A Formula For Islamic Apologetics

Two nights ago Jeff Kran did a live stream and I thought up a formula.  I actually thought up a formula for Islamic apologetics.  My degree is in Engineering.  Spending four years on that degree exposed me hundreds of formulas.  I remember one time when I was in second year doing an assignment with my friend, a friend of mine in fourth year came over and told me a dirty little secret.  He mentioned that every single formula learned in an engineering textbook has a computer program that can calculate it for you.  Of course they don’t tell you this in these classes.

During the livestream I thought up the following formula:

Bart Ehrman + Tovia Singer = Islamic Apologetics

Of course Ehrman is the go to guy for the New Testament.  This is true whether it’s textual criticism, supposedly forged books, supposed contradictions or just “scholarly” opinion in general.  Of course if Ehrman gives a hypothesis that contradicts orthodox Islamic doctrine his opinion becomes completely worthless in the eyes of the Islamic apologist.

Jeff Kran deals with Jewish apologetics so his livestream brought up Rabbi Tovia Singer quite a bit.  Singer has devoted his entire life to arguing against Jesus being the Messiah of Israel.  It’s such a huge shock when Muslim apologists fawn all over this man.  Islam declares that Jesus is the Messiah so shouldn’t Singer be a dreaded enemy?  You’d think so but no.

While Ehrman is the answer to the New Testament, Singer is the Answer to the Old Testament.  Singer naturally tries to argue against various prophecies of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament.  The Muslim sides with Singer.  Why?  Two reasons come to mind.  The first reason is that these prophecies speak of the death, resurrection, and divinity of Jesus which won’t help the Muslim cause.

The second reason is that it creates chaos between the two testaments.  The Old and New Testament connect very smoothly together.  We’ve never had a problem having them side by side for that very reason.  There’s nothing to hide.  The Quran has no continuity with the previous scriptures which it claims to endorse.  The only continuity is the names of the prophets.  Because of this, the Muslim apologist takes the position: If we can’t have it, neither can you.

The conflict between Ehrman and Singer is apparent as well.  Singer inconsistently takes a more liberal position than Ehrman when it comes to the NT.  Of course, Ehrman thinks the OT is just as false, corrupt, contradictory, and incoherent as the NT.  In fact, I’ve heard of more than one case of a Jewish apologist using an Ehrman approach to the NT to destroy the faith of a Christian.  At this point they’ll take the bogus and fraudulent Noahide label but then they’ll use the same anti-supernaturalist principles(that they got from Singer or another similar rabbi) to harshly judge the OT and reach the same conclusions as they did with the NT.  Christian to Noahide to atheist.  I remember when this Hungarian called into Tenak Talk and presented that dilemma to Tovia Singer.  It brought a smile to my face before I realized that a supposed man of God had used an atheist worldview of ruin this man’s faith in anything supernatural.

But these are the two portions of the formula.  I think that it represents the average Muslim apologist.  The smart ones will have read more but those that have moved beyond Zakir Naik will use this formula.