Answering Islam - A Christian-Muslim dialog

Jesus Is indeed God Incarnate

Which Is Why He Is Able To Forgive Sins! Pt. 3

Sam Shamoun

We continue with our response to Williams’ distortion of Biblical truth.

Williams writes:

ii) Then notice Jesus’ words:

‘But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins…”

Who gave Jesus this authority on earth? If he were God he would not be given this authority for he would have it as of right, eternally.


First, the passage says absolutely nothing about Jesus being given authority to forgive sins. It simply says that he possesses this authority, no more no less. It is just like someone saying that God has authority to forgive sins. Would we automatically assume that this somehow means that someone gave God such an authority?

Second, Williams’ comments show that he presupposes unitarianism and also presumes to know enough about God’s nature to positively assert that it is not possible for one divine Person to appoint another divine Person to carry out or perform a specific task or function. However, if we assume for a moment that God is indeed tri-Personal then why would it be a problem for the Father to designate to the Son the role of accomplishing the redemption of God’s people and to pronounce forgiveness of sins?

Third, it is obvious that Williams hasn’t pondered over his own scriptures too carefully since he surely wouldn’t make such statements if he had done so. After all, what does he do with the fact that his own religious texts teach the following concerning Allah?

Allah inherits from his creation (Q. 15:23; 19:40, 80; 21:89).

Allah takes out loans and borrows money from his creatures (Q. 2:245; 57:11).

Now since the Muslim deity is said to receive money and an inheritance from his creation wouldn’t this prove per William’s reasoning that Allah cannot be god?

Fourth, as a further illustration that Williams isn’t that familiar with the teachings of his false religion, he seems to be unaware that Islamic theology insists that there must be three necessary prerequisites for pure monotheism to be maintained. They are:

Tauhid al-Rububiyyah: Allah is the sole creator, sustainer and sovereign ruler of the entire creation.

Tauhid al-Uluhiyyah/Ibaadah: Allah alone is worthy of worship.

Tauhid al-Asma wa-Sifaat: Allah possesses certain names and characteristics, and carries out specific functions, which no one else possesses or can carry out.

Islam also teaches that the one sin which Allah will never forgive is shirk, which is to ascribe partners with Allah in his exclusive sovereignty, worship, names, attributes etc.,

Lo! Allah forgiveth not that a partner should be ascribed unto Him. He forgiveth (all) save that to whom He will. Whoso ascribeth partners to Allah, he hath indeed invented a tremendous sin. S. 4:48 Pickthall – Q. 4:116; 2:22

And, as we saw in the previous section, the only one who can forgive sins according to the Quran is Allah (cf. Q. 2:284; 3:135). In fact, some of the names of Allah include the following:

Al-Ghâfir, Al-Ghafûr; Al-Ghaffar: The Forgiving, The Ever-Forgiving, The Endlessly Forgiving

Al-Ghafir who pardons a particular sin; Al-Ghafur who is in the habit of forgiving sins and covering them up; Al-Ghaffar is the One who does not cease to pardon them, one after the other. Ghafr, in the root, means to cover, veil, so to make hidden (unlike 'afw, to efface), not to punish, to cause them to be undisclosed. The One who covers and forgives the sins of His servants.

Al-Ghafur and Al-Ghaffur are two of the Ninety-Nine Names.

"You are our Protector, so forgive us and have mercy on us. You are the Best of Forgivers (ghâfirin)." (7:155)

"The heavens are all but rent asunder from above when the angels glorify the praise of their Lord and ask forgiveness for those upon the earth. Allah is the Ever-Forgiving (ghafur), the Most Merciful." (42:3)

"Lord of the heavens and the earth and everything between them, the Almighty, the Endlessly-Forgiving (ghaffar)." (38:65) (Aisha Bewley, The Divine Names)

What this means is that to claim that God has granted men such as Jesus the authority to forgive sins is a direct violation of Tauhid al-Asma wa-Sifaat, and therefore leaves Williams with one of three possibilities:

God is guilty of committing shirk since he is allowing specific creatures to share in some of his exclusive characteristics and abilities!

God’s true prophets and apostles did not believe in Tauhid as defined by Muhammad and his followers, and therefore were not Muslims. This means that Muhammad was mistaken when he claimed that all of the Biblical prophets and messengers believed and taught the same things about God that he did (cf. Q. 2:130-133; 3:52, 67; 5:111; 22:78).

Jesus is not a mere man, but God in the flesh, which is why he is able to forgive sins, something which only God can do. Yet this position would again demonstrate that Muhammad was in error since he taught that Christ was not God incarnate (cf. Q. 3:48-59; 5:72-75; 19:27-35).

This leads us to our fifth point. Williams conveniently overlooks the fact that Jesus referred to himself as the Son of Man. It is quite clear that Jesus was identifying himself as the Son of Man whom the prophet Daniel wrote of:

“In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him (yipelachun). His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.” Daniel 7:13-14

The above passage shows that this particular Son of Man rides the clouds like God does, reigns forever like God does, and is worshiped in the same way that God is:

“Then the sovereignty, power and greatness of all the kingdoms under heaven will be handed over to the holy people of the Most High. His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all rulers will worship (yipelachun) and obey him.” Daniel 7:27 – cf. 3:12, 17-18, 28; 6:16, 20, 26; Exodus 13:21-22; 14:19-20, 24; 33:7-11; 40:34-38; Numbers 10:34; Deuteronomy 33:26; Psalm 22:28-30; 68:4, 33-34; 86:8-10; 104:3; 145:13; Isaiah 19:1; 66:23; Nahum 1:3; Zechariah 14:1-9, 16-17; Matthew 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:34-36; Revelation 14:14-16

The Quran itself acknowledges that it is God who comes with the clouds accompanied by his angels:

Are these people waiting, perchance, for God to reveal Himself unto them in the shadows of the clouds, together with the angels - although [by then] all will have been decided, and unto God all things will have been brought back? S. 2:210 Asad

Thus, the Son of Man whom Daniel saw was/is clearly a fully divine being appearing in human form.

That Jesus was claiming to be this divine Son of Man is made abundantly clear by the following texts:

“Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send HIS angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather HIS elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.” Matthew 24:30-31 – cf. Mark 13:26-27; Luke 21:27-28

“… The high priest said to him, ‘I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God.’ You have said so,’ Jesus replied. ‘But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.’” Matthew 26:63-64 – cf. Mark 14:61-62; Luke 22:66-70

This next Son of Man reference is truly astonishing:

When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on HIS glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before HIM, and HE will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. HE will put the sheep on HIS right and the goats on HIS left. Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by MY Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for ME.’ Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for ME.’ Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.’” Matthew 25:31-46

What makes this particular Son of Man saying rather remarkable is that Jesus basically makes himself out to be the glorious divine Judge who sits on the throne to determine the eternal destiny of every single individual, something which the OT says Yahweh will do when he comes to judge the nations:

“As for you, my flock, thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I judge between sheep and sheep, between rams and male goats… Therefore, thus says the Lord GOD to them: Behold, I, I myself will judge between the fat sheep and the lean sheep. Because you push with side and shoulder, and thrust at all the weak with your horns, till you have scattered them abroad, I will rescue my flock; they shall no longer be a prey. And I will judge between sheep and sheep.” Ezekiel 37:17, 20-22

“For behold, in those days and at that time, when I restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem, I will gather all the nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. And I will enter into judgment with them there, on behalf of my people and my heritage Israel, because they have scattered them among the nations and have divided up my land… Hasten and come, all you surrounding nations, and gather yourselves there. Bring down your warriors, O LORD. Let the nations stir themselves up and come up to the Valley of Jehoshaphat; for there I will sit to judge all the surrounding nations.” Joel 3:1-2, 11-12

Even more remarkable is the fact that Muhammad stole these words of Christ and placed them in the mouth of his god!

Hadith Qudsi 18:

On the authority of Abu Hurayrah who said that the Messenger of Allah said: Allah (mighty and sublime be He) will say on the Day of Resurrection:

O son of Adam, I fell ill and you visited Me not. He will say: O Lord, and how should I visit You when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: Did you not know that My servant So-and-so had fallen ill and you visited him not? Did you not know that had you visited him you would have found Me with him? O son of Adam, I asked you for food and you fed Me not. He will say: O Lord, and how should I feed You when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: Did you not know that My servant So-and-so asked you for food and you fed him not? Did you not know that had you fed him you would surely have found that (the reward for doing so) with Me? O son of Adam, I asked you to give Me to drink and you gave Me not to drink. He will say: O Lord, how should I give You to drink when You are the Lord of the worlds? He will say: My servant So-and-so asked you to give him to drink and you gave him not to drink. Had you given him to drink you would have surely found that with Me.

It was related by Muslim. (Forty Hadith Qudsi)

This shows that William’s own false prophet could see that the words of Christ could only be spoken by someone who thought he was God Almighty, the sovereign Lord and Judge of all creation!

Jesus even went so far as to say that as the Son of Man he is the Lord of the Sabbath and greater than the very temple of God!

I tell you that something greater than the temple is here. If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent. For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.” Matthew 12:6-8 – cf. Mark 2:28; Luke 6:5

What makes these assertions truly amazing is that the Hebrew Bible is quite clear that the sabbath belongs to Yahweh alone:

“Then the LORD said to Moses, ‘Say to the Israelites, “You must observe MY Sabbaths. This will be a sign between me and you for the generations to come, so you may know that I am the LORD, who makes you holy. Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it is to be put to death; those who do any work on that day must be cut off from their people. For six days work is to be done, but the seventh day is a day of sabbath rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day is to be put to death. The Israelites are to observe the Sabbath, celebrating it for the generations to come as a lasting covenant. It will be a sign between me and the Israelites forever, for in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.”’” Exodus 31:12-17

“Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, a holy convocation. You shall do no work. It is a Sabbath to the LORD in all your dwelling places.” Leviticus 23:3

The OT writings are equally emphatic that the temple is the place where God dwells in a unique way:

“And David the king said to all the assembly, ‘Solomon my son, whom alone God has chosen, is young and inexperienced, and the work is great, for the palace will not be for man but for the LORD God.” 1 Chronicles 29:1

“Then Solomon said, ‘The LORD has said that he would dwell in thick darkness. I have indeed built you an exalted house, a place for you to dwell in forever.’” 1 Kings 8:12-13

Jesus himself taught that God dwelt in the temple:

“And whoever swears by the temple swears by it and by him who dwells in it.” Matthew 23:21

Thus, the only way for Jesus to govern over the sabbath day and to be greater than the very place where God’s presence dwelt in a special manner is if he is God (even though he is not the Father or the Holy Spirit)! Otherwise Christ would be guilty of blasphemy for trying to usurp God’s unique status and prerogatives.

Interestingly, even a radical skeptic like Bart Ehrman agrees that Daniel’s Son of Man is a divine being:

Another path to seeing Jesus’ divinity starts not with the idea of Jesus as the Son of God but with Jesus as the Son of Man. Jesus himself spoke of the coming of the Son of Man, a cosmic judge of the earth who would bring judgment in his wake, based on his understanding of Daniel 7:13-14. Once his followers came to believe that Jesus was raised from the dead, however, they thought that he himself would be the one who would come from heaven to sit in judgment on the earth. This is Paul’s view, expressed in 1 Thessalonians 4-5. Paul was writing to gentiles, not to Jews, and so he does not use the title Son of Man. But that is how he understood Jesus: as the future judge to come from heaven. If the Son of Man was a kind of divine figure, and Jesus was the Son of Man, that makes him a divine figure who lives with God.” (Ehrman, Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (and Why We don’t Know About Them) [HarperOne, A Division of HarperCollins Publishers, 2009], Seven. Who Invented Christianity?, p. 253; bold emphasis ours)

Ehrman goes so far as to admit that Mark himself believed that Jesus was that Son of Man!

“How will the kingdom arrive? For Mark it will be brought about by ‘the Son of Man,’ a cosmic judge of the earth who will judge people according to whether they accept the teachings of Jesus: ‘For whoever is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of that one will the Son of Man also be ashamed, when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels’ (Mark 8:38). And who is this Son of Man? For Mark it is Jesus himself, who must be rejected by his people and their leaders, executed, and then raised from the dead (Mark 8:31). Jesus will die, he will be raised, and then hell return in judgment, bringing with him the kingdom of God.” (Ibid., Three. A Mass of Variant Views, p. 78; bold emphasis ours)

Hence, Ehrman’s statements basically confirm that even the earliest Gospel portrays Jesus as fully divine, contrary to the assertions of skeptics like Williams’ (and even Ehrman himself!).

And since all the Gospels depict Jesus as claiming to be Daniel’s Son of the Man this means that all our earliest witnesses affirm the absolute Deity of Christ!

A. Daniel’s Son of Man is a fully divine being who appears as a man.

B. All the Gospels agree that Jesus taught that he is that very same Son of Man.

C. Therefore, according to all the Canonical Gospels the historical Jesus actually claimed to be a fully divine being.(1)

Now this creates a bit of a problem for Williams. Since it is inarguable on historical grounds that Jesus identified himself as the divine Son of Man seen by the prophet Daniel, Muhammad is therefore a false prophet for teaching that the historical Jesus claimed to be a mere human messenger. Rather, the Jesus of history taught that he is the unique Son of God and divine Son of Man who sovereignly reigns as Lord over all creation forever!

This brings us to the conclusion of this particular section. Lord Jesus willing, my reply to his distortion of John 20:23 and his rather desperate appeal to the prayer of Nabonidus will appear shortly.


(1) In fact, Jesus’ Son of Man statements pass some of the very criteria which historians use to assess the reliability of a given saying or specific report with flying colors.

9. Some biblical scholars question whether Jesus ever used this title of himself. The designation “Son of Man” was not used, however, in the New Testament as a part of the church’s own way of speaking about Jesus. Other than on the lips of Jesus, he is so designated only in Acts 7:56 (Stephen’s vision prior to his stoning) and Revelation 1:13 (John’s initial vision). The Son of Man sayings of Jesus, then, pass a stringent test of authenticity (the so-called criterion of dissimilarity): if a saying of Jesus is unlikely to have been worded as it is by the early church, then we may infer that Jesus probably said it. (The reverse, though, is not a valid argument: from the fact that the early church would be comfortable wording something as it appears in a Gospel saying, it does not follow that Jesus didn’t say it.) (Robert M. Bowman & J. Ed Komoszewski, Putting Jesus in His Place – The Case for the Deity of Christ [Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, MI 2007], Notes, Chapter 20: God’s Right-hand Man, p. 357)

Dr. William Lane Craig writes:

“It is highly likely that Jesus thought of himself as and claimed to be the Son of Man. This was Jesus’ favorite self-description and is the title found most frequently in the Gospels (over eighty times). Yet, remarkably, this title is found only once outside the Gospels in the rest of the New Testament (Acts 7:56). That shows that the designation of Jesus as ‘the Son of Man’ was not a title that arose in later Christian usage and was then written back into the Jesus tradition. On the basis of the criterion of dissimilarity we can say with confidence that Jesus called himself ‘the Son of Man.’ Dunn concludes, ‘When we encounter a thoroughly consistent and distinctive feature–a tradition which depicts Jesus regularly using the phrase ‘son of man’ and virtually no other use of the phrase–it simply beggars scholarship to deny that this feature stemmed from a remembered speech usage of Jesus himself.’” (Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics [Crossway Books, Wheaton, IL: Third Edition 2008], Part Five: De Christo, 7. The Self-Understanding of Jesus, p. 315; bold emphasis ours)

It also satisfies the criterion of multiple attestation since it is found in all the Gospel strands, e.g., Q, Mark, the so-called M or special Matthean material, L or special Lukan material, John etc.

That Jesus believed in the eschatological appearance of the figure described in Daniel’s vision is multiply attested in Markan and Q sayings (Mark 8:38; 13:26-27; Matt. 10:32-33/Like 12:8-9; Matt. 24:27, 37, 39/Luke 17:24, 26, 30). In Daniel’s vision the figure looks like a human being, but he comes on the clouds of heaven, and to him is given a dominion and glory that is God-like. The Similitudes of Enoch presents a similar vision of the preexistent Son of Man (I En. 48.3-6 cited above; cf. 62.7) who ‘shall depose kings from their thrones and kingdoms’ (I En. 69.29). We have also mentioned the Danielic vision of 4 Ezra 13, in which Ezra sees ‘something like the figure of a man come up out of the heart of the sea,’ whom the Most High identifies as ‘my son’ (4 Ezra 13.37) and who preexists with the Most High. The point in mentioning these passages is not that people listening to Jesus would have recognized his allusions or ideas–which they evidently did not–but rather that the construal of Daniel’s Son of Man as a divine-human figure would be neither anachronistic nor un-Jewish for Jesus. By using the oblique, self-referential expression ‘the Son of Man,’ Jesus prevented a prematurely transparent revelation of his super-human and messianic dignity.” (Ibid., p. 316; bold emphasis ours)

This means that the only real reason why certain NT critics reject the veracity of these Son of Man sayings is primarily due to certain theological and/or historical presuppositions which they share in common with Muslim apologists. It is these very assumptions that do not allow them to accept even the possibility that the historical Jesus would have made such Divine claims. The following NT scholar explains it best:

"Jesus’ favorite self-designation, due to its concealing as well revealing nature, was the title Son of Man. Jesus in using this title clearly had in mind the Son of Man spoken of in Daniel 7:13 (as is evident from Matthew 10:23; 19:28; 25:31; Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Therefore, rather than stressing humility, it is clear that the title reveals the divine authority Jesus possesses as the Son of Man to judge the world and his sense of having come from the Father (cf. here also Matthew 5:17; 10:34; Mark 2:17; 10:45). Many attempts have been made to deny the authenticity of some or all of the Son of Many sayings, but such attempts founder because this title is found in all the Gospel strata (Mark, Q, M, L, John), and satisfies perfectly the 'criterion of dissimilarity,' which states that if a saying or title could not have arisen out of Judaism or out of the early Church, it must be authentic. The denial of the authenticity of this title is therefore based not so much on exegetical issues as upon RATIONALISTIC PRESUPPOSITIONS that a priori deny that Jesus of Nazareth could have spoken of himself in this way." Robert H. Stein (The Portable Seminary, David Horton (general editor) [Bethany House Publishers, 2006], Chapter 5. The Doctrine of God the Son, p. 128; bold and capital ours)

Stein further asserts that the historical Jesus referred to himself as the Son of God in a unique sense,

“… He referred to himself also as the Son of God (Matthew 11:25-27; Mark 12:1-9), and a passage such as Mark 13:32 in which he clearly distinguished between himself and others must be authentic, for none in the church would have created a saying in which the Son of God claims to be ignorant as to the time of the end.” (Ibid.)

Here Stein is alluding to the principle or criterion of embarrassment which states that, as a general rule, committed followers of a religious leader normally would not invent embarrassing stories about their founder. In light of this it seems highly unlikely that the early Church would attribute ignorance to the Son of God. Here again is Craig:

“… It seems highly unlikely that this saying could be the manufacture of Christian theology, especially in light of traditions like Matthew 11:27 (cf. John 5:20; 16:15, 30; 21:17c), because it ascribes ignorance to the Son. The criterion of embarrassment requires the authenticity of the reference to the Son’s ignorance. Just how embarrassing the saying was is evident in the fact that although Matthew reproduces it (Matt. 24:36), Luke omits it, and most copyists of Matthew’s Gospel also chose to drop the verse (though it is preserved in the best manuscripts). That Mark preserves this saying, despite his emphasis on Jesus’ predictive power and foreknowledge (Mark 11:2; 13; 14:13-15, 18, 27-28, 30), is testimony to his faithfulness to the tradition. As Markan commentator Vincent Taylor nicely puts it, ‘Its offence seals its genuineness.’” (Reasonable Faith, pp. 312-313)

Hence, the evidence is simply overwheliming that the historical Jesus claimed to be the divine Son of Man and the unique Son of God, thereby proving that Williams' religion is a lie since Muhammad was a false prophet who denied these facts about the Jesus of history.

For a thorough refutation of the assertion that the Son of Man figure is merely a symbol for God’s saints we recommend the following rebuttals:

These articles not only prove that the Jewish anti-Christian missionaries are simply wrong they also provide documentation to show that the earliest Jewish sources took Daniel’s Son of Man as a reference to the Messiah, whom they depicted as a preexistent heavenly being, not to the saints of the Most High.


Williams has a rather unhealthy fascination with sources that condemn Biblical Christianity, irrespective of whether the presuppositions or arguments of the individuals that he quotes are incompatible with his beliefs as a Muslim.

For instance, Williams linked a youtube clip produced by the Jewish anti-missionary organization Jews for Judaism which seeks to show that Daniel’s Son of Man is not an individual, but a symbol representing the saints of God who will eventually triumph over their enemy.

A more glaring example of William’s utter hatred for Christianity and blatant inconsistency cannot be found. The chief mission of Jews for Judaism is to prove that Jesus is a false messiah whom the Jews must shun. Since Williams’ own prophet affirmed that Jesus is the Messiah,

(And remember) when the angels said: O Mary! Lo! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a word from him, whose name is the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, illustrious in the world and the Hereafter, and one of those brought near (unto Allah). S. 3:45 Pickthall

What in the world is Williams doing endorsing scholars and organizations that, if correct, would prove that Muhammad was a false prophet and a deceiver as well?

Moreover, here is what the Jews for Judaism organization believe about the Messiah:

The Jewish tradition of "The Messiah" has its foundation in numerous biblical references, and understands "The Messiah" to be a human being - without any overtone of deity or divinity - who will bring about certain changes in the world and fulfill certain criteria before he can be acknowledged as "The Messiah".

First of all, he must be Jewish - " may appoint a king over you, whom the L-rd your G-d shall choose: one from among your brethren shall you set as king over you." (Deuteronomy 17:15)

He must be a member of the tribe of Judah - "The staff shall not depart from Judah, nor the sceptre from between his feet..." (Genesis 49:10)

To be a member of the tribe of Judah, the person must have a biological father who is a member of the tribe of Judah.

He must be a direct male descendant of King David and King Solomon, his son - "And when your days (David) are fulfilled, and you shall sleep with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who shall issue from your bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will make firm the throne of his kingdom forever..." (2 Samuel 7:12 - 13)

The genealogy of the New Testament is inconsistent. While it gives two accounts of the genealogy of Joseph, it states clearly that he is not the biological father of Jesus. One of the genealogies is through Nathan and not Solomon altogether!

He must gather the Jewish people from exile and return them to Israel - "And he shall set up a banner for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth." (Isaiah 11:12)

Are all Jews living in Israel? Have all Jews EVER lived in Israel since the time of Jesus?

He must rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem - "...and I will set my sanctuary in their midst forever and my tabernacle shall be with them.." (Ezekiel 37:26 - 27)

At last check, there is NO Temple in Jerusalem. And worse, it was shortly after Jesus died that the Temple was DESTROYED! Just the opposite of this prophecy!

He will rule at a time of world-wide peace - "...they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore." (Micah 4:3)

Have you seen a newspaper lately? Are we living in a state of complete world peace? Has there ever been peace since the time of Jesus?

He will rule at a time when the Jewish people will observe G-d's commandments - "My servant David shall be king over them; and they shall all have one shepherd. They shall follow My ordinances and be careful to observe My statutes." (Ezekiel 37:24)

The Torah is the Jewish guide to life, and its commandments are the ones referred to here. Do all Jews observe all the commandments? Christianity, in fact, often discourages observance of the commandments in Torah, in complete opposition to this prophecy.

He will rule at a time when all people will come to acknowledge and serve one G-d - "And it shall come to pass that from one new moon to another and from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before Me, says the L-rd" (Isaiah 66:23) there are still millions if not billions of people in the world today who adhere to paganistic and polytheistic religions. It is clear that we have not yet seen this period of human history unfold.

All of these criteria are best stated in the book of Ezekiel Chapter 37 verses 24-28:

And David my servant shall be king over them; and they shall all have one shepherd. they shall also follow My judgments and observe My statutes, and do them. And they shall dwell in the land that I have given to Yaakov my servant, in which your fathers have dwelt and they shall dwell there, they and their children, and their children's children forever; and my servant David shall be their prince forever. Moreover, I will make a covenant of peace with them, it shall be an everlasting covenant with them, which I will give them; and I will multiply them and I will set my sanctuary in the midst of them forevermore. And my tabernacle shall be with them: and I will be their G-d and they will be my people. Then the nations shall know that I am the L-rd who sanctifies Israel, when My sanctuary will be in the midst of them forevermore.

If an individual fails to fulfill even one of these conditions, then he cannot be "The Messiah." A careful analysis of these criteria shows us that to date, no one has fulfilled every condition.

Certainly NOT Jesus. (Messiah: The Criteria)

Since Muhammad taught that Jesus as the Messiah came to abrogate parts of the Torah by making lawful some of the things which the Torah prohibited:

And (I come) confirming that which was before me of the Torah, and to make lawful some of that which was forbidden unto you. I come unto you with a sign from your Lord, so keep your duty to Allah and obey me. S. 3:50 Pickthall

And since Islam teaches that Jesus the Messiah will return to govern the world by the Quran, not by the Torah:

Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said, “How will you be when the son of Mary (i.e. Jesus) descends amongst you and he will judge people by the Law of the Quran and not by the law of Gospel?” (Fateh-ul Bari, pages 304 and 305, Vol. 7). (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 55, Number 658)

This again shows that Muhammad is a false prophet and that Islam is a lie.

Now is Williams willing to condemn Muhammad since the very sources which he cites to refute Christianity also expose his prophet as a deceiver who misled people into thinking that Jesus is the Messiah? He must if he is going to be honest and consistent.