بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
الصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله
وعلى آلك واصحابك يا سيدي يا رسول الله
فداك ابي وامي يا رسول الله
In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful
Blessing and peace be upon you, my master, Apostle of God!
And upon your family and your companions, my master, Apostle of God!
May my father and mother be sacrificed for your sake, Apostle of God!
Dr. Zakir Naik’s tour of Pakistan has been a disaster. The man has been exposed as under-qualified and frankly comes off as arrogant and ignorant. Zakir Naik is a typical ghair muqallid whose approach to the field of comparative religion, in which he is self styled as some sort of expert, is very mechanical and shallow. He lacks intellectualism and the ability to satisfy questioners with profound knowledge and depth of reasoning. Even worse, Zakir Naik often ventures out of his so-called expertise in the field of comparative religion to discuss matters in which he has absolutely no qualification or credibility. He teaches that Brahma, Siva and Visnu are valid names for Allah, that women shall practice polyandry in Paradise, that Allah is pleased with Yazid, and that masturbation is permissible!
It is hardly appropriate for such an ignorant and shameless donkey to be considered a representative of Islam in the field of comparative religion or any other field for that matter. Zakir Naik’s favoring of the European suit and tie and other unique features of his style of so-called Da’wah indicate he is a copycat of the typical Protestant minister rather than an Islamic preacher. It would not be a stretch to liken his entire approach to Islam as being heavily influenced by modernist Protestantism.
In his present tour of Pakistan (October 2024), Zakir Naik has been nothing short of an embarrassment for the Muslims. It has been demonstrated that he has not increased in understanding in the field of comparative religion since he first entered into it. Since his debate with Dr. William Campbell almost a quarter of a century ago (Chicago, April 2000), he has not had any significant debate or accepted any challenge for debate from the Christians. Recently, when a Christian representing the Christian Debate Academy in Pakistan challenged Dr. Zakir Naik to a debate, the latter refused under a flimsy excuse. One wonders if Zakir Naik himself knows the limits of his knowledge and ability to debate the Christians and perhaps that is the reason he has not debated any one formally in over 24 years despite claiming to be the preeminent expert in the field of comparative religion.
Zakir Naik famously challenges the Christians to produce a single verse from the Bible where Jesus is quoted as saying unambiguously that he is God or where he commands people to worship him. The Christian gentleman representing the Christian Debate Academy in Pakistan cited John chapter 13, verse 13, to answer Zakir Naik’s challenge. Zakir Naik couldn’t be bothered to address the verse or the argument put forward by the Christians concerning it. But this humble blogger shall address it in the service of Allah Most High, in sha Allah!
John 13:13 reads: “Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am”
The Christian argument is simple. Jesus acknowledges that his disciples and followers are correct to address him as lord [kyrios in Greek] thus it is a proof that Jesus asserted Lordship or Divinity for himself.
The answer to this argument is that the word lord, or kyrios in Greek, is not an exclusive title or attributive name for God, and that there are many instances in many languages where “lord” may be applied to persons who are not God, including many instances in the Bible itself.
According to Strong’s Concordance (2962 kyrios), the word kyrios is derived from kuros which means authority. It may be translated into English as lord, master, owner or even sir in addressing someone with reverence. Kyrios is a person exercising absolute ownership rights and likewise denotes an owner (master) exercising full rights. According to Thayer’s Greek Lexicon, kyrios is a title of honor, expressive of respect and reverence, with which servants salute their master. He cites a parable of Jesus about a father with two sons: “A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to day in my vineyard. He answered and said, I will not: but afterward he repented, and went. And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I go, sir [kyrie]: and went not.” (Matthew 21:28-30, KJV) In this instance a son addresses his father as kyrie meaning lord, master, or sir. Thayer gives another example, this time of the Pharisees who went to Pilate and said to him: “Sir [kyrie], we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.” (Matthew 27:63)
Paul of Tarsus likewise, in his Epistle to the Galatians, applies the word “lord” to persons who are not God: “Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord [kyrios] of all.” (Galatians 4:1)
In conclusion, the word kyrios, often translated to mean “lord”, is not always synonymous with Theos “God” but is often applied to persons in positions of authority or ownership, and is also a title of reverence that is not exclusive to God. Thus John 13:13 is not at all an unambiguous and definitive proof text that Jesus claimed Godhood for himself.
In this blogger’s humble opinion, the Muslim community requires true experts in the field of comparative religion who are especially qualified to debate Christians. Such individuals should have an understanding of the original languages of the Bible (Hebrew and Greek), though Dr. Zakir Naik is completely ignorant of either. Let alone Biblical Hebrew and Greek, Zakir Naik is even ignorant of basic Arabic and is unable to recite the Quran properly!
No comments:
Post a Comment