How Much Of Islam Does James White Really Know?

 

 

By

 

Bassam Zawadi

 

 

 

James White consistenly gives the impression that he is a serious student of Islam and tries his very best to not misrepresent it. However, is that actually the case?

 

James White Claims To Try His Best To Represent Islam

 

James White continuously claims that Muslim apologists always misrepresent Christianity, while he on the other hand supposedly tries his very best to represent Islam. He also says that Muslims should learn from him and try to be honest in representing the opposing side's beliefs.  James White also claims that he doesn't see Muslims responding to his arguments.

 

James White in his video entitled Accusations and Truth Regarding Nazam44 said:

 

I don't see Muslims responding to my arguments on Islam. (Time Slice: 2:34-37)

 

James White in his video entitled Intro to Islam said:

 

Given the volatility of the relationship between Christians and Muslims, if we are going to talk with one another, if we are going to discuss our faith with one another, there must be a desire for accuracy of representation on both sides. (Time Slice: 6:10-6:24)

 

James White in his video entitled Joshua Evans on the Deen Show: Ten Reasons, Part 2 said:

 

When I raise an issue from the Qur'an, I've at least tried to examine the context. I tried to look at it and be fair with it. (Time Slice: 8:28-8:35)

 

James White in his video entitled Khalid Yasin and Inconsistent Islamic Arguments said:

 

Every time I hear an Islamic apologist using this argument, I am immediately strongly tempted to discount this person as having done any serious thought about Christianity. Because if they actually had taken the time to do what I do, read the best what the other side has to offer. (Time Slice: 2:22-2:41)

 

James White in his video entitled Yusuf Estes on the Deen Show: Part 1 said:

 

They've never taken their time, never taken the time to do what I'm doing in learning accurately the faith that I disagree with. (Time Slice: 8:33-8:45)

 

James White in his video entitled Khalid Yasin and Inconsistent Islamic Arguments said:

 

Isn't one of the ninety nine excellent names that Muhammad gave for Allah "Truth"? Isn't Allah true? Why should the most popular Islamic arguments themselves not partake of truth? It's a question I have for our Muslim viewers. (Time Slice: 9:55-10:12)

 

James White in his video entitled Joshua Evans on the Deen Show: Ten Reasons, Part 1 said:

 

I don't love Muhammad. How could I? He claimed to be something I don't believe that he was. (Time Slice: 4:53-5:00)

 

We conclude the citations with something that James White said in his video entitled Ahmed Deedat on the Deity of Christ: Rebuttal #1:

 

When people misrepresent Islam, what does that tell you? That they haven't done their homework and their arguments are really not worth listening to. (Time Slice: 9:28-9:34)

 

 

In summary we see that James White claims the following points:

 

 

1)     Muslims don't respond to his arguments on Islam (which isn't true, since I have a section on my site dedicated to refuting his arguments and he knows that since I have emailed him informing him of my rebuttals. The vast majority of the arguments that James White uses are not unique and have already been refuted, so he should stop thinking that he is providing unique arguments)

 

2)     There must be a desire for accuracy of representation on both sides. (We hope that James would fulfil his end of the bargain.)

 

3)     James has tried to look at the context of the Qur'an as best as possible. (As you will see later on, he knows nothing about the historical context of the Qur'an.)

 

4)     James has read the best what Islamic writers have to offer. (How is that possible when the best of Islamic scholarship is available in Arabic and have mostly not been translated yet and James is still unable to properly read and understand Arabic?)

 

5)     Most popular Islamic arguments don't partake in truth. (If only James could actually prove that!)

 

6)     James does not love Muhammad (peace be upon him). (Isn't James being a bad follower of Jesus? Didn't Jesus supposedly say in the Gospels that you must love your enemies? How could James call himself a follower of Jesus if he doesn't follow Jesus' teachings?)

 

7)     MOST IMPORTANTLY, James claimed that if we see that someone misrepresents Islam then he is someone whose arguments are not worth listening to. After you Muslims finish reading this article, I urge you to take James White's advice and realize that he is a man whose arguments are not worth listening to!

 

 

James White's Fundamental Errors

 

There are many more errors in James White's work that I won't be mentioning here, so let no one think that these are the only errors he has made. The ones that I have selected here are from the most gross of James errors that not only display his ignorance of basic facts in Islam, but also his false claims when he goes and states that he tries his best to represent Islam and criticizes Muslim apologists for supposedly presenting false information about Christianity.

 

Let us begin with the worst one.

 

James White in an episode of the Dividing Line dated December 29, 2009 and entitled Islam, Mormonism, and the Trinity states:

 

In Islam, how do you become a Muslim? Well, there is a certain string of Arabic words that you say and poof, you are a Muslim. Then you say the five daily prayers and you fasting during Ramadan and give Zakat and you're a Muslim. But that's not how a person becomes a Christian, well at least not Biblically. (Time Slice: 23:29-23:54)

 

James White also continues to say in Time Slice: 25:45 that Islam promotes only outward actions and not a spiritual heart.

 

James White mistakenly thinks that the mere proclamation of the Shahadah is enough to make someone a true Muslim. Is that really the case? Let's see what the Prophet (peace be upon him) said:

 

Saheeh Bukhari

 

Volume 1, Book 3, Number 98:

 

Narrated Abu Huraira:

 

I said: "O Allah's Apostle! Who will be the luckiest person, who will gain your intercession on the Day of Resurrection?" Allah's Apostle said: O Abu Huraira! "I have thought that none will ask me about it before you as I know your longing for the (learning of) Hadiths. The luckiest person who will have my intercession on the Day of Resurrection will be the one who said sincerely from the bottom of his heart "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah."

 

And 'Umar bin 'Abdul 'Aziz wrote to Abu Bakr bin Hazm, "Look for the knowledge of Hadith and get it written, as I am afraid that religious knowledge will vanish and the religious learned men will pass away (die). Do not accept anything save the Hadiths of the Prophet. Circulate knowledge and teach the ignorant, for knowledge does not vanish except when it is kept secretly (to oneself)."

 

Volume 1, Book 3, Number 130:

 

Narrated Anas bin Malik:

 

"Once Mu'adh was along with Allah's Apostle as a companion rider. Allah's Apostle said, "O Mu'adh bin Jabal." Mu'adh replied, "Labbaik and Sa'daik. O Allah's Apostle!" Again the Prophet said, "O Mu'adh!" Mu'adh said thrice, "Labbaik and Sa'daik, O Allah's Apostle!" Allah's Apostle said, "There is none who testifies sincerely that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and Muhammad is his Apostle, except that Allah, will save him from the Hell-fire." Mu'adh said, "O Allah's Apostle ! Should I not inform the people about it so that they may have glad tidings?" He replied, "When the people hear about it, they will solely depend on it." Then Mu'adh narrated the above-mentioned Hadith just before his death, being afraid of committing sin (by not telling the knowledge).

 

Notice that the proclamation has to be sincere and right from the heart. This is crucial, since this is not a mere utterance of the lips, but must be coming from the heart as well.

 

Allah also says:

 

Surah 2:88-89

 

The Day where neither wealth nor sons will avail. Except him who brings to Allâh a clean heart

 

Notice that Allah is saying that the most important thing that a person would bring with him on the Day of Judgment is a clean heart. How can James White in light of this say that Islam only focuses on the outward actions and not on the spiritual aspect of the human being? Every practicing Muslim knows these crucial basic facts, but James White is apparently not aware of them.

 

James White in his video entitled Khalid Yasin and Inconsistent Islamic Arguments said:

 

Muhammad did not say in his own words written by himself "I am the final last Prophet sent to all the world" in his own words using the same standards that Khalid Yasin used just now. (Time Slice: 3:08-3:23)

 

James White said the above in response to brother Khalid Yasin's question "Where did Jesus Claim to be God?". James White says that this is a faulty question and that Muhammad (peace be upon him) no where said "I am the final last Prophet sent to all the world". Well, actually that is false, for the Prophet (peace be upon him) did say that himself:

 

The Prophet of Allah (Peace be upon him) affirmed: "The chain of Messengers and Prophets has come to an end. There shall be no Messenger nor Prophet after me." (Sunan Al Tirmidhi, Kitab: ur-Rouya Bab: Zahab-un- Nubuwwa, Hadith No. 2198, Source; Sheikh Albani in his book Erwaa' Al Ghaleel, no. 2473, 8th narration says that this narration is authentic according to the criteria of Saheeh Muslim)

 

How could James White issue such a counter challenge when he knows that he hasn't read all the hadith literature? Perhaps it was due to his ignorance of the existence of other hadith literature that he hasn't read? Only James and God know the truth of the matter.

 

James White in his video entitled Islam Lecture: Baldwin, NY talks about the dating of the writing of the Qur'an:

 

This is written down, actually written down after Muhammad's death, sometime according to Muslim sources around 653 to 655, that maybe a little bit early from some of the studies we're doing. (Time Slice: 6:32-3:36)

 

Anyone familiar with even the basics of history knows that the Qur'an began to be written down during the lifetime of the Prophet (peace be upon him).

 

James White in his video entitled Islam Lecture: Baldwin, NY said:

 

The problems when you try to read the Qur'an is that if go down to the Barnes and Noble or something like that and just buy the thing and start reading Al Surat al Faatiha, with the opening and then start reading straight through number 2, number 3, number 4.its extremely confusing. And there's a reason for that. The Qur'an is organized in such a way that while Al Surat al Fatiha the first one is very short. Starting with al Surat al Baqara the second Surah, that's the longest Surah. Then the third is the next longest and then the next longest and then the next longest until you get to the shortest. So it's organized by length of the Suras. (Time Slice: 1:05-1:44)

 

Notice how James White is saying that the Surahs in the Qur'an are ordered by length. However, even a 5 year old child knows that this is not true because Surah 108 is the shortest Surah in the Qur'an, yet it is not the final Surah. Also, Surah 97 is shorter than Surah 98. Again, this shows that James White hasn't even properly read the Qur'an, nor all of its Surahs.

 

James White in his video entitled Islam Lecture: Baldwin, NY said:

 

Unlike the New Testament when Paul writes to the Corinthians for example we could go back and we could look at Corinth, we can get some back round, we can know who Paul was, we can look at the languages, we know something about that. In entire sections of the Qur'an we have no idea what the back round is. We have no idea what is being addressed. It's extremely difficult to follow at times. In fact many of you can't figure it out at all without the traditions, the hadith, but the hadith were not collected for another two centuries after Muhammad. (Time Slice: 3:09-3:36)

 

James White's is comparing the Qur'an to the Bible, while no such comparison should be made. You can't demand that the Qur'an by itself makes the historical context of each verse clear. The fact that Islamic sources consist of both the Qur'an and hadith should remind James White that making such a comparison is faulty. Also, only people unfamiliar with the history of hadith collection say that the hadith were not collected for another two centuries. Please read this.

 

James White in his video entitled Introduction to Islam #2 said after describing the five pillars of Islam:

 

These are the five pillars of Islam and for many Christians we look at this and we go "Well, where is all the doctrinal content? Where is the material that talks about what Muslims believe outside of just that very first statement that there is one true God, Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger?" Well, Islam is not like many Christian denominations in that it does not normally have this kind of creedal formulation. There are some sections of the Qur'an such as Surah 112 that get close to having the nature of a creedal statement, but Islam is much more related to the "how" of things. "How" we do things. The prayers and the activities and of course Islam has this very widely developed concept of the traditions, the Sunnah. How we wash and how we travel and who we marry and where we live and all these things are addressed in the broader Islamic traditions so that to do those things is what is important to the Muslim demonstrating his faith. (Time Slice: 6:34-7:48)

 

I think this should seal the deal for many of our readers. Notice what James White is asking for. He is asking about what Muslims have faith in instead of what acts of worship we must follow. James White doesn't realize that Muslims believe in the five pillars (that he mentioned) AND the famous six pillars of faith that everyone knows about. How could James not know of the six pillars of faith that a Muslim abides by and which is the most foundational Islamic creedal statement?

 

James White in his video entitled Shirk: A Basic Definition said:

 

But according to the Qur'an God sent down the Torah and the Injeel. The Torah, the Old Testament law. The Injeel, the Gospel. (Time Slice: 3:10-3:16)

 

Where does the Qur'an say that the Torah is the Old Testament law? The Qur'an said that the Torah was revealed to Moses (peace be upon him). How could the Old Testament law have been revealed to Moses (peace be upon him) when even many conservative evangelical scholars even admit that Joshua contributed to it?

 

James White in his video Zakir Naik on the Deen Show: Review and Rebuttal Pt. 1 said:

 

Now the writer of the Qur'an may have been confused enough to think that the Injeel was a book written by Jesus. There's clear evidence that that's what he thought or at least could be interpreted that way. (Time Slice: 12:44-12:59)

 

Well it depends on what Gospel James White is talking about. If he is talking about the four Gospels, well then that is not what the Qur'an is even talking about to begin with. The Qur'an is speaking about the actual revelation sent from God to Jesus (peace be upon him).

 

James White in his video entitled A Response to Mujtahid2006, Part I said:

 

You then made reference to something that I said. I said that the early generations of Muslims did not make an allegation of textual corruption in regards to the Bible and I believe that I can back that up fairly strongly. Examine the earliest sources outside of the Qur'an. Look at the hadith. Right here in my own library, there's Al Tabari sitting right there on the top, there's Bukhari and Muslim and Dawood and Ibn Kathir and so on and so forth. I have taken the time to obtain these resources and it takes many generations in Islamic history before the argument is made that the actual text of the Bible has been altered.  (Time Slice: 5:54-6:40)

 

 

James White claims that the earliest Islamic sources do not claim textual corruption of the Bible. This article documents several authentic narrations going back to the early Muslims where they allege textual corruption of the Bible. What is ironic is the fact that James White claims to have a copy of Al-Tabari, Bukhari and Ibn Kathir in his library. Yet, in my article I have provided documentation from these very same sources that allege textual corruption of the Bible! James White is boasting about having books that he hasn't even bothered to read properly and with understanding!

 

James White then goes on to quote Surah 29:46. He argues that this verse shows that Muslims should say to Christians that we believe in their revelation. He also argues that Surah 5:47 shows that Christians must judge by the Gospel and also argues that Surah 2:285 states that we must believe in the previous books revealed by God. All of these arguments have been soundly refuted here, here and here.

 

Also, James White in his video entitled A Response to Mujtahid2006, Part 2 around the 4th minute gives the Surah 3:55 argument and Surah 61:14, which have already been refuted here.

 

In conclusion, we see that James White has made some serious and inexcusable errors about basic and well known matters about Islam, yet he claims that he tries his best to accurately represent the faith. In conclusion, James White is someone whose - in James White's own words - "arguments are really not worth listening to".

 

 

Appendix

 

 

 

Shamoun attempts to come to the rescue of James White over here.  

 

Shamoun ignores all the crystal clear statements that I have made illustrating James White's ignorance in extremely basic matters about Islam such as not knowing that the Surahs in the Qur'an are not ordered by length, not knowing that the Shahadah must be uttered sincerely in order to be considered a true Muslim, not knowing about the six pillars of faith, etc. Shamoun ignores all that and focuses only on one particular subject. How dishonest and mischievous for him to portray his rebuttal as a complete defense of James White and not even admit to the fact that James White lacks understanding in basic Islamic teachings, which disqualify him from even speaking about the faith. Oh well, we already know that Shamoun isn't an honest truth seeker, hence he doesn't really surprise us when he sides with his buddies no matter what.

 

Getting back to the issue at hand, Shamoun is basically asking me two questions:

 

1)     Why do you deny that the Qur'an refers to the Old Testament and New Testament when it says that the Torah and Gospel were revealed, yet at another place you state that the Old Testament and New Testament are being referred to as Torah and Gospel in the Qu'ran? Furthermore, your scholars state that the early Muslims used the word Torah to refer to the two testaments, so why won't you follow their way since you are a Salafi?

 

2)      You said that the Qur'an states that the Torah was revealed to Moses. Can you show me where?

 

 

In regards to question 1, Shamoun is to be blamed for either forgetting what I have previously said in my writings or purposely deceiving the readers. I have clearly stated in a previous article, which I know Shamoun has read (bold emphasis mine):

 

The main problem with Christians who put forth these arguments is that they fail to identify and understand how the Qur'an uses the terms 'Torah' and 'Gospel' in the Qur'an. When the Qur'an talks about the Torah and Gospel, one of its intentions is to speak about the original revelations sent to Moses and Jesus peace be upon them both respectively. Sometimes the Qur'an or authentic hadith might appear to be speaking about the Torah and Gospel, which Jews and Christians refer to. 

For example, when I debate the topic 'Did Jesus Claim Divinity' with Christians, I usually issue this challenge 'Show me where Jesus claimed divinity in the Gospel'. Now, my intention here is that I am referring to the Gospel referred to by Christians and that is the combined four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. However, my intention is not to state that this is the actual Gospel that God revealed to Jesus peace be upon him. So the word is used in different contexts and Christians fail to identify this when it comes to studying the Qur'an and authentic hadith. 

Notice that I said that the Qur'an at times could mention the Torah and Gospel either in intending to refer to those original revelations by Allah or in intending to refer to the Old and New Testaments. I made that clear. So when I state that in this particular context it is referring to the Bible while in another context it isn't, I am not being inconsistent at all.

Shamoun cites Ibn Kathir, yet doesn't he realize that Ibn Kathir said regarding a certain aspect of the story of Adam in the Bible:

This story in the Old Testament is a falsification and deception. (Ibn Kathir, The Stories of the Prophets, Chapter on Prophet Adam, Source)

Clearly Ibn Kathir had no problem believing in the fact that the word Torah could be used to refer to the Old Testament, yet he knew that this wasn't the Torah revealed to Moses by Allah.

Just because some of the Salaf referred to the two testaments as Torah, that doesn't mean that they believed that these two testaments were the Torah revealed to Moses. I have clearly laid out their position over here.

As for Shamoun's second question, I will have to admit that I made a mistake when I said that the Qur'an says that the Torah was revealed to Moses. Sometimes as a Muslim I mistakenly say "Qur'an" instead of "Islam". Islamic teachings consist of both the Qur'an and the authentic hadeeth.

 

The authentic hadeeth make it crystal clear that the Torah was revealed to Moses:

 

Saheeh Bukhari

 

Volume 6, Book 60, Number 3:

 

'I am not fit for this undertaking.' He will remember his appeal to his Lord to do what he had no knowledge of, then he will feel ashamed thereof and will say, 'Go to the Khalil--r-Rahman (i.e. Abraham).' They will go to him and he will say, 'I am not fit for this undertaking. Go to Moses, the slave to whom Allah spoke (directly) and gave him the Torah .'

 

Volume 8, Book 77, Number 611:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "Adam and Moses argued with each other. Moses said to Adam. 'O Adam! You are our father who disappointed us and turned us out of Paradise.' Then Adam said to him, 'O Moses! Allah favored you with His talk (talked to you directly) and He wrote (the Torah) for you with His Own Hand. Do you blame me for action which Allah had written in my fate forty years before my creation?' So Adam confuted Moses, Adam confuted Moses," the Prophet added, repeating the Statement three times.

Volume 9, Book 93, Number 507:

They will go to Abraham who will reply, 'I am not fit for this undertaking,' and mention to them the mistakes he made, and add, 'But you'd better go to Moses, a slave whom Allah gave the Torah and to whom He spoke directly' They will go to Moses who will reply, 'I am not fit for this undertaking,' and mention to them the mistakes he made, and add, 'You'd better go to Jesus, Allah's slave and His Apostle and His Word (Be: And it was) and a soul created by Him.'

 

The early Muslims and scholars were aware of these hadith. They were aware that the Torah was revealed to Moses. Yet, they were also aware of the fact that the entire Old Testament and New Testament weren't revealed to Moses or even claimed to be by any Jew or Christian. Hence, they had no problem in recognizing that the word Torah could in certain contexts refer to the original revelation sent to Moses and in other contexts refer to the Old and New Testaments.

 

James White tried to defend the fact that the Qur'an was teaching that the Old Testament and four Gospels are viewed as revelations and this is false. My argument stands and Shamoun's defense of his "buddy" just makes the both of them look even worse. Instead, James White should either try to defend himself or retract his statements or at least try to ignore me. Regardless of what he opts to do we strongly recommend him to tell his buddy Shamoun to stop making matters look worse for him. Shamoun should be a "true friend" and just keep his mouth shut.

 

Appendix 2

 

 

Shamoun added an appendix in response to mine, which illustrates nothing but his eagerness to get the last word.

 

He said:

 

The problem with this claim is that my purpose wasn't to address all of Zawadi's false accusations in this particular rebuttal since that will come later if the Lord Jesus wills.

 

Taking Shamoun's record into consideration I confidently say he is a liar. Shamoun has never hesitated to refute whatever he has been able to. We hope Shamoun mans up to his promise in the future.

 

He also said:

 

Since Zawadi acknowledges that he made a mistake and candidly admits that the Quran never says that the Torah was given to Moses this means that by the sovereign grace of the Triune God I successfully established what I had set out to prove.

 

This neophyte thinks that this point was even relevant! The Qur'an says that a book was revealed to Moses (Surah 2:87) and the hadith clarify that it is the Torah. So in essence the Qur'an is actually saying that the Torah is revealed to Moses (in light of correct understanding), even though it does not do so in explicit words. But this in no way affects anything I have said. James White said:

 

But according to the Qur'an God sent down the Torah and the Injeel. The Torah, the Old Testament law. The Injeel, the Gospel.

 

In this statement James White is trying to argue that the Qur'an is saying that God sent down the Old Testament Law and the Gospel (his intention is four Gospels). This is my problem.

 

Shamoun said:

 

But seeing that Zawadi admits that the Torah in the Quran can mean and does refer to the Old Testament why then did he take Dr. White to task? Why did he insult Dr. White and call his statements a joke?

 

This has nothing to do with me admitting that its okay for the Qur'an to refer to the two testaments as the Torah and Gospel in certain contexts. Rather my problem was James White trying to insinuate that the Qur'an is saying that these two testaments were revealed. This is clearly unfounded.

 

Shamoun said:

 

The problem with this assertion is that Dr. White said nothing about "Islam," i.e. the Quran AND the authentic hadiths, identifying the Torah as the Old Testament Law. Dr. White explicitly stated that the Quran says that God sent down the Torah, which he then identified as the Old Testament Law. So if Zawadi meant that it is the so-called authentic hadith which asserts that the Torah was revealed to Moses then he had no business to attack Dr. White since the latter wasn't speaking of the ahadith.

 

Why is Shamoun being so incompetent? What kind of response is this? At the end of the day the Qu'ran is to be interpreted in light of the authentic Sunnah and how the early Muslims understood it. What business does James White have to interpret the Qur'an as saying that the Torah and Gospel revealed refers to what is in his Bible today!?

 

Shamoun said:

 

Therefore, since Zawadi acknowledges that the early Muslims would refer to both the Old and New Testaments as the Torah this means that he was wrong for attacking Dr. White since it turns out that the latter was right after all. The simple matter is that it was Zawadi who was grossly mistaken.

 

This neophyte has to understand that I was attacking James White's attempt to interpret the Torah and Gospel revealed by God according to the Qur'an as the two testaments. This has nothing to do with me admitting that the Qur'an could use the words Torah and Gospel in different contexts to refer to the Bible.

 

Shamoun is honestly too intellectually challenged, I am getting tired of sinking down to his un/intellectual state to help him understand.

 

Appendix 3

The cocky and stubborn Shamoun continues to strike back.

He said:

The hadiths don't help Zawadi since they also identify the Torah as the Old Testament Law which the Jews of Muhammad's time possessed.

No where do the hadith state that the entire Old Testament is revealed by Allah. We have already dealt with Shamoun's arguments on this point. We have illustrated that the hadith identify verses outside of the Old Testament law as Torah.

Shamoun said:

Now Dr. White does go on to say that Muhammad knew of the Old and New Testaments and thought that these books were sent down and should be used to test him. However, Dr. White is clear that Muhammad was ignorant of what these writings contained which may have been why he thought that these were the writings which Allah had sent down.

I would like to see proof for that.

Shamoun continues:

In fact, this was the view of one the earliest Islamic biographers named Ibn Ishaq who claimed that John the Apostle wrote down the Gospel of Jesus for his followers:

"Among the things which have reached me about what Jesus the Son of Mary stated in the Gospel which he received from God for the followers of the Gospel, in applying a term to describe the apostle of God, is the following. It is extracted FROM WHAT JOHN THE APOSTLE SET DOWN FOR THEM WHEN HE WROTE THE GOSPEL FOR THEM FROM THE TESTAMENT OF JESUS SON OF MARY: 'He that hateth me hateth the Lord. And if I had not done in their presence works which none other before me did, they had not sin: but from now they are puffed up with pride and think that they will overcome me and also the Lord. But the word that is in the law must be fulfilled, "They hated me without a cause" (i.e. without reason). But when the Comforter has come whom God will send to you from the Lord's presence, and the spirit of truth which will have gone forth from the Lord's presence he (shall bear) witness of me and ye also, because ye have been with me from the beginning. I have spoken unto you about this that ye should not be in doubt.'

Where did Ibn Ishaq say that the entire Gospel of John was revealed by God to Jesus?! He simply stated that one of the sayings of Jesus revealed to him by God could be extracted from the Gospel of John. No Muslim would object to the fact that there exists truth in the four Gospels.

Shamoun said:

The problem with this "reply" is that it ignores the plain statements of the Islamic scripture that the Christians of Muhammad's time had in their possession the very Gospel which God gave to Jesus:

And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus son of Mary, confirming the Torah that was between his hands and We gave to him the Gospel, wherein is guidance and light, and confirming the Torah that was between his hands, as a guidance and an admonition unto the godfearing. So let the People of the Gospel judge according to what Allah has sent down therein. Whosoever judges not according to what Allah has sent down -- they are the ungodly. S. 5:46-47

If Shamoun knows that I have already responded to this argument, why does he continue to push it forward without trying to refute me?

Shamoun said:

This is nothing more than a case of obfuscation since Zawadi never attacked Dr. White for failing to read the Quran in light of the "authentic" sunna. His objection against White was that he claimed that the Torah which the Quran mentions is the Old Testament Law.

I criticized Dr. White for reading the Qur'an with a false understanding. The question remains as to what Dr. White's proof is that the author of the Qur'an's intention is to say that the Old Testament Law was a revelation? As I have demonstrated above, the word "Torah" does not always mean Old Testament Law when it is mentioned in the Qur'an.

Shamoun said:

Besides, who says that the Quran has to be understood in light of Muhammad's sunna? The Quran? No since the Muslim scripture claims to be a sufficient record and that its verses are fully explained and elaborated:

A Book whereof the Verses are explained in detail; A Qur'an in Arabic for people who know. S. 41:3

Shamoun's arguments are too shallow, these have already been responded to here.

 

 

 

Return to Refuting Aomin.org

 

Return to Homepage

 

click here to view site

HomeWhat's new?IslamChristianityRefutations LanguagesMultimediaE BooksLinksContact Me