When someone like Paul Williams decides to believe in an ahistorical religion and then become an apologist for it, he runs into problems. I used to comment frequently on his blog but ceased doing so for several reasons. However, I do check it out on occasion and I recently found some interesting things.
Pretty much all Williams does on his blog is post quotes, memes, and links. I on the other hand write posts. It’s his website though, so to each their own. I’m not judging him but simply pointing out that we run our websites differently. Some of these quotes that he posts are quite interesting. He often posts Twitter responses. On March 1, 2018 he posted the following Twitter response:
According to Williams, “that God of the OT is portrayed as a genocidal killer targeting women, children and babies for extermination. – see 1 Samuel 15”. Does Williams not believe in the flood of Noah, where God flooded the Earth killing it’s entire population save a few righteous people? Far more people died in that flood than died in 1 Samuel 15 and it was the direct actions of God. It’s a good question.
However, we don’t even need simple logic to refute Williams. Williams is a Muslim and claims to believe in the same religion as Jesus. According to Islam, Jesus was a Muslim. In fact, on February 24, 2018, Williams posted the following quote from the Hadith.
So “their religion is one”. Does Williams believe this? I suppose that he does. The problem is, Jesus believed in the OT and the God of the OT. There is absolutely no way to get around this. According to the Hadith posted by Williams, Muhammad believed what Jesus believed, therefore Muhammad believed in the OT and the God of the OT just like Jesus did.
In fact, we can do one better with this argument. Paul Williams has said in the past that he believes in the religion of Jesus, while Christians believe in the religion about Jesus. He said this in his debate with Chris Green. After all, this is what the Hadith above says, at least with respect to what Islam is.
From these statements of Williams, he has backed himself into a corner. What does he believe? How can he explain this? I see three possibilities.
The first possibility is that Williams rejects Islam since he rejects the religion of Jesus and Jesus believed in the OT and the God of the OT. Same religion, eh Williams?
The second possibility is that Jesus didn’t believe in the OT and the God of the OT. There is absolutely zero evidence for this and Williams knows it. Every scrap of evidence from the Bible, history or his beloved liberal scholars stands in firm opposition to this view.
The third possibility is that Jesus and Muhammad had different religions. This contradicts the Quran and the Hadith and therefore falsifies Islam.
I would really like Paul Williams to address this. I hope he reads this and explains what he believes about the religion of Jesus and the God of the Old Testament.
Williams (or any other unfortunate dawamonger) should provide evidence that his Allah did not approve the harshness of some of the OT prophets. There’s not a single passage in the Quran that condemns that harshness. In fact, as you pointed out, Allah himself is depicted as committing genocide from time to time (Sodom and Gomorrah, anyone?). As Dr. James White loves to say: “Inconsistency is a sign of a failed argument”. Williams just keeps embarrassing himself and his religion, but that comes as no surprise, since he is of the same ilk as Ijaz Ahmad and Yahya Snow.
I do quite like that quote from White. That quote is probably why I could never become a Muslim. It’s a religion that makes one believe contradictory things. Not minor things that are hard to spot, but major things.
I think Christians that convert to Islam, often join because they have trouble grasping Christian doctrine such as Christological and soteriological issues. However, when they realize that Islam has far worse problems, they don’t know what to do. I think deep down, a lot of these Western converts who become apologists are really struggling with their faith. The Islamic narrative contradicts history and not just on a minor point here of there, but the whole thing.
In the next while, I’ll be doing a post on how Christians should read Surah 5. A chapter of the Quran that takes aim at Trinitarian doctrine but does an absolute faceplant in attempting to refute it.
When I engage in a debate face to face, and the Trinity comes up, I just always shift the burden of proof. I say: “If the Trinity is so wrong, then why doesn’t the Quran understand it and completely misrepresent it?” I’ve never heard a decent response to that. However, that won’t be my next post. That’s my Ehrman book review.
“In the next while, I’ll be doing a post on how Christians should read Surah 5. A chapter of the Quran that takes aim at Trinitarian doctrine but does an absolute faceplant in attempting to refute it.”
I shall look forward to that.
Hi Patrick,
Expect it in the next month. I have so many posts to write. I’ve put off the Ehrman review for far too long. I may post it tonight. I may review the recent Wood vs Ally debate soon as well.
As an Englishman you’ll be interested in the book that I’m reading. It’s called The Sultan and the Queen: The Untold Story of Elizabeth and Islam by Jerry Brotton. I may review it on here. Don’t know yet. I’m learning a lot from it though.
You should like these:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzMuvtzro70&t=24s
https://answeringislamblog.wordpress.com/2017/03/06/shabir-ally-proves-muhammad-was-a-terrorist-pt-1b/
http://answeringislam.net/Responses/Osama/zaatri_amalikites.htm
Thank you Sam! I’ll check them out.
As a frequent Tweeter and former frequent blogger, I can confirm that the snarky quick comebacks in Tweets are no substitute for properly reasoned out replies in blog comments.
Amen