This weekend I was doing a lot of reading and I realized something discouraging. It’s not enough to make me give up, if anything I’m going to try that much harder. Any Christian apologist who deals with Islam knows that Islamic apologetics is essentially using double standards which include quoting liberals ad nauseam. The Gospel of John becomes either super useful or super corrupted depending on what topic you’re trying to argue.
The apologists who peddle these double standards are people like Paul Williams, Adnan Rashid, Mohammed Hijab, Shabir Ally, and many others. I thought that by using the inconsistent arguments that they do, they’ll help Islam implode. They are doing that to a certain extent but dealing with a lot of Muslims online in the last two months I’ve come to realize that this won’t produce the results that I once hoped it would.
Why do I say this? These apologists are largely unknown in the Muslim world. The average Muslim doesn’t care about these people in the slightest. They’re nobodies. Interacting with Muslims online, there are only two Muslims apologists who most Muslims care about. They are Ahmed Deedat and Zakir Naik. Naik was the student of Deedat. Although Deedat is dead, he lives on through his debates and lectures which are available on YouTube and from Islamic online stores.
I must confess, I’ve never watched that much Deedat. He’s very condescending, arrogant, and talks in circles on and on that I just lose interest. I haven’t even watched the famous debate where Josh McDowell smashed him to bits.
Zakir Naik on the other hand is a little more tolerable to watch. He’s annoying and condescending like Deedat but he seems to get to the point a lot quicker which is refreshing. He’s also still alive which gives him an advantage over Deedat who is deceased.
Now, neither of these men bring anything of substance to the table. They don’t constantly quote liberals like those that I mentioned. They simply talk in soundbites. Soundbites that are witty and are often repeated. The classic line that they give is:
There is not a single unambiguous statement in the complete Bible where Jesus Christ peace be upon him says I am God or where he says worship me.
This punchline or some sort of variation of it is known to the Muslim world. I’ve spoken to missionaries in Muslim countries and they told me that this verse comes up so you’ve got to be ready for it. Of course this argument is simply ridiculous. It’s one of the first things that I refuted when I started this blog late in 2015. Here’s the piece.
Deedat and Naik seem to be everywhere. A few years ago, I had a roommate from India. He was of the Hindu faith. He noticed that I had one of my Qurans on the living room table and he came to me and said:
“It looks like you’re into Islam and comparative religion. There is a guy from India who’s really popular who talks about these subjects. His name is Zakir Naik.”
This was ironically right after David Wood came out with his video “Zakir Naik is a Joke”. We both watched it and had a good laugh. So it’s a bit depressing that the wrong apologists are going viral. Double standards is losing out to witty soundbites.
Here is the video that I referenced:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7tenqQC7Zo
Speaking of shamelessly fraudulent claims being debunked by David Wood…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ySC9h2yq-w&t=4s
This channel has 2.6 million subscribers, who doubtless cheer for any lie that makes them feel superior. Truth is anathema, an allergen to them.
Yeah, I remember that. I also remember the livestream where they shredded that same video. I laughed so hard. They talk about “dot dot dot”. Good times!
I actually lost much of my interest in Christian theology during the past year. I think I have about 20% of prior interest. I am somewhat learning Arabic (although slowly) and have a similar interest in the Qur’an that reflects my current interest in the Bible.
I don’t know what is the “liberal argument” against Mark 10:45 being in the Ausgangstext. I had realized that there is no compelling argument that Matthew 28:19 was an interpolation.
I like “Paul Williams, Adnan Rashid, and Shabir Ally” because they know what is in the New Testament. I don’t know much about Mohammad Hijab.
As for myself, when I was more engrossed in this, I adopted the mentality that a philosophy professor encouraged. He discouraged his undergrad students from using secondary sources when writing papers on a Platonic work and encouraged students to come up with their answers from the prompt based on what they had learned from the primary text and to a lesser extent, his lectures. He said that writing a paper should be like having a conversation with an interested student about a topic in the text. One would have their own interpretation of the text based on their interaction with it. Secondary sources just tell you what someone else had thought about the text.
I think it is more important to actually read the Bible, more than knowing what someone else has to say. First, know what the Bible says and come up with your own interpretation. (I emphasis coming up with your own interpretation, not as a means of subverting Christian orthodoxy, but to be fresh and creative so could compare what you have arrived at with what others think about the text.) I prefer to memorize scripture and meditate about the intention of the author, so I could have a foundation. If I am more engaged, I often prefer to consult Calvin’s commentaries and perhaps relevant passages in the Institutes. I respect Calvin since he has a coherent theology and respected the sovereignty of God.
Hello Latias,
Your comments are always appreciated. If I can understand your position for both Christianity and Islam it is that you’re more interested in textual exegesis than actual theology? Correct me if I’m wrong.
I agree with your philosophy prof. I also agree with your entire last paragraph if you just replace Calvin with the great Saints of the Church.
I hope that you’re enjoying the summer.
God bless.
Allan