Christians say" Jesus did claim himself as God"

Christians say " Jesus did claim himself as God
Christians answer " Jesus did claim to be a God when he said " I and the Father are One. Did Jesus said that in the Bible?

Who give better explanation and answer then the famous muslim scholar, preacher and debater Allahyaraham Sheikh Ahmad Deedat. A man with mission. He died at age 87 with a legacy of propagating Islam and defending it against missionaries. He also conducted classes on Bible studies.

He delivered lectures all over the world and successfully engaged Christian Evangelists in public debates. Several thousand people have converted into Islam as a result of these efforts.
One of his most famous debates was “Was Christ Crucified?” when he debated Bishop Josh McDowell in Durban in 1981.

Famous books by Deedat included "The Choice - Between Islam and Christianity; "Is the Bible God’s Word?"; "Al Qur’an the Miracle of Miracles" ; "What the Bible says about Muhammad (PBUH)?"; and "Crucifixion or Cruci-Fiction?"

" Invite all to the way of the Lord with
wisdom and beautiful preaching and
reason with them in ways that are best
and most gracious "
( Al-Quran 16:125)

I extract one of his famous articles for your reading or you can read the full text by visiting
http://www.ais.org/~maftab/chirst

CLAIMED NO DIVINITY

if this is the statement of truth from the all-knowing, that"never did i say to them anything other than what i was commanded to say,that is wor-ship god, who is my lord and your lord", then how do the Christians jus-tify worshipping Jesus? there is not a single unequivocal statement throughout the bible, in allits 66 volumes of the Protestant versions, or in the 73 volumes of theroman catholic versions, where Jesus claims to be god or where he says -'worship me.' nowhere does he say that he and god almighty are one and the same person. the last phrase above - "one and the same person" tickles many a "hot-gospeller" and "bible-thumper," not excluding the doctor of divinity and the professor of theology. even the new converts to Christianity have memorized these verses.they are programmed like zombies to rattle offverses, out of context, upon which they can hang their faith.
the words"are one" activates the mind by association of memories. "yes", say theTrinitarians - the worshippers of three gods in one god, and one god in three gods - "Jesus did claim to be god!" where? REVEREND AT THE TABLE i had taken rev. Morris D. D. and his wife, to lunch at the "golden pea-cock". while at the table, during the course of our mutual sharing of knowledge, the opportunity arose to ask, "where?" and without a murmur he quoted, "i and my father are one" - to imply that god and Jesus were one and the same person. that Jesus here claims to be god. the verse quoted was well known to me, but it was being quoted out of context. it did not carry the meaning that the doctor was imaging, so i asked him, "what is the context?" CHOKED ON "CONTEXT"the reverend stopped eating and began staring at me. i said, "why? don'tyou know the context?" - "you see, what you have quoted is the text, i want to know the context, the text that goes with it, before or after."here was an Englishman (Canadian), a paid-servant of the Presbyterian church, a doctor of divinity, and it appeared that i was trying to teach him English. of course he knew what "context" meant. but like the rest of his compatriots, he had not studied the sense in which Jesus(pbuh) had uttered the words. In my forty years of experience, this test had been thrown at me hundredof times, but not a single learned Christian had ever attempted to hazard a guess as to its real meaning. they always start fumbling for their bibles. the doctor did not have one with him. when they do start going fortheir bibles, i stop them in their stride. "surely, you know what you are quoting?" "surely, you know your bible?" after reading this, i hope some"born-again" Christians will rectify this deficiency. but i doubt that Muslim readers will ever come across one in their lifetime who could give them the context. WHAT IS THE CONTEXT? It is unfair on the part of the reverend, having failed to provide the context, then to ask me, "do you know the context?" "of course," i said."then, what is it?" asked my learned friend. i said, "that which you have quoted is the text of john chapter 10, verse 30. to get at the context,we have to begin from verse 23 which reads: 23 and Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. john, or whoever he was, who wrote his story, does not tell us the reason for Jesus tempting the devil by walking alone in the lion's den. for we do not expect the Jews to miss a golden opportunity to get even with Jesus. perhaps, he was emboldened by the manner in which he had literally whipped the Jews single-handed in the temple, and upset the tables of the money-changers at the beginning of his ministry (john 2:15). 24 then came the Jews round about him. and said unto him, how long dost thou make us to doubt? if thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. they surrounded him. brandishing their fingers in his face, they began accusing him and provoking him; saying that he had not put forth his cl-aim plainly enough, clearly enough. that he was talking ambiguously. they were trying to work themselves into a frenzy to assault him. in fact,their real complaint was that they did not like his method of preaching-hisinvectives, the manner in which he condemned them for their formalism,their ceremonialism, their going for the letter of the law and forgettingthe spirit. but Jesus could not afford to provoke them any further-therewere too many and they were itching for a fight. discretion is the better part of valour. in a conciliatory spirit, befitting the occasion - 25 Jesus answered them, i told you, and you believed not:the works that i do in my father's name, they bear witness of me. that is to say , the miracles bear witness of my prophethood and of me being the messiah . 26 but ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as i said unto you. Jesus rebuts the false charge of his enemies that he was ambiguous inhis claims to being the messiah that they were waiting for. he says that he did tell them clearly enough, yet they would not listen to him, but 27 my sheep hear my voice, and i know them, and they follow me: 28 and i give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, nei-ther shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29 my father which gave them me, is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my father's hand. how can anyone be so blind as not to see the exactness of the ending ofthe last two verses. but spiritual blinkers are more impervious than physical defects. he is telling the Jews and recording for posterity, the real unity or relationship between the father and the son. the most crucial verse - 30 i and my father are one. one in what? in their omniscience? in their nature? in their omnipotenceno! one in purpose! that once a believer has accepted faith, the messen-ger sees to it that he remains in faith, and god almighty also sees toit that he remains in faith. this is the purpose of the "father" and the"son" and the "holy ghost" and of every man and every woman of faith. let the same john explain his Gnostic mystic verbiage. that they all may be one: as thou. father, art inme, and in thee, that they also may be one in us... i in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one.... john 17:20-22 if Jesus is "one" with god, and if that "oneness" makes him god, then the traitor Judas, and the doubting Thomas, and the satanic peter, plus the other nine who deserted him when he was most in need are god(s),becausethe same oneness which he claimed with god in john 10:30, now he claims for all "who forsook him and fled"(mark 14:50) - all "ye of little faith" (mathew 8:26) - all "o faithless and perverse generation"(Luke 9:41) where and when will the Christian blasphemy end? the expression "i and my father are one," was very innocent, meaning nothing more than a com-mon purpose with god. but the Jews were looking for trouble and any ex-cuse will not do, therefore, - 31 the Jews took up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, many good works have i shewed you from my father for which of those works do you stone me? 33 the Jews answered him, saying, for a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself a god. in verse 24 above the Jews falsely alleged that Jesus was talking ambiguously. when that charge was ably refuted, they then accused him of blasphemy (Kufr) which is like treason in the spiritual realm. so they say that Jesus is claiming to be god - "i and my father are one". the Chris-tians agree with the Jews in this that Jesus (pbuh) did make such a claim; but, differ, in that it was not blasphemy because the Christians say that he was god and was entitled to own up to his divinity. the Christians and the Jews are both agreed that the utterance is seri-ous. to one as an excuse for good "redemption", and to the other as anexcuse for good "riddance". between the two, let the poor Jesus die. butJesus refuses to co-operate in this dirty game, so - 34 Jesus answered them, is it not written in your law, i said,ye are gods? 35 if he called them gods, unto whom the word of god came, and thescripture cannot be broken; 36 say ye of him, whom the father hath sanctified, and sent into theworld, thou blasphemest; because i said, i am the son of god? WHY "YOUR LAW"?he is bit sarcastic in verse 34, but in any event, why does he say:"your law"? is it not also his law? didn't he say: think not that i amcome to destroy the law or the prophets: i am come not to destroy, butto fulfill (the law). for verily i say unto you, till heaven and earthpass away, one lot or one title shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (Matthew 5:17-18) "YE ARE GODS""ye are gods:" he is obviously quoting from the 82nd. psalm (verse 6)"i have said, ye are gods: and all of you are, the children of the most high." Jesus, continues, "if he (i.e. god almighty) called them gods, unto whom the word of god came (meaning that the prophets of god were called 'GODS'and the scripture cannot be broken (in other words- you can't contradict me!)." - Jesus knows his scripture; he speaks with authority; and he reasons with his enemies that "if good men, holy men, prophets of god are being addressed as "gods" in our books of authority, with which you find no fault - then why do you take exception to me? - when the only claim i make for myself is far inferior in our language, viz. "a son of god"as against others being called "gods" by god himself. even if (Jesus)described myself as "god" in our language, according to Hebrew usage,you could find no fault with me." this is the plain reading of Christian scripture. i am giving no interpretations of my own or some esoteric meaning to words!

CHAPTER 7 : "IN THE BEGINNING" "where does Jesus say - "I am god," or "I am equal to god," or worship me"i asked the D. D. from Canada, again. reverend Morris took a deep breath and took another try. he quoted the most oft-repeated verse of the Christian bible. - john 1:1. "in the beginning was the word, and the word was with god and the word was god."please note, these are not the words of Jesus. they are the words of john (or whoever wrote them). acknowledged by every erudite Christian scholar of the bible as being the words of another Jew, Philo of alexan-dria, who had written them even before john and Jesus were born and Philo claimed no divine inspiration for them. no matter what mystical meaning that Philo had woven around these words (which our john has plagiarized)we will accept them for what they are worth. GREEK NOT HEBREW since the manuscripts of the 27 books of the new testament are in Greek,a Christian sect has produced its own version and has even changed thename of this selection of 27 books to "Christian Greek scriptures"! iasked the reverend whether he knew Greek? "yes," he said, he had studiedGreek for 5 years before qualification . i asked him what was the Greek word for "god" the first time it occurs in the quotation - "and the word was with god"? he kept staring, but didn't answer. so i said, the word was HOTHEOS, which literally means "the god". since the European (including the north American) has evolved a system of using capital letter to start a proper noun and small letters for common nouns, we would ac-cept his giving a capital "g" for god; in other words HOTHEOS is rendered"the god" which in turn is rendered - god. "now tell me, what is the Greek word for god in the second occurrence in your quotation - "and the word was god"? the reverend still kept silent. not that he did not know Greek, or that he had lied - but, he knewmore than that, the game was up. i said the word was TONTHEOS, whichmeans "a god".according to your own system of translating you aught to have spelt this word God a second time with a small "g" i.e. god, and not God with a ca-pital "G"; in other words TONTHEOS is rendered "a god". both of these,"god" or "a god" are correct. i told the reverend "but in 2 Corinthians 4:4 you have dishonestly reversed your system by using a small "g" when spelling GOD - "(and the devilis) the god of this world." the Greek word for "the god" is HOTHEOS thesame as in john 1:1. "why have you not been consistent in your transla-tion?" "if Paul was inspired (?) to write hotheos - the God for theDevil, why begrudge him that capital 'G'?" and in the old testament, the lord said unto Moses,"see, I have made thee a god to pharoah"(exodus 7:1). "why do you use a small "g" for "god"when referring to Moses instead of a capital "g" as you do for a mereword - 'word' - "and the word was god."? "why do you do this? why do you play fast and loose with the word of -god ?" i asked the reverend. he said, "i didn't do it." i said, "i know,but i am talking about the vested interests of Christianity, who are hellbent to deify Christ, by using capital letters here and small letters there, to deceive the unwary masses who think that every letter, every comma and full stop and the capital and small letters were dictated by god."



Ahmad Deedat: Christianity and Islam (Geneva Switzerland)



Islam and Christianity -Ahmad Deedat and Gary Miller (2/18)




Lecture -Truth and Proof by Yusuf Estes