Rebuttal to Dallas M. Roark's Article "Rebuttal to Bassam Zawadi: On the value of questioning and other things"



Bassam Zawadi



Dallas M. Roark's article could be found here.


Dallas M. Roark said:

I was trying to avoid lots of questions about the truth of the Qur'an such as whether the sun sets in a puddle of mud, or whether one wing of the fly has an antidote for the other wing, or the fictions quoted in the Qur'an about the youths who slept for 300 years, and other historical errors in the Qur'an, etc. You remember that Deedat slandered the death and resurrection of Jesus calling it the "cruci-fiction." Deedat was trying to make a historical verified event of the crucifixion a fiction. Muslims seek to make verifiable fictions into fact.


My Response:


Dallas M. Roark said:

My response:

There are all kinds of questions that Muslims have been discouraged from asking.

Forbidding any question to be asked opens the door to forbidding lots of questions. There are reasonable answers that a child can understand in dealing with "who created Allah?" When you don't allow questions to be asked you force doubt into the sub-conscious and it doesn't go away.

The history of Islam has been one of anti-intellectualism. Islam inherited a vast body of information from the Greeks, but eventually did little with it. The answer is found in the educational system of early and later Islam.

Very early in the history of Islam knowledge was divided into two categories: 1) "Islamic science which included the study of the Qur'an, the traditions of the Prophet, legal knowledge (fiqh), theology (kaalam), poetry, and the Arabic language." 2) the natural sciences which were called the foreign sciences. As time went on the natural sciences were viewed as "a tainted enterprise." (Toby Huff, The Rise of Early Modern ScienceIslamChina, and the West, Cambridge U. Press, 1995, p. 68. All quotes following are from Huff as well.)

People who were at risk because of their studies in the natural sciences concealed their interests because they would be considered an impious person. (p. 69) The people who studied the Islamic sciences periodically denounced those who were studying the natural sciences.

The madrasas began to appear in the 11th century and were schools of Islamic sciences and rejected the natural sciences. Religious scholars regarded the natural sciences with suspicion.

Moreover, the educational system favored rote memory rather than critical thinking. When a student had memorized, or copied, or read the manuscripts available from his professor he was given an ijaza, an approval to teach others the same content.

It was presumed that memorized statements were true and could be learned without any process of thinking about the truth or falsehood of the statements.

Within the medieval Islamic intellectual life was the sharp distinction between the elite and the novice. The elite believed that the ordinary citizens, the commoners, were not capable of understanding the higher truths of philosophy or the Scripture. Averroes maintained that "a believer will know that to discuss those (philosophical) questions openly is forbidden by the Holy Law." (p. 82)

The conclusion of the matter is that reason was to be rejected for submission to Islamic law. There could be no criticism of Mohammed, the Qur'an, or the whole complex of Islamic science. In contrast, the West was influenced by the idea that man is created in the image of God and is therefore rational, and thereby can gain truth, a knowledge of good and evil by rational means. Man has a conscience in which he can make judgments and arrive at the truth. Islam did not develop a sense of conscience as the Greeks did, and as the New Testament taught, and therefore submission was the only path one could take.

"The greatest philosophical thinkers in Arabic-Islamic civilization after al-Ghazali never failed to cast doubt on the powers of human reason and to disparage the virtues of demonstrative logic; they insisted instead on the priority of faith (fideism) or on the unsurpassed authority of tradition (the Sharia and the Sunna). Reason for the orthodox was little more than common sense, and there was no acknowledgement of the idea that reason could reach new truths unaided by revelation. Innovation, in matters or religion, was equivalent to heresy:" (p. 117)

A general conclusion about knowledge in the Arabic-Islamic world is summed up as follows: "The madrasas were closed to the teaching of science and philosophy, and official Islamic law, fiqh, denied that all men had reason in the Greek and Platonic sense. Nor did Islamic jurisprudence have any place for the idea of conscience, that inner moral agency that could guide the actor in moral dilemmas. Moreover, there was no room for organized skepticism within Islamic thought." (p. 233)

My Response:

What nonsense! Visit and see the Muslim contributions to this world. Also read this article and see how Islam encourages worldly advancement.

Dallas M. Roark said:

The lack of progress in many ways relates to the model of Mohammed in one of the hadiths. It claimed that "the worst things are those that are novelties, every novelty is an innovation, every innovation is an error and every error leads to Hell-fire: In its extreme form this principle has meant the rejection of every idea and amenity not known in Western Arabic in the time of Mohammed and his companions, and it has been used by successive generations of ultra-conservatives to oppose tables, sieves, coffee and tobacco, printing-presses, and artillery, telephones, wireless, and votes for women." (p. 234)

My Response:

This is so absurd. Every scholar has understood the Prophet's statement regarding innovation to be referring to innovations in religious practices, not innovations in worldly matters. What a disastrous way of taking the Prophet's statement out of context and abusing its meaning!


Dallas M. Roark said:

The fact that there are million upon millions of Muslim today and only 8 have won the Nobel peace prizes in the sciences as compared to nearly 200 Jewish winners reflects upon the issue of the kinds of knowledge that is not taught, nor asked, nor discussed in the Muslim educational system.

So I doubt the truthfulnesss of your statement that "Muslims are not only encouraged but obligated to seek knowledge and how can this be done besides asking questions....." The history of Islam would not validate that statement.

My Response:

First of all, just because Muslims don't practice what their religion teaches that doesn't mean that it is Islam's fault. Millions of Muslims today drink alcohol and deal with interest despite Islam's clear and stern warnings against doing so. Do we blame Islam for this or the sinning Muslims? The latter obviously.

Does Dallas really want us to judge religions based upon the people instead of what the scriptures actually teach? Would he really want me to do that with his faith? Should we go ahead and blame the Dark Ages on Christianity? Should we blame Christianity because many early Christians believed in a flat earth? Should we blame Christianity for attempting to kill the ideas of people like Galileo (*)?

Come on Dallas let's not sink to this poor quality of argumentation please.


Dallas M. Roark said:

You have raised the question about the nearness and farness of God. I don't think you are aware of your problem in your statement. You say, "Orthodox Muslims don't believe that Allah is everywhere in His essence. Rather He is outside the universe."If he is outside the universe how can he be "nearer than his jugular vein." Is he or is he not outside the universe?

My Response:

Simple, He is near to us with His knowledge. That is the orthodox Muslim position.

Dallas M. Roark said:

So you asked, "so what is the problem exactly?"

The problem is that you have no idea of the kind of relationship that is possible with God.

A relationship for you means obeying the law, observing prayers, Ramadan, knowing Allah's commands. etc.

My Response:

For you to say A relationship for you means obeying the law, observing prayers, Ramadan, knowing Allah's commands to me is like me saying to you A relationship for you means sitting back in the shade drinking lemonade because someone innocent was tortured for your behalf and your still the same lousy sinner before you accepted this religion. You have a good relationship with a God who did you a big favor that you didn't deserve

Now obviously you would argue back that I am viewing your faith in a very shallow and unfair manner. You would argue back that I don't understand the relationship that you have with God, thus I have no right to speak.

Well, I will say the same to you. You are viewing my faith in a very shallow and unfair manner. Yes, obeying Allah's laws is part of my faith but it is not simply a matter of a Master commanding his slave to do some chores. Rather, we are in a love relationship with Allah (2:222) and we are His friend and ally (Surah 5:56). The inner feeling of tranquility that the Muslim receives when he prostrates to his Lord won't be traded for any of the riches of this world. The inner hope and peace in heart that the Muslim has when he knows that he has Allah to call upon (Surah 40:60) is enough to put him at ease. The Muslim lives his life in submission to Allah's command and gains satisfaction through doing so. You have no right to say to me "you have no idea of the kind of relationship that is possible with God" because I already am in a relationship with Allah.

Dallas M. Roark said:

Are you aware that the Son of God can live in your heart? Are you aware of his continued presence in your life?

My Response:

No I am not aware of this and no I haven't experienced the presence of the "Son of God" in my life, for the simple reason that God has no sons. Stop committing blasphemy and saying such horrible things.

Dallas M. Roark said:

Have you experienced God in asking him to enter your life, your heart?

My Response:

If what you mean by "entering my life" is that I am always in a continuous relationship and communication with God and that He is the central reason for my existence, then the answer is yes.

Dallas M. Roark said:

The problem is that you have not thought rationally about your concept of God.

You have not weighed the whole system of what you think is right and what you are doing.

My Response:

This is where I have to chuckle. For a Trinitarian who believes that 1+1+1 equals 1 to accuse others (especially Muslims) for not having rationally thought about their concept of God must have a lot of nerve. We challenge Dallas to rationally defend his concept of God and show anything irrational about the Islamic concept of God.

Dallas M. Roark said:

I respond:

You claim I have distorted Muslim beliefs and you argue that Allah does not break his promise (Surah 3:9) What are some of this promises? Consider the fact that Allah sends people astray-Allah has already decided who is going to paradise and who is not.

In spite of your good works, obedience, trying to live right, it has already been determined whether you are going to paradise or not. You can't change the situation. All your good works may be a mockery to you.

Perhaps it should be said that you are distorting Muslim beliefs. You are emphasizing the role of good works without regard to the more serious issue of predestination. The apparent emphasis of freedom in doing good works is over-ruled by the decision of Allah who has already decided on who will be admitted to paradise. So which promise is true? If this sura is true, then the conclusion of the matter is that you can do nothing about your destiny.

"Already have We urged unto hell many of the jinn and humankind, having hearts wherewith they understand not, and having eyes wherewith they see not, and having ears wherewith they hear not. These are as the cattle - nay, but they are worse! These are the neglectful." 7:179 (Pickthall-in the following also.)

"And whomsoever it is Allah's will to guide, He expandeth his bosom unto the Surrender, and whomsoever it is His Will to send astray, He maketh his bosom close and narrow as if he were engaged in sheer ascent. Thus Allah layeth ignominy upon those who believe not." 6:125

"He whom Allah leadeth, he indeed is led aright, while he whom Allah sendeth astray - they indeed are losers." 7:178

"Those whom Allah sendeth astray, there is no guide for them. He leaveth them to wander blindly on in their contumacy." 7:186

"Had Allah willed He could have made you (all) one nation, but He sendeth whom He will astray and guideth whom He will, and ye will indeed be asked of what ye used to do". 16:93

And he whom Allah guideth, he is led aright; while, as for him whom He sendeth astray, for them thou wilt find no protecting friends beside Him, and We shall assemble them on the Day of Resurrection on their faces, blind, dumb and deaf; their habitation will be hell; whenever it abateth, We increase the flame for them." 17:97

"Is he, the evil of whose deeds is made fairseeming unto him so that he deemeth it good, (other than Satan's dupe)? Allah verily sendeth whom He will astray, and guideth whom He will; so let not thy soul expire in sighings for them. Lo! Allah is Aware of what they do!" 35:8

"Yet he hath led astray of you a great multitude. Had ye then no sense?" 36:62

"Thus Allah sendeth astray whom He will, and whom He will He guideth. None knoweth the hosts of thy Lord save Him. This is naught else than a Reminder unto mortals". 74:31

"And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." 3:54

What are the possibilities that it is you who has been led astray by Allah? What are the possibilities that you have been led astray in believing that saying prayers 5 times a day, observing Ramadan, giving alms, doing jihad, etc are going to bring you to paradise? What are the possibilities that you may have been led astray in accepting this religion?

Mohammed raised the questions concerning himself.

34:50 Say: 'If I go astray, I go astray only to my own loss; if I am guided, it is by what my Lord reveals to me. He is All-hearing, Ever-nigh.' (Arberry)

Say: "If (even) I go astray, I shall stray only to my own loss. But if I remain guided, it is because of the Inspiration of my Lord to me. Truly, He is All-Hearer, Ever Near (to all things)." (Al-Hilali & Khan)

My Response:

No need to reinvent the wheel on topics that have already been addressed:

Dallas M. Roark said:

Consider the statement of Mohammed in 34:50. If Mohammed has been led astray it is not really his own loss. This is a contradiction. If Mohammed has been led astray think of all the millions of people who have submitted because of him. Their loss is on his shoulders, is it not?

My Response:

Dallas M. Roark said:

For more on the role of Allah as a deceiver of both believers and unbelievers, consult this article.

My Response:


Dallas M. Roark said:

First a word about your use of I Corinthians 15. The if in this passage does not express any doubt as to their salvation, nor does it teach that they were saved by holding fast. Rather, Paul is simply stating that if there is no such thing as resurrection, then they weren't saved at all. In other words, those who denied bodily resurrection were launching a frontal attack on the whole truth of the gospel. To Paul, the resurrection was fundamental. Without it there was no Christianity. Thus this verse is a challenge to the Corinthians to hold fast the gospel which they had received in the face of the attacks which were currently being made against it.

My Response:

I am afraid that you are reading into the passage. The verse says:

"By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain."

Paul is putting on a condition for one to be saved by the Gospel. That condition is that one holds firmly onto it. Clearly there is no point for saying such a thing if it is not possible for a true believer to let go of it. If the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints were true then it would have been enough for Paul to say (or something similar):

"By this gospel you are saved, once you have firmly embraced the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain."

According to the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints (which appears that Dallas holds to) once one has become truly regenerate, he will never apostatize. Once he has embraced the gospel he will never let go of it. There is no "ifs" about the matter. However, Paul's statement fits perfectly well with the doctrine of conditional preservation of the saints, which states that there must be a condition for one to be saved and that is the condition that Paul put:

if you hold firmly to the word.

Furthermore, the author of Hebrews makes it crystal clear that those who were truly regenerate could apostatize:

Hebrews 6:4-8

"For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God, and put Him to open shame. For ground that drinks the rain which often falls upon it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close to being cursed, and it ends up being burned."

Calvinists and other proponents of the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints have had to go to desperate measures in reconciling the above passage with their doctrine.

Even if Dallas does not agree that the doctrine of conditional preservation of the saints (which many well respected evangelicals such as Dr. William Lane Craig adhere to) is Biblical, he surely can't go to the extreme by condemning it to be irrational. If he does, then we ask him to carefully lay out for us why this belief is objectively (we don't want Dalla's personal feelings, opinions and logic) irrational.

Dallas M. Roark said:

You think it to be arrogance to claim that one is going to heaven. It would be arrogance for the Christian to claim that he is going to heaven based on his own good works and religiosity. But that is not the case. The Christian claim of going to heaven is based on what Christ has done for us, not on what we do. This is one of the major differences between Christianity and Islam. The Christian gospel, or good news, is that Jesus, the Son of God, has done something for us that we could not do. His death and resurrection for us is his accomplishment. We have little to accomplish-only to accept it. When you are given a gift you accept it, you don't pay for it. The gift is not wages earned.

My Response:

This is all assuming that Christianity is true to begin with. Anyone can make up a false religion that sounds attractive to the people by making it easy for them to practice (how difficult is it to just lay back and accept "Jesus's sacrificial gift"?). Dallas has to stop begging the question that his religion is true and start proving it.

Dallas M. Roark said:

You are focusing on winning paradise by your actions.

My Response:

Muslims believe that they can win paradise by having both faith and actions by Allah's Mercy. No matter how many actions one has performed, they will be wasted if one does not have faith (Surah 9:17). Faith is what is most essential. After one has obtained faith, he must live his life according to the faith that he has by performing good actions.

This is even the message of the Old Testament, Biblical Jesus and his half brother James§ion=memberbase&subsection=myarticle


Dallas M. Roark said:

Your good works will not stand up against the standard of a Holy God.

My Response:

Dallas says that our finite actions can never measure up to please the infinite God. That logic does not work perfectly you see, because then someone could argue "well if my finite actions don't measure up to please the infinite God then that means that my finite evil actions do not measure up to displease the infinite God either, therefore he should not punish me". Now of course that would be absurd.

Dallas has a point though. Now if God put us here on earth and we are supposed to please him by actions, who sets the standards? Only God can. Allah tells us how we must worship Him (Surah 2:239) Us Muslims believe that if we follow the law prescribed and put forth by the infinite God, we are therefore in a way following a law whose source is from the infinite and therefore in a way meeting the standards of the infinite God in order to please Him. We believe that any other actions performed besides those set by God are useless. Now God does not need our actions. He does not benefit from them either, for we are the ones that benefit from them. However, He loves that we obey Him. 

Dallas M. Roark said:

Believing in Jesus was to accept Him as Savior. They did not do anything to seek his approval as you are doing for your God.

My Response:

I don't know what Dallas means when he says that I seek God's approval to be a Muslim.

Dallas M. Roark said:

They received Him as one accepts a gift.

My Response:

I also believe that Allah's blessing me with the guidance of Islam is a gift. So what is the difference?

Dallas M. Roark said:

Religion is the human attempt to win the favor of whatever deity is accepted. Christians don't do that. They receive God's gift.

My Response:

It appears that Dallas is giving a definition to religion that is unbiblical. The Bible clearly recognizes that Christianity is a religion:

1 Timothy 5:4

4 But if a widow has children or grandchildren, these should learn first of all to put their religion into practice by caring for their own family and so repaying their parents and grandparents, for this is pleasing to God.

James 1:27

Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

Or does Dallas want to suggest that the New Testament's usage of the word "religion" is out of date and we must accept his definition?


Dallas M. Roark said:

Christian accept [sic] the favor of God rather than trying to win it themselves.

My Response:

Dallas misrepresents the Islamic position regarding salvation. He is trying to give everyone the impression that Muslims believe that they earn paradise through works, which anyone with a speck of dust of knowledge of basic Islamic theology knows is not true. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) made it clear that we don't enter paradise based on our works:

Saheeh Bukhari

Volume 7, Book 70, Number 577

Narrated Abu Huraira:

I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "The good deeds of any person will not make him enter Paradise." (i.e., None can enter Paradise through his good deeds.) They (the Prophet's companions) said, "Not even you, O Allah's Apostle?" He said, "Not even myself, unless Allah bestows His favor and mercy on me." So be moderate in your religious deeds and do the deeds that are within your ability: and none of you should wish for death, for if he is a good doer, he may increase his good deeds, and if he is an evil doer, he may repent to Allah."

Volume 8, Book 76, Number 474

Narrated Aisha:
The Prophet said, "Do good deeds properly, sincerely and moderately, and receive good news because one's good deeds will NOT make him enter Paradise." They asked, "Even you, O Allah's Apostle?" He said, "Even I, unless and until Allah bestows His pardon and Mercy on me."

In another narration we read:

Angel Jibrail (alayhis salam) told RasulAllah (salAllahu alayhi wasalam) the following incident about a man in the past who worshipped Allah Ta'ala continuously for 500 years. He was granted a shelter on top of a mountain that was surrounded by salty water. However, Allah caused a stream of sweet water to flow through the mountain for that individual. The man would drink from this water and use it to make ablution. Allah Ta'ala also raised a pomegranate tree from which the man would eat one fruit every day.

One day, this person supplicated to Allah that, "Oh Allah, bring my death while I am in the state of prostration." Allah accepted this dua of his. Whenever Jibrail (alayhis salam) came down to the Earth, he found this man prostrating to Allah. Jibrail (alayhis salam) said that on the day of Judgement, Allah will tell the angels to take this individual to Paradise through His mercy. However, this man will insist that he should enter paradise through the good deeds that he had performed.

Then, Allah will tell the angels to compare his good deeds with the blessings that were given to him in the world. It will be seen that 500 years of his worship does not even equal to the gift of eye sight that was given to him by Allah. The angels will be asked to take him towards the hell fire. Then the man will plead, "Oh Allah! Enter me into Paradise only through Your mercy." At that point, the following discussion will take place between Allah and that man.

Allah: Oh my servant, who created you?

The worshipper: Oh Allah, You have created me.

Were you created because of the good deeds you have done or because of My mercy?

The worshipper: Because of Your mercy.

Allah: Who granted you the ability to worship for 500 years?

The worshipper: Oh the Almighty! You have granted me that ability.

Allah: Who placed you on the mountain surrounded by the ocean? Who caused a stream of sweet water to flow in between the salty water? Who caused a pomegranate tree to grow for you? Who granted you death while in the state of prostration?

The worshipper: Oh the Sustainer of the Worlds! You have done all of these.

Then Allah will say"All these have happened due to My mercy and you too will enter Paradise only through My Mercy."
 (I am not certain about the authenticity of this story, however it communicates the same message as the previous two hadith in Saheeh Bukhari that I cited)

So here we clearly see that Muslims don't believe that we can earn our salvation through works. We can only attain salvation by Allah's Mercy.

However, Allah will only bestow His Mercy on those that have faith (accepted Islam) and have implemented that faith practically in their lives (by righteous works).

Now that we have educated Dallas on this key Islamic doctrine that he should have known before writings articles on Islam, what objective logical objections does he have against this belief? Again, we don't care about his personal opinions and feelings we want objectivity.

Dallas M. Roark said:

You previously said, "Muslims believe that we are going to heaven IF we stick firmly to the teachings of Islam and adhere to the laws set by God. But since we don't know for sure whether we will be successful in doing so, we say inshallah (if Allah wills) that Allah keeps us on the straight path in order to go to heaven." Religion is your attempt to appease Allah. Christian faith stresses that God loves us even while we are yet sinners.

My Response:

It also teaches that God hates sinners

Also, in Islam we believe that Allah offers His love and Mercy to everyone. The door is always open for you to accept the true and pure monotheistic faith of Islam Dallas. Allah is laying out His love for you. All you have to do is accept it. If you reject Allah's offer of love then that means that Allah won't love you because you didn't allow His love to reach you.

Dallas M. Roark said:

Since you quoted Paul in Corinthians, let me quote him in Romans 5:1-8,

"Being therefore justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ; through whom also we have had our access by faith into this grace wherein we stand; and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. And not only so, but we also rejoice in our tribulations: knowing that tribulation worketh stedfastness; and stedfastness, approvedness; and approvedness, hope: and hope putteth not to shame; because the love of God hath been shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit which was given unto us. For while we were yet weak, in due season Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: for peradventure for the good man some one would even dare to die. But God commendeth his own love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (ASV)

Please note that God did this for sinners, not the righteous. God did it out of love.

Prayer for the Christian is not rote prayers specified 5 times a day. Prayer is a conversation throughout the day in a spontaneous manner, like talking to a friend. Jesus had some strong words about prayer.

"When you pray, don't be like those show-offs who love to stand up and pray in the meeting places and on the street corners. They do this just to look good. I can assure you that they already have their reward. When you pray, go into a room alone and close the door. Pray to your Father in private. He knows what is done in private, and he will reward you." Matthew 6:5-6.

This is a warning before he taught the people how to pray, that is, the Lord's Prayer.

You can judge whether calling together hundreds of people saying the same prayers is an example of what Jesus is talking about.

My Response:

Muslims pray five times a day because it is a means of showing the loyalty, gratitude, modesty and love towards God and it is also to remind Muslims that there is a God who created them throughout the day. If it is done five times a day, one can imagine how close to God one is and that will help him to abstain from all evil. If you were to adopt the attitude "well I will pray when I feel like it", it is very possible that in this case you would end up praying to God less and this will weaken your faith. You might actually end up only praying to God during times of need and this is selfish. With Allah making appointed times, this would force you to remember God and get closer to Him. Again, this is all for your benefit and not His.

Also, congregational prayer has practical benefits. During a congregational prayer, Muslims stand side by side close to one another. This strengthens the bond between the Muslims and is a practical way of eradicating racism.

Dallas M. Roark said:

You wrote: "The rest of Dalla's (sic) statements are just empty words of preaching. He continues to beg the question that Christianity is true and that we should follow it simply because it appears to be easier than following Islam."

My response

Your concluding remark is typical of Muslim apologists that I have read.

If you cannot refute them, ridicule what they have to say. Your claim about "empty words of preaching" is to ignore the great truth of the Gospel that I mentioned. The words of Jesus that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life is not my preaching, but his claim. You can ignore it, but only to your own loss.

My Response:

What is Dallas talking about? He has not provided one shred of evidence throughout his previous article or this one regarding Christianity being true. To just simply present your faith is not evidence for your faith. I can do the same thing and present Islam, however that is not evidence for Islam.

Dallas M. Roark said:

Since you felt free to quote Paul as an authority when you want to use him, this gives me the same right to quote him again.

". Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." Philippians 2:6-11 (ESV)

It is not my preaching about the Christian life, but it is the message of the Gospel that you are refusing. You can admit that Jesus is Lord now, but if not, you will later.

My Response:

Dallas, I appreciate your good manners unlike Sam Shamoun and I also appreciate you asking good questions about the Islamic faith, unlike the annoying hair splitting questions that Jochen Katz asks. However, I seriously advise you to increase your knowledge about the basics of Islam before continuing to write further on such topics.




Return to Refuting Dallas M. Roark


Return to Homepage

click here to view site

HomeWhat's new?ChristianityRefutations Contact Me