Farhan Ahmed Zia Ignores the Point Entirely

Farhan Ahmed Zia, huh? Seems our friend has a bit of a chip on his shoulder. Here’s his original video:

Farhan tries to poison the well right out of the gate, claiming I’m making stuff up without any knowledge. He says: “Testify is a Christian YouTuber that has recently started to upload videos about Islam. I’ve already made a refutation of one of his videos. You can go check it out. The brother can upload anything without any knowledge or make up lies, and everyone will still hype him up no matter what he says.”

Okay, dude. I’ve offered to have a discussion with him from another video he made in response to me several weeks ago, but so far it’s been crickets. If he can’t handle a healthy debate without resorting to personal attacks and baseless accusations, maybe discussing religion publicly shouldn’t be his thing.

But here’s the real kicker: Farhan completely misrepresents my argument. He claims I’m saying the Quran is wrong because the Bible says so, just based on some kind of blind faith. Talk about a straw man! That’s not even remotely close to what I’m arguing. Here’s my original video to catch up, you can probably spot Farhan’s errors yourself:

Here’s the deal: I’m presenting two independent historical reasons to believe that Jesus predicted his crucifixion and resurrection. Notice that word “independent.” These reasons stand on their own, regardless of either of our faith commitments. Farhan seems to have a talent for missing the point entirely. Let’s break down the first reason he conveniently ignores: the false testimony at Jesus’ trial.

In Mark 14:58 and Matthew 26:61, witnesses claim to have heard Jesus say, “I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and in three days I will build another, not made with hands.”

Later, in Mark 15:29-30 and Matthew 27:40, the mockers at the cross echo this accusation.

Now get this: neither Matthew nor Mark bothers to explain where this accusation came from. It’s just there, hanging in the air, an unexplained allusion. And that’s precisely what makes it so intriguing.

Think about it: accusing someone of threatening to destroy the Second Temple was a serious charge. Yet, Matthew and Mark don’t feel the need to elaborate. Why? Perhaps they simply didn’t know the full story. But they faithfully recorded what they heard, even if it didn’t make perfect sense to them.

This suggests the accusation wasn’t just pulled out of thin air. It seems to be a distorted version of something Jesus actually said. Especially considering the reference to “in three days,” a phrase we often associate with Jesus’ predictions about his resurrection.

Now, let’s turn to John 2:18-19. Here, Jesus tells the Jews, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

John clarifies that Jesus is talking about his own body, the true temple. But he doesn’t mention the later misrepresentation of Jesus’ words.

See the pattern? Matthew and Mark give us the misrepresentation without the context, while John gives us the context without the misrepresentation. It’s like a puzzle where the pieces fit together perfectly, even though they come from different sources.

This “undesigned coincidence” is a strong indicator of independence and truthfulness. Matthew and Mark, writing before John, couldn’t have known how their accounts would dovetail so perfectly with his. Yet, they do. This isn’t the work of clever fabricators. It’s the ring of authenticity.

For my second piece of evidence, I went to the incident in Mark 8:31-33.

“And he began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and be killed, and after three days rise again. And he said this plainly. And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. But turning and seeing his disciples, he rebuked Peter and said, ‘Get behind me, Satan! For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.'”

Now, this saying passes the test of embarrassment with flying colors. Why would Mark, whose information came from Peter, invent a story where Peter gets rebuked so spectacularly? And to have Jesus call Peter “Satan”? That’s not exactly flattering.

The harsh rebuke only makes sense if Jesus actually predicted his suffering, death, and resurrection. It’s a detail that adds authenticity, not something someone would make up to bolster their case.

Let’s not forget the sheer volume and variety of Jesus’ predictions about his death and resurrection. They come in different forms, in different settings, and to different audiences. This diversity screams eyewitness memory, not a carefully crafted narrative.

So, there you have it, Farhan. Two independent lines of evidence pointing to the same conclusion: Jesus predicted his crucifixion and resurrection. You can try to ignore them, you can try to dismiss them, but the truth is staring you in the face. This is what he should have spent his time on in the video refuting, but he pretended that I just have blind faith in the Four Gospels.

And all this leaves Farhan and his Muslim audience with a big, fat dilemma. Either Jesus didn’t die by crucifixion, which makes him a false prophet and Islam false, or he did die by crucifixion, which contradicts the Quran and also makes Islam false. You’re between a rock and a hard place, Farhan.

Now, in my video, I highlighted the glaring contradiction between the Quran and the Gospels regarding Jesus’ crucifixion. While the Quran claims Jesus wasn’t crucified, the Gospels and historical evidence tell a different story.

This raises an obvious question: If Jesus wasn’t crucified, why did the disciples believe and preach that he was? The Quran itself seems to acknowledge this discrepancy when it says, “They killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them” (Quran 4:157).

Some Muslims try to wiggle out of this by arguing that it was only made to appear as if Jesus was crucified. Whether it was a look-alike, an illusion, or something else entirely, it would look the same to everyone, right? So, they triumphantly declare, “Checkmate, Christians! Our perfect book is right, and yours is wrong.”

But here’s where Farhan’s logic takes a nosedive. He says, “Yes, you are right. You literally refute yourself in this video.” He then goes on to claim that my question is a “non-question” because the Quran says it only appeared that Jesus was crucified.

Talk about missing the forest for the trees! Farhan is doing exactly what he accuses me of: begging the question for the Quran. He simply assumes the Quran is correct and that everyone else must be wrong. As if some guy in a cave 700 years after Jesus has some kind of special historical insight over the eyewitnesses.

But let’s not forget the earliest and most reliable sources we have: the four Gospels and Paul’s letters. These texts consistently affirm Jesus’ crucifixion. Mark 8:31-33 records Jesus predicting his own suffering, death, and resurrection. Paul, who wasn’t a direct witness but met with Peter and John repeatedly states that Jesus was crucified (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). And John, an eyewitness, describes Jesus entrusting his mother to John’s care during the crucifixion (John 19:26-27). Furthermore, the resounding chorus of voices from the early Church Fathers – Ignatius, Polycarp, Clement of Rome, and countless others – all echo the undeniable truth of Jesus’ crucifixion. Many of these guys were disciples of the apostles. The evidence is overwhelming, and those who deny it are simply burying their heads in the sand.

Farhan can try to spin it all he wants, but the truth remains: Jesus was crucified. And that inconvenient fact poses a serious problem for Islam.

Let’s take this a step further. Why would Jesus entrust his mother to John’s care instead of one of his own brothers? John reveals in John 7:5 that Jesus’ brothers didn’t believe in him. This sheds light on why Jesus chose John, a trusted disciple, to look after Mary.

This subtle detail, an undesigned coincidence I didn’t even mention in my video, further strengthens the case for eyewitness testimony. It’s a small but telling piece of evidence that suggests the Gospels are based on genuine experiences, not fabricated stories.

So, not only do we have multiple accounts of Jesus predicting his crucifixion and resurrection, but we also have this hidden gem that speaks volumes about the authenticity of the Gospel accounts.

Now, in my video, I emphasized that all the historical evidence we have shows the disciples believed Jesus was crucified. This creates a real head-scratcher for Muslims, who believe the disciples were followers of Islam. If they believed Jesus was crucified, were they deceived by Allah or by Jesus himself?

Farhan responds by saying, “Just for two seconds, please take off your Christian lens. Not everyone accepts the presupposition that everything in the Bible is true.” He then repeats his mantra that Muslims don’t accept the Bible and claims my argument is a “non-question.”

But hold on a second. I’m not presupposing the Bible is true like Farhan seems to be doing with his beloved Quran. I’m pointing out that all the available evidence, indicates Jesus was crucified. I’m not presupposing the Gospels are true. I’m arguing they are, and if Farhan just briefly perused a few of my recent playlists he might learn a thing or two. Plus, Paul, who personally met Peter, James, and John, taught that Jesus was crucified. (Galatians 1-2) All four Gospels report the crucifixion. And I’m more than happy to debate their reliability.

Let’s not forget the eyewitnesses: John was there at the crucifixion, as was Jesus’ mother, Mary Magdalene, and other women who followed him.

So, if Allah deceived Jesus’ own mother, his female followers, and his closest disciples into starting a false religion, that’s a pretty big problem, wouldn’t you say? The issue isn’t with my argument, Farhan. It’s with the implications of your own beliefs. This also directly contradicts what the Quran says about Jesus and his disciples being successful preachers of Islam, as I discussed in this video. If they were such successful Islamic missionaries, then why did they preach things that directly contradict the Quran, like the deity of Christ and Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection?

This was a really lazy debunk attempt. Honestly, this is low-hanging fruit and Exhibit A of why I normally don’t do response videos. I hope Farhan can get better and less touchy in his responses going forward.