INTRODUCTION
Let there be no misunderstanding of our intentions. This booklet is not an
assault on Christianity. Instead, we intend to clarify vagueness, supply
neglected information, and finish incomplete thoughts found in the usual
presentation of the Christian missionary. The Qur'an encourages the discussion
of religious matters but according to a vital principle: both sides are
supposed to discuss truth. (Qur'an 3:61). Where the missionary has left
matters vague or has hidden some information, or has not finished a thought
the truth has not been presented.
Since our goal is a careful analysis, let the reader consider his own response
carefully. Any disagreement must be specified as a disagreement with something
actually stated in the following material . It must also be said that nothing
written here can be applied to all Christians. Christian belief covers a wide
range. We are concerned with the style described in the first paragraph.
CHRISTIAN OBJECTIONS
Consider first some common Christian objections to Islam. The Christian points
to corruption and bad behavior in so-called Muslim lands; he cites the warfare
Muhammad waged; he denounces polygamy. In response, it must be said that bad
Muslims condemn Islam only if bad Christians condemn Christianity; warfare
disqualifies Muhammad as God's spokesman only if it also disqualifies Joshua;
polygamy condemns Islam only if it condemns Christianity. (It is Christian
culture, not the Christian religion, which has prohibited polygamy. In the
Bible Paul has recommended monogamy for bishops and Jesus has spoken of the
sanctity of the union but no Bible verse prohibits the practice.)
Most Christian objections are of this nature. They are the same kind of
charges that national groups or political parties might make against each
other. They are built on those things which one person dislikes about another
person. The attacker does not ask the other man to justify his position. He
simply announces his disgust. By contrast, a Muslim is concerned that the
Christian should justify his position.
MUSLIM OBJECTIONS
Christians say that God is "immutable", i.e. unchanging. How
then can it be said that He passed through the state of death? How could He
grow in knowledge? (Luke 2:52). When we forgive a debt it means that we expect
no payment. "The Lord's Prayer" asks God to forgive our debts
the way we forgive our debtors. Why then does Jesus' have to pay a price for
our sins? The usual answers: The many paradoxes of a God-man, a being
simultaneously mortal and immortal are said to be resolved by the phrase "with
God all things are possible." The "debt of sin" is
explained as a misunderstood term so that the crucifixion was not so much a
payment as a necessary demonstration of God's justice.
BASIC POINT
As will be shown, these responses illustrate the Christian difficulty: while
he seems to respond to every question, there is no way to form an explanation
consistent with all those things he has said. Instead, the total of the
answers is a contradictory system. This fact is itself incorporated into the
total. That is, where a logical investigation finds a conflict, this is
covered over by insisting that the love of God is more important, doubt is a
dangerous tendency, and these difficulties are "divine mysteries"
If a person is satisfied with this kind of rationale, no logical presentation
is likely to change his mind. However, for those who would be motivated by
exposure to facts, this booklet describes the situation in brief. If the
Christian feels that a logical discussion is more than we should expect when
considering religious matters, let him be encouraged by the Biblical passage
at Isaiah 1:16: " . . . come let us reason together."
DEMONSTRATING THE POINT
Now consider the responses, the second then the first. The missionary is most
concerned that the non-Christian "take advantage" of the "ransom
sacrifice" of Jesus - otherwise a man is "lost". But
this urgency is based on a price being paid. If we acknowledge that God is
just, we do not need a demonstration of His justice. But the Christian insists
that we must acknowledge the crucifixion itself, not God's justice, or be
lost. Despite his answer, we are required to acknowledge a debt as paid not
forgiven. Even though the phrase "with God all things are
possible" are from the words of Jesus in the Bible, this proposition
actually turns against Christian belief. It is self-destructive because it
says that God can do "un-Godly" things (act foolishly for
example). It demolishes arguments where it is used. For example:
Christian: "The true nature of God is a Trinity."
Muslim: "How can 1+1+1=1?"
Christian: "With God all things are possible."
Muslim: "Then the Trinity is not His nature, how He must
be. It is an option. He could have been 3, 5, 9 or whatever."
THE PATTERN
These are two examples of the difficulties which we promised to expose. In
general the pattern is this: A question is asked and an answer is given. But
the answer conflicts with another article of faith or practice. So, in fact,
the original question is not really answered because the response has not come
from Christian belief. Instead it has come from something in conflict with
Christian teaching.
EXPLANATION VERSUS PROOF
There is a more basic issue than all that has been discussed so far. If we are
only concerned with the analysis of explanations, we have skipped a point. The
fact is, explanation is not proof. Ask a man why he believes something and he
will usually respond by explaining his belief - not why it must be true.
Whatever a missionary explains to a Muslim, our first question is really: "Where
did you get your explanations?" On this matter, the missionary almost
always holds a minority view among Christians. The majority of Christians
believe the same as Muslims regarding the Bible.
