Alpha & Omega Ministries Apologetics Blog
|

The Deen Show MailBag on the Trinity
09/29/2008 - James White
00:01:00 - Category: Islam - Link to this article -

Mohamed Did Not Believe that the Old Testament was Corrupt
09/26/2008 - Tur8infan
Today, many Islamic apologists like to claim that the Bible (both Old and New Testaments) is corrupt. They feel the need to claim this, because they are aware of the fact that the Bible is inconsistent with Islam.There is a problem for their position: it is not the position of their prophet, assuming that Surah 62:5 is itself not corrupt.
Surah 62:5 The similitude of those who were charged with the (obligations of the) Mosaic Law, but who subsequently failed in those (obligations), is that of a donkey which carries huge tomes (but understands them not). Evil is the similitude of people who falsify the Signs of Allah: and Allah guides not people who do wrong.
Notice that the Surah compares the Jews to Donkeys carrying "huge tomes" that they do not understand. Notice that the Surah alleges that the Jews "falsify the Signs of Allah," but the most natural reading of the Surah (at least in this translation) is that they falsify not through destroying the text, but through misunderstanding or misinterpreting the text.
Notice that is says "huge tomes" not "no tomes" or "tattered tomes."
And, in another translation, we see the same concept:
62.5 The likeness of those who were charged with the Taurat, then they did not observe it, is as the likeness of the ass bearing books, evil is the likeness of the people who reject the communications of Allah; and Allah does not guide the unjust people.
Notice how the text parallels "books" and "communications of Allah." Notice also that in this translation they are described as rejecting them - presumably because like donkeys they don't understand what is in them - perhaps simply because "Allah does not guide" them.
And it is not the only place in the Koran that such an idea can be found. Recall that it is recorded:
[2.285] The apostle believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, and (so do) the believers; they all believe in Allah and His angels and His books and His apostles; We make no difference between any of His apostles; and they say: We hear and obey, our Lord! Thy forgiveness (do we crave), and to Thee is the eventual course.
And in another translation:
Surah 2:285 The Apostle believeth in what hath been revealed to him from his Lord, as do the men of faith. Each one (of them) believeth in Allah, His angels, His books, and His apostles. "We make no distinction (they say) between one and another of His apostles." And they say: "We hear, and we obey: (We seek) Thy forgiveness, our Lord, and to Thee is the end of all journeys."
Notice that it is says "books," not "book." What's even more interesting is that we are told that the Surahs were themselves orally proclaimed at first - which would suggest that the "books" do not even include the Koran. There is no need, however, to go that far. The fact that the plural form is used is enough to establish the fact that Mohamed did not hold to the idea that the books were corrupted, for if they were corrupted why would he teach that he believes in them?
And we need not rest on only those two places, for there is at least one more:
[20.133] And they say: Why does he not bring to us a sign from his Lord? Has not there come to them a clear evidence of what is in the previous books?
And again, in another translation:
Surah 20:133 They say: "Why does he not bring us a sign from his Lord?" Has not a Clear Sign come to them of all that was in the former Books of revelation?
Note how Mohamed here actually states that there is "clear evidence" or a "clear sign" as to what the content of the "former books" or "previous books." These are not books hopelessly lost in obscurity in the mind of the author of this Surah.
The problem here is that Mohamed simply was not well informed. He did not know the content of the books himself, for we have no reason to believe he was ever provided with an Arabic Bible, and he could not read the Greek or Hebrew original languages.
If you are a Muslim, doesn't this sort of thing cause you a bit of concern? Aren't you bothered by the fact that your prophet accepted the books and "believed in them," while you must not? For the books declare that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God - God incarnate - the sacrifice to satisfy the justice of God and bring forgiveness to all the people of God.
-TurretinFan
06:00:00 - Category: Islam - Link to this article -

Yusuf Estes on the Deen Show: Part 8 (Conclusion)
09/22/2008 - James White
00:01:00 - Category: Islam - Link to this article -

More from the Islamic Debates in California
09/21/2008 - James White
Here is my first rebuttal from Saturday night's debate with Osama Abdullah. The debate was supposed to be on the reliability of the New Testament, but Osama decided to do the "scatter gun" thing, raising a dozen different topics or more, throwing out everything he could think of, all the while completely ignoring my presentation and the material I presented. So, here are my comments in my first "rebuttal" period.
Just a quick note (I just arrived back in Phoenix), the debate yesterday with Farhan Qureshi was vastly superior to the debates on Saturday, and I will try to get a clip of that up as soon as possible.
Many thanks to all who prayed and supported us in this weekend, and a special thanks to George Saieg and David Wood for their hard work this weekend. And a special thanks to BB the BAD Reformed Baptist, and his Italian side-kick, WFP. Don't even try to figure that one out.
23:49:48 - Category: Islam - Link to this article -

A Quick Clip from Bellflower
09/21/2008 - James White
I engaged in two debates today in Bellflower, California. I have never done two debates in one day before, so that was quite the interesting experience. David Wood likewise debated today. Just a quick clip of the second rebuttal I offered in the first debate on the crucifixion against Osama Abdullah.
00:30:00 - Category: Islam - Link to this article -

A Comparison of Islam and Christianity
09/15/2008 - James White

I was noticing news reports concerning the rise in violence against Ahmadi Muslims in the news this morning. Evidently, an Islamic scholar, Dr. Aamer Liaqat Hussain, during a television program commemorating the 1974 act by Pakistan's parliament that declared Ahmadis "non-Muslims," argued that the murder of Ahmadis is a "religious duty." This sparked violence and murder, including the shooting of Abdul Manan Siddiqui, an American medical doctor, while he was seeing patients.
The violence spawned by "heresy" on the part of orthodox Muslims stands in stark contrast to how believing, Biblical Christians respond to heresy. Compare and contrast the Ahmadis with, say, Jehovah's Witnesses. How do we respond to those who deny central aspects of our faith? We surely identify their error. We refuse fellowship with them as well. And we train our people to proclaim the truth to them. We write books, produce pamphlets and tracts, even post YouTube videos refuting their claims. But we do not walk into their homes or offices and shoot them dead on the spot. We do not burn down Kingdom Halls and destroy the homes of Jehovah's Witnesses. But this is exactly what orthodox Islam does when its adherents are excited by the religious rhetoric of their leaders.
It is important to note that as soon as this observation is made, Islamic apologists---rather than condemning the violence against Ahmadis---will instead point to historical events like the Spanish Inquisition. Of course, some of you noted that I specified "Biblical Christians" above, and of course, I reject the Roman system as a Christian system in the first place. But even here the Inquisition did not work like the rampaging fanatics in Pakistan. As wrong and heretical as the inquisitors themselves were, they had rules and guidelines, and what is more (and frankly, what is scary), many of those inquisitor believed they were doing God's will by "aiding" in the repentance of their victims! All of this goes to show the importance of recognizing that God did not give to the Church the sword, but gave to the Church the Gospel, by which men's hearts are changed.
So as you see the violence raging yet again in Islamic countries, reflect on how this arises from the religion itself, and how we must be thankful that God has changed our hearts by grace, not because we are better than those rampaging through the streets in Pakistan, screaming out their religious hatred. We are not better than they. They follow a man of war, we follow the Prince of Peace.
12:11:58 - Category: Islam - Link to this article -

Yusuf Estes on the Deen Show: Part 7
09/15/2008 - James White
00:01:00 - Category: Islam - Link to this article -

Yusuf Estes on the Deen Show: Part 6
09/08/2008 - James White
00:01:00 - Category: Islam - Link to this article -

San Diego Debate Location Established - The Great Debate Series
09/03/2008 - James White
The Great Debate Series
Admission
$10 - One Day
$15 - Both Days
Students free with valid ID
September 20, 2008
Location: 16705 Bellflower Bl. Registration 9:30 AM
Was Jesus Crucified or Substituted? Debate 10:00 AM –12:30 PM Dr. James White
Can We Trust the Qur'an? Debate 2:00 PM – 4:30 PM Professor David Wood vs. Apologist Farhan Qureshi
Can We Trust the New Testament Debate 6:00 PM – 8:30 PM Dr. James White
| September 21, 2008
Location: 2449 S. Centre City Parkway Registration: 1:30 PM
Did Jesus Claim to Be God? Debate 2:30 PM –5:00 PM Dr. James White
Is Muhammad a True Prophet? Debate 6:00 PM – 8:30 PM Professor David Wood vs. Apologist Osama Abdullah
|
17:05:44 - Category: Islam - Link to this article -

Yusuf Estes on the Deen Show: Part 5
09/01/2008 - James White
00:01:00 - Category: Islam - Link to this article -
|





