https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBwvPJa0HPE
In my years of dealing with Islam, I’ve heard a lot of arguments for their faith. I haven’t been convinced by any of them and that is the reason that I’m not a Muslim. However, there is certainly a hierarchy in their arguments as some are better than others.
I’m going to list what I think are the three worst arguments for Islam. I should point out that I will only list arguments that are widely used by apologists. I’ve heard other bad ones but they’ve only been used by either a single apologist or YouTuber so I won’t list them here.
3. Numerology in the Quran
Islamic apologists like to talk about the numerology in the Quran. Shabir Ally has started using this in recent years. Yusuf Ismail has picked up on this as well. Essentially there are all of these supposed numerical patterns in the Quran and therefore it comes straight from the creator. David Wood in a debate with Shabir Ally did a random Google search on the fly and pulled up a bunch of Bible numerology that was equally impressive(or non-impressive) as Ally’s Quran numerology. Here’s the video of that little encounter below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qunUypvBQ4
2. Science in the Quran
This argument has actually started to wane. I haven’t seen it used lately by Shabir Ally who was once a great promoter of it. It comes from a French Muslim named Maurice Bucaille and he published a book in the 1970’s about this topic. Muslims say that there are a bunch of scientific facts in the Quran that weren’t known at the time of Muhammad. This usually concerns the development of the human embryo.
My answer to this is, why didn’t Arabia become a hotbed of science? Arabia has never been known for its biology. It’s obvious that Muslims are reading this back into the text after the fact. Shabir Ally used to use this one quite a bit but he seems to have dropped it for the Quran numerology which I spoke about above.
1. Muhammad is the “Machmadim” in Song of Solomon 5:16
We have our winner!
His mouth is sweetness itself; he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, this is my friend, daughters of Jerusalem.
– Song of Solomon 5:16
The words “altogether lovely” in Hebrew are “Machmadim” and is supposedly an allusion to the Muslim prophet. The argument is essentially a phonetic parallel to another language that probably didn’t even exist at the time. On top of that, the word in Hebrew used is not even Muhammad’s name. If you go to Israel today and ask someone to write down Muhammad’s name, you’ll find that they spell the name differently. Hebrew Quran translations also spell his name differently than the word that appears in Song of Solomon 5:16.
Does this sound bad yet? We haven’t even gotten into the context of the book which is a minefield in itself. How come the greatest Muslim that ever lived is drinking wine in verse 1 of the same chapter? In fact, wine is spoken of numerous times in this short book and it’s talked about positively every time. Also, in the verse in question it says that Muhammad was introduced to the daughters of Jerusalem which he never was. I encourage a plain reading of the book to see how much substance this argument really has. For these and other reasons, I believe this is the worst argument used by Islamic apologists today.
This wasn’t meant to be offensive to Muslims but I just want them to know which of their arguments that I’m the least impressed with. Other Christian apologists may have different opinions.
I would like my Christian readers to list what they think are the three worst arguments for Islam in the comments section. I’m also curious as to what Muslims think about our arguments and which ones are the worst. I would like my Muslim readers to list in the comments what they think are the three worst Christian arguments used by mainstream apologists.
That cat food is not 100% halal. The devil must have got into that cat and inspired it to step on those qurans
1. The argument against the crucifixion of Christ. In this argument Muslims claim that Christ’s death on the cross did not actually happen but only appeared so. This argument, I believe, is based on a Gnostic gospel account and may be consistent with Islamic theology concerning Christ’s nature. The only historical support for this claim may be a single Gnostic account.
2. The argument against the reliability of the New Testament. This argument is supported by Bart Ehrman’s thesis that the Bible is corrupted due to deliberate (and sometimes accidental) additions to copies. The Muslims would argue that their Koran has never been tampered with and thus maintains the original and true word of God (Allah). This may be an argument that could effect some Biblical fundamentalist who believe that the Word of God is literally the actually written words in the Bible, but not so much for the Catholic who maintains a more broader understanding of Biblical interpretation.
Hi Mark,
The crucifixion of Christ isn’t really an argument, it’s the position that they hold and will give various arguments for it. They’re all terrible arguments. Shabir Ally and Zakir Hussain give completely contradictory arguments on what happened here but they’re both equally horrible. Hussain actually admitted in his debate with James White that he was using Basilide’s position. Pretty sad.
Thanks for your input.
God bless,
Allan
Three quick responses to each of the stated Islamic arguments:
3) As Shabir Ally later conceded to Jay Smith, this is based on only the 1924 Cairo edition Hafs Quran – a text edited by a human committee. Also, numerological coincidences do not automatically prove DIVINE inspiration – angels, demons, aliens or supercomputers are all potentially smarter than humans and able to generate such number patterns.
2) First cousin marriage. That this allowed and even encouraged defeats two others Islamic arguments – that it contains scientific revelation, and that it is a pattern for all people in all times to emulate.
1) Ezekiel 24:16 similarly says that ‘Machmadim’, the prophet of Islam, is Ezekiel’s wife. *clapclapclap*
Hi Scott,
Thanks for your input. Hopefully one of my Muslim readers will give their opinion on what the three worst Christian arguments are. I’d really like to hear that one.
God bless,
Allan
Hey, you missed my favorite worst argument for Islam: the supposed literary miracle of the Quran. Muslims claim that its eloquence is incomprehensible and unmatchable. As David Wood has already explained, this argument simply makes no sense. How is one supposed to measure natural and “supernatural” eloquence? You cannot claim that human beings are not able to arrange certain words in a certain sentence, because this by definition is a natural process. Moreover, the Quran sounds pretty unimpressive in translation. I’ve read “The Raven” in three different languages besides English. It sounds powerful and moving in all three, just as in English. And “The Raven” is not even a divine writing. Are we supposed to excuse the Quran? Sorry, no.
Hi Orangehunter,
I would actually say that I respect Muslims who use this argument. Why? Because it’s traditional. It comes straight from their text – produce a Surah like it! But you’re right, it’s a terrible argument for the reasons you’ve given and others. I respect the boldness and traditionalism, not the argument itself.
As you know, many times throughout the Quran, the Quran gives arguments to Muhammad(of which surah like it is only one) and they’re simply awful. Now, most Muslims are smart enough not to use them, but that just shows that the Quran can’t defend itself. People like Shabir Ally or Yusuf Ismail would never use the “produce a Surah like it” argument. I can imagine the 7th century Meccans rolling their eyes at these arguments and being like seriously Muhammad????
Thanks for commenting Orangehunter,
I’m still waiting for a Muslim to give their three worst arguments for Christianity used by Christian apologists.
God Bless,
Allan
1) In my opinion the worst argument for Islam is that it must be true because 1.5 billion people follow it and that it is allegedly the fastest growing religion in the world.
2) Second must be the exhortation for those who doubt that the Koran is a revelation from God to try and produce a chapter like it.
3) The third (although it could easily be first or second) is that Mohammed is to be believed as a true prophet of God.
Hi Christopher,
I actually totally forgot about the first one that you mentioned. Muslims have lots of babies therefore it’s a true religion.
Thanks for commenting and God bless,
Allan