Originally written for Muslim Apologetics on Reasonable Faith.org.

A person posted a friend's response regarding William Lane Craig's podcast Muslim Apologetics, and asked for feedback.



Emphasis mine.

The part that I high-lighted, i.e. Christ has one nature vs Christ has two natures (fully God and fully human), is historically correct. I base this on "Eastern Christendom," by Kallistos Ware, pp 123-162 in The Oxford Illustrated History of Christianity, edited by John McManners, 2001. Most of the Christians on Reasonable Faith.org forums are descendents of the Western or Latin Church, and generally reject these Eastern communities as heretics. Craig is a Western or Latin Christian.



I listened to the video. I agree with the beginning in which the speaker says many people learn about Islam only from its enemies. However, I think some Muslims are like some Christians in that they see enemies where none exist. That being as it may, most of what I know about Islam comes from nonMuslims and--from the perspective of some Muslims--from its enemies.



I can't. However, would Craig consider himself obliged to do more than read it for himself in English and come to his own conclusions? I don't know; I'm asking.



One would think a scholar who is truly interested in the religion on a level where he is qualified to make critical statements on the rightness or wrongness of the beliefs he would learn to correctly pronounce the name of the sacred text. Either that, or apologize for being unable to do so.

This is especially the case, given the great importance Islam gives to the spoken word of the sacred text despite being unable to understand it. I understand that one of the first things devoute Muslims teach their little children is to memorize the Quran in Arabic. Understanding it is not what matters, but being able to recite the text correctly from beginning to end.

Christianity does not have this aspect of absolute reverence for the spoken word that Islam does. Craig fails to acknowledge this. I agree that this is a serious breach of scholarship.



Dr. Craig does not, to my knowledge, reply on these lowly forums. Sorry, but the man lost my respect long ago with his shoddy scholarship. I, too, came here [to Reasonable Faith.org] with a question for him to clear his name. He has not yet done so. His fans ridicule me for having the question. So be it. Our world turns in part on sound scholarship the likes of which your friend expects.

I'm still listening to the video. I find WLC's criticism of the Qur'an outright offensive. He speaks as though he himself were the final word of authority on the origins of the Quran. He's not. Not even close. What he is doing is trampling someone else's pearls in the dunghill.

Craig reads a verse in the Quran about God commanding people to worship him and Mary. He says any Christian would reject such a doctrine. I'm sorry, but that is an outright lie. If God exists, then so does the Virgin Mary and the Catholic Church has revered her as supernatural since early times.

The other person (I don't know his name) told about how he was treated in a Muslim chatroom. It was awful but he knew going in that he wasn't wanted, and the Muslims made their points graphically so that I understand them better than ever. If he had gone into an atheist chatroom where it was specified that Christians were not wanted he would have been treated the same way though with other verses.

Conservative Christians treat all other religions and atheists exactly like that every day of the week: Witness how he blasphemed the Quran. And then they ask why we reject their "love."