The religion of atheism

– Taken at 2:23 PM on May 07, 2006; cameraphone upload by ShoZu (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I don’t know how many times I’ve had a conversation with an atheist which ends up with them saying something like:

Christians believe in the Trinity. Muslims believe in Allah. The Ancient Romans believed Jupiter etc. Who knows what Hindus believe. Your faith may all be genuine but you can’t all be right, therefore the only logical conclusion is to only believe in a god if there’s objective, undisputed, absolute, cast-iron proof. And there isn’t any. So you’re a fool.

Seems sensible, actually.

Oh no, wait. It doesn’t. Because this atheist hasn’t given the full picture. They might think they have, but they haven’t. Here’s how they should have presented it:

1. Everyone believes in something (I believe that the Bible is true, a Muslim believes that Muhammad was Allah’s final prophet, atheists believe that there’s nothing other than what we can observe in nature).
2. We can’t all be right.
3. Therefore, we should do everything in our power to determine who is right.

Ok, now that’s better. The atheist demands evidence not only that a god exists, but that one specific God (or host of gods) exists. Problem though: God is outside of nature, and therefore can’t be observed in the manner which the atheist has faith in.

In other words, all that the atheist is saying is ‘I don’t believe in God, therefore I don’t believe in Him.’ Clearly circular reasoning.

Now, everyone demonstrates circular reasoning when it comes down to worldviews. I believe that humans don’t have wings. I’ve seen evidence that humans do have wings (e.g. in movies, people dressed up in public) but I easily dismiss those as fiction because of my beliefs. So atheists shouldn’t be ashamed of their faith (in fact, it comes across as a bit desperate when atheists insist so strongly that everyone should believe them), but should acknowledge it.

So there we go.

‘Muhammad is mentioned in the Bible’

That’s the claim that was made by a Muslim friend of mine earlier this week.

I asked him if he had ever read the Bible, and he said no. I said that I had read the Bible a few times and had never seen Muhammad’s name in there, but he said I must have missed it. I asked him if he could show me, and he said he would.

True to his word, he sent me an e-mail sending me to two Bible verses with Muhammad’s name in them, one in the Old Testament, and one in the New Testament. Here they are:

Song of Solomon 5:16

He said that there’s an Aramaic word, Muhammad, which is used in this verse and predicts his coming. I had a look.

First of all, the Aramaic word is machmad. It’s got some of the same letters but it’s not the same name. I’m willing to overlook that though – if the context was about a future prophet coming, I’d be willing to admit I was wrong. Here’s the verse:

His mouth is most sweet, and he is altogether desirable [machmad]. This is my beloved and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem.

Um…I asked him if he knew what the Song of Solomon was, and he said no. I explained that it was an erotic poem between a husband and a wife. I asked if he thought it would be appropriate to use the name of Muhammad to describe how a man is sexually attractive to his wife. He said no.

Conclusion: This verse does not talk about the future ‘prophet’ Muhammad.

John 14:16

Now, he showed me this one, and this seems a bit more like it:

And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper [Muhammad]

Completely ignoring the fact that Jesus says here that God is his Father, something which Muhammad denied, this verse seems to be a bit more along the right lines.

My friend showed me a quote from a book, explaining that the Greek word used in this verse is parakletos, which literally translated means ‘adoration’ or ‘praise’, and that’s the same meaning as Muhammad’s name. Well, it seems like we have our verse!

…

But I know some very limited Ancient Greek, and I thought that parakletos means Helper (i.e., what it’s translated as in the verse). I looked it up in a dictionary, and asked my friend to check the meaning of the word. He said that, yes, parakletos does mean Helper, and not ‘adoration’ or ‘praise’.

The words themselves are taken out of context anyway – here they are in Jesus’ full sentence:

And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you. (John 14:16-17)

This passage is one of the biggest examples used by Christians to point to the personhood of the Holy Spirit. The Greek language hints very heavily that this ‘Helper’, the Spirit of truth, is similar in pretty much every way to Jesus, is similar in pretty much every way to God, will be around forever, and will dwell in believers. I asked my friend if this sounded like it could have been talking about Muhammad. He said no.

Conclusion: This verse does not talk about the future ‘prophet’ Muhammad.

More on that story later.

The Islamic doctrine of Takkiya

I’m sure this isn’t politically correct but I read it in a book a bit ago and thought it would be interesting to start a discussion on it. I don’t think I’ve ever blogged anything about Islam before so this may be an absolute flop, or may attract attention. Time will tell.

So anyway, there is an Islamic doctrine called Takkiya. It’s taken from the Qur’an, Sura 16:106:

Anyone who after accepting faith in Allah utters Unbelief except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in faith but such as open their breast to unbelief, on them is wrath from Allah.

This verse was given after one of Muhammad’s followers, Ammar bin Yasir, was forced to worship idols, encouraging him that you can deny your faith outwardly while still remaining a guilt-free Muslim.

In fact, Muhammad said that Allah would not hold a Muslim accountable for lying in three situations: (1) when in war, espionage, concealment, or in weakness, (2) with a spouse, and (3) when reconciling and maintaining peace. This is added to by the Qur’an when it allows Muslims to take oaths yet still lie in Sura 2:225:

Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts.

As a result it is very difficult to debate with a Muslim about matters of faith, as Sam Soloman explained:

The Takkiya is very effectively used in apologetics, so a Muslim debater will hide or deny certain parts of the Qur’an to justify and advance the cause of Islam. Always outmanoeuvring his Christian opponents, the debater does this with no guilt as it is divinely sanctioned. I personally practiced this prior to coming to the Lord [Jesus Christ].