Debate with Muslims: Proof, not mere evidence

Recently I've been dialoguing with some Muslim aquaintances of mine about all manner of issue. One of those debates can be found here: The great challenge to produce one chapter like the chapters of the Holy Quran

We've run into a problem here, one which may shed some light on what our debate is really about to anyone else who may be reading this.

Mohammed wrote a number of things about Jesus and the Bible that conflict with what the Bible itself. As a basic tenent of your faith, you must necessarily argue that the Bible is in error. If you are to hold to your faith, it is paramount that you discredit the Bible and assert that the authors of its book misquote Jesus, and so on. If not, Mohammed is wrong and your whole religion crumbles. Would you agree?

Christianity does not need to prove that there has been errors in transmision of the Quran. It can be exactly reproduced from what Mohammed wrote for all we care. All we need to do is show the proof or necessity of Jesus Christ being fully divine and fully human, and that by default makes Mohammed in error. Not that the text was copied inaccurately, but that when he wrote it he was himself wrong.

Thus, Muslims mount evidence, and loads of it, against the Bible. Christians then supply answers for why this evidence is inconclusive, distorted, or plain wrong. And on we go, endlessly. But there is a difference between evidence and proof. Your arguments rely upon a weight of evidence with which you hope to smother the opposition. Christians do the same against evolution, showing by weight of evidence how it is wrong. Proof is different. Proof requires rational arguments that necessarily lead to a conclusion if the premises are correct. In the case of evolution, we can rationally prove that pure chance can't creat anything, and that the world cannot be eternally old and self-existent, otherwise the laws of thermodynamics prove that the universe would have died a cold death. Such arguments don't rely upon a weight of evidence, but upon proof. Proof doesn't need evidence that can be debated back and forth. Proof only needs basic presuppositions we can agree upon, and a line of reasoning that conforms to the rules of logic. The conclusion is then a necessity, whether we like that conclusion or not.

Christianity has survived 2000 years against endless attempt to smother with evidence. The Liberals who hate God, yet want to keep the morality of the Bible, also mount such attacks on the Bible. So do Atheists and Agnostics. It is likely where many of your evidences comes from, such as the late dates of the Gospels, or the JDEP source theory for the Pentateuch. I can show that the Gospels must have had an early date, and Mosaic authorship, but what is the point? A basic tenent on your faith requires you to deny the inerrancy of Scripture, and no weight of evidence will change that, no matter how convincing. You can just say we are wrong.

So what I'm saying is, we are at a dead lock when it comes to "mounting evidence" against each other. I know that no weight of evidence, however true it may be, can convince you that the Quran is wrong. Nor can your weight of evidence convince me the Bible is wrong, because it is only evidence, not proof. I've studied the evidence agaisnt the Bible. I find it faulty, historically ill-supported, and very conjectural.

You need to give me proof that God cannot be Trinity. I need to provide you with proof (logical necessity) that God must be Trinity, and that for God to let anyone into Heaven their sins must be paid for by a worthy sacrifice, Jesus Christ. Everything hinges on that, and everything falls into place if that is true.

Here is the question I pose for us to debate: How can God be both just, and the justifier of men?

Will you grant that God is just? Second, will you grant that all men have a conscience given them by God? Third, will you grant that God gave Moses the Ten Commandments? I think those three would be a good starting place.

Transparency of Christianity in relation to the Bible

I've been in some discussion lately with some Muslim. Most of it centers around attacks on Scripture and why there would be different books in the Catholic and Protestant Bibles. For the reason why Muslims are so dead set on discrediting the Bible, see this blog. Here is my answer, which I think you will enjoy. (It will also help you debunk Davinci Code theories)

The transparency of Christianity in relation to its texts is a virtue, not a weakness. We don't destroy alternate copies, we preserve them and can show why, how, and when mistakes in copy were made, and can prove definitively what the originals said. The same cannot be said of the Quran...all you have is one edited compiled copy, and you have to trust that the one doing the editing wasn't mistaken, since all of the evidence of other texts has been destroyed. You can't prove it. We can. (But I'm not arguing the Quran has accumulated errors in its transmission, just showing you that if you follow this line of argument you will tear your own Quran apart by the exact same faulty arguments.)

A lot of what we know about early Christianity is a result of attacks upon it. The early Gnostics attacked the Christian teachings on the nature of the Trinity and Christ. Consequently, counsels were held to write statements against such false beliefs and to formulate in a written code exactly what is orthodox and what is not. It isn't that something new was decided (as The Davinci Code says), it is that there was never a need to make a point by point list of what orthodoxy was before someone attacked it. (For comparison, there is a modern movement called "Open Theism" that says God doesn't really know the future. As a result, new statements are added to confessions of faith (like the BFM2000) that refute "open theism." God sovereignly knowing the future is not a new belief, it just hadn't been attacked in that way, and hadn't needed to be formulated in a statement before then.)

In relation to the Christian cannon, those books Christians hold to be inspired by God and thus infallible, we know much from attacks upon the cannon. The early heretic Marcion made a list of which books of the Old and New Testament he considered to be false, and which were true (even some he edited to fit his strange theology.) By telling us which documents he thought were correct and which he did not, that tells us exactly which documents the early church held to be inspired. Ecclesiasticus, the Maccabees, and a few other books in the Catholic Bible are not on those lists. Marcion did not need to argue that these books were uninspired, because no one believed they were when he was writing. Does that make sense?

There are a number of other lines of reasoning and evidences, such as which Old Testament books are quoted in the New Testament, and so on, but that should suffice I think to show which books the early church father accepted as inspired.

If that didn't make sense yet, here are a couple illustrations to explain further....

I'm not necessarily asking if you agree and think the Bible is inspired or anything, just if the argument is rational. Let me give one last example: Suppose a document were found from the 7th or 8th century which made claims that Surah's 1-100 are not correct, only 101-114 are correct. (I didn't want to list the names of each of the Surah's, but suppose the author had mentioned them by name.) What would that tell us? It would tell us the Muslims of the 7th and 8th century held that Surah's 1-114 are legitimately part of the Koran, otherwise this heretic would not have needed to argue against something no one believed. The author would not need to argue that the Works of Josephus were not a part of the Koran. Why? Because no one thought they were.

In the same way, the heretic Marcion listed all of the 66 books we have in the Bible, arguing some were inspired and others were not. We know why he argued as he did, because he was a Gnostic, trying to mix strange paganism with Christianity. But Marcion didn't argue that The Works of Josephus were not a part of Scripture, nor that they were a part. He didn't even mention them. Why? Because no one thought they were a part of Scripture, hence no reason to even bring them up. the same goes for the extra books of the Apocrapha.

So yes, the 66 books are inspired. Again, this is not why the 66 books were 'chosen.' (that is a whole different subject, and one which we have to cover on a book by book basis...quite a lengthy process) But from our perspective 1900 or so years later, we can know exactly which books of the Bible the early church fathers (those who were the direct disciples of the Apostles) believed were inspired due to attacks upon it, and the true church's response to Marcion in defense of those same 66 books.

Thailand!

God willing, Jessi and I will be headed to Chiangmai, Thailand this Summer! I had been meaning to post a note here about it for some time, but have been busy studying for finals and such. (still am...or should be...)

We will be gone from July 11 through July 30. While there, I will take a class on "Buddhism and Islam" and an "International Evangelism Practicum." Translation: I get to learn about both of those religions and witness to Imams at Mosques and Monks at Temples. We will also get to go to the Buddhist University near Chiangmai and talk with students who want to improve their english.

Of course we won't be alone. A group from Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, another from Southeastern Seminary, and some missionaries from Southeast Asia will all be meeting up in Chiangmai. A couple of our friends who are lifetime missionaries, Katie and Joseph, will also be going. So while Joseph and I are in classes and out at various locations, Jessi will be helping Katie with the kids as they traverse the area witnessing to locals and doing a little shopping/site-seeing.

Thailand is 95% Buddhist, 4% Muslim, and 1% everything else. So, please be praying that God would open the hearts of the Thai people to receive the Gospel, and that we wil be emboldened to share it with them.

Recently, I had the wonderful opportunity to speak in front of the Eisenhauer Road Baptist Church congregation about our trip. It was "Missions Day," so I was able to put in a plug for various kind of missions, as well request for ourselves prayers, encouragement, and financial aid.

One plug I made while talking, which I'm making again here, was for the Cooperative Program of the SBC. Besides cutting my tuition in half for seminary, which is already significantly cheaper then other evangelical seminaries, the Cooperative program supports other efforts including the 5000+ international missionaries and 5000+ North American missionaries. So instead of missionaries spliting their time and energy between missions work and worrying where their next meal will come from (or requesting aid from friends, family, and churches like we are doing) they get to devote all of their time to their work.

The one drawback of the Cooperative program is the annonimity. Most of us don't kno who any of them are. So while their financial needs are met through the Coop. Prog. (most of it from Lotti Moon offering) we do still need to partner with them for prayer and encouragement. Maybe send them care packages occasionaly as well. In many places you can't get BBQ sauce, or coffee, or even a pound of sugar.

Jessica and I might not be called to full time international missions work, and you might not be either (though none of us should ever rule it out and tell God what we won't do!) But we are all given the Great Commission, and one of the ways we can fulfill that is by sending out and supporting missionaries just as Paul and Barnabas were sent out. Pray for them, encourage them, partner with them, let them come tell their stories at your churches when they come back to the States, and give to the Lotti Moon Christmas offering. 100% of that goes directly to funding international missions work. Since I've been here at SWBTS in Ft. Worth I've been able to meet and get to know closely a number of missionaries. I've been highly impressed by their character, so if I come off sounding passionate about missions, its because I've really come to believe that the work they do is of God and worth our support.

Alright, that's the end of my plug for the Cooperative Program. :) If you have any questions about our trip to Thailand, please let me know. If we are able to, Jessi and I will post blogs and pictures from Thailand. Pray for us!