Recently Islamic apologist Paul Williams posted a pretty good article on his website. It’s called How to Explain the Sharia to Your Christian Neighbor. If I were a Muslim, I’d pretty much use these arguments to defend Sharia to a Christian. Here is the article:
How to Explain the Sharia to Your Christian Neighbor
My favorite quote in this article is the following:
If you, as a Christian, want to oppose the Sharia, then at least be principled about it. Don’t “sell out” by invoking cheap secular arguments about “separation of church and state” and “freedom of religion,” arguments that are ultimately incoherent anyway. Don’t hide behind liberal secularism to attack Islamic law because that same liberal secularism is equally antithetical to your Christian faith, whether you want to admit it or not.
Yes! Thank you! This is exactly what Western Christians don’t understand. Modern Western society and true Christianity are like oil and water. They can fit in the same glass but they’ll never mix. The West may have been Christian at one point but it certainly isn’t anymore. Although Jesus Christ wins in the end, the French Revolution has taken a firm hold in what used to be called Christendom.
If I am to be consistent in condemning Muslims for using secular arguments and quoting secular authorities like Bart Ehrman against the Bible and Christianity, I have to be equally, if not more hard on my fellow Christians for using French Revolution and Freemasonic arguments against Sharia.
If one doesn’t believe me, just look at the following statements by one of the greatest Christian theologians who ever lived, Pope Pius IX. Pius IX writes:
And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that “that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require.” From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an “insanity,” viz., that “liberty of conscience and worship is each man’s personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way.”
– Quanta Cura, 3, December 8, 1864
The following Statements were condemned by the Syllabus of Errors on the same day Quanta Cura was published:
55. The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church.
80. The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.
Well there you have it. As a Christian one must oppose freedom of religion, democracy, and the secular state.
To all who read this, know that this isn’t a bad thing. When a Muslim defends Sharia like this, he’s giving you an invitation to debate the validity of Islam. Don’t quote from secularists or Freemasons. Use this as an opportunity. After all, if Islam falls, Sharia has no basis or support. Engage the Muslim. Don’t let him get away with statements he hasn’t earned like the supposed corruption of the Scriptures. If you don’t have good enough arguments, read this blog. I provide plenty.
It’s painful to watch Christians making silly arguments against Sharia and Islam. Sadly, most Christians have never read the Scriptures or studied Church history. We live in a dark age but we have to keep on fighting.
That was a fairly well-written article by Paul Williams. His point is fair, however most “ordinary” Christians would probably object to sharia’ by pointing out it’s clear discrimination against women and its violent remedies which I don’t think counts as secular liberalism.
The argument against Sharia is fundamentally that Islam is false. These days all Christians should be able to point out that.
Let me reword that.
That was a fairly well-written article by Paul Williams. His point is fair, however most “ordinary” Christians would probably object to sharia’ by pointing out it’s clear discrimination against women and its violent remedies which I don’t think counts as a criticism born of secular liberalism.
The argument against Sharia is fundamentally that Islam is false. These days all Christians should be able to point out that.
Hi Patrick,
One problem is that we can’t get bogged down in details. These details include Sharia and women, and violence.
If we cut off the head of Islam, Sharia laws is defeated de facto. We should focus on Islam itself.
Yes. You are correct. We see the distractions time and again.
I just read the original post and found it thought-provoking as I have been confronted myself by Muslim friends with their convincing rationale – that why would you as a God-believer and fearer, not want an all encompassing life system (Sharia) that results in less sinful (or “haram”) activity, centering both the private and public life around God-given morals versus civic/secular laws, etc.? Another bit of justification I’ve been given is, if you look at Islamic-ruled countries, the crime rates are significantly lower than western societies (with the exception of terrorism) – so again, why not instill Sharia law?
Honestly, I had no answer to these questions. Is the truth/validity of something based on its outward manifestations and fruits? What is the barometer of truth?
I do want to end this with a final thought from the book of Habbakuk. One main lesson I derived from the book is that God sometimes uses evil for the greater good. He raised up an evil nation, Babylon, in order to eventually bring judgment on Judah for their idolatry. A passing thought I had reading this book was, can God use even Islamism as a vehicle through which to pass righteous judgement/punishment on sinners?
Hello Jane,
Thank you for taking an interest in my blog.
Let me help you with answers for your Muslim friends.
“that why would you as a God-believer and fearer, not want an all encompassing life system (Sharia) that results in less sinful (or “haram”) activity, centering both the private and public life around God-given morals versus civic/secular laws, etc.? ”
Only if it is founded by God himself. At this point, engage in the theological debate. If Islam falls, then Sharia loses this argument. Let me know if they have any theological objections that you can’t answer. I’ll help you out. I’ll also give you some good arguments against Islam.
“Another bit of justification I’ve been given is, if you look at Islamic-ruled countries, the crime rates are significantly lower than western societies (with the exception of terrorism) – so again, why not instill Sharia law?”
First of all, there are zero countries today that are ruled by Islamic law. The last remnants of Islamic law were abolished with the last Caliph in 1924 so there is no Islamic law today. First of all, don’t go out to defend the West. Defend the Christian faith. Yes, crime is high in the West but the West has long since left Christianity. South America has been ravaged by Masonic governments.
You could also, point out that most of the crime in Western Europe is committed by Muslim youths. This is true in France, England, Scandinavia and almost everywhere else. However, know that this is not a Christian argument but a secular one, so be careful.
Either way, your number one priority is to prove Islam is false. Why not Sharia? Because it’s promoted by a false religion and attacks the one true religion.