The Qur'an or Bible - Which is the Word of God? Zakir Hussain & Samuel Green 18-02-2013

Thanks again Zakir for a clear presentation and for giving me some new things to think about. Here are some points I was not able to make in the debate:

1. The main point I did not answer was that in Exodus 6:3 God says he did not make himself known to Abraham as the LORD (Yahweh) but in Genesis we see Abraham using this name. This was put forward as evidence for the JEPD source theory of the Torah. The answer I thought of later (as you do) was that we see the name Yahweh (LORD) used not just with Abraham but by those after him too (Gen. 26:25, 28:13, 49:8). So how does Exodus 6:3 fit with this? Exodus actually tells us. While people may have used the name Yahweh none of them had the meaning of the name revealed to them like Moses did, see Exodus 3:15 and 33:18-34:7. This was the first time that God had proclaimed the meaning of Yahweh and what made Moses' revelation unique.

2. Regarding the idea that Genesis 21:14 says that Ishmael was a baby when he should have been about 16. This is not the case for two reasons: Firstly, when Ishmael is called a "child" it is the same word used of Joseph (37:30) when Jacob sent him on a journey to check on his brothers, so it does not mean baby. Secondly, Ishmael is not put on Hagar's shoulder as a child would be, it is the food and water. And so this is not evidence for JEPD either. You may be interested in reading the JEPD methodology applied to Winne the Pooh.
https://www.uniontheology.org/resourc...

3. Regarding the use of 'Pharaoh' in the Biblical account of Joseph and whether it is anachronistic. In addition to what I said in the debate I would now add the following: The Egyptian kings had names which grew over time into the 5-fold royal titulary.
Horus
Horus Nebty
Horus Nebty Nesu Bity
Horus Nebty Nesu Bity Pharaoh
Therefore, if the Qur’an was correcting the Bible and revealing something unknown it would have used the earlier names of Horus Nebty Nesu Bity. Simply saying “king” is generic and something you may say if you don’t know the name at all. The Qur'an is not correcting anything.
By the time of Moses "Pharaoh' was the normal way to speak of any Egyptian king. There is no problem here. But there is also a question of anachronism in the Qur'anic version of Joseph because Joseph is sold for a few dirhams (12:20) and dirhams did not exist at this time and it if is referring to weight, then a weight of what? Both the Bible and Quran are using words in a way that are understood by the original audiences.

4. Regarding "Machamad(im)" in Song of Songs 5:16, the following references have the same word "machamad()" with the same vowels as the Song of Song 5:16: 2 Chron. 36:19, Isaiah 64:10, Lam. 1:10, 2:4, Hos. 9:16, Joel 3:5/4:5. It is a phonic fallacy to take a word from one language and transfer it to another while ignoring the context.

5. Historians accept that Jesus rode a donkey into Jerusalem. Matthew links it to the prophecy of Zechariah. This is not writing of the story to make it fulfil prophecy, Matthew is just explaining the historical fact by quoting scripture. The claim that Matthew 21:7 says he rode 2 donkeys at once false. When it says "he sat on them", it is referring to the multiple cloaks that had been placed on the donkey. It never says he sat on two animals at once.

6. Matthew 24 is not a false prophecy. The temple was destroyed within this time frame and in Matthew 25 Jesus explains that his return will be a long time and at an unknown hour. If the time is unknown then we cannot say we know as so judge Jesus as false.