Dear Mr Dallas

Having read your dialogue with the Islamic guy, the point you miss out on is that any source can be sighted to support a view point. I have no fancy PhD to call upon but I have read some books. You can cite references until the cows come home.

My response:             Yes, you can find all kinds of people claiming to know the truth about something.  How do you judge your books over against my books?    Are your books based on history?  Let’s look at one issue.   Muslims claimed that Jesus was not crucified and resurrected.   This comes from Muslim books.   Non-Muslim books going back before Mohammed write that Jesus was indeed crucified and resurrected.   Now  there are people who are atheists who believe he was crucified, but not resurrection because they do not believe in God.   Their personal views are imposed on the fact of the resurrection, but not the crucifixion.    Muslims are inclined to reject history solely because Mohammed claimed it was not so. 

He wrote:  From your dialogue I get the feeling that you are anti-Islamic, given some of you remarks against the prophet Mohammed (pbuh) and the way in which Islam was spread. Islam was NOT spread by the sword. You can read any unbiased general history of Islam by many historians, (not orientalists) and find that it was the religion that spread itself. Yes, like many people and societies, even today, people will convert if there is some kind of economic reward and people are threatened to behave in certain ways if it means they will not be killed.

My response:             I would prefer to say that I am pro-truth, not anti-Islam.   One of the problems I observe about Muslims is that if you reject some of their views, they charge you with being anti-Islamic.
You have not agreed with me, are you anti-Christian?   Are you prejudiced against Christians?
            You have been brain-washed about the spread of Islam.  Whose armies fought against the Romans?  Whose armies fought against the people of Jerusalem, Egypt, North Africa, Spain, etc. Whose army was defeated at the Battle of Tours and turned the Muslims back from taking France?
            You have close to admitting the truth in your last sentence, “People are threatened to behave in certain ways if it means they will not be killed.”   Remember the Qur’an says to invite them to Islam, if they reject it, , then impose the Jizya, and then if they reject that, Kill them.   You need to read more than Muslim histories of the spread of Islam.  In one day in one invasion of India, 300,000 men were beheaded by the Muslim army.

Check out the following:   http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-home.htm
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-self-defense.htm
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-rape.htm
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-multiple-wives.htm

There is always rape and pillage in wars but you can’t generalise that against a religion or prophet unless you have proof that can’t be refuted. And, why do all western academics have such a hangover about the prophet having many wives? Is it some kind of Victorian puritanical protestant chip? At the time it was the custom for men to have more than one wife if wished. Yes, feminists may disagree but in some societies, like today, men have power over women in many different ways.

my response:       Have you read Ibn Ishaq’s life of Mohammed?   This is one of the oldest biographies of Mohammed.   When one village was conquered Mohammed gave his approval to his men to rape the women and he married a woman whose husband was captured and had sex with her on the spot.
            What do you mean by proof that can’t be refuted?    There is a close minded attitude on the part of Muslims who will not admit any fact that raises questions about Mohammed’s character.  There are plenty of hadiths about Mohammed that tarnish his  reputation.  These are written by Muslims, not critics.   The usual attitude about hadiths is that if they are favorable toward Mohammed, they are considered genuine.  If they give information that makes him look lustful, greedy, or mean, the hadith is regarded as unhistorical.  But remember that all the hadiths were written by Muslims, not Christians, not atheists, nor anyone else.

            Now about the many wives.  You need to put this into context.  Arabia was a pagan society and the Arabs did a lot of things that were ungodly.   Not only were there 360 gods in Mecca, but immorality was practiced.    Mohammed reduced the 360 gods to one, but did not say who  it was.   He claimed a special privilege of marrying anyone he wanted, but limited his followers to four wives, but also slave girls they owned.  Mohammed also had slave women.
            The story of Creation is that marriage is one man, one woman.   Jesus affirmed this and used it to declare that easy divorce was a sin.   The Muslim attitude toward women is that they are play things, sexual objects, and can be discarded, beaten, divorced for any reason.   Jesus elevated the role of woman to be a person with equality with men.
            Your last sentence affirms your belief that women are less than men.          

He wrote: You may want to look up who Constantine the African was? You may also want to research how Toledo in Spain was the real point of the beginning of the European Renaissance.

 My response:            There is considerable mythology created by Muslims about the rise of science.  I would urge you to read The Rise of Early Modern Science, by Toby Huff.  It is a fairly recent book.
Muslims inherited considerable science from the Greek world.  It was translated by Christians and Jews into Arabic.  In spite of this Muslims did not advance much in the natural science except in astronomy and  medicine.  Muslims did not break into modern science because of the attitude of the Madrassas.  There were lots of libraries but not about science.  Being interested in the sciences could get one killed in those days.   Muslims did not invent the zero as some claim,  it came from India.  There have been few Muslim scientists who have won Nobel prizes in the sciences because of the attitude–if it is not in the Qur’an it is not worth studying.

He wrote: You may also want to accept that all cultures take from those that came before and develop ideas and thinking for others after them to take advantage of.You may also want to research into how the Africans and Muslims from West Africa got to the Americas before Columbus.I think you should look up the Islamic scholar called Ahmed Deedat from S.Africa if you want a real dialogue.

My response             I know about Deedat.  He was a dishonest debater, smearing opponents rather than honestly debating them.    Deedat has been rebutted by many honest people. Check out his dishonesty here.   http://answering-islam.org/Green/deedat.htm

He wrote:I don’t have the brains to discuss with you given your advanced academic knowledge but to paraphrase the Quran, ‘ to you your religion (whatever that may be?) and to me mine. On the day of judgement we will find out who was right’.

My response:             Unfortunately, this phrase comes from the early days in Mecca before Mohammed had power.  This would be abrogated by the later command to do jihad.   It is more unfortunate that this is not a welcome attitude among militant Muslims.

            You don’t have to wait until then to find out.  You can know NOW that you have everlasting life, but it only by accepting Jesus as your Saviour that you can know this. Inspite of your previous life of rejecting Jesus as the Son of God, God does really love you.
John 3:16-18     “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believes on him may not perish, but have life eternal.  For God has not sent his Son into the world that he may judge the world, but that the world may be saved through him.  He that believes on him is not judged: but he that believes not has been already judged, because he has not believed on the name of the only-begotten Son of God.”