Is Christianity good for the World?
A reply to James White
Sami Zaatari
Some time ago I wrote an article titled why Christianity is bad for the world, for those interested you can read the article on this link:
http://muslim-responses.com/Why_Christianity_is_bad_for_Society/Why_Christianity_is_bad_for_Society_
Recently a Christian apologist and missionary decided to respond to my claims. The Christian in question is Dr. James White, a Christian apologist who runs his own ministry at www.aomin.org, one can find his rebuttal here.
So with that said let us now proceed to Dr. White's points to see if he has adequately refuted my points.
If one were to read my article one would see one of my main arguments was that Christianity basically offers no set of rules, there are no legal punishments to be handed out on certain sins that are committed in this world, and due to this this allows and makes Christians free to do whatever you want, the Christians only have to be worried in the here-after. However so what good is that? By allowing the temptations and sins to flow freely without stopping it this will simply lure others to fall into the trap! Hence there must be some sort of legal code to put an end to sinful actions, sadly we find that Christianity OFFERS NO legal rules on how to treat sinners, just let them be is how it goes!
Dr. White responds to this claim of mine by firstly quoting Romans chapter 3 verse 31 which reads:
31Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
This verse does not refute my claims. If this verse is meant to say that Paul established the law, which had specific rules on adultery, homosexuality, and murder etc, then Paul directly contradicts that! When we go to the book of 1 Corinthians chapter 7 verse 19 we read Paul saying:
Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts.
Notice Paul says that circumcision is nothing and those who aren't circumcised means nothing as well! Well let us read what God had to say about this in the OT:
7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. 8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God. 9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. 10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. 11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you. 12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed. 13 He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. 14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant. (Genesis 17:7-14)
Every Jew from the time of Abraham to the time of Moses and beyond used to practice circumcision as the law commanded them to! Yet Paul says circumcision means nothing and that you don't have to do it! So how did Paul establish the Law? All Dr. White managed to do is show a contradiction in Paul's teachings, and that Paul is a liar. Dr. James white cited Romans chapter 3 verse 31 which shows Paul saying he establishes the law, yet in 1 Corinthians we see Paul abrogating the Law, hence Dr. White has not brought a solution, but a very bad problem!
So I ask Dr. White, did Paul ESTABLISH the Law as he said in Romans, or did he nullify it as he said in 1 Corinthians?
In fact Christian scholars don't Read Romans chapter 3 as saying that Paul established the Law, i.e. calling for its commands to be followed and carried out, Christian scholar and commentator John Gill tells us what is meant by Romans chapter 3 verse 31:
Nor is it made void by the doctrine of faith, and by the particular doctrine of a sinner's justification by faith in Christ's righteousness, which is here more especially intended; for though it is made void by it, as to any use of it for justification by the deeds thereof; yet its use in other respects is not set aside, such as to inform us of the mind and will of God, to discover and convince of sin, to show believers their deformity and imperfection, to render Christ and his righteousness more valuable, and to be a rule of walk and conversation to them; and it still remains a cursing and condemning law to Christless sinners, though justified ones are delivered from it as such: yea, the law is so far from being made void, that it is established by this doctrine
So as you can see, when Paul said he establishes the law he did not mean it in the Law's complete sense, basically the Law is only used for advice now, not for implementation.
How does that refute what I said? That proves what I said! That Christianity has no set of rules or laws, there is no legal code! People are free to sin with no punishments, the only punishment to come is in the here-after, but what good is that! If you let sin to flow freely it will simply lead to more sin, more sinners, and more temptation!
There has to be a legal code, a set of punishments for sinners in this life, just like we have a legal law to punish criminals, there must also be a legal code to punish sinners, and Christianity offers none, therefore what good is Christianity? Hence my point remains, Christianity has no legal rulings or laws, hence Christians can go sin as much as they want, and this leads to further problems because Christianity allows sins to flow freely leading to a very corrupt backward society, hence this is why Christianity is no good!
James also quotes Romans chapter 6 verses 12-13 which reads:
12Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.
13Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.
How does this verse refute what I said? It seems Dr. White can only resort to straw man answers to try and give the impression that he is refuting me. In my arguments I NEVER made the claim that Christianity allows people to sin and do bad things, I challenge Dr. White to show me where I said that. So therefore quoting Biblical passages saying don't commit sins does not refute me since I never made the claim in the first place! What I am arguing is that CHRISTIANITY OFFERS NO LEGAL CODE FOR SINNERS AND CRIMES, it just says wait till the here-after, but what good is that! By letting sin and sinners freely flow it makes the society worst and simply tempts the people and will make the innocent into sinners because they will eventually get tempted!
For instance the Quran commands the people to not sin, yet the Quran and Sunnah make it perfectly clear that there will be consequences for certain sins, not in the here-after only, BUT IN THIS WORLD AS WELL. Hence the Quran has a legal code for dealing with sinful actions of this world, and this helps clean the society up and stop the sins. It would be useless for the Quran to simply say don't sin and offer no legal code and punishments. There has to be a ruling my friends, just like we have a ruling on criminals, if we let criminals get away with their crimes it would simply lead to more crimes, and more trouble, and a bad society! Hence this is why the law of secular countries say, don't commit a crime, and if you do commit a crime you will be punished, secular countries do not say don't commit a crime, but if you commit a crime there is no legal punishment! What good is that?! And that is EXACTLY WHAT CHRISTIANITY SAYS!
This is why I say Christianity is bad for society, and why all westerners should keep secularism over Christianity, since if Christianity were to rule the day they would not know how to do anything since their NT doesn't give them any structured legal code!
I hope this will now make it very clear to Dr. White, and hopefully he will now end his straw man responses.
Dr. White goes on to quote many passages telling Christians to not sin, but since my argument had nothing to do with whether the NT allows you to sin or not, I will simply ignore the rest as we have sufficiently dealt with this type of response already.
Now in my article I argued that Christianity offers you alcohol, basically alcoholism, which leads to drunkenness, hooligans, violence, and death.
Let us see if the verses that Dr. White brings up refute any of what I said, he starts by quoting Proverbs chapter 20 verse 1 which reads:
1Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.
This verse does not refute my claim, where in this verse does it tell you to not drink wine? All it says is that those who become drunk by it are not wise. Notice the verse does not say that all who become drunk by it are sinners, it simply says they are not wise!
There is a difference between saying becoming drunk is a sin, and becoming drunk is not wise! Hence Dr. White needs to get a better verse, such as an explicit verse like this:
002.219
YUSUFALI: They ask thee concerning wine and gambling. Say: "In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit." They ask thee how much they are to spend; Say: "What is beyond your needs." Thus doth Allah Make clear to you His Signs: In order that ye may consider-
Notice the Quran tells the Muslims that there is a great sin in wine, in alcohol. Here is Ibn Kathir's tafsir of this verse:
(Say: In them is a great sin, and (some) benefits for men.)
As for the harm that the Khamr and gambling cause, it effects the religion. As for their benefit, it is material, including benefit for the body, digesting the food, getting rid of the excrements, sharpening the mind, bringing about a joyous sensation and financially benefiting from their sale. Also, (their benefit includes) earnings through gambling that one uses to spend on his family and on himself. Yet, these benefits are outweighed by the clear harm that they cause which affects the mind and the religion.
So notice how the Quran explicitly tells Muslims of the sin to be found in alcohol. Here is another explicit verse for Dr. White:
O ye who believe! Intoxicants (al-khamru) and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are AN ABOMINATION,- OF SATAN'S HANDWORK: eschew such (abomination), that ye may prosper. Satan's plan is (but) to excite enmity and hatred between you, with intoxicants (al-khamri) and gambling, and hinder you from the remembrance of Allah, and from prayer: will ye not then abstain? S. 5:90-91 A. Yusuf Ali
Dr. White quotes another verse from Proverbs chapter 23 verses 31 to 32 which read:
31Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.
32At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder.
This verse does seem to warn you of the bad dangers in wine, but it STOPS SHORT of saying to drink it is a sin.
Yet we now have a big problem, a very big problem! Notice this verse tells people to not give in to wine, and it warns people of it's dangers. Yet when we read the NT we find that Jesus was turning water into wine for people at a wedding party! We read in the Gospel of John that the FIRST miracle Jesus performed was turning water into wine! We read in the Gospel of John chapter 2 verses 7-11:
7Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. 8And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. 9When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, 10And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now. 11This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.
So notice the major problem we have, Dr. White quoted us a verse from the Bible talking about the great danger of wine, and here we see Jesus serving wine at a wedding party! Talk about inconsistency and contradiction! And as we know folks, in wedding parties people do tend to drink a lot, and this was a large wedding party, therefore Jesus was serving a lot of wine, hence people drank a lot, and definitely got drunk! Such inconsistency!
Now since Christians claim that Jesus is an example to all, I as a Christian could follow this example, and serve wine at large parties, which leads to drunkenness and accidents after-wards, hence my initial arguments still STAND. All Dr. White has managed to do now is show Biblical inconsistency!
In fact I had to chuckle at how weak Dr. White's response was to this point! Dr. White wrote:
Notice How Zaatari, a man who exhorted the audience to interpret the actions of Muhammad in the context of ancient Mecca and Medina, refuses to let this text stand in its historical context. This was not a "party" it was a wedding.
RESPONSE
I never told anyone to judge the prophet Muhammad by the context of ancient times! I don't know from where Dr. White gets this from! Perhaps he is misrepresenting my statements yet again! He is most likely referring to my public debate, yet in that debate I did no such thing. I think I know what he is talking about, but it would be too long to explain, and plus it is STRAW MAN AGAIN as my statements is not what Dr. White is claiming.
Dr. White continues to write:
It was a great embarresment to the groom for not providing for the guests, there is no mention of drukenness what so ever, Zaatari ignores the fact this was a ?sign' of Jesus' ministry and power.
RESPONSE
Notice what Dr. White is saying folks! Just because back then, in the time of Jesus, it would be embarrassing for a man to not provide drinks for the guests, Jesus helped the man out by providing alcoholic drinks! That is the weakest nonsense I have seen! Jesus could have done something better, he could have FOLLOWED THE TEACHINGS OF THE BIBLE, he could've gotten up, and preached to the people and groom, and tell them all that there is no need for wine at a wedding, and the groom should not feel ashamed as wine is no good in the first place. Remember Dr. White quoted a Biblical passage saying wine is bad, so Jesus could've taught them this verse and say wine is no good my brothers! Instead he provides them wine! A prophet is meant to CHANGE his people's ignorant cultural trends, not support it and give in to it! This was the perfect opportunity for Jesus to get rid of such man made traditions, that a groom had to serve alcohol at a banquet, instead Jesus gives support and backing to such corrupt traditions!
In fact why couldn't Jesus provide them with juice?! WHY WINE?! Of all the drinks he could have given them why did he have to it make it wine, the one drink which the Bible warns you about!
Lest Dr. White wants to respond back by saying the prophet Muhammad gave into traditions of his own people, such as Muta, and right hand captives, then I direct him to these articles which will adequately respond to these claims and show that the prophet Muhammad DID CHANGE the trends of his people:
http://answering-christianity.com/sami_zaatri/muta_is_banned.htm
http://islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=1373&ln=eng&txt=muta
http://islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=20738&ln=eng&txt=muta
http://muslim-responses.com/islam_on_slavery_/islam_on_slavery_
Jesus however did not change the trend of his people in regards to alcohol and wine, because even in his last hours he gave the disciples wine to drink during the Passover meal!
Dr. White goes on to quote passages telling believers to not get drunk, yet telling someone to not get drunk is not telling someone that getting drunk is a sin! And again, we saw from the Gospel of John that Jesus was handing wine out at a WEDDING PARTY, and people drink a lot at such banquets, hence people did get drunk, so obviously we can take the example of Jesus and drink wine and get drunk if we choose to, the Bible may dislike it, but it doesn't make it a sin.
I will give Dr. White an example, in Islam we have the Haram, which is basically the sin and something forbidden to do, and the Makruh, which is something that is disliked and not recommended yet even if one does it, it doesn't count as a sin, it is viewed with displeasure, yet not enough to be a sin. Here is a basic definition:
In Islamic terminology, something which is makruh (Arabic مكروه, also transliterated makrouh, makrūh etc.) is a disliked or offensive act (literally "hated"). Though it is not haram (forbidden) and therefore not punishable, a person who abstains from this action will be rewarded. Muslims are encouraged to avoid such actions when possible. This is one of the degrees of approval (ahkam) in Islamic law.
All Dr. White does is quote Biblical passages of Makruh, passages that dislike wine and drunk behavior, yet doesn't count them as a sin. So my points on Christianity leading to drunkenness, hooliganism, violence, and death still stands!
Moving on, in my main article I argued that Paul was a liar. Here are the passages I used to prove this, from 1 Corinthians chapter 9 verses 19-20:
19For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.
20And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
And also from 1 Corinthians 9 verses 21-22:
21To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
22To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.
So notice Paul acts like something he is not to simply win people over! Just like missionaries, who come in disguise to deceive people. Jesus even warned people about this, people who come as sheep in wolves clothing! This is Paul and the missionaries.
James says that Paul did this so those groups would not stumble! Stumble? Stumble from what?! It was Paul who needed the guidance and help in the first place! The text is clear, Paul was a liar, he pretended to be something he was not to simply win people over! Folks what do we call such behavior?! This is a trait of satan, he pretends to be your friend and have your best interests at heart!
Dr. White then tries to address my points on Paul being anti-marriage, as usual James fails and attacks straw man. I said Paul says use marriage as a LAST RESORT! Hence James showing verses of Paul talking about man and wife means nothing and is a straw man yet again! Did I say Paul says NO MARRIAGE AT ALL! Or did I say Paul is against marriage and only allows it as a last resort? So again Dr. White refutes nothing, and only attacks straw man.
My last point which I raised in my article was:
Christianity also leads to a very bad anti-women society. It will lead to a society where women won't be allowed to speak, or teach! As Paul and Timothy said, women must keep silent in the Church, and don't have a right to teach, or have authority over men, they should simply keep silent!
Dr. White claims I ?conveniently' fail to mention that Christian women remaining silent only applies to the church, well I guess he forgot to read Timothy:
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence (1 Timothy 2:11-12)
Paul limited a women's silence to a Church, Timothy went general, notice Timothy doesn't mention in a church only! But he goes general!
Does that make it any better though? That Paul said women should keep silent in Church and that it is a shame, and that they should only ask at home? Dr. White does that make it any better?
Either way my point stands, Paul told women keep silent in Churches, Timothy made his ruling in general terms not limited to Churches only.
After failing to refute anything Dr. White claims he is repelled by what I claim to the truth. Well Mr. White, I must say I am shocked at the weakness of your responses, if this is what you have to offer then indeed Christianity is in a worst state than I had envisioned! You have simply proven what I have said, that Christianity is indeed bad for the world!
I do not blame Dr. White for the weaknesses of his answers, because when you don't have the truth this is what happens, therefore I call on Dr. White to do the right thing and leave his false faith of Christianity which provides no answers, and come to Islam which provides the answers, the guidance, AND THE RULINGS.
And Allah Knows Best!
www.muslim-responses.com
