The End (Of the Refuting Islam review)

The end

The End (Of the Refuting Islam review)

Preface

The book review ends:

WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers. 

I have been reviewing this text since October 18, 2017 and I think it has taken its course. This is the last related entry.

I will continue to review the Langer, philosophy text, and I am very much looking forward to purchasing an academic, Orthodox New Testament and Psalms with commentary, from my employer tomorrow and reviewing it on this website.

There is no interest on my part in joining the Orthodox Church, I am firmly Reformed, but I respect the Orthodox tradition and will contrast views with Reformed and Evangelical theology, in particular.

This new book is a beautiful red and a work of scholarship. We should learn a significant amount...

Chapter 17: Muhammad is a false prophet

On page 143, Mr. Wallace lists errors and contradictions made by the Prophet Muhammad:

A notable one

Cited

'Surah 5:69 says Christians have nothing to fear on the last day, but three verses later, in Surah 5: 72, Christian are going to hell.' (145).

I can reason that an explanation from scholarship could be that some Christians have nothing to fear and some Christians are going to hell.

Of course, those chosen by God and truly in Jesus Christ are saved through the applied atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ through faith by grace. (Ephesians 1-2).

Theologically, no true Christian is hellbound.

A regenerated (Titus 3) Christian is going to inherit the Kingdom of Heaven/God.

A merely and only cultural Christian is indeed, hellbound (barring regeneration).

Incidentally, years ago an Islamic teacher emailed me to inform me that if I did not repent of my Christianity I would be going to hell. I explained that my Christian faith, theology and philosophy was older than his Islamic faith and the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament were legitimately divinely inspired and that I had nothing to fear, but that his scripture was not authentically from God.

Chapter 18: The Sinking Qur'an

Wallace claims that the Qur'an was influenced by the devil, but the Qur'an is a poorly constructed work of fiction. (156).

May I add, a similar claim is made against the Book of Mormon by many within Christian and Biblical scholarship.

In regard to the Qur'an, I am certain this will be vigorously contended by Islamic scholarship.

Chapter 19: How does it end?

Wallace hopes for revival and repentance in the United States. (160). On page 161 a useful Glossary of Terms is provided, followed by end notes.

In the Chapter, Wallace correctly reaffirms the divine superiority of Jesus Christ as God-man (incarnate man) within the Trinity over the prophet Muhammad.

Overall, this text is a good academic reference in regard to Islam, even with the strong American, cultural, political and religious overtones which are generally not observed in texts that review religion. In other words, as a religious scholar, I would not include them in my work (s).

Key Muslim Objection to Christianity (Brief)

The book review continues:

WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.

Chapter 16: Muslims Tops Objections To Christianity

These objections provided by Mr. Wallace:

A key objection and his first objection noted:

'Christians and Jews have corrupted the bible and that it is no longer trustworthy.' (122).

Wallace counters that the Qur'an actually teaches:

1. Christians are to stand by their Scriptures (122).

Wallace cites

Surah 5: 68 (122).

2. There is no difference between the Qur'an and the Bible (122-123).

In the context of the Muslims being required to reverence (123).

Surah 2: 136 (123)

3. The Bible is inspired of God (123).

Surah 21: 7 (123).

4. The Scriptures will be kept from corruption. This includes the Bible (123).

Surah 15: 9 (123).

Surah 5: 48 (123).
---

These citations can be researched. But, of course an Islamic theological view that the Qur'an is the later more progressive scripture, will have Islamic theology negate the Bible and biblical theology where there is significant disagreement with the newer revelation.

The orthodox Christian position is that Islamic scripture, although it contains truth at points, is not inspired scripture in unity with the Gospel message.

My recent archived presentations in regard to Biblical manuscript evidence...

Trusting the Bible

Are the copies inspired?

New Testament text numbers

Lecture on New Testament manuscripts

UFOs (MPhil Edit)

UFO Sightings Daily

MPhil, Bangor University, 2003: The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives 

Certainly, the historical figures in the Old and New Testaments who claimed to have witnessed miracles have to be considered when one evaluates an explanation for our Universe.

As J.D. Spiceland stated:

Christian faith is informed by the revelation of God to man in Scripture and in the mighty acts recorded there. . . .The continuing work of the church in the world may itself be viewed as evidence for the truth of the biblical concept of miracle. Spiceland (1996: 724).

A belief in the Christian God and Christ is not comparable to a belief in fictional Unicorns, or even UFOs or Atlantis I might add, for which their existence has been speculated but not proven. People and events are documented in sixty-six books of Scripture and other historical books. The Biblical books contain a consistent story of God’s work in humanity, and at times these books contain miracles.

PhD, University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Lampeter, 2010: Theodicy and Practical Theology 

SPICELAND, J.D. (1996) Miracles, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

Not the Cookie Monster theory

This week

Preface

Again, this entry, as with my last entry, deals with my friendly discussion with a very intelligent scholar from the translation department at work.

The Calvinist God is a ‘monster’ theory was expressed.

Well, I pointed out that I refer to myself as Reformed and not a Calvinist. I am not a devotee of Calvin and also theologically with study, prefer believer’s baptism to infant Baptist.

In short, hard determinism, when accepted by someone with a Reformed or other position, could reasonably be connected to a God is a ‘monster’ theory.

Hard Versus Soft Determinism

Louis P. Pojman (1996) explains the difference between determinism, which is also known as hard determinism, Pojman (1996: 596). and compatibilism, which is also known as soft determinism. Within determinism (Pojman (1996: 596)) or hard determinism, God causes an act and no created being is responsible for his or her moral actions, while for compatibilism or soft determinism, although God causes actions, created beings are responsible where they act voluntarily. The human will would be the secondary cause in human decisions. Persons would still therefore be morally responsible for moral actions. Pojman (1996: 596).

Philosophically, the first and/or primary cause could be an outside force, as well, that is not God. An atheist may be a compatibilist and/or an incompatibilist, or one could hold to hard determinism. 

Schelling suggests that ‘absolute causal power in one being leaves nothing but unconditional passivity for all the rest.’ Schelling (1845)(1936: 11). This would be a difficulty with accepting hard determinism.

Incompatinilism

John S. Feinberg, who has written extensively on the concepts of free will and determinism, explains incompatibilism is defined as the idea within free will theodicy or defence that a person is free in regard to an action if he or she is free to either commit, or refrain from committing the action. Feinberg (1994: 64). There can be no antecedent (prior) conditions or laws that will determine that an action is committed or not committed. Feinberg (1994: 64). Feinberg writes that for this view, freedom is incompatible with contingently sufficient nonsubsequent conditions of an action. The contingently sufficient nonsubsequent actions would be God making people in such a way that they only freely did one thing or another. Feinberg (1994: 60). Feinberg importantly writes that just as the incompatibilist does not claim that all actions are significantly free, the compatibilist also does not attach significant freedom to all acts. Feinberg (2001: 637).

Therefore, the compatibilist, soft-deterministic God of Reformed theology allows significant human freedom with the embracing of human thoughts, acts and action via human nature, desires and limited free will.

Although, in a basic agreement with Feinberg, I reason God at times, does force or coerce events in regard to humanity, in those cases, there is not significant human moral accountability. For example, a person unwillingly becomes an amputee. This is against the nature, desires and will. A person does not sin by rejecting the amputation with nature, desires and will.

The human ability with significant freedom to embrace thoughts, acts and actions as a secondary cause, philosophically and theologically eliminates God as forcing or coercing human thoughts, acts and actions where there is human, moral, accountability.

This answers the ‘monster’ theory.

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (2001) No One Like Him, John S. Feinberg (gen.ed.), Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books.

POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.

SCHELLING, F.W.J. (1845)(1936) Schelling, Of Human Freedom, Translated by James Gutmann, The Open Court Publishing Company, Chicago.

Sesame Street