Karim Al-Hanifi and French Apologetics

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSPiqPmsJzo&t=1s

The English language is not the only Western language in which Islamic dawah is being conducted.  There is of course the French language.  Millions of Muslims live in France, Belgium, Luxembourg, and Switzerland.  In North Africa in countries like Morocco and Algeria, French is widely spoken.  Being a Canadian who grew up speaking French, I can also help the French speaking regions fend off dawah efforts.

Although France is a secular country, there is still Catholic influence there.  Some of the greatest saints of the Catholic Church have come from France.  The greatest medieval apologist against Islam is Peter the Venerable who was the abbot of Cluny, the greatest French monastery ever built which gave the Church four popes, including Pope Gregory VII.  I’d like to help protect the once thoroughly Catholic France from this onslaught of Islamic dawah.

The biggest name in French Islamic apologetics is Karim Al-Hanifi who can be seen in the video above.  Apologist Sam Shamoun had a translated debate with him not long ago.  I don’t know if I’ll do written apologetics in French or make French YouTube videos responding to him, but I will offer English responses when needed.

The video above is titled True or False? The Prophets and Messengers were all Muslims! Now, Al-Hanifi frames the debate.  How can the prophets and messengers be Muslims when they all come before the final prophet Muhammad?  It’s your standard dawah message.  All of the prophets were Muslims because they believed in the prophets and messengers before then while submitting to God.  According to 1:55 in the video, a Muslim is someone who believes in God and consecrates his life, death, actions, deeds, thoughts, and his whole life to God.  Of course this definition is absurd.  If the Quran didn’t engage in such glowing ahistorical anachronisms we wouldn’t need this ridiculous definition.

Going a litter farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me.  Yet not as I will, but as you will.”

– Matthew 26:39

Al-Hanifi goes on to say that this is a Muslim statement.  Readers, how will you answer this?

My answer to statements like these are simple.  I concede that this could be interpreted in an Islamic way.  It can also be interpreted in a way to show that the Son is being subservient to the Father in His incarnate state to completely fulfill the law.  Both interpretations work.  Now, Al-Hanifi like many other dawah folk doesn’t take into account the entirety of the Gospels.  When we look at the Gospels we find statements like:

He said to them, “The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men.  They will kill him, and after three days he will rise.”

– Mark 9:31

He said to them, “The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men.  They will kill him, and after three days he will rise.”

– Matthew 20:28

I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”

– John 8:24

“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”

– John 8:58

These verses can only be interpreted only in a Christian way, therefore Matthew 26:39 must be interpreted in a Christian and not a Muslim way.

Perhaps at this point a counter-example is needed to show the Muslim that they grasping at straws.  I would show the Muslims that you could take one verse and show them that it can be interpreted in a gnostic way.  For example, John 14:11 reads:

Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the works themselves.

It’s best to show the Muslims that this could be interpreted in a gnostic or Christian way.  Since there are many anti-gnostic verses in the Bible like John 1:1-18, we have no choice but to interpret John 14:11 in a Christian way.

If I wanted to I could make the Quranic Jesus divine.  I could ignore the verses that deny his divinity and re-interpret the statement where Jesus is referred to as Word and compare it with the statement of Jesus as a divine Word in John 1:14.  Now, I won’t do this because I’d rather read the Quran in its context.  I wish that Karim Al-Hanifi and other Muslim apologists would do this with the Gospels.