Why Didn't Jesus say I am God? He Did!


By Quennel Gale




In this article we will respond to Sami Zaatari’s non-challenge of “Prove to me if Jesus said he was God”. Before we do this, we must remind our readers that Muslim propagandists like Zaatari are liars and wouldn’t accept Jesus being God even if it were shown that Christ explicitly said he was in the Bible. A perfect example illustrating this point is the crucifixion of Christ. Notice in the following passages that Jesus predicts his crucifixion and death:


From that time Jesus began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem and SUFFER MANY THINGS, from the elders and chief priests and scribes, AND BE KILLED AND ON THE THIRD DAY BE RAISED. Matt. 16:21


As they were gathering in Galilee, JESUS SAID TO THEM, 'The Son of Man is to be delivered unto the hands of men, AND THEY WILL KILL HIM, and He will be raised on the third day.' And they were greatly distressed, Matt. 17:22


When Jesus had finished all these sayings, He said to His disciples, 'You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and THE SON OF MAN WILL BE DELIVERED UP TO BE CRUCIFIED. Matt. 26:1-2


HE BEGAN TO TEACH THEM that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, AND BE KILLED, and after three days rise again. Mark 8:31


For He was TEACHING HIS DISCIPLES and saying to them, 'The Son of Man will be delivered into the hands of men, and they will KILL HIM, and when HE IS KILLED, after three days He will rise.” Mark 9:31


And they were on the road going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was walking ahead of them, and they were amazed and those who followed were afraid. And taking the twelve again He began to tell them what was to happen to Him, saying, 'Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn Him to death, and deliver Him to the Gentiles, and they will mock Him and spit upon Him and scourge Him AND KILL HIM; and after three days He will rise.' Mark 10:32-34


The Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes and be KILLED and on the third day be raised." Luke 9:22


In all of the above passages Jesus explicitly stated that “he would die and be crucified and be raised on the third day”. However neither Muslims nor the Quran believe this very clear statement. If Muslims don’t believe what Jesus says regarding his crucifixion and subsequent resurrection then what makes them think that they can lie to us and perpetrate the idea that they would believe that Jesus claimed to be God if he explicitly said “I AM GOD”? They won’t.


Hence, Sami Zaatari’s challenge is nothing more than a big waste of time; it is cheap debate tricks used to score points. In fact, we are so convinced that Zaatari isn’t serious about this challenge that we doubt that he would believe that Jesus was God even if Jesus personally appeared to him and said that he was!


With that in mind let’s answer his challenge.


Missionary Sam Shamoun has tried to respond to this common question which is often posed to Christians, which is "Why didn't Jesus ever say I Am God?" if he was God?!


Shamoun has come out with the worst reasons as to why Jesus said no such thing, and it is that to which I shall be refuting.




Actually Sami Zaatari believes that Shamoun’s reasoning isn’t good simply because he refuses to believe the contextual meaning as to what “GOD” would mean to the Jews in Jesus’ time. This is why Sam used these scholars to say:


The simple answer as to why Jesus didn’t simply come out and say, "I am God" is because of the confusion this would have caused the Jews living at that time. Noted New Testament Scholar and Catholic Theologian Raymond E. Brown states it best:


"The question concerns Jesus a Galilean Jew of the first third of the first century, for whom ‘God’ would have a meaning specified by his background and the theological language of the time. By way of simplification (and perhaps oversimplification) let me say that I think by a Jew of that period ‘God’ would have been thought of as One dwelling in the heavens - among many attributes. Therefore, a question posed to Jesus on earth, ‘Do you think you are God?’ WOULD MEAN DID HE THINK HE WAS THE ONE DWELLING IN HEAVEN. And you can see that would have been an inappropriate question, since Jesus was visibly on earth. As a matter of fact the question was never asked of him; at most he was asked about his relationship to God." (Brown, Responses to 101 Questions on the Bible [Paulist Press, Mahwah, N.J., 1990], p. 98)


Another NT scholar, this time an evangelical one, concurs with Brown. Former atheist turned Christian apologist Lee Strobel interviewed Ben Witherington and asked him basically the same question, namely, why did Jesus never come out and say he was God. Here is Witherington’s response:


"The truth is that Jesus was a bit mysterious about his identity, wasn’t he?" I asked as Witherington pulled up a chair across from me. "He tended to shy away from forthrightly proclaiming himself to be the Messiah or Son of God. Was that because he didn’t think of himself in those terms or because he had other reasons?"


"No, it’s not because he didn’t think of himself in those terms," Witherington said as he settled into his chair and crossed his legs. "If he had simply announced, ‘Hi, folks; I’m God,’ that would have been heard as ‘I’m Yahweh,’ because the Jews of his day didn’t have any concept of the Trinity. They only knew of God the Father–whom they called Yahweh–and not God the Son or God the Holy Spirit.


"So if someone were to say he was God, that wouldn’t have made any sense to them and would have been seen as clear-cut blasphemy. And it would have been counterproductive to Jesus in his efforts to get people to listen to his message.


"Besides, there were already a host of expectations about what the Messiah would look like, and Jesus didn’t want to be pigeonholed into somebody else’s categories. Consequently, he was very careful about what he said publicly. In private with his disciples–that was a different story, but the gospels primarily tell us about what he did in public." (Strobel, The Case For Christ [Zondervan Publishing House; Grand Rapids, MI, 1998 - Pocket Size Edition], pp. 178-179)


Therefore, for Jesus to say that he was God without qualification would have meant that he was claiming to be the same Person commonly referred to by both Jews and Christians as the Father. Yet Jesus was not the same Person as the Father, but was personally distinct from him, although sharing the same essence and nature with him. (http://answeringislam.net/Shamoun/q_jesus_claiming_deity.htm, Added Emphasis ours)         


Sami Zaatari wants Jesus to ignore his historical and cultural context and not to take into consideration how his audience in the first century would have reacted and understood his claim if he simply came out and said he was God in those precise words. Zaatari presumes that Jesus is speaking to a 21st century biblically literate Christian audience who would understand the use of such language and not assume that Jesus was claiming to be God the Father. How foolish can this guy be? He wants Jesus to speak to a 1st century Jewish audience in the same way that he would speak to a literate Christian group who have come to understand the intricacies of the doctrine of the blessed and holy Trinity.


A sign of a great communicator is the ability to explain complex truths in a manner that would not confuse the audience but help them grasp the point being made, irrespective of whether they accept that point or not. And since Jesus is the greatest communicator that ever walked this earth, we would expect that he would not use language that would confuse his audience into thinking that he was claiming to be the same Person as the Father, which is what they would have understood from his simply saying that he was God in those exact words.  We would expect Christ to speak in the language and thought patterns that the people of his day would clearly recognize, which is precisely what he did.


This is why Jesus used language that drove his point home more clearly, specifically, that he is God even though he is not the Father. One of the ways that Jesus communicated this Divine truth is by calling himself the Son of God in a unique and special way:


And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees THE SON AND BELIEVES IN HIM may have everlasting life; and I WILL RAISE HIM UP AT THE LAST DAY." John 6:40


"Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to THE SON, that all may HONOR THE SON JUST AS they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him." John 5:22-23


For God so loved the world that He gave HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, that WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send HIS SON into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. John 3:16-17


"He who believes in Him is not condemned; but HE WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE is condemned already, because he has not believed in THE NAME OF THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD. John 3:18


Thus, Jesus knew that the best way to identify himself as God without the people assuming that he was claming to be the Father was to say that he was the unique Son of God. He knew that this would avoid any confusion that the words “I am God” would have caused in their minds.


And this is precisely what his audience understood him to be saying, namely, that by calling himself God’s Son Jesus was claiming to be God without this making him the Father:


"And this was why the Jews persecuted Jesus, because he did this on the sabbath. But Jesus answered them, ‘My Father is working still, AND I AM WORKING.’ This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal (ison) with God." John 5:16-18


We read in Scoffield’s notes on the Greek text that:


Literally, “His own Father”-Greek- patera idion. It is clear that the Jews understood that Jesus was claiming to be God.’” (Scoffield NKJV, footnote on John 5:18; pg 843; 1989)


Jesus by his own admission is claiming to be God here! As Scoffield’s notes imply, the words “patera idion” indicates that God was Jesus’ Father in a unique and different way which made him equal with God. Just as the late, world-renowned Greek NT scholar A.T. Robertson noted:


But also called God his own Father (alla kai patera idion elege ton qeon). "His own" (idion) IN A SENSE NOT TRUE OF OTHERS. That is precisely what Jesus meant by "My Father." See Romans 8:32 for o idioß uioß, "his own Son." Making himself equal with God (ison eauton poiwn twi qewi). Isoß is an old common adjective (in papyri also) and means equal. In Philippians 2:6 Paul calls the Pre-incarnate Christ isa qewi, "equal to God" (plural isa, attributes of God). Bernard thinks that Jesus would not claim to be isoß qewi because in John 14:28 he says: "The Father is greater than I." And yet he says in John 14:7 that the one who sees him sees in him the Father. Certainly the Jews understood Jesus to claim equality with the Father in nature and privilege and power as also in John 10:33; John 19:7. Besides, if the Jews misunderstood Jesus on this point, it was open and easy for him to deny it and to clear up the misapprehension. This is precisely what he does not do. On the contrary Jesus gives a powerful apologetic in defence of his claim to equality with the Father (verses John 19-47). (Source)


Jesus was essentially saying that because God was his spiritual (not physical) Father in a special manner he had the right to perform certain functions and to act in certain ways that no other child of God could. Thus, by making such an assertion Jesus was expressly claming to have THE VERY SAME NATURE OF GOD HIMSELF.


To illustrate the point further, just as human fathers have children that share their same nature, God the Father likewise has a Divine Son who has his very own essence and nature in all its fullness. Moreover, just as human sons are personally distinct from their fathers, even though they share the same essence, in a similar manner the Divine Son is personally distinct from his Divine Father even though both have the very same exact nature. 


Interestingly, even the Old Testament writers knew that God has a Divine Son who was equal with him in nature:


"Who has gone up to heaven and come down? Who has gathered up the wind in the hollow of his hands? Who has wrapped up the waters in his cloak? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, AND THE NAME OF HIS SON? Tell me if you know!" Proverbs 30:4


According to the Jewish OT the One who established the earth is none other than Yahweh God:


For thus says the LORD, WHO CREATED THE HEAVENS, WHO IS GOD, Who formed the earth and made it, WHO HAS ESTABLISHED IT, Who did not create it in vain, Who formed it to be inhabited: "I am the LORD, and there is no other. Isaiah 45:18


Agur is asking about the name of the Son of God, with name here signifying the nature and essence of the subject. What Agur was basically saying is that not only are God’s nature and ways incomprehensible to man, the nature and acts of the Son are just as incomprehensible as well. This is similar to what Jesus himself said:


“All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows who the Son is except the Father, and no one knows who the Father is except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.” Luke 10:22


Just as the Father is incomprehensible so is his Son, and just as no one completely knows the Son except the Father in a similar manner no one comprehensively knows the Father except his Son!


Because we know that Jesus claimed to be THE Son of God the OT tells us how to treat him:


Serve the LORD with fear, And rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, And you perish in the way, When His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him. Psalms 2:11-12


In Psalm 2 we have a prophetic picture which should be read in its entirety. In vv. 2-3 it describes the time when the nations will stand against God and against his Anointed One (Mashiho, from which our English word Messiah comes). God says in verse 6 that he will nevertheless establish this Messiah as his King on Zion, his holy hill:


Why have nations tumultuously assembled? And do peoples meditate vanity? Station themselves do kings of the earth, And princes have been united together, Against Jehovah, AND AGAINST HIS MESSIAH (Mashiho): `Let us draw off Their cords, And cast from us Their thick bands.' He who is sitting in the heavens doth laugh, The Lord doth mock at them. Then doth He speak unto them in His anger, And in His wrath He doth trouble them: `And I -- I have anointed My King, Upon Zion -- My holy hill.' I declare concerning a statute: Jehovah said unto me, `My Son Thou [art], I to-day have brought thee forth. Ask of Me and I give nations -- thy inheritance, And thy possession -- the ends of earth. Psalms 2:1-88 YLT


In verse 7 Messiah steps forward to declare the decree by which his coronation shall be accomplished, saying: "I will proclaim the decree of the Lord: ‘He said to me, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father. Ask of me, and I will make the nations (goyim) your inheritance.”’”


Furthermore, in Psalm 2:11-12 we are solemnly instructed to:


Serve the LORD with fear, And rejoice with trembling. KISS THE SON (nashqu bar), lest He be angry, And you perish in the way, When His wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him. Psalms 2:11-12


The Hebrew for "kiss the Son" is nashqu bar. Even if this is translated, as some would have it, "Do homage in purity," the homage is to the Lord of verse 2 and to the Son of verse 7. The Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) clearly indicates that there is a Divine personality who is called the Son of God!


Some Muslims have attempted to link this passage, particularly Psalms 2:7, to David; however this is easily refuted since neither the Holy Bible nor the Quran calls David the Messiah nor does either one claim that one must put their trust in David. Hence, to call David “the Son” in this verse would refute all of Islam and the Quran because this passage explicitly refers to THE MESSIAH, who is Jesus according to Islam!


Hence, both the NT data and the clear evidence from the OT show that Christ is Divine and that he made explicit claims to Deity. That’s why the Jews wanted to have him killed:


"The Jews answered him, ‘We have a law, and by that law he ought to die, because he has made himself THE SON OF GOD.’" John 19:7


"And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, ‘Have you no answer to make? What is it that these men testify against you?’ But he was silent and made no answer. Again the high priest asked him, ‘Are you THE CHRIST, THE SON OF THE BLESSED?’ And Jesus said, ‘I AM; and you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.’ And the high priest tore his garments, and said, ‘Why do we still need witnesses? You have heard his blasphemy. What is your decision?’ And they all condemned him as deserving death." Mark 14:60-64


Claiming to be the literal (albeit spiritual) Son of God himself was equivalent to claiming to be God which would be blasphemy if the person wasn’t who he claimed to be. Yet if a person is indeed the actual, unique Son of God then such a person must be worshiped as Deity.


Another line of evidence supporting the Deity of Christ is the fact that the Bible says that God has never been seen, specifically God the Father. Yet both the Old and New Testaments refer to God appearing to people on more than one occasion.


When we piece all of this together then the meaning is that whenever God appeared in the OT that this was GOD THE SON:


"No one has ever seen God. It is GOD THE ONLY SON, who is close to the Father's heart, who has made him known." John 1:18 NRSV


Note, once again, how this reaffirms the point of Jesus being God’s Son in a unique manner. Jesus is the Son who has the very nature of God and could therefore make God known to man.


When you take this in light of the fact that even Muhammad, Zaatari’s own false prophet, recognized what “Son of God” meant it becomes strikingly clear that Jesus did explicitly claim to be God himself! For instance, the Quran says that to believe that Jesus is the Son of God is to believe that he is God and is to commit the sin of associating others with Allah (called shirk):


The Jews say, 'Ezra is the Son of God'; the Christians say, 'The Messiah is the Son of God.' That is the utterance of their mouths, conforming with the unbelievers before them. God assail them! How they are perverted! They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords apart from God, and the Messiah, Mary's son -- and they were commanded to serve but One God; there is no god but He; glory be to Him, above that they associate --S. 9:30-31 Arberry


Muhammad further reason (correctly I might add) that God’s unique Son must be worshiped:


Say: "If the Lord of Mercy had a son, I WOULD BE THE FIRST TO WORSHIP HIM". S. 43:82


Ibn Kathir comments:


Allah has no Offspring Allah says:


(Say) -- `O Muhammad' --

[إِن كَانَ لِلرَّحْمَـنِ وَلَدٌ فَأَنَاْ أَوَّلُ الْعَـبِدِينَ]


(If the Most Gracious had a son, then I am the first of the worshippers.) meaning, `if this were so, then I would worship Him on that basis, because I am one of His servants; I obey all that He commands me and I am not too arrogant or proud to worship Him.' This conditional phrase does not mean that what is described could happen nor that is possible as Allah says:


[لَّوْ أَرَادَ اللَّهُ أَن يَتَّخِذَ وَلَداً لاَّصْطَفَى مِمَّا يَخْلُقُ مَا يَشَآءُ سُبْحَـنَهُ هُوَ اللَّهُ الْوَحِدُ الْقَهَّارُ ]


(Had Allah willed to take a son, He could have chosen whom He willed out of those whom He created. But glory be to Him! He is Allah, the One, the Irresistible.) (39:4). Allah says here:

[سُبْحَـنَ رَبِّ السَّمَـوَتِ وَالاٌّرْضِ رَبِّ الْعَرْشِ عَمَّا يَصِفُونَ ]


(Glorified is the Lord of the heavens and the earth, the Lord of the Throne! Exalted be He from all that they ascribe (to Him).) meaning, exalted and sanctified and glorified be the Creator of all things far above having any offspring, for He is Unique, One and Eternally Self-Sufficient. There is NONE EQUAL TO HIM OR LIKE HIM, and He does not have ANY OFFSPRING.


[فَذَرْهُمْ يَخُوضُواْ]


(So leave them (alone) to speak nonsense) means, in their ignorance and misguidance,




(and play) in their world,

[حَتَّى يُلَـقُواْ يَوْمَهُمُ الَّذِى يُوعَدُونَ]


(until they meet the Day of theirs which they have been promised.) which is the Day of Resurrection, i.e., then they will come to know what their end and destination will be on that Day. (Source; Tafsir Ibn Kathir; S. 43:82 emphasis ours)


The hadith provides further support that Muhammad believed that the title Son of God implied Deity:


Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

During the lifetime of the Prophet some people said, : O Allah's Apostle! Shall we see our Lord on the Day of Resurrection?" The Prophet said, "Yes; do you have any difficulty in seeing the sun at midday when it is bright and there is no cloud in the sky?" They replied, "No." He said, "Do you have any difficulty in seeing the moon on a full moon night when it is bright and there is no cloud in the sky?" They replied, "No." The Prophet said, "(Similarly) you will have no difficulty in seeing Allah on the Day of Resurrection as you have no difficulty in seeing either of them. On the Day of Resurrection, a call-maker will announce, "Let every nation follow that which they used to worship." THEN NONE OF THOSE WHO USED TO WORSHIP ANYTHING OTHER THAN ALLAH like idols AND OTHER DEITIES but will fall in Hell (Fire), till there will remain none but those who used to worship Allah, both those who were obedient (i.e. good) and those who were disobedient (i.e. bad) and the remaining party of the people of the Scripture. THEN THE JEWS will be called upon and it will be said to them, 'Who do you use to worship?' They will say, 'We used to worship Ezra, the son of Allah.' It will be said to them, 'YOU ARE LIARS, FOR ALLAH HAS NEVER TAKEN ANYONE AS A WIFE OR A SON. What do you want now?' They will say, 'O our Lord! We are thirsty, so give us something to drink.' They will be directed and addressed thus, 'Will you drink,' whereupon THEY WILL BE GATHERED UNTO HELL (FIRE) which will look like a mirage whose different sides will be destroying each other. Then they will fall into the Fire. AFTERWARDS THE CHRISTIANS WILL BE CALLED upon and it will be said to them, 'Who do you use to worship?' THEY WILL SAY, 'WE USED TO WORSHIP JESUS, THE SON OF ALLAH.' It will be said to them, 'YOU ARE LIARS, for Allah has never taken anyone as a wife or a son,' Then it will be SAID TO THEM, 'What do you want?' They will say what the FORMER PEOPLE have said. Then, when there remain (in the gathering) NONE BUT THOSE WHO USED TO WORSHIP ALLAH (ALONE, the real Lord of the Worlds) WHETHER THEY WERE OBEDIENT OR DISOBEDIENT. Then (Allah) the Lord of the worlds will come to them in a shape nearest to the picture they had in their minds about Him. It will be said, 'What are you waiting for?' Every nation have followed what they used to worship.' They will reply, 'We left the people in the world when we were in great need of them and we did not take them as friends. Now we are waiting for our Lord Whom we used to worship.' Allah will say, 'I am your Lord.' They will say twice or thrice, 'We do not worship any besides Allah.'" (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 105)


Hence, Zaatari can continue to play stupid all he wants. The Jewish understanding of Jesus’ claims to Sonship, the NT Scriptures, and his own false prophet all serve to refute him in his quest to deny that Jesus claimed to be God. After all, saying that you are God’s unique Son is not only blasphemous in the religion of Judaism (since it denies that God has such a Son), but it is also considered to be shirk in Islam. The reason? Because such an assertion means that the person is basically claiming to be God, that’s why!


Challenge refuted.


For starters this article proves Shamoun is a liar, because if you listen to our debate you will see that I asked this exact same question to Shamoun, rather than admitting it during the debate that no such verse existed, he went on for 2 hours non stop saying he will bring me the verse! You can hear it for yourself, in fact I had to remind him to bring me this verse since the debate kept going on and I was still waiting for this challenge to be met and it never was! Hence thank you Sam, thanks for showing everyone that you are a liar, and that you lied in the debate to deceive Muslims and Christians who don't know the Bible, because by Shamoun saying I will bring the verse this may have made a few Muslims and Christians who don't know the Bible actually believe that such a verse exists, they will simply take Shamoun's word for it and Shamoun knew this, this is what you call missionary tactics, they are liars by nature and all they do is put on a show for you.


Shamoun's very own colleague wrote a review of our debate, and concerning this point this is what he wrote:


Nevertheless, Shamoun did say that he would answer Zaatari's challenge to bring forth an explicit reference of Jesus, but never got around to it. Thus I gave Zaatari a pearl for that. (http://answeringislam.net/Authors/Wildcat/shamoun_zaatari_debate.htm)


So notice, even Shamoun's own friend admits that Shamoun said he would meet my challenge of EXPLICITLY bringing a verse where Jesus says I am God, but now in this new article Shamoun is arguing as to why Jesus never said such a thing! Hence Sam was lying, thank you.




Here is where Zaatari exposes that he is a liar and is following in the footsteps of his false prophet. Since Zaatari is appealing to Wildcat’s assessment then he surely must have read the following note: 



Some of the points which Sam Shamoun didn't address due to time constraints are carefully discussed elsewhere. Is the Prophet Daniel Worshiped as God? deals with the issue of King Nebuchadnezzar bowing to Daniel, and the so-called unanswered challenge IS ANSWERED in an endnote of the article Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath.


The article clearly says that Shamoun DID ADDRESS Zaatari’s challenge to show him where Jesus said he is God. And to further prove that this liar knows that Shamoun addressed his challenge, Zaatari wrote an article to refute Shamoun’s answer to his challenge! See, for instance, the following: http://www.answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/counter_rebuttal_to_sam_shamoun_6.htm


How can this liar therefore have the audacity to claim that Shamoun NEVER answered his challenge but ran from it when he is written an answer to Shamoun’s response and even has a link to it in his article?


Furthermore, Zaatari not only has no problems lying to people, much like his false god and dead prophet, but he also suffers from a lack of reading comprehension. He makes the assertion that Shamoun admits in his recent article that there is no verse where Jesus claimed to be God in those exact words, when this is not what Shamoun said. Here is what he wrote for the readers to see:


This doesn’t mean, however, that Jesus in his earthly ministry never told his disciples that he was God in those precise words. He may have revealed to them that he was God in the flesh, but only after the idea had been ingrained in their mind that he wasn’t claiming to be the Father.




The only problem is that we do not have a record of him actually saying it, at least during his earthly ministry. But not having a written record of Christ telling his followers that he is God exactly in those words is not the same as saying that he never made this assertion, since the Gospel writers did not set out to give us an exhaustive list of everything Jesus said or did:




Thus, to argue, as some do, that Jesus never said he was God in those exact words while on earth solely because there is no record within the NT that he did is nothing more than an argument from silence, which is a logical fallacy. After all, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, i.e. just because the NT doesn't record Jesus claiming to be God precisely in that manner doesn’t mean that he never did say it, specifically to his followers who believed in him.


Shamoun never claimed that there was no verse where Jesus said he was God in those exact words. Rather, he plainly says that there is no recorded statement of Jesus saying this DURING HIS EARTHLY MINISTRY, while he was on earth! That is why Shamoun went on to quote Revelation 21:6-7 in his other article since these words were uttered by Christ WHILE HE WAS IN HEAVEN, not on earth!


So you can see that this guy is lying through his teeth, like his prophet, and thinks he can get away with it.


Moreover, in trying to refute Sam Shamoun on the issue of Jesus’ claim to Deity in the book of Revelation Zaatari claimed that:


My Response


I must say this is very funny, why? Because I SPECIFICALLY ADRESSED THESE VERSES IN THE DEBATE!!!!!!!!


So Shamoun is LYING, these verses were brought up in the debate and he was REFUTED ON IT, so once again this missionary gets exposed for what he is.


Here is the response I gave which was basically from a previous article of mine:


Revelations 21: 1-8


1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. 4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. 5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. 6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. 7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. 8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

This is not Jesus speaking but rather the Father. As it says I will be his God and he will be my son. Or does Jesus have a son now? (Source)


Zaatari’s article was very amusing to say the least! In the book of Revelation we see that both God the Father and the Lamb share the same divine throne:


"To him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I overcame and sat down with my Father ON HIS THRONE." Revelation 3:21


"Therefore, 'they are before THE THRONE OF GOD and serve him day and night in his temple; and he who sits on the throne will spread his tent over them. Never again will they hunger; never again will they thirst. The sun will not beat upon them, nor any scorching heat. For the Lamb AT THE CENTER OF THE THRONE will be their shepherd; he will lead them to springs of living water. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.'" Revelation 7:15-17


The references do not speak of the thrones of God and of the Lamb, but rather of their throne (singular). What makes this even more interesting is that John was given a vision where he saw all creation, not just the angels, worshiping the Lord Jesus:


"And I saw in the right hand of him who was seated on the throne a scroll written within and on the back, sealed with seven seals; and I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, ‘Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?’ And no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or to look into it, and I wept much that no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it. Then one of the elders said to me, ‘Weep not; lo, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals.’ And between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders, I saw a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain, with seven horns and with seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth; and he went and took the scroll from the right hand of him who was seated on the throne. And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down BEFORE THE LAMB, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints; and they sang a new song, saying, ‘Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain and by your blood did ransom men for God from every tribe and tongue and people and nation, and have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on earth.’ Then I looked, and I heard around the throne and the living creatures and the elders the voice of many angels, numbering myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice, ‘Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!’ And I heard EVERY CREATURE in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all therein, saying, ‘To him who sits upon the throne AND TO THE LAMB be blessing and honor and glory and might for ever and ever!’ And the four living creatures said, ‘Amen!’ and the elders fell down and worshiped." Revelation 5:1-14


Notice here that although God is explicitly shown sitting on the throne, the Lamb IS ALSO WITH GOD AT THE CENTER OF THE THRONE AND RECEIVES WORSHIP FROM ALL CREATION!


More importantly, notice that in this text Jesus receives the very same exact honor that God receives. This proves that what Jesus meant in John 5:23 was that everyone must give Christ the very same exact worship that the Father receives.


In light of the above let us look at Revelation 21 once again:


THEN HE WHO SAT ON THE THRONE said, "Behold, I make all things new." And He said to me, "Write, for these words are true and faithful." And He said to me, "It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. I will give of the fountain of the water of life freely to him who thirsts. He who overcomes shall inherit all things, AND I WILL BE HIS GOD and he shall be My son. Rev. 21:5-8


According to Revelation the One “WHO SAT ON THE THRONE” is

  1. THE FATHER (Rev. 3:21)
  2. THE LAMB Jesus (Rev. 3:21, 5:1-14, 7:15-17)


That Jesus also sits on the throne shows just how little merit Zaatari’s argument holds since he must be able to prove, not simply assume, that it is the Father, not the Son, who is speaking at this point. In fact, since both the Father and the Son are sitting on the same throne it may even be that both are speaking in Revelation 21:5-8 which means that both of them are identifying themselves as the one God of all believers!



Now with all of this said, let us respond to Shamoun's ?reasons' as to why Jesus never said I am God (which proves he is not God!):


The simple answer as to why Jesus didn't simply come out and say, "I am God" is because of the confusion this would have caused the Jews living at that time.


This is perhaps the worst answer Shamoun could have though off, little does he know that by giving such a response he is simply causing more problems for his own non-existent faith! Shamoun claims Jesus said no such thing because the Jews would be confused, however so people to this day are still confused if we want to use Shamoun's criteria! According to Shamoun, he believes I alongside every other Muslim and Jew are confused lost souls, hence what was the point of Jesus sparing a few Jews at his time which meant that he would confuse billions of other people in the next generations which comes all the way down to 2007!


People to this day say Jesus is not God because he never claimed it, hence if Jesus didn't want to create confusion then it seems that tactic backfired really badly because there seems to be more confused people today than there were in his time! This alone proves Jesus is not God, since he would've known this fact in his time since God is all-knowing, so thank you Sam your reason is actually a refutation to your own belief!


Secondly notice Shamoun says the Jews would have been confused, now we must ask ourselves why would the Jews become confused? Well, the thought that God becomes a man is just absurd! So why would God ever even think of making things so complicating and confusing for them?! This sounds like a strange God to me, God knows his people, so will God do the most confusing thing for them, or will he do something simple and easy for them to understand? The answer is very clear, it seems Christians have the most confusing and complicated beliefs and the reason why its so complicating and confusing is because its all blasphemy and made up! Christians say 3=1, they say the all powerful becomes a baby, they say God dies for our sin, and on it goes, everything is confusing, everything makes no sense with rationality, and how does the Christian respond? It's all a mystery!




Just because people today claim that Jesus isn’t God doesn’t mean it is correct. We don’t base our beliefs on what people say, but on what the NT teaches. The language of the NT itself clearly shows that Jesus claimed to be God.


Also Zaatari seems to get stuck in trying to explain why he believes the Jews would be confused. It was shown very clearly that for Jesus to claim to be God he wouldn’t have to necessarily say “I AM GOD,” since this may have been misunderstood to mean that he was the Father. By saying that he was the Son of God Jesus would have been communicating the fact that he is God without being the Father.


For example, if I were to say I am the son of a human, this would mean that I am fully human though different from my father.


If I were to say I am the son of an animal, this would mean that I am an animal though different from my father.


Likewise, if I were to claim to be the unique Son of God, this would mean that I am God though different from THE FATHER.


As we saw earlier, even Muhammad and Allah recognized the ramifications of this. Yet Zaatari wants us to believe that Jesus never specifically claimed to be God solely because he didn’t say so in those precise words. How hilarious!


The only problem is that we do not have a record of him actually saying it, at least during his earthly ministry. But not having a written record of Christ telling his followers that he is God exactly in those words is not the same as saying that he never made this assertion,


This is too funny, I really am laughing, I seek refuge from the shaytan from his blasphemy! Shamoun, if no such statement exists why did you lie to me and the audience then that such a verse exists and that you would bring it?


Secondly, notice how silly Shamoun's argument is, he claims ah yes maybe Jesus did say I am God, but his disciples just didn't feel like recording it or didn't bother writing it down!!!!! Are we really to believe such junk? That such a powerful statement by Jesus would not be recorded down by his most loved and followed disciples?!


Thirdly, we can very easily use Shamoun's evidence against him, I can clearly make arguments saying Jesus said the prophet Muhammad will be after me, that Islam will be the true religion, I can make all these arguments, and a Christian cant say that's false because the Bible says no such thing, I will simply say hey just because its not recorded down doesn't mean it wasn't said! I am using the missionaries own weak argument against him! Indeed it is amazing as to how far a blasphemous idolater will go to defend such corrupt beliefs.




Actually Jesus did explicitly claim to be God in the Gospels; it is found in the story of the Gadarene demoniac:

Then they sailed to the country of the Gadarenes, which is opposite Galilee. And when He stepped out on the land, there met Him a certain man from the city who had demons for a long time. And he wore no clothes, nor did he live in a house but in the tombs. WHEN HE SAW JESUS, he cried out, fell down before Him, and with a loud voice said, "What have I to do with You, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg You, do not torment me!" FOR HE HAD COMMANDED THE UNCLEAN SPIRIT TO COME OUT OF THE MAN. For it had often seized him, and he was kept under guard, bound with chains and shackles; and he broke the bonds and was driven by the demon into the wilderness. JESUS ASKED HIM, saying, "What is your name?" And he said, "Legion," because many demons had entered him. And they begged Him that He would not command them to go out into the abyss. Now a herd of many swine was feeding there on the mountain. So they begged Him that He would permit them to enter them. And He permitted them. THEN THE DEMONS WENT OUT OF THE MAN and entered the swine, and the herd ran violently down the steep place into the lake and drowned. When those who fed them saw what had happened, they fled and told it in the city and in the country. Then they went out to see what had happened, and came to Jesus, and found the man from whom the demons had departed, sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed and in his right mind. And they were afraid. They also who had seen it told them by what means he who had been demon-possessed was healed. Then the whole multitude of the surrounding region of the Gadarenes asked Him to depart from them, for they were seized with great fear. And He got into the boat and returned. Now the man from whom the demons had departed begged Him that he might be with Him. BUT JESUS SENT HIM AWAY, SAYING, "RETURN TO YOUR OWN HOUSE AND TELL WHAT GREAT THINGS GOD HAS DONE FOR YOU." And he went his way and PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE CITY WHAT GREAT THINGS JESUS HAD DONE FOR HIM. (Luke 8:26-39)


We see that after Jesus healed the demon possessed man he explicitly tells him to:


"Return to your own house and tell what great things GOD HAS DONE FOR YOU."


And yet the man,


“went his way and proclaimed throughout the whole city what great things JESUS HAD DONE FOR HIM.”


The man understood that Jesus was identifying himself as God since he obeyed Christ’s orders to proclaim the great things God had done for him by going around telling the people all the great things Jesus had done! Note that:


-         The man was commanded to proclaim the great things God had done.

-         The man goes around telling the people the great things Jesus had done.

-         This, therefore, shows that Jesus is the God who had done these great things for the man!


At the very least, this shows that Luke understood that Jesus was identifying himself as God.


If Jesus didn't want the person to confuse him with God he could have told him to, "Proclaim the great things God has done for you through me", just like in the following examples:


This is the same Moses whom they had rejected with the words, 'Who made you ruler and judge?' He was sent to be their ruler and DELIVER BY GOD HIMSELF, THROUGH THE ANGEL who appeared to him in the bush. Acts 7:35


On arriving there, they gathered the church together and reported all that God had done through them and how he had opened the door of faith to the Gentiles. Acts 14:27


When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them. Acts 15:4


The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. Acts 15:12


God did extraordinary miracles through Paul. Acts 19:11


In Jesus’ case he didn’t say this to the man, which would have insured that the reader would not have mistakenly assumed that Christ was claming to be the God who was doing these great things for him. At the very least, Luke could have avoided any confusion by not mentioning the fact that the man went around telling people all the great things Jesus had done right after the latter had plainly told him to proclaim the great things God had done for him.


If Zaatari tries to use verses where God is said to be doing things through Jesus we need to remind him of this:


When he heard this, Jesus said, "This sickness will not end in death. No, it is for God's glory so that God's Son may be glorified through it." John 11:4


Challenge met once again.


What makes this more amazing is Shamoun actually twists his own Bible to back this statement up, he quotes these two verses:


"Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." John 20:30-31

"Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." John 21:25

Anyone who knows how to read will clearly see the verses are saying that Jesus PERFORMED MANY THINGS AND MIRACLES which aren't recorded, it says nothing about making statements! So Shamoun is guilty of twisting his own Bible, since the verses don't say many statements were made by Jesus which we left out, rather they say miracles and deeds were left out!

And lets not play games please, Shamoun himself knows that Jesus NEVER uttered any statement, he himself knows that had Jesus ever said such a thing every single Gospel writer would record it, he knows this, I know this, and so does everyone else, let us not play games please.



In light of the NT teaching that  “Son of God” is a phrase  which equates Jesus with God note that this verse itself claims that it was written for people to believe that Jesus is the Messiah THE SON OF GOD, which is another way of saying that people must believe that Jesus is God in the flesh. There is no need to elaborate on this any further when we have proven that even the Quran and Hadith recognize that claiming to be the Son of God means that one is claiming to be God, or at least a divine being in place of Allah.

Shamoun then writes:

More importantly, this erroneously assumes that the only way that the Lord Jesus, or even the NT writers for that matter, could ever identify himself as God is by using this exact phrase. We say this is erroneous since Christ's Divinity is not based on him having to say, "I am God."

When they can't answer, they go off topic, what is more amazing is that Shamoun is committing a red-herring to his own topic and article! Shamoun is now saying just because Jesus never said such a statement doesn't mean he can't prove he is God by other ways! Yet that's a different topic altogether! And even if we did want to go to that topic you would still lose, because I would refute every argument you have from Jesus saying I AM to John 1:1!


Actually Shamoun is correct, there are many different ways one could claim to be God. However, dealing with the I AM argument we present this for Zaatari:

Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM.” (John 8:58)

Robertson, Word Pictures In The New Testament, says:


{Before Abraham was} (prin abraam genesqai). Usual idiom with prin in positive sentence with infinitive (second aorist middle of ginomai) and the accusative of general reference, "before coming as to Abraham," "before Abraham came into existence or was born." {I am} (egw eimi). Undoubtedly here Jesus claims eternal existence with the absolute phrase used of God. The contrast between genesqai (entrance into existence of Abraham) and eimi (timeless being) is complete. See the same contrast between en in # 1:1 and egeneto in # 1:14. See the contrast also in # Ps 90:2 between God (ei, art) and the mountains (genhqhnai). See the same use of eimi in # Joh 6:20; 9:9; 8:24, 28; 18:6.


The late A.T. Robertson was one of the greatest Greek scholars and linguists of all time, and any study of the Greek would lead to the same conclusion given above. The Greek text of the NT thoroughly refutes anything Zaatari can come up with. Just like Muslims can turn to the Arabic text of the Quran to prove or disprove an argument, can Christians can also turn to the Greek NT to establish their case.


An examination of the Greek of John 8:58 conclusively proves that Jesus used the same absolute phrase used of God’s timelessness! Jesus literally claims eternal existence, which is only applicable to God himself. Angels definitely cannot make such a claim since they were created before the world (cf. Genesis 2:1-3; Nehemiah 9:6; Job 38:4-7). Hence, even though Jesus may not be referring to Exodus 3:14, he is claiming to be God since he claims to possess one of the very essential attributes of Deity, specifically eternal existence, having no beginning or end!


To, therefore, claim that Jesus’ I AM statements merely implies that he existed before Abraham like the angels is desperate in light of the fact that Jesus used the present tense verb, eimi, which in this context implies pure existence without any beginning, as opposed to the imperfect tense which Christ could have used. The use of the imperfect would have denoted that Jesus’ existence goes back into the past prior to Abraham without implying that such an existence was eternal. As one scholar put it:


The most emphatic claim of Jesus to deity is the statement in His discussion with the Jews, "Before Abraham was born, I am" (John 8:58, A.S.V.) The Jews brought the name of Abraham, their physical and spiritual father, into the conversation (vss. 52-53). Jesus seized upon it to lead on to His final claim in the verse already quoted, startling the Jews by saying: "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad" (vs. 56). When the Jews responded with a question as to how a man as young as Jesus could have seen Abraham, "Jesus claims eternal existence with the absolute phrase used of God." [Archibald Thomas Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, V, 158-59.]

Jesus did not claim mere pre-existence to Abraham, which would have been expressed by the imperfect tense of the verb used concerning Abraham, but eternal existence, the self-existence that belongs to God alone. (John A. Witmer, Did Jesus Claim to be God, Bibliotheca Sacra, January 1961, pp.152-153; bold emphasis ours)


Many Christians who study Christianity already know this and such foolish Muslim propaganda only makes the denizens of Allah look like ill prepared amateurs! How would it look like if I made a claim from the English translation of the Quran and then what I claimed was disproved by the Arabic text? Foolish!


Shamoun ends his article by saying:

Hopefully, this sufficiently answers the question for all those honestly seeking the truth by God's grace.

I am afraid you have not sufficiently answered the question at all, and it is you who is not an honest seeker because we have seen that you are a liar! You now claim no verse exists, yet in our debate you say it does and you will bring it, hence you're a liar. Not only that, you had to twist your own Bible! So let's not kid ourselves, you're just a missionary, making propaganda work, and you have nothing with the truth, you are like a salesman trying to sell a product and a very bad product, and it must be said you are a very bad salesman and I would like to speak with your manager Jochen Katz and file a complaint! 

And Allah Knows Best!





As we showed earlier, Shamoun didn’t claim that such a verse doesn’t exist in the Bible. Rather, he said that we have no recorded statement of Jesus making this claim during his earthly ministry.


Shamoun further said that for Jesus to have just come and said he was God in those exact words without first qualifying his statement or insuring that the people knew that he wasn’t claming to be the Father would have simply confused not just his opponents, but his own followers as well.


Yet as we have shown in this paper, there are verses where Jesus applies the word God to his own Person, to himself.


More importantly, why does Zaatari insist on only accepting a statement from Jesus claiming to be God in those precise words when we have God himself calling Jesus God as recorded in the book of Hebrews?


"BUT OF THE SON he (God) says, 'THY THRONE O GOD, is for ever and ever, the righteous scepter is the scepter of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; THEREFORE GOD, thy God, has anointed thee with the oil of gladness beyond thy comrades.'" Hebrews 1:8-9 RSV


Here, the Father calls Jesus God and says that his throne or reign lasts forever and ever!


Why won’t Zaatari accept the fact that Jesus claimed to be God when he applied Divine titles and functions to himself such as in the following example:


Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen. ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,’ says the Lord God, ‘The Being/ Existing One (Greek- HO ON) who is and who was and who is to come, THE ALMIGHTY (pantokrator)." Rev. 1:7-8


The One who is coming is the One that was pierced, i.e. the Lord Jesus Christ. Christ not only identifies himself as the Almighty, a rather explicit claim to Deity, but also as the Being/Existing One who is, who was and who is to come, a phrase which refers to God’s eternal nature.


In fact, this phrase is actually an expanded interpretation of the meaning of God’s name that is found in Exodus 3:14, specifically, ehyeh asher ehyeh, translated either as “I am who I am” or “I will be what I will be.”


The Greek version of the Hebrew Bible known as the Septuagint (LXX) rendered the Hebrew as ego eimi ho on, “I am the Being/the Existing One”, a translation which denotes God’s timeless existence.

Here is a comparison of the Greek Septuagint and New Testament:

Greek symbol =>
egw eimi o wn

Greek symbol =>
o wn

Exodus 3:14: kai eipen o qeoV proV mwushn egw eimi o wn kai eipen outwV ereiV toiV uioiV israhl o wn apestalken me proV umaV (LXX)

Exodus 3:14: kai eipen o theos pros mousen EGO EIMI O ON kai eipen outos ereis tois yiois israel o on apestalken me pros ymas (LXX TRANSLITERATION)


Hence, Jesus Christ is claiming to be Yahweh God Almighty, the eternally Existing One! As the Open Companion Bible says in reference to Revelation 1:8:


I am
A trademark of the book of John which records the self-identification of Jesus using this phrase. Jesus said unless you believe “I am” (John 8:24), you will die in your sins. He said that before Abraham “I am” (John 8:58), an intentional reference to the self-existent One of Exodus (Ex. 3:6, 14) for which the Jews attempted to stone Him.1 It was before the power of this declaration of deity that those who came to arrest Jesus fell back: “Now when he said to them “I am,” they drew back and fell to the ground” (John 18:6).


the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End
This complete title is applied both to the Father (Rev. 21:6+) and to the Son (Rev. 22:13+). The phrase is also applied to the Son in two parts (Rev. 1:11+; 2:8+). It is clear that the title can apply to both Father and Son and is therefore yet another clear indication of the deity of the Son.

The use of a very similar phrase by Isaiah underscores the uniqueness of God: “Besides Me there is no God” (Isa. 44:6). Alpha, being the first letter of the Greek alphabet (as our “A”) stands for the “beginning.” Omega, being the last letter of the Greek alphabet (as our “Z”) stands for the “end.” Because God existed from before all time and will exist beyond all time, there is no room for another God (Isa. 43:10). Throughout the Father’s preexistence, the Son was with Him (John 1:1-3; 8:54; Col. 1:17).


the Lord
Designating someone as “Lord,” especially in John’s day, could have serious implications. It was a title which Christians did not use lightly: “ ‘Lord’ (kyrios) means that the bearer was worthy of divine recognition and honor. The apostolic writers and early believers were well aware of this meaning. Polycarp, for example, died as a martyr rather than call Caesar kyrios.”2


who is and who was and who is to come
See commentary on Revelation 1:4. Some see grammatical evidence identifying the speaker here as the Father.3 Yet the switch to the Father here after the Son has just been the subject (Rev. 1:7+) and prior to similar statements by the Son (Rev. 1:11+, 17+) seems too abrupt.4 Elsewhere we discuss the role of the Antichrist, empowered by Satan, as the Master Imitator. Pink notes the correlation between this phrase describing God’s self-existence and the phrase applied to Antichrist: “Christ is referred to as Him ‘which was, and is, and is to come’ (Rev. 4:8+); the Antichrist is referred to as him that ‘was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit’ (Rev. 17:8+).”5


the Almighty
παντοκρτωρ [Ho pantokratōr] (“the Almighty”) is derived from πντων κρατν [ho pantōn kratōn] (“the one who holds all”) and is rendered in the LXX for שַׁדַּי [shadday] in the book of Job and צְבָאּות [tsebā`ōt] (“hosts”) elsewhere.6 It is a reference to God’s sovereignty and might, His command of powerful force.


Here are some of the notes to the above:



1 It was the Angel of the Lord who met Moses in the burning bush (Ex. 3:2) and who made claims that no ordinary angel dare make (Ex. 3:14). Indeed, it was no ordinary Angel, but the preincarnate Messiah (John 1:14, 18).

2 Harold D. Foos, “Christology in the Book of Revelation,” in Mal Couch, ed., A Bible Handbook to Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2001), 107.

3 Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 1-7 (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1992), 11.

4 John F. Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1966), 40.

5 Arthur Walkington Pink, The Antichrist (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, 1999, 1923), s.v. “Comparisons between Christ and the Antichrist.”

6 Thomas, Revelation 1-7, 81. (Source)


Another author, a biblical scholar with over 40 years of experience, Clarence Larkin says this in his theological book, "Dispensational Truth":


JESUS SAID OF HIMSELF "I am 'Alpha' and 'Omega', the 'Beginning' and the 'Ending' the 'First' and the 'Last', which IS, and which WAS, and which is TO COME, THE ALMIGHTY. REV. 1:8, 11. JESUS THUS IDENTIFIES HIMSELF WITH GOD AND CONFIRMS HIS EARTHLY STATEMENT- "I and my Father are One". John 10:30. (Dispensational Truth, Clarence Larkin, 1920, pg. 31)


And to further demonstrate that the title Almighty is a term used specifically for God alone note what the following anti-Christian Jewish missionaries from the Jews for Judaism wrote in response to my question on this issue: 




1. Hi I noticed that the term THE ALMIGHTY or ALMIGHTY is used for God alone. This is true right?
2. Also if a person claimed to be the Almighty that would mean that they were claiming to be God since God is only described as the Almighty in the Bible? Can you just answer these simple questions. God Bless.




YES, the expression in Hebrew is Kel (E-l) which we take to mean, almighty G-d.
Rabbi Joel Finkelstein-----


It seems so.


I cannot imagine another usage for this term. Of course, ancient kings and rulers considered themselves powerful like God. However, I am not aware of a single specific passage in the Bible where "THE ALMIGHTY" can be used for anything (or one) - else. thank you for your question hope all is well,
Rabbi Aaron Parry-----


Quennel Gale wrote:


> Hi I noticed that the term THE ALMIGHTY or ALMIGHTY is used for God alone. This is true right?




> Also if a person claimed to be the Almighty that would mean that they were claiming to be God since God is only described as the Almighty in the Bible?


CORRECT, but obviously they would be incorrect, AS ONLY G-D IS G-D, AND CERTAINLY NO PERSON CAN BE G-D.


> Can you just answer these simple questions. God Bless.


You too.
Mark Powers- Jews for Judaism-----


Now what do these responses show us?


They show that:

1. Only God is called THE ALMIGHTY.
2. That if a man claimed to be THE ALMIGHTY, he would clearly be saying that he is God, the Creator of the universe.


Hence, in Jewish rabbinic understanding THE ALMIGHTY can be used only in reference to the true God. If a prophet claimed to be "THE ALMIGHTY" he would clearly be saying that he is God.


In light of the foregoing, why doesn’t Zaatari simply accept the fact that Jesus does claim to be God, even though he may have not said it in exactly those words?


We already know the answer… he is not interested in the truth but only in attacking it anyway he can in order to deceive himself and others into thinking that what the Quran says about Jesus is true. Sadly for him and the rest who swallow his lies, the Quran has deceived him into believing a falsehood about Jesus which will only end up damning his soul to hell where his prophet is.


We now issue some challenges of our own.  


Challenge to Zaatari: Show us where the Quran explicitly says “God is not a Trinity”


Sami Zaatari is good in demanding evidence from others even though he believes in certain Islamic beliefs which aren’t explicitly stated in the Quran and which he cannot prove. For example, Zaatari fails to tell his the readers that the word "Trinity" does not even appear in the Arabic text of the Quran. Remember Zaatari believes that the Bible must show where Jesus claimed that he is God or he won’t believe it! Since he believes that the Trinity is refuted in the Quran THEN BY HIS OWN CRITERIA HE MUST SHOW US WHERE THE WORD IS PRESENT IN THE QURAN! If Allah or Muhammad wanted to refute Trinitarianism they could have clearly mentioned the word itself in the Quran. But they do not mention it.


Thus, even though the word Trinity was used from at least the second century it doesn’t appear in the Quran at all, despite the fact that Muslims tell me that their scripture clearly refutes this doctrine because it allegedly inspired error!


Zaatari may try to claim that the Quran commands people to believe in ONE God as a way of addressing our challenge. The problem with this response is that the Quran never states that God is ONE PERSON. Zaatari needs to prove from the Quran that by one the Quran means that Allah is only a single person, not just a single essence.


So here is our challenge to Zaatari:





Lest Zaatari try to bring up Q. 4:171 or 5:73 we need to remind him that neither text uses the Arabic word for the Trinity, which is al-thaaluuth al-aqdas. This phrase doesn’t appear in the Quran at all even though it was known in Arabia long before the time of Muhammad and Islam.


The word used in 4:171 is thalaath, more specifically thalaathatun, which literally means “three”. And Q. 5:73 uses thalithu thalathatin which means “the third of three”.


In fact, this is how the word "thalaathatun" is used all throughout the Quran, as a reference to three of something with at least one of the three being of the masculine gender:


Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for THREE (Waalmutallaqatu yatarabbasna bi-anfusihinna THALATHATA) monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise. S. 2:228


He said: "O my Lord! Give me a Sign!" "Thy Sign," was the answer, "Shall be that thou shalt speak to no man for THREE (Qala rabbi ijAAal lee ayatan qala ayatuka alla tukallima alnnasa THALATHATA) days but with signals. Then celebrate the praises of thy Lord again and again, and glorify Him in the evening and in the morning." S. 3:41


Remember thou saidst to the faithful: "Is it not enough for you that Allah should help you with THREE (Ith taqoolu lilmu/mineena alan yakfiyakum an yumiddakum rabbukum BITHALATHATI) thousand angels (Specially) sent down?" S. 3:124


If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or THREE (Wa-in khiftum alla tuqsitoo fee alyatama fainkihoo ma taba lakum mina alnnisa-i mathna WATHULATHA) or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. S. 4:3


Allah will not call you to account for what is void in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed ten indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or give a slave his freedom. If that is beyond your means, fast for THREE (La yu-akhithukumu Allahu biallaghwi fee aymanikum walakin yu-akhithukum bima AAaqqadtumu al-aymana fakaffaratuhu itAAamu AAasharati masakeena min awsati ma tutAAimoona ahleekum aw kiswatuhum aw tahreeru raqabatin faman lam yajid fasiyamu THALATHATI) days. That is the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth Allah make clear to you His signs, that ye may be grateful. S. 5:89


If you look at the above verses you will see that the Arabic for three (thalaathatun) doesn't mean Trinity at all. After all, here is what happens when we translate the word as Trinity:


Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for TRINITY monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise. S. 2:228


He said: "O my Lord! Give me a Sign!" "Thy Sign," was the answer, "Shall be that thou shalt speak to no man for TRINITY days but with signals. Then celebrate the praises of thy Lord again and again, and glorify Him in the evening and in the morning." S. 3:41


Remember thou saidst to the faithful: "Is it not enough for you that Allah should help you with TRINITY thousand angels (Specially) sent down?" S. 3:124.


If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or TRINITY or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. S. 4:3.


Allah will not call you to account for what is void in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed ten indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or give a slave his freedom. If that is beyond your means, fast for TRINITY days. That is the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth Allah make clear to you His signs, that ye may be grateful. S. 5:89


Hence, based on modern Islamic thinking that the word three in the Quran actually refers to the Trinity this implies that every time three appears in the Quran this must be a reference to the Trinity. So if your kid turns three years old he is Trinity years of age or if you have three kids or three of something it is a trinity according to modern Muslim apologists!


The foregoing further shows that if the Arabic word for three refers to the Trinity then this means that the Quran is accusing Christians of believing that Allah is the third god among three other gods. Interestingly, the Quran tells us who the other two gods are:


And when Allah saith: O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he saith: Be glorified! It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then Thou knewest it. Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I know not what is in Thy Mind. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Knower of Things Hidden? S. 5:116 Pickthall


But this is not what Christians believe, that God is the third of three, with Jesus and Mary being the other two. Rather we believe that God is one IN three, that God is one eternal Being who eternally exists as three Persons.



Moreover, in Trinitarian vocabulary God either denotes the Father or the Trinity which means that the Quran is wrong on any account.


For instance, if God refers to the Father then the Quran is accusing Christians of believing that the Father is the third of three, which is not what we believe. Rather, we believe that the Father is the first of three Persons that exist as one God.


On the other hand, if the term God refers to the Trinity then the Quran is blaming Christians for believing that the entire Trinity itself is the third of three, which is also blatantly wrong!


We break this down so as to highlight this huge blunder committed by Allah:


-         God in Trinitarian thought refers to the Father.

-         The Quran accuses Christians of believing that God is the third of three.

-         This means that the Quran blames Christians for believing that the Father is the third of three!




-         God in Trinitarian thought also refers to the Trinity.

-         The Quran accuses Christians of believing that God is the third of three.

-         This means that the Quran blames Christians for believing that the Trinity is the third of three!


The foregoing shows that neither Muhammad nor Allah attacked the Trinity as defined and understood by orthodox Christianity. They only attacked a distortion of this doctrine, whether falsely accusing Christians of believing in three gods consisting of the Father, Mary his wife, and Jesus their Son, or of believing that either the Father or the Trinity is the third of three.


In fact, a Muslim cannot produce any verse where Muhammad or Allah attacked the Trinity either by name or by what this name refers to, namely, that there are three eternally distinct Persons who exist as one God, specifically the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.


In light of this, would Zaatari consider that to disbelieve in the Trinity is wrong since the Quran doesn’t attack it by name? Hardly! Zaatari still believes that the Quran denies it despite the fact that neither the word nor the precise formulation of the doctrine ever appears in the Muslim scripture.



We also ask Zaatari to answer the following:


Show us a single verse in the Quran where Jesus is quoted as saying in these exact words,


-         "I am not God, do not worship Me."

-         "I am not the Son of God."

-         "I didn't come to die for your sins or lay my life as a ransom for many.”  


He might quote Q. 5:117 where God asks Jesus if he taught people if whether he claimed that he and his mother were TWO GODS apart God. Notice that this is not what we are asking him to show since we don't claim that Jesus is A GOD apart from the One God.


If Zaatari says that “it doesn’t have to be present in the Quran in order for it to reject it” then he has to be consistent and admit that the Bible doesn’t have to use a precise word or formulation in order for that particular doctrine to be a truth revealed in it, whether it is Jesus being God or God being a Trinity.


The purpose of raising these challenges and examples is to show you the hypocrisy of Zaatari who claims that something must be present explicitly in the Bible for him to believe it, and yet he rejects the Trinity even though this never appears in the Quran! He also denies the crucifixion of Christ despite the fact that Jesus does explicitly refer to his death and resurrection! His lies and hypocrisy are truly amazing to say the least.


We will keep you posted whether Zaatari was able to meet our challenges.


Zaatari’s article can be found here. God bless All.

  1. Home Back Home
  2. New Articles Back to New Section