I. Introduction: The Art of Disagreeing Deeply
Interfaith dialogue is frequently reduced to a polite exchange of platitudes or a superficial clash of “proof texts.” However, when pursued with intellectual rigor, these conversations reveal a fundamental epistemic conflict. The impasse often lies in the fact that two people can use the same words to describe entirely different realities. To understand the friction between Islam and Christianity, one must examine the underlying “grammar” of their respective faiths. Central to this is the understanding of the biblical Trinity, illustrating how divergent definitions of justice, personhood, and textual integrity shape the search for truth.
II. Takeaway 1: “Textual Variance” is Not “Corruption”
A primary point of friction concerns the reliability of the Bible. The Muslim perspective often operates on a “letter-for-letter” benchmark of preservation. Christian apologist Avery argues that for the Christian, preservation is defined by the endurance of the core revelation across the manuscript tradition. “We believe that the message is preserved… the message and the theme is preserved; it’s consistent and so it is unchanged.” The conflict is fundamentally about what constitutes “God’s Word”: is it a static sequence of letters, or a preserved thematic message?
III. Takeaway 2: The Logic of Being vs. Personhood
The most significant philosophical hurdle is the biblical Trinity. To the Muslim interlocutor, the concept feels like “adding” entities. Avery addresses this by introducing a classical ontological distinction: the difference between a “Being” (the What) and a “Person” (the Who). Avery argues that submission is a functional role, not an ontological one. Just as an employee and a boss share the same human nature, the persons within the Godhead can willfully serve one another without losing their status as the one Divine Essence.
IV. Takeaway 3: The Courtroom Analogy of Divine Justice
The conversation shifts to the necessity of the crucifixion. Avery reframes this through a courtroom metaphor. Justice demands the debt be paid. If a third party enters the courtroom and pays the fine, justice is satisfied. The crucial nuance is volition. Avery cites Jesus’ words to emphasize that the crucifixion was a voluntary act of divine love: “No one takes it from me, but I lay it down on my own accord. I have the authority to lay it down and I have the authority to pick it back up again.” (John 10:18).
V. Takeaway 4: The Prophecy Hidden in a Cry of Despair
One of the dialogue’s most insightful moments centers on Jesus’ cry: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Avery describes this as a “tactical citation.” By quoting the first line of Psalm 22, Jesus was invoking a 1,000-year-old “evidentiary fulfillment.” The Psalm contains startlingly specific details: onlookers mocking, the piercing of hands and feet, and soldiers casting lots for His clothes. Rather than a cry of defeat, this was a final pedagogical act signaling that His suffering was the precise fulfillment of prophecy.
VI. Takeaway 5: The Definition of a “Christian” is Non-Negotiable
Avery rejects the idea that the definition of a Christian is subjective. He asserts that 2,000 years of creeds and the writings of the Church Fathers have set the boundaries. Just as one cannot claim to be a Muslim while rejecting Muhammad, one cannot claim the label “Christian” while rejecting the biblical Trinity and the deity of Christ. True doctrine remains in line with established scriptures and apostolic tradition.
VII. Conclusion: The Challenge of the Objective Lens
The dialogue eventually reaches a fundamental impasse: the “lens” through which one views the other. Avery challenges the need to look at the Christian scriptures “objectively” on their own terms. Until both sides can step outside their respective “lenses,” they will continue to use the same words while speaking entirely different languages.
Bible Verse References (ESV)
John 10:18 “No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again.”
Hint: Highlights the voluntary nature of Jesus’ sacrifice and His divine authority.
Psalm 22:16-18 “For dogs encompass me; a company of evildoers encircles me; they have pierced my hands and feet… they divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.”
Hint: The “evidentiary fulfillment” prophecy cited by Jesus on the cross.
Matthew 28:19 “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”
Hint: Supporting verse for the biblical Trinity and the shared name (essence) of the three Persons.
Romans 5:8 “But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”
Hint: Supports the theme of divine justice being satisfied through a substitute of love.
SOURCE: Female Muslim TRIES CONVERTING ME TO ISLAM For 47 Minutes STRAIGHT…, God Logic Apologetics
