Evangelical Propaganda and Islam.

If coming across an Evangelical Christian who has studied Islam and is trained to debate and dialogue issues pertaining to Islam, expect the following and do not fall into their traps. This website contains all necessary counter-arguments, rebuttals and debate tactics to conquer Evangelical Christianity.

1. There is absolutely no way of convincing a Muslim that Jesus is God and that God literally died on a cross to symbolically save a multitude of people except by somehow convincing the Muslim that the Bible is authentic, that the Quran itself acknowledges the Bible, and that it tells Muslims to believe in it as truth. The trap that the Christian is looking for is for the Muslim to either say “we believe in the Bible” or that “we believe in parts of the Bible, but the Bible has been changed”. Any time a Muslim says any one of these two statements, he has already been set up in the Evangelical trap.

Islamically, and correctly, we are to say exactly what the Quran tells us to say and nothing more, that we believe in whatever revelation God has revealed. Tell the Christian that we believe God had revealed to Moses, Abraham, and Jesus. Tell them that these revelations are known to us as being the Torah and the Gospel. The Christian will then hope that you mean the Bible, and therefore will try to affirm by asking if you therefore believe in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. At that point you should blatantly say no. Tell them you do not believe in the Bible nor are you allowed to assume that any part of it is true, because as Muslims our faith and beliefs are not based upon assumptions.

Regardless of authenticity. What a lot of Muslims like to do is debate the authenticity of the Bible, show contradictions within it, or perhaps argue that the New Testament was canonized, that no original manuscripts exist, and of the manuscripts that do exist there are variants, etc. While this is absolutely a fine route to take the point here is why waste your time over the issue of authenticity of manuscripts? Why not tackle the issue directly and exclaim that Bible scripture itself, when it was initially written by the author, it was absolutely the perception, the hearsay, the conjecture, the opinion, the beliefs, and the interpretations of and “according to” the authors themselves. All of the New Testament and even a lot of what’s there in the OT is narrative ‘according to’ – and it is not for us to believe in the conjecture of any man.

The Christian simply can not argue that the New Testament of the Bible is not conjecture, perception, narration, and hearsay according to ‘xyz’ – the only option they have is to say the writers were filled with the Holy Ghost – yet the Bible also teaches that normal people are filled with the Ghost, but by no means can an individual who has received the Ghost sit down, write a piece of work, and then say it’s the word of God. Such is absurdity. Nevertheless, the authors being filled by the Holy Ghost is a belief of theirs, not ours. If I were a Christian I’d believe they were filled by some Ghost, but then again, I’d believe in the Bible too, so this tactic of theirs can not work with us.

Unfortunately what a lot Muslims try to do is impress the Christian by saying “we believe in the Bible”. They think that this will somehow intrigue the Christian. First of all, we must always be honest, and the honest to God truth is that Muslims do not in any context believe in the Bible. How so? Because belief entails faith and trust in something – and Muslims do not and can not put trust and faith in the Bible or assume parts of it are true only because those parts agree with the Quran. On the contrary, we believe that God revealed, in the past, revelations of which He, God, has by name mentioned in His Glorious Quran. These revelations mind you are not the OT and NT of the Bible.

So where are the Torah and Gospel? Please read the necessary arguments that I have elaborated upon here, in these links:

http://defendingislam.com/domuslims.htm - Do Muslims Believe in the Bible

http://defendingislam.com/quranmiracle.htm - Difference between Revelation and Inscription; between the Glorious Quran and the Bible

2. The second tactic to be wary of is the Evangelical Christian questioning the morals of Islam, the Quran, and the character of Prophet Muhammad (sa) – via particular Ahadith. They think that by showing Islam as an unfair and intolerant religion, they can somehow sway you over to Christianity. They will therefore question the character and morality of Prophet Muhammad (sa). This tactic is usually done after they realize that they can not theologically convince you of Christianity, or they realize that they can not theologically or rationally disprove Islam. Make sure you take notice of this tactic. Some Christians already know that they can not debate you on theological issues so they may start ‘bashing’ Islam right away. If this occurs, acknowledge what is happening in the conversation, and make the distinction so that the other person realizes what they are doing.

Though both issues are absolutely and equally relevant, the difference should be acknowledged, and once it is, ask the Christian who and what they are basing their morals upon? Because as God-believing people, it does not make any sense for us to retrieve our morals from a secular source and somehow attempt to use these views as legitimate arguments for our religion.

Our morality should entirely be based upon our God’s word and not the so called morals of modern society. If we, as Muslims and Christians are debating morality, or anything for that matter, it makes no sense to go to secular sources. Its like saying the Hindus say it is wrong and immoral to slaughter an animal – that is morality according to them, not us. So therefore let us only take morality from our respective scriptures and religion. Stick to this argument. The Christian will not be able to get around it. Once this has been established, ask them what the Bible says about the issue. For example, they might raise an objection against Aisha (ra)’s age upon marriage – ask them what the Bible, OT or NT has to say about the issue. Silence on the issue does not mean prohibition. That is when you can bring up the age of the girls in Numbers 31:18, or the age of Mary when she was impregnated etc. Nevertheless, make sure that the morality debate is based upon religion and scripture evidence only – not secular perspectives.

Relevant Links:

http://defendingislam.com/bibleterror.htm - Biblical Terrorism

http://defendingislam.com/allegations.htm - Section: Allegations

http://defendingislam.com/misconceptions.htm - Section: Misconceptions

3. Debating Bible verses and trying to prove that Rasul Allah (sa) is mentioned in their Bible. This is quite an old-school tactic so to say. This is not a good way to start a dialogue or debate because honestly, it’s going to be your interpretation versus their interpretation, and usually these debates are endless and pointless. However, if you’re going to quote the Bible, do it with the agenda to question Christian doctrine - do not make it seem as if you are taking the Bible as authoritative. Simply ask questions about the Bible and let the Christians explain themselves. As they explain, continue to question. Never say God says in the Bible. It changes both your and their mentality. You also don’t want to say that Jesus said or did this, rather say Jesus is narrated as having said or done “xyz” according to your Bible. It will help them understand your view that no one really knows if what the Bible is saying is true or not, even if it sounds right. This to the human psyche makes sense because the thought is, if any one part of the Bible is corrupt, than naturally everything else is in question – though not necessarily wrong, we just don’t know, and again, as believers, we are not allowed to base our faith and beliefs on assumptions.

So if we’re not going to use the Bible to refute Christianity or use it to prove Islam what should we use? Use Qur’anic argumentation. This is what the Muslim Ummah has miserably failed to do. We never find the Prophet (sa) ever arguing or quoting from the Bible. EVER! There are many arguments that are presented in the Qur’an itself. Use them! Allah (swt) is telling you in the Qur’an to pose certain questions and objections to the Jews and Christians. Click Here for Qur’an Argumentation. Also compare Islamic concepts to Christian concepts. Tawheed versus the Trinity – the very concept. Islam, as a universal principle and way of life and way of being for everything in creation versus Christianity, nothing more than a doctrinal sectarian religion. Jesus as a creation of God, being considered a graven image if worshiped, impossible for him to be the biological offspring of God; salvation through a death that is symbolic in nature and nothing more than that, the Miracles of the Quran as proof, and there are tons of other issues and topics one can bring up as well. Just make sure you know what you’re talking about.

Now obviously, there is nothing wrong with debating Bible verses, or debating the authenticity of Bible manuscripts. We have the luxury to take this route as well, but for the person that does take this route, make sure to always keep in mind and point out that scripture can be metaphorical. So consciously and rationally examine what can and can not be seen as literal, and therefore instead be seen as parable, metaphorical, and allegorical. It will help explain the Islamic perspective on things. To see an example of this being done read our following article:

http://defendingislam.com/trinity.htm

4. Now everyone has an inmost desire to defend their religion, to invite people to their religion, to stand up against allegations and misconceptions about their religion, and unfortunately what happens with a lot of people is, though their intentions are good, they simply do not have the knowledge needed to debate the issues. And this is when individuals and people end up defaming their religion. There are a lot of people who think they know a thing or two because they’ve read a couple of arguments from a website or a book. This is not the knowledge you need to defend Islam. Think before you step up to the plate, and if you can’t do it yourself, then get someone that can. Always remember the etiquettes of dawah.

There are also brothers out there who do in fact have the proper knowledge but are not able to express themselves clearly due to language barriers, and this too is an issue to be conscious of – not being able to get the right words you need to make the point you are trying to make. Always think before stepping up to the plate because when you do, you have to realize the important role you are taking. If you mess up, people aren’t going to remember you, they’re going to remember Islam in the light of your inabilities and shortcomings. The whole point here is that we need to be careful. You’re sincere prayers can do a lot more than your arguments at times. Let us strive to be good people. Remember that your character, behavior, and personality also play an important role in dawah.

Now of course, we don’t have to be scholars to defend our deen. I know that there are a lot of educated brothers out there too. Brothers who have the knowledge. They’ve read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. They’ve memorized ayats of the Quran and several Ahadith of Rasul Allah (sa). They’ve understood the meanings of everything they’ve read, studied, and memorized. We need you! Your Ummah needs you! If there is anyone out there willing to help with Dawah anywhere in the world – we need to unite our efforts and our minds. Feel free to contact me at any point if you wish to contribute.

We need more multimedia, documentaries, recordings, experiences, orators, speakers, apologists, anything you can do to bring back the glorious image of Islam, send it and do it!

5. Always keep in mind that most of these Evangelical Christians are not your enemy. If a person questions Islam, do not automatically assume that their range of questioning is actually an attempt to belittle or mock Islam. Give them a chance. Be kind to them. Remember that we have to be consistent in our methodology. If we don’t want to be labeled and stereotyped by Christians, then don’t stereotype Christians according to the actions of some inconsiderate Christians.

Yes there are those Evangelicals who ‘bash’ our religion. They talk nothing but trash, and they’re abusive and so on. With these kinds of people, it is automatically and Islamically wrong to sit in their company and debate them in the first place (4:140). If the image of Islam is being mocked at and the general public feels the need to respond to the allegations, then one can and should respond in an open forum, and publish the arguments without directly speaking to the opponent. In this type of situation for us, there is no dialogue, there is no conversation, there’s only answering objections and foul evidence. Remember that we can not give into our emotions and our nafs in these types of situations. We have to do exactly what the Quran commands to us do and that is not entertain their low mentality (4:140). Sabr – Patience has to be implemented.

6. Debate tactics within an open forum. There is no doubt that the key to any debate is knowledge. However a debate between any two individuals should never be solely based on ones limited knowledge. Otherwise more than likely the person with more knowledge will defeat the one with lesser knowledge, and therefore nothing really was accomplished in this case. It’s a “my knowledge versus your knowledge” scenario. Preparation is certainly important, and in order to be better prepared, try to see if both of you can exchange information pertaining to the issue going to be discussed prior to the event. That way the audience will be able to hear a much more concise and accurate perspective.

Usually any debate that is ever held in any format at a University, between politicians, between apologists etc. is a competition of knowledge and perspective. The idea is that if you have a perspective, you should be able to defend that perspective and you should be able to argue the reasons you hold the perspective you have. You should know what you believe and why you believe it. However this competition of knowledge and perspective, if that is the definition of debate that we’re using, is not what a person who believes in God should be looking for in a religious debate – at least according to the Quran 6:70:

Yusuf Ali: Leave alone those who take their religion to be mere play and amusement, and are deceived by the life of this world.

Shakir: And leave those who have taken their religion for a play and an idle sport, and whom this world's life has deceived.

Religion and salvation is not a sport, competition, or game. What happens is that a proclaimed apologist¹ might become so obsessed with debating their views that it’s nothing more to them then just that - an opportunity to argue that perspective and prove that “I know more than you and my way is right and your way is wrong” or “I know so much, look at me”. A religious debate should be based upon the sincere and genuine desire that the guidance and grace of God might fall upon our brethren in humanity.

See the following link: http://defendingislam.com/debatesch.htm

Now, if involved in a public debate, be sure to make your points in an organized, point by point format. That way in their rebuttal, they will have to tackle each and every point you’ve made individually. If they in their rebuttal do not tackle any one of your points, acknowledge this openly. That way they and the public will be able to see the context of your argument, rather then a jumping all over the place and going to the points they feel are easier to answer scenario. In this case make sure you always repeatedly point out that they are not answering or dealing with the specific objection, point, or argument that you have raised. Continue to press on the fact that they are ‘beating around the bush’ or avoiding the issue.

Do not discuss too many topics at once. The reality is that often times in order to understand one subject, another subject has to be understood. The superior way to go about doing this is by discussing the latter subject prior to the former subject. And this should be analyzed by those involved in the debate. For example, one would have to debate the authenticity of the Bible and whether Muslims are required to believe in the Bible in the first place prior to discussing the Trinity or Crucifixion, because the reality is that Christians can not prove their doctrines without Bible hearsay. So therefore one must discuss the reliability of the Bible first. This way the danger of multiple subjects or changing of subjects won’t occur as much in the debate. There is nothing wrong with discussing two subjects in one single debate, and sometimes this has to be done, but make every effort to stick to the core subject that both parties agreed upon.

¹ Apologist: 1. a person who makes a defense in speech or writing of a belief, idea, etc. 2. a person who argues to defend or justify some policy or institution; "an apologist for capital punishment" {syn: vindicator, justifier, champion, defender} {this definition is given so that the general public understands that an Apologist is not a person who is making an apology for something in the sense that most people understand the word – Ha!}

Note: In a public debate, one can, but does not have to, use the law procedure known as discovery, where both parties exchange basic arguments and perspectives prior to presentation. This way the audience receives a much more concise and accurate perspective and counter-perspective.

On should always remember that debating is usually never for the apologist, debater, or speaker rather it’s for the audience. Therefore the superior method of dawah is conversation.

7. Muslim Apologetics: In the past decade a number of individuals have arose as apologists defending and arguing for Islam. It is very critical for us to study the argumentation of these individuals and categorize their abilities. First off an apologist is never necessarily a scholar, or at least how a Muslim would understand the concept of scholarship.

Scholarship in Islam has been recognized generally as a deep understanding of Islam via sources that Muslims regard sacred. The Quran and the Sunnah being the primary sources. The opinions of the early Muslims, dubbed the ‘salafus salaheen’ or pious predecessors, and how they understood the teachings of the Quran and Sunnah makeup the jurisprudence or ‘fiqh’ that orthodox Muslims follow today. In those sources we never happen to find argumentation against opposing theologies rather the sources only expound on Islamic teachings and philosophies.

The study of opposing theologies and perspectives falls outside of the massive curriculum for a Muslim scholar who focuses on Islamic jurisprudence, theology and practice. Therefore, the likes of Shaykh Ahmed Deedat and Dr. Zakir Naik who have examined Christian theology for example, derive their argumentation through their personal studies of the Bible. Muslim scholars in their curriculum or in their studying Islam never are taught the Bible. Therefore Deedat, Naik, or any other Muslim who may attempt to dive into and study the Bible have done so without the help of the early Muslims whose focus was on Islamic literature, jurisprudence, theology, and practice. Likewise anyone who may aspire scholarship in Islam would naturally focus on Islamic teachings and philosophies derived from the Qur’an and Sunnah and pertaining to Islamic practice and jurisprudence before ever conceiving comparative religious studies.

Therefore the studies of Ahmed Deedat and Dr. Naik although intriguing and full of accurate perspective are subjective to their own personal studies. Their argumentation is not derived from early Muslim sources whose focus was elsewhere in the first place. Therefore there are no ‘official arguments’ on behalf of Islam when it comes to the dissecting or exposing Christian theology. As I’ve mentioned before, never do we find the Prophet (sa) ever quoting or arguing from the Bible or against it even. Rather he (sa) simply taught the Qur’an and focused on the depth of spiritual truth that was revealed to him (sa).

Because Ahmed Deedat and Dr. Zakir Naik had studied the Bible from a Muslim upbringing, one could easily say that their argumentation could equal up to any biased Christian apologist who may be reading the Qur’an or Sunnah to “expose” it. I could never possibly downplay the knowledge and perspectives and use of captivating arguments by the two individuals, where in many cases they’ve done exceptionally well, however personally I find some of the angles they have taken against Christianity to be erroneous in the sense that they could ever possibly seem to take the Bible authoritatively and definitively attempt to imply that our Prophet (sa) is mentioned in specific passages of an uncertain canonized book of conjecture. If their intentions are to explore the Bible to fascinate thought and possibility or to question Christian theology alone then more power to them.

I personally advocate the argumentation of Gary Miller who understands Christian theology from a traditional Christian standpoint and counters it using their own understanding of the Bible and Christian theology. I have not found any Muslim apologist or Muslim enthusiast of comparative religion, with the exception of Gary Miller, who takes this route in exposing Christianity.