Smith's point that the Synoptics are not necessarily referring to the Passover meal is strengthened by Mark's account:
"It was Preparation Day (that is, the day before the Sabbath). So as evening approached, Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body. Pilate was surprised to hear that he was already dead. Summoning the centurion, he asked him if Jesus had already died. When he learned from the centurion that it was so, he gave the body to Joseph. So Joseph BOUGHT some linen cloth, took down the body, wrapped it in the linen, and placed it in a tomb cut out of rock. Then he rolled a stone against the entrance of the tomb." Mark 15:42-46
The fact that Joseph bought linen presumes that the Eve of Passover fell on that very same day, which also happened to be the Sabbath Day. It would not have been possible for Joseph to buy linen that day had the Eve of Passover been the night before since all the shops would have been closed.
MT 26:59-66, MK 14:55-64 Jesus was tried by the entire Sanhedrin (the chief priests and the whole council).
LK 22:66-71 There was no trial but merely an inquiry held by the Sanhedrin.
JN 18:13-24 There was no appearance before the Sanhedrin, only the private hearings before Annas and then Caiphas.
Response:
We have already shown that Luke does not deny that Jesus had been tried before the Sanhedrin on the night of his betrayal, and hence no contradiction exists between him and Matthew and Mark. Ghounem is simply arguing from silence. We challenge Ghounem to show us where Luke explicitly denies that a trial took place the night of Jesus' arrest. Luke 22:66-71 refers to the morning proceedings, not to the trial which Matthew and Mark mention occurred the night before.
As far as John 18:13-24 is concerned, Ghounem is again arguing from silence since the Evangelist does not deny that the Sanhedrin was present. Rather, John is simply singling out Annas and Caiaphas as the ones initiating the hearings against Jesus.
The fact is that John does affirm that the ruling council was present at the hearings before Annas and Caiaphas:
"Then the JEWS led Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now it was early morning, and to avoid the ceremonial uncleanness the JEWS did not enter the palace; they wanted to be able to eat the Passover." John 18:28
The phrase, "the Jews," is used elsewhere by John in reference to the Jewish ruling council:
"They brought to the Pharisees the man who had been blind. Now the day in which Jesus had made the mud and opened the man's eyes was a Sabbath. Therefore the Pharisees also asked him how he had received his sight. 'He put mud on my eyes,' the man replied, 'and I washed, and now I see.' Some of the Pharisees said, 'This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath'… Finally they turned to the blind man, 'What have you to say about him? It was your eyes he opened.' The man replied, 'He is a prophet.' The JEWS still did not believe that he had been blind and had received sight until they sent for his parents. 'Is this your son?' they asked. 'Is this the one you say was born blind? How is it that now he can see?' 'We know he is our son,' the parents answered, 'and we know he was born blind. But how he can see now, or who opened his eyes, we don't know. Ask him He is of age; he will speak for himself.' His parents said this because they were afraid of the JEWS, for already the JEWS had decided that anyone who acknowledged that Jesus was the Christ would be put out of the synagogue." John 9:13-16a, 18-22
In light of the fact that John uses the phrase "Jews" as a reference to the Jewish ruling council, we again find Ghounem imposing contradictions upon the biblical text when none actually exist.
MT 27:11, MK 15:2, LK 23:3 When asked if he is King of the Jews, Jesus answers: "You have said so," (or "Thou sayest").
JN 18:33-34 He answers: "Do you say this of your own accord?"
Response:
Is this really a contradiction? Is it not just as likely that Jesus actually said what all three Synoptics and John report? For instance, when we combine all the accounts together this is what we end up with when we add a little imagination in piecing the reports together:
"So Pilate asked Jesus, 'Are you the king of the Jews?' (Synoptics-John) 'Yes, it is as you say,' Jesus replied. (Synoptics) 'By the way, is that your own idea,' Jesus asked, 'or did others talk to you about me?'" (John, with the italicized words added to make the paragraph run more smoothly)
The fact that the accounts can be harmonized clearly demonstrates that no real contradiction exists.
MT 27:11-14 Jesus answers not a single charge at his hearing before Pilate.
JN 18:33-37 Jesus answers all charges at his hearing before Pilate.
Response:
Ghounem does not read carefully since both accounts agree that Jesus answered only questions regarding his identity:
"Meanwhile Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, 'Are you the king of the Jews?' 'Yes, it is as you say,' Jesus replied." Matthew 27:11
"Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, 'Are you the king of the Jews?' 'Is that your own idea,' Jesus asked, 'or did others talk to you about me?' 'Am I a Jew?' Pilate replied. 'It was your people and your chief priests who handed you over to me. What is it you have done?' Jesus said, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place.' 'You are a king, then!' said Pilate. Jesus answered, 'You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.'" John 18:33-37
Yet, both accounts also agree that Jesus refused to defend himself against the charges made against him:
"When he was accused by the chief priests and the elders, he gave no answer. Then Pilate asked him, 'Don't you hear the testimony they are bringing against you?' But Jesus made no reply, not even to a single charge-to the great amazement of the governor." Matthew 27:12-14
"The Jews insisted, 'We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God.' When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid, and he went back inside the palace. 'Where do you come from?' he asked Jesus, but Jesus gave him no answer. 'Do you refuse to speak to me?' Pilate said. "Don't you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?' Jesus answered, 'You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.'" John 19:7-11
MT 27:28 Jesus is given a scarlet robe (a sign of infamy).
JN 19:2 A purple robe (a sign of royalty).
Response:
Admittedly, this is a difficulty. A possible explanation is that during the mocking, the soldiers first placed a scarlet robe on Jesus and then placed a purple one. This scenario is strengthened by the fact that John implies that the soldiers repeatedly mocked Jesus during the trial before Pilate. The New Bible Commentary- 21st Century Edition states:
"… The imperfect tense of the verbs in v 3 suggests a succession of mock acts of homage…" (Ibid., ed. G.J. Wenham, J.A. Motyer, D.A. Carson & R.T. France [InterVarsity Press; Downers Grove, Il 1994], p. 1061)
Matthew and Mark affirm that the mocking continued right after Jesus' meeting with Pilate. Hence, during this period it is likely that the soldiers placed both a scarlet robe as well as a purple one.
MT 27:46-50, MK 15:34-37 Jesus' last recorded words are: "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"
LK 23:46 "Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit."
JN 19:30 "It is finished." (Note: Even though both MT and MK represent direct quotes and are translated similarly, the actual Greek words used for God are different. MT uses "Eli" and MK uses "Eloi.")
Response:
Here is the response on the actual last words of Jesus on the cross as taken from the booklet 101 Cleared Up Contradictions in The Bible:
'What were the last words of Jesus before he died?' is the question asked by Shabbir in this supposed contradiction. This does not show a contradiction any more than two witnesses to an accident at an intersection will come up with two different scenarios of that accident, depending on where they stood. Neither witness would be incorrect, as they describe the event from a different perspective. Luke was not a witness to the event, and so is dependent on those who were there. John was a witness. What they are both relating, however, is that at the end Jesus gave himself up to death.
It could be said that Luke used the last words that he felt were necessary for his gospel account, which concentrated on the humanity of Christ (noted in the earlier question), while John, as well as quoting the last words of Jesus, was interested in the fulfilment of the salvific message, and so quoted the last phrase "it is finished".
John 17:4 records Jesus' prayer to the Father in the light of Christ's forthcoming crucifixion, stating that He had completed the work of revelation (John 1:18), and since revelation is a particular stress of the Gospel of John, and the cross is the consummation of that commission (John 3:16), it is natural that this Gospel should centre on tetelestai. At any rate, if Jesus said 'It is finished; Father into your hands I commit my spirit' or vice versa, it would be quite in order to record either clause of this sentence, his last words. Luke-Acts reaches its conclusion without any climax, because the continuing ministry of the exalted Christ through the Holy Spirit and the Church has no ending prior to the Parousia, and to record tetelestai might have undermined this emphasis, or it could have been taken the wrong way. At any rate, no contradiction is involved; purely a distinction of emphasis.
As for the reason why Matthew and Mark differ slightly in Jesus' cry to God, again here is the answer from the same article:
The question of whether Jesus spoke Hebrew or Aramaic on the cross is answerable. However, the reason for Matthew and Mark recording it differently is probably due to the way the event was spoken of in Aramaic after it happened, and due to the recipients of the Gospel. However, the whole issue is not a valid criticism of the Bible.
Mark 15:34 is probably the most quoted Aramaism in the New Testament, being "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabakthani." However, it is doubtful that Jesus spoke in the language that Mark records them in. The reason is simple; the people hearing Jesus' words thought he was calling Elijah (Matthew 27:47 and Mark 15:35-36). In order for the onlookers to have made this mistake, Jesus would have to have cried "Eli, Eli," not "Eloi, Eloi." Why? Because in Hebrew Eli can be either "My God" or the shortened form of Eliyahu which is Hebrew for Elijah. However, in Aramaic Eloi can be only "My God."
It is also worth noting that lama ("why") is the same word in both languages, and sabak is a verb which is found not only in Aramaic, but also in Mishnaic Hebrew.
Therefore Jesus probably spoke it in Hebrew. Why therefore is it recorded in Aramaic as well? Jesus was part of a multilingual society. He most probably spoke Greek (the common language of Greece and Rome), Aramaic (the common language of the Ancient Near East) and Hebrew, the sacred tongue of Judaism, which had been revived in the form of Mishnaic Hebrew in Second Temple times. Hebrew and Aramaic are closely related Semitic languages. That Hebrew and Aramaic terms show up in the Gospels is, therefore, not at all surprising.
That one Gospel writer records it in Hebrew and another in extremely similar Aramaic is no problem to Christians, nor is it a criticism of the Bible. The simple reason for the difference is probably that when one of them remembered and discussed the happening of Jesus' life, death and resurrection, this phrase may well have been repeated in their conversation as Aramaic, which would be perfectly normal. So he wrote it down as such. Secondly, Mark may have written it in Aramaic due to the fact that he was the original recipients of the Gospel.
However, both these reasons are simply speculation. If Mark recorded his words in Arabic, then we would worry!
MT 27:48, LK 23:36, JN 19:29 Jesus was offered vinegar to drink.
MK 15:23 It was wine and myrrh, and he did not drink it.
JN 19:29-30 Whatever it was, he did drink it
Response:
This is another example of Ghounem not reading carefully. Mark indicates that the soldiers first offered Jesus wine and myrrh, which Christ refused to drink:
"Then they offered him wine mixed with myrrh, but he did not take it." Mark 15:23
Yet, Mark also indicates that Jesus was then offered vinegar to drink:
"And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, 'Eloi, Eloi, lama'-which means, 'My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?' When some of those standing near heard this, they said, 'Listen, he's calling Elijah.' One man ran, filled a sponge with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink. 'Now leave him alone. Let's see if Elijah comes to take him down,' he said." Mark 15:34-36
John tells us why the soldier offered Jesus the vinegar:
"Later, knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, 'I am thirsty.' A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus' lips. When he had received the drink, Jesus said, 'It is finished.' With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit." John 19:28-30
Hence, after Christ cried out to God he became thirsty. In response to Jesus' cry of thirst, the soldier offered him vinegar to drink. The contradiction therefore disappears.
MT 27:55, MK 15:40, LK 23:49 The women looked on from afar.
JN 19:25-26 They were near enough that Jesus could speak to his mother.
Response:
The simple solution is to keep in mind that Jesus hung on the cross from approximately 9:00 AM till before sunset. In light of this factor, the women began at the foot of the cross and slowly pulled away as the day continued.
MT 28:1 The first visitors to the tomb were Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (two).
MK 16:1 Both of the above plus Salome (three).
LK 23:55 - 24:1, 24:10 Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and "other women" (at least five).
JN 20:1 Mary Magdalene only (one).
Response:
None of the accounts contradict since none of the accounts state that Mary alone went to the tomb, or only the two Marys had gone to anoint Jesus' body. In fact, in John's Gospel the Evangelist clearly affirms that Mary Magdalene was not alone when she set out to the tomb early that morning:
"Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance. So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, 'They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and WE don't know where they have put him!'" John 20:1-2
John records Mary as affirming that she was not alone that first Easter morning as indicated by Mary's "WE" statement. Hence, each one of the Evangelists is simply highlighting a specific woman or group of women that were essential in their story-line without this implying that the specific writer was unaware that the other women were also present.
Furthermore, this again demonstrates Ghounem's distortion of scripture by inserting words into the text such as "only" or "first." By so doing, Ghounem is trying to force the Holy Bible to contradict itself. This is not exegesis but rather eisegesis, reading things into the text that are not stated or implied.
MT 28:1 It was toward dawn when they arrived.
MK 16:2 It was after sunrise.
LK 24:1 It was at early dawn.
JN 20:1 It was still dark.
Response:
A little imagination would help resolve these alleged discrepancies. Seeing that the women did not have rapid transportation, they headed towards the tomb at the crack of dawn when it was real early and still dark, with the sun barely visible upon the face of the horizon. Upon arriving at their destination, the sun had risen and it was daylight. Again, the alleged contradictions disappear.
MT 28:9 On his first appearance to them, Jesus lets Mary Magdalene and the other Mary hold him by his feet.
JN 20:17 On his first appearance to Mary, Jesus forbids her to touch him since he has not yet ascended to the Father.
JN 20:27 A week later, although he has not yet ascended to the Father, Jesus tells Thomas to touch him.
Response:
Ghounem again introduces a contradiction into the Gospels when none actually exist. As far as John 20:17 is concerned Jesus was not forbidding Mary from touching him since she was already holding on to him. This is clear from the Greek text since it implies that Mary had begun clinging on to Christ and apparently did not want to let him go. The King James Study Bible states it best:
"20:17. Touch me not is a present imperative, forbidding the continuation of an action already begun. 'Stop clinging to me' is a helpful paraphrase. Compare with verse 27, where one week later, we are told He encouraged Thomas to touch Him. I am not yet ascended: 'Do not worry, I am not leaving immediately.'" (The King James Study Bible [Thomas Nelson Publishers; Nashville, TN 1988], p. 1653 italic emphasis ours)
Hence, Christ did not forbid Mary from touching him, but rather from clinging on to him since she was already touching him.
MK 1:14 Jesus began his ministry after the arrest of John the Baptist.
JN 3:22-24 Before the arrest of John the Baptist.
Response:
The simple answer that Ghounem could not see is that Jesus had not begun his Galilean ministry until John had been arrested. John is referring to Jesus' Judean ministry that began way before Christ had ever begun preaching in Galilee.
MK 6:53 After the feeding of the 5000, Jesus and the disciples went to Gennesaret.
JN 6:17-25 They went to Capernaum.
Response:
The New American Bible, St Joseph Edition published by Catholic Book Publishing Company, New York, states:
"CAPERNAUM. Little town located northwest of Lake Tiberias which served as headquarters for Jesus' ministry in Galilee (Mt 4, 13)." (Ibid., p. 416)
And,
"GENNESARET. Plain to the northwest of the Sea of Tiberias. It gave its name to a town close to Capernaum. Jesus sojourned there for a long time (Mt 14, 34). (Ibid., p. 421)
Both Capernaum and Gennesaret were located on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee, also called the Sea of Tiberias. Hence, there is no contradiction here since one writer gives us the general location (Capernaum), with the other specifying the exact location Jesus and his apostles settled, namely on a plain by Capernaum.
MK 15:25 It was the third hour when Jesus was crucified.
JN 19:14-15 It was after the sixth hour since Jesus was still before Pilate and had not yet been sentenced at that time.
Response:
First, John does not contradict Mark since John does not mention when Jesus was actually crucified. John only points out that Jesus' trial before Pilate where Pilate petitioned the crowd in deciding Christ's fate occurred at the sixth hour.
Furthermore John may have been using Roman time, with Mark using Jewish time. In light of this, John would be suggesting that Christ's trial before Pilate took place at 6:00 A.M. Mark would then be implying that the actual crucifixion occurred several hours later at 9:00 A.M.
MK 16:1-2 The women came to the tomb to anoint the body.
JN 19:39-40 The body had already been anointed and wrapped in linen cloth.
Response:
We again fail to see how this is a contradiction. Although John tells us that Joseph and Nicodemus wrapped Jesus in 75 pounds of myrrh and aloes, evidently they did not complete the job. This is implied by the fact that in John 19:42 the Evangelist states that it was the Jewish Day of Preparation, indicating that Joseph and Nicodemus had to rush through the process of wrapping the body of Jesus.
The women therefor took it upon themselves to come back to the tomb and complete the job Joseph and Nicodemus had begun.
MK 16:5, LK 24:3 The women actually entered the tomb.
JN 20:1-2, 11 They did not.
Response:
Again, neither account contradicts. As we stated earlier, Mary Magdalene did not remain behind long enough to hear the angel's announcement that Christ had been raised. John makes this point clear. Yet, the other women who remained behind did in fact enter the tomb. Both Mark and Luke highlight this fact.
Furthermore, John does not actually say that Mary Magdalene did not enter the tomb, but that she saw that the stone had been removed. It could be just as likely that she did enter the tomb and after seeing that the body was gone, ran to tell the disciples about the missing body without having had the chance to see the angels who were present at the tomb that morning.
Finally, Ghounem contradicts himself here. Ghounem earlier made the assertion that the Gospels' claim that a group of women heading out to the tomb contradicted John's testimony that Mary Magdalene went to the gravesite all by herself. Now he uses John 20 to show that there was a group of women that did not enter the tomb when arriving at the site. Hence, Ghounem implicitly admits that John 20 does not single out the fact that more than one woman was present with Mary when arriving at the tomb that first Easter morning.
So which is it? Does John 20:1 claim that Mary Magdalene was alone when she went to the tomb? If so then why does Ghounem use this to prove that there is a contradiction with Luke 24:3? If Ghounem admits that John 20 does not rule out the possibility that the other women were present with Mary, then why does Ghounem use John 20 to show that this passage contradicts the other Gospels' mention of all the women that actually went to the tomb that morning?
LK 1:15 John the Baptist had the Holy Spirit from before his birth or the birth of Jesus.
LK 1:41 Elizabeth had it long before Jesus went away.
LK 1:67 So did Zechariah.
LK 2:25 So did Simeon.
LK 11:13 It is obtained by prayer (presumably at any time).
JN 7:39, JN 16:7, The Holy Spirit cannot come into the world until after Jesus has departed
Response:
First, Luke 11:13 does not imply that the Holy Spirit can be given at any moment. Had Ghounem read Luke carefully, he would have seen that Luke affirms that the Spirit would only be given after the ascension of Jesus:
"'I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.' When he had led them out to the vicinity of Bethany, he lifted up his hands and blessed them. While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up into heaven." Luke 24:49-51
"On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: 'Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit'… 'But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.' After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight. They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. 'Men of Galilee,' they said, 'why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven. Then they returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day's walk from the city." Acts
1:4-5, 8-12
Second, in the case of Zechariah, John and Simeon these men received the Spirit prior to the baptism of Christ. After the baptism, the Holy Spirit came to rest upon Christ and would not be poured out upon believers until Jesus' resurrection and ascension, as stated in both Luke and John.
Third, Ghounem implicitly admits that the Paraclete of John 14-16 is the Holy Spirit of God. This means that the Paraclete cannot be a prophecy of Muhammad. Hence, whenever Ghounem attempts to use the Paraclete passages of John to point to Muhammad he only serves to discredit his credibility as an apologist seeing that he often contradicts himself.
LK 14:26 No one can be a disciple of Jesus unless he hates his parents, wife, children, brothers and sisters.
JN 3:15 Whoever hates his brother is a murderer.
JN 4:20 If anyone claims to love God but hates his brother, he is a liar.
Response:
Ghounem badly misquotes the Bible in these specific passages. Jesus' point in Luke 14:26 that one must hate parents etc. refers to a person's willingness to even forsake family for Christ. Hence, Jesus' point is that one must never love family, friends and the world more than Christ but must be willing to give up everything for the Lord Jesus.
Second, Ghounem misquotes John 3:15 and 4:20 since these passages have nothing to do with loving or hating one's brothers.
What Ghounem is seemingly referring to is John's first epistle, not the Gospel of John. Be that as it may, 1 John is not referring to biological siblings, but spiritual brothers that have been adopted into God's family through faith in Jesus Christ. Believers can never hate other believers, but must love one another as Christ loved us.
LK 22:3-23 Satan entered Judas before the supper.
JN 13:27 It was during the supper.
Response:
There is no contradiction between Luke and John since both writers are referring to a different time period. Luke indicates that Satan entered Judas right before making a deal with the Jews to betray Jesus:
"Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve. And Judas went to the chief priests and the officers of the temple guard and discussed with them how he might betray Jesus. They were delighted and agreed to give him money. He consented, and watched for an opportunity to hand Jesus over to them when no crowd was present. Then came the day of the Unleavened Bread on which the Passover Lamb had to be sacrificed." Luke 22:3-6
The implication Luke makes is that a period of time had elapsed from the moment Satan entered Judas to the time when Jesus was actually arrested.
John tells us that on the night of Jesus' arrest Satan entered Judas a second time:
"The evening meal was being served, and the devil had already prompted Judas Iscariot, son of Simon, to betray Jesus… As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him." John 13:2, 27
Even prior to stating that the Devil entered Judas after the evening meal had been served, John indicates that Satan had already prompted Judas to betray Jesus. Luke tells us when this prompting took place, namely on the very day when Satan entered Judas the first time, causing the latter to negotiate with the chief priests and officers to betray Jesus.
Therefore, when the two accounts are pieced together we discover that Satan entered Judas the first time on the day the latter negotiated with the chief priests and the officers of the temple. Satan then reentered Judas on the night of Jesus' arrest. In light of this, Ghounem's contradiction disappears.
LK 23:43 Jesus promises one of those crucified with him that they will be together, that very day, in Paradise.
JN 20:17 Jesus was not raised until the third day and did not ascend until at least forty days later.
Response:
The answer is really simple. On the day Jesus and the criminal died, their spirits entered Paradise together. Both orthodox Muslims and Bible believing Christians agree that when a person's body dies, his soul continues to exist.
Yet, Jesus' ascension into heaven forty days later does not refer to the ascension of his soul but rather to his physical body. Hence, Jesus ascended with his physical body into heaven only after he had been raised from the dead. There is no contradiction between the two accounts.
LK 23:55-56 The women followed Joseph to the tomb, saw how the body had been laid, then went to prepare spices with which to annoint the body.
JN 19:39-40 Joseph brought spices with him (75 or a 100 lbs.) and anointed the body (as the women should have noticed).
Response:
This has already been answered above. No need to repeat ourselves here.
JN 1:1, 10:30 Jesus and God are one.
JN 14:28 God is greater than Jesus.
Response:
Here, Ghounem commits a categorical fallacy, confusing nature with position. The Father and the Son are equal in nature and essence, not in position. Hence, they are equal in one sense yet in another sense the Father is greater than the Son.
Interestingly, Ghounem implicitly acknowledges that John 10:30 affirms the essential equality of the Father and the Son, that the Father and the Son are one in nature and power. The reason why this is interesting is that throughout his book Ghounem tries to disprove the deity of Christ. Yet, he now indirectly admits that John 10:30 does teach that Jesus and the Father are equal in nature, which would then mean that both the Father and the Son equally participate in the eternal being of the one true God.
Ghounem often makes these types of slips throughout his article.
JN 1:1 Jesus was God incarnate.
AC 2:22 Jesus was a man approved by God.
Response:
Both statements are true since Jesus is both God and man at the same time. Had Ghounem read John carefully he would have discovered that John also taught that Jesus was not only God, but that he was fully human as well, as does Acts. (Cf. Jn. 1:1, 14; 8:40, 58; Acts 3:14-15)
Second, Ghounem again tries to have his cake and eat it too. As we stated above one of the major themes of Ghounem's book is to prove that the NT does not teach that Jesus is God. Yet, he seemingly makes a Freudian slip and admits that the NT does in fact teach the absolute deity of Christ, a slip he also makes just prior to this one! Again, we ask Ghounem to tell us what in fact does he believe about the NT teaching on the person of Christ. Does he believe that the NT teaches the deity of Christ, and if so then why does he try to prove that it does not? If it does not teach Jesus' divinity, then how can he accuse John of contradicting the testimony of Acts that Jesus is a man, if in fact the NT does not teach the deity of Christ?
JN 3:17, 8:15, 12:47 Jesus does not judge.
JN 5:22, 5:27-30, 9:39, AC 10:42, 2CO 5:10 Jesus does judge.
Response:
There are no contradictions. The first set of passages refer to Christ's first coming where he did not come to judge the world, but to save his people from their sin by dying on their behalf.
The judgment referred to in John 5:22-23, 27-30 and 2 Corinthians 5:10 is the future judgment that takes place at the consummation of the age where Christ returns to judge the nations and rewards true believers for their patient endurance and good deeds. Christ is coming again to save his people from the wrath of God that will be poured out upon all unbelievers:
"God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people and to be marveled at among all those who have believed. This includes you, because you believed our testimony to you." 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10
"So Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation those who are waiting for him." Hebrews 9:28
Acts 10:42 is emphasizing that God has appointed Christ for the specific task of judging the world, a function that Jesus will execute at the end of the age as the apostle Paul later explains:
"In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead." Acts 17:30-31
Let us quote John 9:39-41 to see what type of judgment Jesus was referring:
"Jesus said, 'For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.' Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, 'What? Are we blind too?' Jesus said, 'If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.'"
The judgment Christ refers to in this passage is not the same judgment mentioned above which takes place at the consummation of the age. The judgment referred to here is the taking away of spiritual insight from those who refuse to believe the truth of God as revealed in Christ. Hence, the very presence of Christ brings to light the judgment looming over those who refuse to believe in him as the Son of God:
"For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned ALREADY because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son." John 3:17-18
Their rejection of Jesus is a clear indication of the judgment of God upon them, which Christ shall manifest at the consummation of the age.
JN 5:22 God does not judge.
RO 2:2-5, 3:19, 2TH 1:5, 1PE 1:17 God does judge.
Response:
First, John 5:22 does not say GOD will not judge anyone, but rather that the Father judges no one.
Second, God the Father does not judge directly, but indirectly through the agency of his Son:
"In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day when HE WILL JUDGE THE WORLD with justice BY THE MAN he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead." Acts 17:30-31
In fact, had Ghounem continued reading in 2 Thessalonians he would have discovered that this is specifically the point made by Paul, namely that God will judge all flesh through the agency of his Son:
"
30 A.D. Jesus crucified
33 Paul converted
50-60 Paul's undisputed writings
60 1 Peter written if Peter wrote it
75 Mark written
85 Matthew written
90 Luke & Acts written
95-150 Rest of New Testament written
Third, seeing that Jesus is God, God indeed shall judge the world. Yet, it is not God the Father who judges but rather God the Son.
Finally, 1 Peter 1:17 does not necessarily refer to the Day of Judgment. Rather, 1 Peter refers to God's impartiality in that God does not show favoritism but looks upon all with justice:
JN 5:31 Jesus says that if he bears witness to himself, his testimony is not true.
JN 8:14 Jesus says that even if he bears witness to himself, his testimony is true.
Response:
This is another time where Ghounem misquotes the scriptures. Let us quote the relevant context to see what Jesus actually said:
JN 5:38-47 Men have a choice as to whether or not to receive Jesus.
JN 6:44 No one can come to Jesus unless he is drawn by the Father.
Response:
We fail to see how this is a contradiction. The fact is that men are held accountable for their actions since God created all men to be moral agents, not robots. Yet, due to the fall of Adam all men are born with a sinful nature that enslaves them to sin. Hence, man is responsible for responding to the call of God. Yet, due to the sinful nature inherent in humanity man becomes incapable of choosing Christ without God empowering him to do so. The apostle John states it best:
"He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God-children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God." best John 1:11-13
In this passage, we find that both human responsibility (i.e., "to all who received him, to those who believed in his name") and the Divine Sovereignty (i.e., "nor of human decision… but born of God") are at work in the salvation of man.
Islam also holds to a similar view, yet with one added exception. Whereas the God of the Holy Bible will not tempt anyone with immorality (cf., James 1:13-15), Allah on the other hand is the cause of both good and immoral acts:
Hadith 46:
I am Allah. I created human beings with My knowledge. For whom I willed good, I granted good character. And for whom I willed evil, I granted bad character. [Abu al-Shaikh al-Ansari] (Dr. Abdul Khaliq Kazi & Dr. Alan B. Day, Al-Hadith Al-Qudsiyyah- Divine Narratives [Dar Al Kitab Al Arabi, USA 1995], p. 225)
Hadith 47:
I am Allah, there is no god besides Me. I created evil and decreed it. Woe to a man for whom I created evil AND CAUSED HIS HANDS TO CARRY IT OUT! [al-Bayhaqi] (Ibid.)
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Apostle as saying:
Verily Allah has fixed the very portion of adultery which a man will indulge in, and which he of necessity must commit (or there would be no escape from it)." Sahih Muslim # 6421, 6422
JN 7:38 Jesus quotes a statement that he says appears in scripture (i.e., the OT).
(No such statement is found in the OT.)
Response:
Christ is simply alluding to the promise in Scripture that God would pour out living waters to all those who thirst and are weary without this having to be a literal quotation:
"For I will pour water on the thirsty land, and streams on the dry ground; I will pour out my Spirit on your offspring, and my blessing on your descendants." Isaiah 44:3
"They will neither hunger nor thirst, nor will the desert heat or the sun beat upon them. He who has compassion on them will guide them and lead them beside springs of water." Isaiah 49:10
"Come, all you who are thirsty, come to the waters; and you who have no money, come, buy and eat! Come, buy wine and milk without money and without cost." Isaiah 55:11
"The LORD will guide you always; he will satisfy your needs in a sun-scorched land and will strengthen your frame. You will be like a well-watered garden, like a spring whose waters never fail." Isaiah 58:11
"My people have committed two sins: They have forsaken me, the spring of living water, and have dug their own cisterns, broken cisterns that cannot hold water." Jeremiah 2:13
"O LORD, the hope of Israel, all who forsake you will be put to shame. Those who turn away from you will be written in the dust because they have forsaken the LORD, the spring of living water." Jeremiah 17:13
"On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half to the eastern sea and half to the western sea, in summer and in winter." Zechariah 14:8
If Ghounem has a problem with Christ alluding to a general OT promise that is not a literal citation, then he will have to reject the Quran as well:
"Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Taurat; and their similitude in the Gospel is: like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward." S. 48:29
We challenge Ghounem to produce any verse from the Holy Bible that is a literal word-for-word citation from what is quoted in the above passage.
"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the GOSPEL, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme." S. 9:111
We again challenge Ghounem to produce where the above promise is ever made in the Gospel. Hence, either Ghounem will impose his very own criteria against the Quran and admit that it misquotes previous Scriptures, or will now agree that alluding to general promises that are not a literal word-for-word citation is something completely acceptable.
JN 10:27-29 None of Jesus' followers will be lost.
TI 4:1 Some of them will be lost.
Response:
First, Ghounem mistakenly alludes to Paul's letter to Timothy simply as TI without telling his readers to which letter of Timothy he is referring. This is a common mistake that he makes throughout his article.
Second, there is a rather simple answer to Ghounem's alleged contradiction. Jesus' true followers will never fall away from the faith since Christ preserves them for all eternity:
"being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus." Philippians 1:6
"That is why I am suffering as I am. Yet I am not ashamed, because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him for that day." 2 Timothy 1:12
"We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the one who was born of God keeps him safe, and the evil one cannot harm him." 1 John 5:18
"… To those who have been called, who are loved by God Father and kept by Jesus Christ." Jude 1
It is only those who do not truly belong to Christ that eventually fall away from the faith:
JN 12:31 The Devil is the ruler (or "prince") of this world.
1CO 10:26, RE 1:5 Jesus is the ruler of kings--the earth is his.
Response:
Our response here entails that we delve into a little theological lesson. The Holy Bible teaches that God has complete, sovereign control over the entire universe:
"The words were still on his lips when a voice came from heaven, 'This is what is decreed for you, King Nebuchadnezzar: Your royal authority has been taken from you. You will be driven away from people and will live with the wild animals; you will eat grass like cattle. Seven times will pass by for you until you acknowledge that the Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes.' Immediately what had been said about Nebuchadnezzar was fulfilled. He was driven away from people and ate grass like cattle. His body was drenched with the dew of heaven until his hair grew like the feathers of an eagle and his nails like the claws of a bird. At the end of that time, I, Nebuchadnezzar, raised my eyes toward heaven, and my sanity was restored. Then I praised the Most High; I honored and glorified him who lives forever. His dominion is an eternal dominion; his kingdom endures from generation to generation. All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth. No one can hold back his hand or say to him: 'What have you done?' At the same time that my sanity was restored, my honor and splendor were returned to me for the glory of my kingdom. My advisers and nobles sought me out, and I was restored to my throne and became even greater than before. Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and exalt and glorify the King of heaven, because everything he does is right and all his ways are just. And those who walk in pride he is able to humble." Daniel 4:31-37
"Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience." Romans 13:1-5
During the time Paul wrote this, this would have meant that God had also instituted Rome itself for his sovereign purposes.
"but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, SUSTAINING ALL THINGS BY HIS POWERFUL WORD. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven." Hebrews 1:2-3
As such, God is sovereign over all authorities and rulers and guides all creatures to fulfill his perfect and righteous will, even if they do not realize that this is what they are doing:
"In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps." Proverbs 16:9
"… who says of Cyrus, 'He is my shepherd and will accomplish all that I please; he will say of Jerusalem, "Let it be rebuilt," and of the temple, "Let its foundations be laid."' This is what the LORD says to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I take hold of to subdue nations before him and to strip kings of their armor, to open doors before him so that gates will not be shut: I will go before you and will level the mountains; I will break down gates of bronze and cut through bars of iron. I will give you the treasures of darkness, riches stored in secret places, so that you may know that I am the LORD, the God of Israel, who summons you by name. For the sake of Jacob my servant, of Israel my chosen, I summon you by name and bestow on you a title of honor, THOUGH YOU DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ME. I am the LORD, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God. I will strengthen you, THOUGH YOU HAVE NOT ACKNOWLEDGED ME, so that from the rising of the sun to t he place of its setting men may know there is none besides me. I am the LORD, and there is no other. I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things. You heavens above, rain down righteousness; let the clouds shower it down. Let the earth open wide, let salvation spring up, let righteousness grow with it; I, the LORD, have created it. Woe to him who quarrels with his Maker, to him who is but a potsherd among the potsherds on the ground. Does the clay say to the potter, 'What are you making?' Does your work say, 'He has no hands'? Woe to him who says to his father, 'What have you begotten?' or to his mother, 'What have you brought to birth?' This is what the LORD says- the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker: Concerning things to come, do you question me about my children, or give me orders about the work of my hands? It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry ho sts. I will raise up Cyrus in my righteousness: I will make all his ways straight. He will rebuild my city and set my exiles free, but not for a price or reward, says the LORD Almighty." Isaiah 44:28-45:13
The Holy Bible also states that God has given man the authority to rule over the creation of God:
"When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him? You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor. You made him ruler over the works of your hands; you put everything under his feet: all flocks and herds, and the beasts of the field, the birds of the air, and the fish of the sea, all that swim the paths of the seas. O LORD, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth!" Psalm 8:3-9
"Jesus replied, 'I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" John 8:34-36 Christ came to redeem man by breaking Satan's bondage and reclaiming for man the authority that he had lost:
"I pray also that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is like the working of his mighty strength, which he exerted in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every title that can be given, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way." Ephesians 1:18-23
"The ten horns you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but who for one hour will receive authority as kings along with the beast. They have one purpose and will give their power and authority to the beast. They will make war against the Lamb, but the Lamb will overcome them because he is Lord of lords and King of kings-and with him will be his called, chosen and faithful followers." Revelation 17:12-14
"On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS." Revelation 19:16
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger as saying: The vilest name in Allah's sight is Malik al-Amlak (King of Kings)...There is no king but Allah, the Exalted, and Glorious. Sahih Muslim # 5338, 5339.
JN 13:36 Peter asks Jesus where he is going.
JN 14:5 Thomas does the same.
JN 16:5 Jesus says that none of them have asked him where he is going.
Response:
First, the context of John 13:36 and 14:6 are completely different:
"When he was gone, Jesus said, Now is the Son of Man glorified and God is glorified in him. If God is glorified in him, God will glorify the Son in himself, and will glorify him at once. 'My children, I will be with you only a little longer. You will look for me, and just as I told the Jews, so I tell you now: Where I am going, you cannot come. A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.' Simon Peter asked him, 'Lord, where are you going?' Jesus replied, 'Where I am going, you cannot follow now, but you will follow later.' Peter asked, 'Lord, why can't I follow you now? I will lay down my life for you.' Then Jesus answered, Will you really lay down your life for me? I tell you the truth, before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times!'" John 13:31-38
The context of John 13 relates to Jesus' passion, i.e. that God will glorify Christ through Jesus' death, resurrection and ascension into heaven. Hence, Jesus is speaking about his journey to Calvary. It should also be pointed out that Jesus is responding directly to Peter, since the Greek word for "you" in 13:36 is singular.
"'Do not let your hearts be troubled. Trust in God; trust also in me. In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going.' Thomas said to him, 'Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?' Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'" John 14:1-6
Jesus is speaking here about the way to heaven, not the path to his suffering and glorification.
Second, the Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary gives the reason behind Jesus' statement in 16:5:
5-6 The statement 'none of you asks me, 'Where are you going?'" seems incongruous in the context of Peter's question in the earlier part of the discourse (13:36). At that point Peter's question was casual, and neither he nor the other disciples pressed the issue to ascertain what Jesus' plans really were. The same thing is true here. There is little concern about Jesus' future; they are interested mainly in their own future. They are sorrowful because they will lose him, so they make no inquiry about the reasons for his departure nor about the objectives he might wish to attain. (Ibid., Volume 2-New Testament [Zondervan Publishing House; Grand Rapids, MI 1994], p. 353)
The NIV Study Bible concurs:
16:5 none of you asks me, 'Where are you going?' Peter had asked such a question (13:36), but quickly turned his attention to another subject. His concern had been with what would happen to himself and the others and not for where Jesus was going.
The New Bible Commentary continues:
"… There appears to be a contradiction between v 5 and 13:36; 4:5, since in the latter cases Peter and Thomas did ask where Jesus was going. But consider the different contexts. Here Jesus was concerned with the completion of his whole mission. The disciples had insufficient insight to enquire about this. Neither Peter nor Thomas had earlier grasped the full significance of their question. The disciples were now plunged into even more perplexity by Jesus' further revelation…" (Ibid., p. 1058)
In light of this, the difficulty vanishes.
JN 17:12 Jesus has lost none of his disciples other than Judas.
JN 18:9 Jesus has lost none, period.
Response:
We have already mentioned that those who abandon the faith demonstrate that they never belonged to Christ in the first place. Had they truly been the Lord's they would have remained. Likewise, Judas was never a true follower of Christ and therefore perished. Earlier, Christ specifically pointed out that Judas was a devil:
"Then Jesus replied, 'Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!' (He meant Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot who, though one of the Twelve, was later to betray him.)" John 6:70-71
Judas did not belong to Christ but to the Devil. Hence, Jesus did not lose any of those that were truly his and therefore "lost none, period."
JN 17:12 Mentions a "son of perdition" as appearing in scripture (meaning the OT).
(Note: There is no "son of perdition" mentioned in the OT.)
Response:
Jesus nowhere claims that the title "son of perdition" is found in the OT. Rather, Christ is pointing to the fact that Judas' destruction had been predicted and that is why he is referred to as the "son of perdition" since the title refers to one set apart for destruction:
"While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled." John 17:12
The NIV Study Bible states:
17:12 I protected them. Christ's power is adequate for every need. The one doomed to destruction. Lit. "the son of destruction" (see 2Th 2:3), i.e., one belonging to the sphere of damnation and destined for destruction (but predestination is not in view here). Reference is to Judas Iscariot.
Both the Lord Jesus and the Apostles quote the OT passages that predict Judas' betrayal and destruction:
"I am not referring to all of you; I know those I have chosen. But this is to fulfill the scripture: 'He who shares my bread has lifted up his heel against me.'" John 13:18
Jesus cites Psalm 41:9 as prophesying Judas' betrayal.
"In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) and said, 'Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus- he was one of our number and shared in this ministry. (With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.) For,' said Peter, 'it is written in the book of Psalms, "May his place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in it," and, "May another take his place of leadership."'" Acts 1:15-20
Peter quotes Psalms 69:25 and 109:8 as predicting Judas' destruction and replacement.
Now let us apply Ghounem's methodology to the Quran and see if it passes his own test:
"And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: 'O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad.' But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, 'this is evident sorcery!'" S. 61:6
We challenge Ghounem to show us where Jesus ever predicted the coming of a messenger named Ahmad. There is not a single reference in the entire Holy Bible of an Ahmad or a messenger to come after Jesus whose name would be the "Praised One."
"It (the Qur'an) is indeed a revelation from the Lord of the Worlds, with it came down the spirit of truth Upon your heart so that you may be one of the warners in clear Arabic speech and indeed IT (the Qur'an) is in the writings of the earlier (prophets)." S. 26:192-196
We would like for Ghounem to show us where exactly IN the Holy Bible can one find the Arabic Quran.
TI 1:15 Paul says that he is the foremost of sinners.
JN 3:8-10 He who commits sin is of the Devil. Children of God do not sin.
Response:
First, Ghounem again alludes to TI and JN without telling his readers that he actually means 1 Timothy and the first epistle of John, not the Gospel of John.
Second, let us quote Paul in context to see the point the Apostle was actually making:
"I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who has given me strength, that he considered me faithful, appointing me to his service. Even though I was once a blasphemer and persecutor and a violent man. I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief. The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners of whom I am the worst. But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life." 1 Timothy 1:12-16
Paul was speaking of the sins he committed in ignorance while still an unbeliever. Yet, John is addressing believers who have been born of God:
"He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work. No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God. This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother." 1 John 3:8-10
This is precisely what Paul refused to do, namely sin willfully against God. Rather, Paul beat his body into complete submission to the will of God in order that he might live completely for Christ:
"Therefore I do not run like a man running aimlessly; I do not fight like a man beating the air. No, I beat my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize." 1 Corinthians 9:26-27
"I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live for the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me." Galatians 2:20
"Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires." Galatians 5:24
"May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world." Galatians 6:14
We now see since the Gospel of John was written the last of the four cannonized Gospels, it differs more than the others, therefore, the quotes used from the Gospel of John has less credibility than the others.
Response:
First, just because John differs from the Synoptics does not prove that he is any less reliable than the other Gospels. The fact is that the Quran is totally different from the Synoptics. Does this mean that Ghounem will now reject the Quran because it is substantially later than the Synoptics and differs greatly in content? Although John is different in content, nothing he says contradicts the testimony of the Synoptics. In fact, we find that the four Gospels are often harmonious and complementary.
Second, early Muslim scholarship viewed John as a reliable report of the Gospel originally passed down by Jesus to his disciples. For instance, Ibn Ishaq quotes the Gospel of John as THAT Gospel that was given to Jesus and that also allegedly predicts the advent of Muhammad. Yet, Ishaq never even hints that this particular Gospel is inauthentic or corrupt:
"Among the things which have reached me about what Jesus the Son of Mary stated in the Gospel which he received from God for the followers of the Gospel, in applying a term to describe the apostle of God, is the following. It is extracted FROM WHAT JOHN THE APOSTLE SET DOWN FOR THEM WHEN HE WROTE THE GOSPEL FOR THEM FROM THE TESTAMENT OF JESUS SON OF MARY: 'He that hateth me hateth the Lord. And if I had not done in their presence works which none other before me did, they had not sin: but from now they are puffed up with pride and think that they will overcome me and also the Lord. But the word that is in the law must be fulfilled, 'They hated me without a cause' (i.e. without reason). But when the Comforter has come whom God will send to you from the Lord's presence, and the spirit of truth which will have gone forth from the Lord's presence he (shall bear) witness of me and ye also, because ye have been with me from the beginning. I have spoken unto you about this that ye should not be in doubt.
"The Munahhemana (God bless and preserve him!) in Syriac is Muhammad; in Greek he is the paraclete." (Ishaq, Life Of Muhammad, trans. Alfred Guillaume, pp. 103-104)
The particular citation is taken from John 15:23-16:1. This implies that Islam's first renowned biographer, Ishaq, had no doubt that the Gospel of John was in fact THE Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Ishaq also affirms that the apostle John wrote the fourth Gospel.
This indicates that Ghounem is not even faithful to the testimony
of his own Muslim sources that agree with conservative Biblical
scholarship and the early Church on the authorship and reliability
of individual New Testament books.
In conclusion, we again discover that nothing stated in Ghounem's
article had any real substance behind it. Oftentimes his entire arguments
crumble when his points are read within the context of the citations
given throughout his article.
Jesus is the Risen Lord of Eternal Glory! Amen. Come Lord Jesus.
Responses to Mohamed Ghounem
Answering Islam Home Page