Zakir Naik has made a living out of traveling the world with the challenge,
“Show me a single unequivocal unambiguous verse in the complete Bible where Jesus Christ (pbuh) himself says, “I am God.”
Imagine someone coming up to you and saying, “I am the President.” What would your reaction be?
President of what? President of the bird-watching society? President of India? So what?
The word “president” is a common noun, a generic title, that can apply to anyone.
Similarly, the word “god” in the Bible is a common noun, a generic title that can apply to judges (Psalm 82:6), a man with authority (Exodus 4:16), or even satan! (2 Corinthians 4:4). Even idols are “gods” to their devotees, aren’t they? Of course, the word can also apply to the one true GOD Almighty.
However, anyone can say, “I am God”, but that doesn’t make them the Almighty creator of the universe!
So what is the use of demanding to see where Jesus said, “I am God”? This is such a poor challenge and reveals shallow knowledge at best, or simply, plain ignorance. Unfortunately such is the state of Islamic apologetics. And remember this is coming from the very best in Islam. Ahmed Deedat used this same challenge. Zakir Naik parroted it and every Muslim apologist on the planet echoes it today.
Even if Jesus did say, “I am God”, it would not necessarily mean that He is God Almighty. In the Quran, Pharoah said, “I am your Lord, Most High.” (79:24) Therefore, according to Zakir Naik, Pharoah is Allah! We have an unequivocal and unambiguous verse from the Quran that proves that. This is what you learn from Zakir Naik.
If you read the Bible you will see that God rarely made general claims, like “I am God”. It was often very specific. “I am the Lord who brought you out of Egypt.” “I am the God of your Father Abraham.” “I am the Lord, your God.” “I am the Lord that heals you.” etc. etc.
Jesus never made a generic statement like, “I am God”, but he did claim to be God in very specific and unmistakable ways. There is a ton of data in the Bible if you were to read the Bible honestly. Let’s look at just a couple of instances.
In John 8:58, Jesus claimed for himself the divine name of God as revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14. The Jews who heard him knew exactly what he was claiming. And it was blatant blasphemy in their ears. That is why they wanted to stone him.
Another one. Jesus claimed that he is the Lord of the Sabbath. (Mark 2:28, Matthew 12:8, Luke 6:5)
Sabbath was instituted and given by God Almighty as one of the ten commandments. Only the One who gave the ten commandments is Lord of the Sabbath. This title cannot be attributed to anyone but God. By claiming that he is the Lord of the Sabbath, Jesus was telling them that he is the One who gave the ten commandments including the Sabbath! This is an extraordinary claim of deity!
Interested in Christian-Muslim apologetics?
Read more articles like this and learn how to expose lies
Get my book. Now available on Amazon.
Please can I ask something. A difficulty I have with all this is that I couldn’t not find where Jesus said he had a dual nature. Or he never explained he has a dual nature in his own words. this is a miraculous and unprecendtented phenomena but there is no mentioned by Jesus I have come across yet. Why have we come to the conclusion that he has a dual nature?
There is also a unitarian perspective on those above verses, how should one interpret this? for example they would say just like Ezekiel means “God strengthens” does not mean the person called Ezekiel is God rather it is a name of honour him similarly lord of sabbath does not mean he is God but rather a title of honour an authority to adjust the law. Ishmael means God hears, but that does not mean he is God himself rather he represent the God who sent him.
Thanks
Jesus did speak about his dual nature.
In Matthew 22:45, Jesus shows that, even though He descended from the line of David, he is the LORD of David.
This saying (“The Lord said to my Lord…”) is repeatedly quoted in the Bible. (see Psalm 110:1, Mark 12:36, Luke 20:42, Acts 2:34).
This passage not only hints at the incarnation but also at the human nature of Jesus (as the son of David) and the divine nature of Christ (as Lord of David).
This dual nature of Jesus Christ is referred to in theology as the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union.
Jesus talked about this and challenged his critics to respond, but they didn’t comprehend “…and no one was able to answer him a word….”
This is exactly my difficulty, when reading the bible one can quote Matt 22 and psalms 110 where it says Lord said to Lord. you only believe that that it refers to thedevininty of Jesus becuase you believe it anyway, and you are trying to find verse which support that concept in your mind.
To me, this is an uncomfortable experience. shouldn’t; you get your doctrine from the bible?
Pslams 110 has other interpretations. The word Lord can refer to people as well as a way of honour:
husband (master), 1 Peter 3:6
father (sir), Matthew 21:30
the Roman emperor (lord). Acts 25:26
Please see = https://onegodworship.com/jesus-is-lord/
this is exactly my difficulty, if we gave the bible to an alien would he become a traditional trinitarian? If the answer is yes then here is my difficulty, where did Jesus say he had a dual nature, teach it was even possible and that it was necessary for salvation, and teach that he was God.?… Without referring to previously known beliefs and ideas in your mind since I am purely talking in the realm of scripture and nothing else. Please provide some thoughts thanks, hope you gave a nice sunny day.
Yes, the word “lord” can be used for human masters. No one is disputing this. It depends on the context.
However the context of the passages I showed you teaches that the “Lord” is divine.
Psalm 110 is not referring to any emperor or husband or father.
Jesus’ question in Matthew 22 still stands. If the Messiah is the Son of David, why did David call him Lord?
Can you understand the question? No one could answer him then.
The answer is: human nature of Jesus (as the son of David) and the divine nature of Christ (as Lord of David).
I’m not plucking ideas from the air that would suit my theology. What I say is based on Scripture.
John 1:1 begins by declaring that Jesus is God. And he came to the earth as a human.
“He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him.” John 1:10
“The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.” John 1:14
What is necessary for salvation? Not religion.
“Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.” John 3:3
“Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them.” John 3:36
Could not one say that ‘son of David’ refers to the tribe of David/lineage and ‘my Lord {adonee}’ refers to the fact that if David were to come back to life at the time of Jesus, then he would be a follower of Jesus – who would have authority over him so the next prophet has authority over the previous one. If Moses and Abraham were alive at the same time, Moses would have authority since he has the most updates teachings.
Unitarians say adonee is reserved for human/angel beings of authority.
Prophets having “updated” teachings is a false Islamic concept.
God is not an operating system that needs to keep improving.
This is the idea that Allah espouses in 2:106. The concept of abrogation.
“None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar..”
This shows the revelation of the Quran was not perfect.