Is there a place for Christian apologetics in the contemporary church? Is apologetics a leftover from a previous era and no longer relevant to this postmodern world? Should we just focus on creating community and facilitating worship services where people can experience God?

While those who have what Gary Thomas calls the intellectual pathway for connecting with God may see apologetics as important, it would be nice to have some hard evidence for the value of Christian apologetics.

We now have such evidence. Complete article here

Sharing the Gospel with our Muslim neighbors and friends can be a challenge which at times seems almost insurmountable. This seeming insurmountability can take place rather quickly in the conversation when the allegation/charge of textual corruption of the Bible is brought ‘front and center’ into the conversation by our Muslim friends. If we, as Christians, are not prepared to respond, this baseless charge can bring the discussion to a grinding halt, or an impasse. The apostle Peter stated that we are to “always be ready to give a defense to anyone who asks us for the reason of the hope that is in us,” (1 Pet. 3:15) and the defense of the veracity, truthfulness and reliability of the New Testament is central to our defense. In order to mount an effective defense (and offense) to this issue, some background as to why it is made will be helpful in understanding how to deconstruct and refute it.

In order to support their claim that the Qur’an is the inspired word of God, superseding all previous revelations, Muslims sustain an attack upon all competing claims. For the most part their efforts are directed against their chief rival, the Bible. There accusations fall into two basic categories: first, the text of Scripture has been changed or forged; second, doctrinal mistakes have crept into Christian teaching, such as the belief in the incarnation of Christ, the trinity of the Godhead, and the doctrine of original sin.

These Islamic views about the Bible are critically flawed. One evidence is the internal inconsistency within the Muslim view of Scripture itself. Another is that it is contrary to the factual evidence. There is serious tension in the Islamic rejection of the authenticity of the current New Testament. This tension can be focused by the following teaching from the Qur’an:

Point #3 is of critical importance in dismantling the charge of biblical corruption. The Qur’an/Muslims claim that the Bible is “the Word of God” (Surah 2:75). They also insist that God’s words cannot be altered or changed. But, as C. G. Pfander points out, “if both these statements are correct…then it follows that the Bible has not been changed and corrupted either before or since Muhammad’s time.” Islamic teaching insists that the Bible has been corrupted, thus, the contradiction. As we begin the discussion, we need to be clear that “we do not in any way whatever rely upon the Qur’an to prove our Scriptures for us. What we are doing is quite a different thing. We are endeavouring to show Muslims that they, as believers in the Qur’an, are bound to accept what it says about the Jewish and the Christian Books.”[2]

The point that, ‘God’s words cannot be altered or changed,’ is stated repeatedly in the Qur’an. The following are some of the key ayahs (verses) confirming the claim:

 
Having established the Qur’an’s claim that the words of God cannot be altered, we move on to the Quranic instruction to the Christians and Jews, which obligates them to accept and ‘find guidance’ in the New Testament (and Torah) that existed in Muhammad’s day. This along with Allah’s instruction to Muhammad to also consult the Gospel and Torah, as well as the Christians and Jews who believed and were given “the Books,” makes for a strong case as too the truthfulness and purity of the Gospel and Torah of Muhammad’s day.

 
Dr. William Campbell notes:

 
The reading of “the Book from before thee,” is in reference to the Taurat (Torah) given to the Jews—“But why do they come to thee for decision, when they have (their own) law before them?– therein is the (plain) command of Allah…” (Surah 5:43)

 
The following is an authoritative hadith that confirms that the Old Testament/Torah/Taurat that we have today was in existence and in use during the time of Muhammad, and as such, the ‘revelation’ given to Muhammad which we now have in the Qur’an:

 
In Surah 5, the Christians, “people of the Gospel,” are told to judge by what had been revealed therein:

These ayahs were quoted by Muhammad during the time period of 609 to 632AD, and as such, they were referring to the exact same New and Old Testaments that we possess today. (Almost all Muslim scholars argue that the original Old Testament was distorted/corrupted. However, like the New Testament, the ancient Dead Sea Manuscripts of the Old Testament reveal that the Old Testament today is substantially the same as the one in the time of Christ, over 600 years before Muhammad.) Therefore, since the Qur’an urges the Jews in Muhammad’s day to accept God’s revelation in the Law (10:94), and since the Jewish OT is substantially the same today as it was in Muhammad’s day, the Qur’an is not referring to scripture that Jews and Christians possessed in the past, but now are lost. Rather, the Torah given to Moses, and the New Testament/Gospels concerning Jesus, is the scripture that is with them (the Christians and Jews) and in their possession at the time of Muhammad. This is historically verified by copies such as the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, both dated to the 4th century AD, as well as Codex Alexandrinus, 5th century AD. Each of these which contains both the Old and New Testaments, and includes the Four Gospels and the Book of Acts as we have them in our present day Bibles. These manuscripts prove conclusively that the only scriptures in the hands of the Church at least two hundred years prior to Muhammad’s time were the Old and New Testaments that we have in our hands today. 

After reading the Quranic passages above, we must then put forth the following propositions to our Muslim friends for response:

 
This brings us to the following conclusion:

 
When I hear the charge of textual corruption being leveled against the Bible (both the Old & New Testament), I simply ask my Muslim friend the following question: “If the Bible has been corrupted, please show me where, when, how, and by whom?” This is usually sufficient to cause a long pause, after which they simply restate the charge without any proof to offer. Most Muslims have been taught this response by their Imam’s and leaders along with the traditions passed down to them via the hadiths, and thereby accept this claim on ‘blind faith’ with no argument/facts to substantiate the claim. As Muslim scholar and apologist Ahmed Deedat explains, “…the Muslim believes this authoritative statement as the veritable Word of God. And as such, he asks no questions, and he demands no proof. He says, “There are the words of my lord: I believe, and I affirm.”

One response I have used on occasion is, “If the Bible is true, then the Qur’an is false. If the Bible is false, then the Qur’an is still false, because it says that the Bible is true.” (A comparison of Surah 4:157-denial of the crucifixion-with the Gospels’ eyewitness crucifixion accounts [along with extra-biblical sources] proves the point of contradiction) This usually places my Muslim counterpart square in the middle of a dilemma of contradiction that has no solution. (See video below) By ‘leveraging’ the Qur’an’s ‘truth claims,’ 1) God’s words cannot be altered or changed, and 2) the Bible [of Muhammad’s day] was/is the Word of God, the Qur’an’s internal inconsistency is exposed and the charge of biblical textual corruption is soundly refuted. The Muslim is soon brought to a crossroads of decision–either the charge is true, which cannot be proven by the Qur’an, or it is false, which can be proven by the Qur’an–there is no middle road.

As H. W. Stanton states:

 
It is interesting to note that Ibn Ishaq, the author of what is considered the authoritative biography of the life of Muhammad, quotes the Gospel of John as the very same gospel given to Jesus:

 
The preceding Gospel citation is taken from John 15:23-16:1. Ibn Ishaq NEVER ONCE HINTS THAT THIS PARTICULAR GOSPEL IS INAUTHENTIC OR CORRUPT.

In the first four centuries after Muhammad (600 – 1000 AD) no Muslim theologian seriously contended that the Gospel texts were not authentic. They might accuse Christians of giving a wrong interpretation to the words; they would not dispute the words themselves. As studies of Muslim apologetics have shown it was only with Ibn-Khazem who died at Cordoba in 1064, that the charge of falsification was born. Many of the great Muslim thinkers have, indeed, accepted the authenticity of the New Testament text. Listing the names of these men seems a fitting conclusion to this article. Their testimony proves that Christian-Muslim dialogue need not for ever be stymied by the allegation of biblical corruption introduced by Ibn-Khazem. Two great historians, Al-Mas’udi (died 956) and Ibn-Khaldun (died 1406), held the authenticity of the Gospel text. Four well-known theologians agreed with this: Ali at-Tabari (died 855), Qasim al-Khasani (died 860), ‘Amr al-Ghakhiz (died 869) and, last but not least, the famous Al-Ghazzali (died 1111). Their view is shared by Abu Ali Husain Ibn Sina, who is known in the West as Avicenna (died 1037). Bukhari (died 870), who acquired a great name by his collection of early traditions, quoted the Qur’an itself (Sura 3:72,78) to prove that the text of the Bible was not falsified.

Finally, Muhammad Abduh Sayyid Ahmad Khan, a religious and social reformer of modem times, accepted the findings of modern science. He said:

 
References:
[1] Norman L. Geisler & Abdul Saleeb, Answering Islam-The Crescent in the Light of the Cross, Baker Books, 2002, pgs. 213, 217
[2] C. G. Pfander, The Mizanu’l Haqq, Balance of Truth, Indo-Asiatic Publishers, 1910
[3] William Campbell, The Qur’an and the Bible in the Light of History, Science, Middle East Resources 1992, p. 39
[4] H. W. Stanton, The Teachings of the Qur’an, New York: Biblo and Tannen, 1969
[5] Hans Wijngaards, Can we trust the Gospels?, A letter to my Muslim brothers, 1985, found, here

For a comprehensive overview of the topic, please see:

The Quranic Witness to Biblical Authority/The Quran on the Authority and Integrity of the Biblical Text, Part 2/The Quran on Biblical Authority Revisited, Part 3-by Sam Shamoun, here

The Mizanu’l Haqq, Balance of Truth-by C. G. Pfander and W. St. Clair Tisdall, here

Other resources found at this site:

Historicity of the Crucifixion & the Law of Non-contradiction-by Lane, here

The question: Why was Jesus crucified? ‘What think ye of Christ? Whose son is he?’-Matt. 22:42-by Lane, here

The Quran, the Bible, and the Islamic Dilemma

A Quranic Case for Biblical Preservation–Islam Critiqued

The Bible is Corrupted: Another Later Muslim Development–Islam Critiqued

Is The Bible Corrupted? – Jay Smith

The book, The Apologetics of Jesus–A Caring Approach to Dealing with Doubters, by Norman Geisler and Patrick Zukeran, is a milestone in the discipline of Christian apologetics. As Josh McDowell states in his cover comment, “it is one of the most important books on apologetics.” It is a must read for the current day Christian apologist, and in my opinion, every Christian who is engaged in the proclamation and defense of the Gospel of Christ.

Among the other works that I have studied in relation to the apologetic methodology of Jesus’ ministry, I must say that this book is truly exceptional. In just 207 pages, Geisler and Zukeran bring Jesus’ use of apologetics to life, presenting eight apologetic models used by the greatest Apologist who every lived, which can be applied today, in the communication and defense of the Gospel in our relativistic and post-modern culture.

In the introduction, Geisler and Zukeran state:

Geilser and Zukeran cover eight ways in which Jesus used apologetics in His ministry:

Other Resources:

The Apologetics of Jesus and Paul–by John W. Robbins, here

Jesus: Philosopher and Apologist–by Douglas Groothuis, here

Jesus the Logician–by Dallas Willard, here

At a time when even the most basic facts about reality are challenged, it is more important than ever for Christians to be able to articulately and persuasively proclaim and defend the Gospel. Learn from some of the leading Christian thinkers in the world about the evidence for the historic Christian faith, navigating controversial social issues, and articulating truth in a secular culture. Now is not the time to disengage. It’s time to get off the sidelines and into the game. Join us for the 23rd Annual SES National Conference on Christian Apologetics, the largest and longest-running apologetics conference in the country.

Speakers: Gary Habermas, Norman Geisler, Josh McDowell, Lee Strobel, J. Warner Wallace, and more

Conference info, here

The Thrive Apologetics Conference and Biola University team up to present this two day conference featuring world-class speakers and over 40 breakouts on topics that will help us explore the intersection of faith and culture. Together we will be tackling tough questions and be inspired to an intellectual faith.

At the Thrive Apologetics Conference we tackle some of today’s most commonly asked questions. Questions, like: In this scientific age, is it reasonable to believe God exists? How do I talk with my kids about faith? Hasn’t the Bible been changed over time? How do I have tough conversations about faith? Register today and dive deeper into these questions.

We will be covering topics such as: Christianity and World religions, how to deal with contradictions in the Gospels, how do we communicate with those we disagree with, and hot button cultural issues.

Speakers: Craig Hazen, Douglas Groothuis, J. Warner Wallace, Paul Copan, Dena Davidson, and others.

(Conference info, here)

As Christian apologists and/or case-makers, we need to be sure that we have done our due diligence before making our claims, whether it be in arguments for the existence of God, the historicity of the Resurrection, the reliability of the Gospels, etc., so that we don’t find ourselves ‘out on a limb’ and thereby embarrass ourselves and hinder the cause of Christ. As J.R.R. Tolkien once said, “The wise speak only of what they know.”

In this regard, I would like to highlight the following interview with preeminent New Testament scholar, Daniel Wallace, which can be found at Apologetics315. (Click here for interview/downloadable mp3) [Daniel Wallace is professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary and an authority on Koine Greek grammar and New Testament textual criticism. He is founder of the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts]

Wallace brings an interesting fact and/or clarification to the table in regards to the popular apologist claim that, “in the first three centuries of Christianity, only eleven verses of the entire New Testament had not been able to be found in those Church Fathers’ writings.” Here is an excerpt from the interview which I found to be enlightening:

I am sure that many of us, in our zeal, have stated this popular and/or ‘accepted’ claim at one time or another to bolster our case-making. But as Wallace so wisely advises, we need to be sure to do our due diligence, asking the tough questions, putting time into our research, and making sure our facts are indeed facts. “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15 ESV)

As a follow-up to Wallace’s interview, I’d like to also recommend the following article by J. Warner Wallace, Can We Construct The Entire New Testament From the Writings of the Church Fathers?  J. Warner Wallace confirms Daniel Wallace’s findings, and then adds an excellent summary and defense of the Gospels and the historical Jesus:

William Lane Craig’s Advice to Christian apologists/case-makers
(Note: Dr. Craig makes an excellent case for preparation in communicating and defending the Christian faith-preparation that requires due diligence on the part of the Christian case-maker.)

The Importance of Becoming a Christian Case-Marker–J. Warner Wallace

“Michael Licona is one of the world’s leading experts on the historical evidence for resurrection. I use his book The Resurrection of Jesus in my Master’s Level course at Biola. For the past few years, Dr. Licona has been working on some cutting-edge research related to Gospel contradictions. His research is both fascinating and groundbreaking. He answers a few of my questions:

SEAN MCDOWELL: Mike, what got you interested in the question of Gospel contradictions?

MIKE LICONA: Back in 2008 and 2009 I was publicly debating Bart Ehrman on the resurrection. He brought up Gospel contradictions as one of his major objections to the Gospels. I have noticed that this genuinely bothers many Evangelical Christians. As a result, I decided to look into it in more depth. I wasn’t so much concerned about resolving them, because I understood that if Jesus rose from the dead, Christianity is true, regardless of any errors that might be present in the Bible. So, even if there are contradictions in the Gospels, it wouldn’t negate the truth of Christianity. But it does bother a lot of Evangelicals, so that’s what got me interested in the topic. And to be honest, it did make me question the historical reliability of the Gospels.” Complete interview, here

As the augmented reality game Pokémon Go is increasingly gaining popularity across the world, Christians have expressed varying viewpoints across the spectrum, with some calling the game a demonic influence, and others embracing it and putting up signs at their churches welcoming Pokémon Go players.

The game has been a topic of concern and interest for Christians not only because it is one of the most significant cultural phenomena in recent weeks (the game has had more than 15 million downloads as of July 13 according to SensorTower, and has some 21 million active daily users in the U.S. as of July 11 according to SurveyMonkey), but also because many churches are actually a part of the game, either as PokéStops (locations where players can gather free items) or gyms (where players can battle against each other with their best Pokémon). For complete article, here

Our world has never been a place of ease. Torn by war, famine, disease, and natural disasters, the earth, and the humanity that dwells upon it, are regularly rocked by tragedy. Our recent past, certainly, is rife with it, with incidents such as the shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando being a prime example. But how do we reconcile the reality of tragedy—of the existence of evil—with the existence of God? How do we hold to the idea that God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and also all-loving, yet allowed something like the Holocaust to happen? Do we simply let go of our faith, declaring it untenable? No—this is a problem worthy of exploration, one that Christians have struggled with since the Fall, but it’s not one that is without an answer. The answer to this problem boils down to one concept—that of free will.

God is inarguably good. Psalm 145:9 sums up God’s scriptural character well with “The Lord is good to all; He has compassion on all He has made”. Jesus later reinforces this in Matthew 19:17, saying that “There is only One who is good,” speaking of God. He is also definitively all-powerful and all-knowing, attributes which God, Himself declares to Job throughout Job 38. So if God is, scripturally, all-knowing, all-powerful, and good, shouldn’t all evil intention be squashed before it can bloom into consequence?

The answer to that lies in what Alvin Plantinga, noted scholar of Christian apologetics, calls libertarian free will—free will that is genuinely free. This kind of free will is morally significant—we are free to choose between the moral and the immoral. In that way, we, as God’s creations can be rightfully punished or praised for our actions, as God does throughout scripture. For complete article, here

In the following video presentation, Dr. Andy Bannister presents a compelling analysis of the origins of the Quran which challenges the standard popular model that states that Mohammad borrowed or did a bit of ‘cut & paste’ from the Taurat and the New Testament Gospels/Injil, as well as other sources such as, the heretical Christian and Jewish sects that lived in Arabia at that time.

Highlighting the Quranic story of Iblis and Adam (Sura 7:11-18) which appears seven times in the Qur’an, each time as a different version of the story, Dr. Bannister makes the case that Mohammad wasn’t a cut and paste plagiarist, as has been promoted by popular scholarship.

He outlines three problems with the borrowing hypothesis as it relates to the Qur’an:

Dr. Bannister states, “The borrowing theories…initially looked quite compelling, [but] when you begin to dig into them, you hit a problem very quickly.”

His analysis revealed the following:

 
Dr. Bannister offers the following summary of his findings:

Dr. Bannister concludes:

 
Dr. Bannister also refutes the Muslim claim that the Qur’an is a miracle because Mohammad was unread and illiterate. He states, “Claims that Mohammad’s illiteracy mean the Qur’an is a miracle fail to appreciate that we have examples of hundreds of other cultures around the world that don’t have writing that have been able in history to produce amazing works of literature. It assumes that oral cultures are primitive and that is not the case at all.” He goes on to give a number of examples of such cultures.

The Qur’an-an oral-formulaic construction-“a very human product indeed”-Andy Bannister

In the above video, Dr. Bannister unpacks his findings from his mile-stone book, An Oral-Formulaic Study of the Qur’an. Dr. Bannister is an adjunct research fellow at the Centre for the Study of Islam and Other Faiths, Melbourne School of Theology, and visiting lecturer at the Centre for Islamic Studies and Muslim-Christian Relations, London School of Theology, and is the director of Solas Centre for Public Christianity based in Scotland.

The following is a book description of his An Oral-Formulaic Study of the Qur’an:

The Qur’an makes extensive use of older religious material, stories, and traditions that pre-date the origins of Islam, and there has long been a fierce debate about how this material found its way into the Qur’an. This unique book argues that this debate has largely been characterized by a failure to fully appreciate the Qur’an as a predominately oral product. Using innovative computerized linguistic analysis, this study demonstrates that the Qur’an displays many of the signs of oral composition that have been found in other traditional literature. When one then combines these computerized results with other clues to the Qur’an’s origins (such as the demonstrably oral culture that both pre-dated and preceded the Qur’an, as well as the “folk memory” in the Islamic tradition that Muhammad was an oral performer) these multiple lines of evidence converge and point to the conclusion that large portions of the Qur’an need to be understood as being constructed live, in oral performance. Combining historical, linguistic, and statistical analysis, much of it made possible for the first time due to new computerized tools developed specifically for this book, Bannister argues that the implications of orality have long been overlooked in studies of the Qur’an. By relocating the Islamic scripture firmly back into an oral context, one gains both a fresh appreciation of the Qur’an on its own terms, as well as a fresh understanding of how Muhammad used early religious traditions, retelling old tales afresh for a new audience.