Today, I finally watched the debate between Dr. Zakir Naik vs
Pastor Ruknuddin Hendry, which I postponed to watch since I went to the outside
of the city to do something. Let me introduce the both parties in which Dr.
Zakir Naik represented the Muslim while Pastor Ruknuddin Hendry represented the Christian. Dr. Zakir Naik is well-known as the scholar of Comparative Religion
Study who amazingly understands and memorizes the contents and the context of
the holy books of all religions, from Al-Quran, The Bible, Taurah, Weda, and
many more. While Pastor Ruknudiin Hendry is an Arab Christian Missionary. You
can look up more detail about the both on the internet, if it’s necessary. Dr.
Zakir Naik has a TV channel which was called as “Peace TV”, you can easily
found it on Dr. Zakir Naik’s youtube channel for a better reference. I want to warn
you first that please excuse both of my English writing and the context
understanding of this debate since I downloaded the full video on Dr. Zakir’s
Youtube channel without the hard English subtitle and understanding it by hearing (It might contain some errors). I actually could use the
soft subtitle which had been provided by Youtube on the right bottom of the
screen. Just hit the CC button then automatically, the subtitle would appear. However,
I could not find the video that provided the hard subtitle in Bahasa, I only
found the dubbing of Bahasa and to be very honest, I prefer not to download it
as you know many terms that can not be easily translated into Bahasa. Also please bear with my messy grammar,
I promised to myself that I have to develop my English skill through writing. You can download the video from the official channel of Dr. Zakir Naik on Youtube.
The topic was sort of sensitive though, especially for the Christians
which was “Was Christ (PBUH) really crucified?” The purpose of this debate was
letting for both parties to explain the real story of Jesus PBUH and the Cross
and build up the spirit of friendship to understand each point of view. The finale
result was not showing who was the winner nor the loser, but let the audience
choose which study was more logical and fitted to their brain and heart. For me, it is such an interesting idea
because I can learn more widely, not only about my religion but the other
religions as well. There were three sections, the first was both parties did presentations.
The second was rebuttal and the last section was an openl Question
and Ask from the audience. I only review from the first section since it truly
took many times. Just imagine the full debate was three more hours-long. The
first section began, and Pastor Rukhnuddin started it off. Wait, I would review from the technical
presentation and the content. I am trying to not sound so biased and pretended
that I did not know Dr. Zakir. I am really trying to be as neutral as I could.
From the gesture itself, Pastor Ruknuddin was more likely to be
more friendly and smiley. He dressed up casually, not like many pastors in
general who were usually more formal in dressing. From the technical presentation,
Pastor Rukhnuddin seemed a bit nervous, made small jokes, not very serious-type
(he said by himself), the gestures could not stay still like he walked on
tiptoe (Probably he was nervous), he focused on the finding of the ayah/verse
in the Bible, yes he did not memorize the Bible, and seemingly not really
preparing for this debate (He asked his student besides him if I am not
mistaken). However, he was kind-type and open minded person. The points of
his presentation in term of the crucifixion were:
a. a. The central of the cross for many
Christians. The Christian believed that the cross is a place of curse. God sent
Jesus, a sinless man (Was it mean that Jesus not God as most likely of
Christian believed?) to the earth. He was willing to sacrifice himself on the
behalf of the people who committed sins by letting him to be crucified. And God
accepted it as he was a sinless man and like only certain person could do this such
as Jesus PBUH. His death was the key for
those who believe in him, then their sins would be removed. If you remove the
cross from the Christians’ live was equal to removing the Christians faith.
b. b. The book of Genesis (He did not
mention the chapter nor the verse). It told about the creating of Adam and Eve.
As we knew Prophet Adam PBUH disobeyed God that He threw him and Eve away for
the heaven. It was also the beginning of the existence of the sins on the Earth.
The Garden of Eden on Earth was beautiful but Prophet Adam nor Eve could not
enter into it because the Angelic being kept it with the sword, he was swirling
the sword to the left and right to protect people from entering into it. If
people wanted to enter, it had to do with the sword that was in short, there
should be a sacrifice. It had correlation with Jesus PBUH story which he was
crucified to sacrifice himself on the behalf of the Christians’ sins. And Jesus
PBUH once said, “I am the door”.
c. c. The story of Prophet Abraham PBUH.
He had two sons from two wives, Hagra and Sarah, they were Issac PBUH and Ismail
PBUH. Prophet Abraham PBUH was well-known for being tested to slaughtering
Ismail. However, it was replaced by the lamb to be sacrificed instead. The summary
of this story was God was demanding a sacrifice for Himself. From this, he said
that God delivered us His own Son which was Jesus Christ who had to be sacrificed.
Why Jesus Christ? Because he was more perfect than Angels and willing to be
servant of the sins. The Christians who look at Jesus hung on the cross and
receive his faith, tonight their sins would be washed away. And all the good
deeds without believing that Jesus was crucified is useless.
d. d. Jesus PBUH was perfect lamb for God
(not physically but symbolically) as we might know when we were about to
slaughter the lamb, it should be perfect lamb, not blind, not limping. Just
like Jesus Christ since he was perfect
that he had to sacrifice himself.
From his
talks, literally, he proved that Jesus was crucified by the concept of
sacrificing. His first until the last story, it was all talked about
sacrificing such as Prophet Ismail PBUH. To be honest, I think it is still
absurd because he did not give the other reasons that would be matched to the
topic. I mean sacrificing is still very general topic. I am disappointed too since I
wished I could hear more evidence about this but honesty I already knew the
whole story. I expected more evidence in the bible about the cross physically not
just guessing and correlation. He also did not mention the verse nor the
chapter clearly and just said the bible said bla bla bla (He did once if I am not mistaken). One thing I feel a
bit confused until now, he said that God sacrificed Himself as Jesus PBUH. But
Jesus PBUH was hung on the cross for God. So, God was sacrificed Himself for
Himself? And why he said earlier that Jesus Christ was perfect since he was the
son of God? I did not get the concept, maybe the trinity concept (?) To be clear, Pastor
Rukhnuddin believed that Jesus PBUH was crucified.
Now is Dr. Zakir’s turn. He dressed up like
usual if you already knew him, a suit with an Islamic cap (Sorry I do not
know “Kopiah” in English). He was serious, gave a very clear explanation, he
directly quoted from both Al-Quran and the Bible, to the point, memorized the
contents and the context so no need to bring and read both Al-Quran and the
Bible, and very calm and relax. If you look up from both sides, Dr. Zakir was
more prepare and mastering the technical presentation (Since it was his field).
The points of his presentations were:
a. Surah An-Nisa Chapter 4 Verse
157, it was said that Jesus PBUH (the son of Marry) was not killed nor
crucified. It was very explicit, clear, and unambiguous statement.
b. The definition of the word
“Crucify”. According to the Oxford dictionary, crucify is to put to death by
fastening onto the cross. In short, someone who was crucified must die, if not
she/he was not crucified (logical). The definition of Resurrection (the same
source) is the rising from the death. Idem with the logical.
c.
Not a single verse in any of the
Gospels mention that Jesus PBUH was Resurrected. The Gospel of Luke chapter 24
verse 37 says that the Disciples were terrified and affrighted and SUPPOSED him
to be a spirit. The point was why the disciples thought Jesus PBUH to be a
spirit while exactly he did not look like a spirit? It was because they heard
that Jesus was put on the cross and dead. In the Gospel of Mark Chapter 14
verse 50 that the disciples deserted him and fled (ran away). Then Jesus
clarified in the Gospel of Luke chapter 24 verse 39-40 that in short he
explained (sorry I just wrote based on my hearing so I could not catch up all
contents) he was himself because a spirit doesn’t have flesh and bones as you
see I (Jesus PBUH) have. Then in the Gospel of Luke chapter 24 verse 41-42 says
that the disciples did not believe it because of the joy and he asked “Do you
have anything here to eat?” Then they gave him a piece of broiled fish and
honeycomb. It means that he was not a spirit nor resurrected but still alive
because he ate.
d.
Next was the story of Marry
Magdalena in the Gospel of John chapter 20 verse 1 as well as the Gospel of
Mark chapter 16 verse 2 that in the third day of Jesus PBUH was supposedly to
dead, Marry went to the Tomb to massage Jesus PBUH. Why did she go to the Tomb
and massage a spirit? So, it is also means that he was alive since how did
somebody massage a spirit? Did not make any sense at all. Ok next was in the
Gospel (phew) of John chapter 20 verse 1 and the Gospel of Mark chapter 16
verse 4 that the stone had been removed and the winding sheets unwound? So does
the spirit require the stone of the entry of the tomb to be removed? It was
also means that Jesus was physical body and he was still alive. Then in the
Gospel of John chapter 20 verse 15 in short that Mary guesses Jesus as
gardener. Why did she guess him as a gardener? Because he was in disguise. And
why was a spirit disguised like a gardener? Next I just shared the reference
and the contents you can search by yourself since Dr. Zakir used many
references that I could not catch up. Gospel of John chapter 20 verse 16-17,
the Gospel of Mark chapter 16 verse 11, the Gospel of Matthew chapter 12 verse
38, the Gospel of Matthew chapter 39 verse 39-40 (I think it was very clearly
said he was still alive since the signs about him being alive or not is on par
with the sign of Jonah, the Christians and Muslims must know this story. In
case you do not know, Prophet Jonah PBUH for 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of whale did
not die. Hence Jesus PBUH who put on the cross was not dead either based on this story). To summary from Dr. Zakir’s talk is that Jesus was hung on the cross
but not die. He could not use the word “crucify” since Jesus was no dead. The
English dictionary does not have a word of put on the cross but not dead, hence
he used “Crucificted” or “crucifiction”. In short, Dr. Zakir denied that Jesus
was crucified, he is still alive until now. He was risen up by God and will come
someday as the sign of Kiamah.
From Dr.
Zakir’s talk, I feel it more clearly, authentic since he used both Al-Quran and
the Bible. In short, it was very amazing explanation, note that I promise to
not sound biased but it is the reality. You can try to watch by yourself and
you can notice who is more trustworthy. In the end, it is back to the audience
whether they want to follow Pastor Ruknuddin or Dr. Zakir. You have a brain
that is enough to choose which is more logical and fit to your heart. I do respect
the both since they had a courage to do debate that was witnessed by millions
of people over the world and not all people willingness to do it. I also
respect the concept of the debate that is not putting down nor downgrading one
another but respect each point of view. You can either choose Dr. Zakir's or Pastor Ruknuddin's talk. My review is 100% based on the debate,
not one sided judgment. Try to watch it, believe me, it was really interesting
debate. Actually there were two sections left, the rebuttal and QA. If you are curious, you can search in easily on Dr. Zakir Naik's youtube channel.
