Refuting Paul Bilal Williams on Luke 18 and the doctrine of justification

The British convert to Islam, Paul Bilal Williams thinks that Jesus’ teaching on justification ( Jesus mentions justification in Luke 18:14) is different than the apostle Paul’s teaching on justification by faith.   He has written several articles on this issue and Luke 18:9-14, and within one of his articles, he brings up Luke 18:9-14 here.

Note:  Paul Williams took down his wordpress blog and left Islam for a few days, then repented and came back to Islam after creating a new blog.  www [dot] bloggingtheology [dot] org.   (Paul’s old sites are no longer there; and now they have viruses or other cyber problems, so I am trying to get rid of those links.)

Addendum:  April 24, 2015 – sometime in January of 2015, Paul Bilal Williams got rid of his “blogging theology” [dot] org blog and created a new one,, so, unfortunately all the other links to past articles are no longer there.

I asked Paul in a combox why he did this, and he wrote that he was no longer going to be focusing on criticizing the Bible and Christianity, after he got some spiritual advice from Timothy Winter (another western man who converted to Islam years ago, whose Islamic name is Abdal Hakim Murad.)  It seems at first, Paul was doing that, but later, I noticed that Paul removed that post (the one explaining his getting counsel from Abdal Hakim Murad, and emphasis on Sufism in his early posts in 2015), and has since, at least in my opinion, gone back to more criticizing of the Bible, the Trinity, and Christianity.  It may not be his main emphasis as before, but he still does devote a lot of space to that issue.

Paul Bilal Williams seems to change his mind a lot.

blogging theology [ dot] wordpress  “why-the-christian-understanding-of-salvation-is-morally-grotesque”  (no longer there)

I also already responded to this article, and refuted Paul Williams here, at another blog that I am a part of the blogging team. (Beggar’s All Reformation and Apologetics) (with James Swan)

Also he asked me about what Jesus taught on justification and what Paul the apostle taught on justification recently in the com- boxes of the article, “The Qur’an Speaks about earlier Revelations”.  (as of me writing this, we are almost at 400 comments.  Other Christians are making comments with several Muslims.  It is very interesting to see the kind of questions that Muslims ask about the incarnation and atonement especially. )

The article that had almost 400 comments is no longer there.

First, here is the text of the passage that Jesus Al Masih taught:

And He also told this parable to some people who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt: 10 “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood and was praying this to himself: ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’ 13 But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful (or propitious ) to me, the sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.”  (Luke 18:9-14)

My answer:

ὁ θεός, ἱλάσθητί μοι τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ.  (The Greek text of the most pertinent phrase in Luke 18:13)

“O God, be propitious toward me, the sinner!”
 from Luke 18:13

Usually, this is translated “O God, be merciful to me, the sinner!”  But Luke uses a very technical and specific term here that is a different word than the usual concepts of mercy.  The mercy here is based on propitiation or the “satisfaction” or “appeasement of justice” or the “quenching of wrath”.

The same root words from “hilasmos” (propitiation) are also used in Romans 3:25, Hebrews 9:5 – where it is used of the place of the atonement, the mercy seat in the holy of holies inside the temple in the OT, where the blood of the sacrificed lambs were to be sprinkled onto.  See also at the end where propitiation is used in Hebrews 2:17, 1 John 2:2, and 1 John 4:10.

It is really ironic that Paul Williams tries to use Luke 18:9-14 as somehow agreeing with Islam.  The Greek word for “have mercy on me” is better translated “be propitious toward me” – because mercy is based on justice being fulfilled. The “hilasmos” ( ‘ιλασμος = propitiation in 1 John 2:2; 4:10 ) root in Luke 18:13 (verb – ‘ιλασθητι, from ‘ιλασκομαι = “to be merciful based on satisfaction” or “to be propitious or “to propitiate”) is also used in Romans 3:25-26, Hebrews 2:17; I John 2:2 and I John 4:10 and means “to appease the just wrath of”. (see more at the end of this article)  It is translated as “propitiation” in the NASB and “atoning sacrifice” in the NIV.  The prophesies in the OT and the Passover and tabernacle sacrifices and the temple sacrifices all point to this. Jesus Al Masih knows He is going to the cross to be the final sacrifice and atonement and ransom for sin – Mark 10:45; Matthew 20:28; Luke 22:20; Luke 24:46-47. So deep within the cry for mercy, the reason why the sinner in the parable is justified is because

1. He confesses His sin as a sinner by nature. ( the Greek definite article, τω – “the sinner”, shows us this. (not just individual sins, but the root nature of his being “the sinner”, and at the core, “sinful”.) that is what the Pharisee missed, he thought his good works were good enough to get him justified.

Islam denies that we are sinners by nature and evil and wicked and self-righteous in our hearts. So, Paul can hardly use this passage as agreeing with Islam.

2.  His confession and repentance and cry for mercy is based on the future propitiatory work of Christ in the future (the future to this parable). verse 13 All true repentance and faith all through the Bible presuppose God’s holiness and wrath against sin, His justice and our guilt; the future Messiah who would be the final sacrifice, and trust in that future Messiah. (Genesis 3:15; 15:6; 12:1-3; 22:18; Exodus 12; Leviticus 1-7; 16-17; Isaiah 53; Daniel 9:24-27; Psalm 51; John 1:29; Revelation 5:9)

Therefore, Jesus’ teaching on justification in Luke 18:9-14 is in complete agreement with the apostle Paul’s teaching on justification in his epistles – Romans 3:21-28; Galatians 2:16; 3:6-24; Philippians 3:9; Ephesians 2:8-10.

Also, verse 9 of Luke 18 is a key that refutes Islam also.

9 “And He also told this parable to some people who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt.”

The Qur’an says, “you (O Muslims) are the best of peoples” (Surah 3:110) and that Christians and Jews “are the worst of creatures” (Surah 98:6). Islamic culture seems to teach that emphasis of superiority and that they are good and righteous, thus it would seem that Luke 18:9 is speaking to the hearts of Muslims to be careful of their spritual pride and self-righteousness and thinking they are good by nature. (In Islam, they have the doctrine of the “Fitrah”(Arabic) or “Fitrat” (Farsi) ( فطرت = upright nature) – Surah 30:30) – which to them is contradictory to the Biblical and Christian doctrine of original, inherited sin in the hearts and natures of all humans.  (see Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9; Psalm 51; Romans 5:12; Mark 7:18-23)

Because Islam teaches that all humans are basically good, and not sinners by nature, and only weak and forgetful, and if they just get the right guidance and knowledge of Islam and do the external rituals of shahada, wudzu, salaat, fasting during Ramadan, Hajj once in lifetime, zakat, etc. So, how come all that guidance and knowledge doesn’t help get rid of secret sins, lusts, jealousies, angers, adultery, hatred, pride, selfishness, etc. ??

Because of this emphasis – it is Muslims sincerely (they think, as they don’t seem to see the depths of pride, lust, selfishness, evil motives in their hearts) who trust in themselves that they are righteous – they are good and actively preach against the Biblical doctrine of original sin and internal sins as roots of external sins; it is Muslims who have the great tendency to be like the Pharisees and self-righteous, as in this parable; which is another really ironic thing about Paul Williams trying to use this parable as somehow like Islam.

Another problem is that Islam teaches people (not always, but by having this Hadith, and the nature of humans the way they are, the whole culture lends itself to this tendency) to hide their secret embarrassing sins (especially sexual sins like lusts, Adultery, pre-marital sex, abortions) – as the article that Paul wrote over a year ago, here, on “Veiling one’s wrong-doing” – January 13, 2012. I am still waiting on that Hadith reference.

The article on “Veiling One’s wrong doing” is no longer there.

NT passages where the propitiation (nouns and verbs) word group concept is used:

Romans 3:25-26

ὃν προέθετο ὁ θεὸς ἱλαστήριον

“which God put forward as a propitiation (satisfaction of justice; appeasement of wrath” – ‘ιλαστηριον )

διὰ πίστεως ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ αἵματι

through faith in His blood

εἰς ἔνδειξιν τῆς δικαιοσύνης αὐτοῦ

leading to demonstrating His righteousness . . .

διὰ τὴν πάρεσιν τῶν προγεγονότων ἁμαρτημάτων

through the passing over the previously committed sins,

26  ἐν τῇ ἀνοχῇ τοῦ θεοῦ,

in the forbearance of God

πρὸς τὴν ἔνδειξιν τῆς δικαιοσύνης αὐτοῦ

toward the demonstration of the righteousness of His

ἐν τῷ νῦν καιρῷ,

at the present time

εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν δίκαιον καὶ δικαιοῦντα

leading to Him being the just and the justifier

τὸν ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ.

-of the one who has faith in Jesus

Hebrews 2:17 – He had to be made like His brethren in all things . . .  “in order to make propitiation for the sins of the people”


1 John 2:2 – ‘ιλασμος

“He is the propitiation for our sins, not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world”

1 John 4:10 – ‘ιλασμον

In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

About Ken Temple

I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I am a sinner who has been saved by the grace of God alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), through faith alone (Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:28; 4:1-16), in Christ alone (John 14:6). But a true faith does not stay alone, it should result in change, fruit, good works, and deeper levels of repentance and hatred of my own sins of selfishness and pride. I am not better than you! I still make mistakes and sin, but the Lord is working on me, conforming me to His character. (Romans 8:28-29; 2 Corinthians 3:16-18) When I do sin, I hate the sin as it is an affront to God, and seek His forgiveness in repentance. (Mark 1:15; 2 Corinthians 7:7-10; Colossians 3:5-16 ) Praise God for His love for sinners (Romans 5:8), shown by the voluntary coming of Christ and His freely laying down His life for us (John 10:18), becoming flesh/human (John 1:1-5; 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8), dying for sins of people from all nations, tribes, and cultures (Revelation 5:9), on the cross, in history, rising from the dead (Romans 10:9-10; Matthew 28, Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24; John 20-21; 1 Corinthians chapter 15). His resurrection from the dead proved that Jesus is the Messiah, the eternal Son of God, the word of God from eternity past; and that He was all the gospels say He was and that He is truth and the life and the way to salvation. (John 14:6)
This entry was posted in Apologetics, Islam, Justification, missions, Paul Bilal Williams. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Refuting Paul Bilal Williams on Luke 18 and the doctrine of justification

  1. Debilis says:

    I enjoyed this one.
    I’ve often heard it pointed out that Christianity is the only world religion which is not essentially a set of instructions as to how we might come to God. That realism in dealing with our frailties is definitely part of its brilliance.

  2. Sam Shamoun says:

    Ken, isn’t Williams simply amazing? In one of his comments to you, he claims that Gnostics were a sect that considered themselves Christians. Is this guy serious? If the Gnostics were truly Christians then this is even further proof that Muhammad was a false prophet, a deceptive antichrist, since his teachings contradicted theirs on fundamental points! Moreover, if we apply his skewed logic then Ahmadiyyas and the Nation of Islam are all true Muslims as well.

    As far as the Apostle Paul being an apostate is concerned, this again only proves that Muhammad was a false prophet since this line of arguments proves that Paul defeated Allah, and is therefore more powerful than the Muslim god! To get an idea of what I mean, read this article:

    In it you will find quotes from Muslim scholars acknowledging that Paul was a true Apostle and follower of Christ. Here is another:

    Use these quotes to expose and silence William’s lies and ignorance.

  3. Sam Shamoun says:

    More of William’s lies exposed. He recently posted something where he says that Islam doesn’t teach original sin. Here are a couple of articles which exposes this boldfaced lie:


  4. the verses of the Qur’an about man’s ungratefulness and inclination to evil, I knew; and some of the Hadith.

    The Qur’an – 100:6-8; 80:17; 12:53, and especially the one in Surah 16:61 – I have used these to try to show Muslims man’s sinfulness; but it seems they still officially deny original sin in official Islamic doctrinal statements.

    And if Allah were to impose blame on the people for their wrongdoing, He would not have left upon the earth any creature, but He defers them for a specified term. And when their term has come, they will not remain behind an hour, nor will they precede [it]. 16:61

    it seems to affirm something close to the Christian idea of the pervasiveness of sin; but why does Islam officially teach that man is innocent (babies are Muslims! yeah, right!) and is born with an upright nature – the Fitrah فطره or Fitrat فطرت (Farsi form of the same word) – Surah 30:30. They say that man is weak and forgetful and our parents and environment corrupts us. I have never heard a Muslim admit that the doctrine of original sin is true.

  5. Is this (your argument that Islam actually does teach the doctrine of original sin) the same parallel as the official Islamic view of our Bibles is that they have been corrupted, but the Qur’an never actually says that the text has been corrupted, and in fact affirms the previous Scriptures?

    You make a good case, and there seems to be evidence of the results of the fall of Adam and Eve in the corruptions and pain in nature, childbirth, etc.

    But, the orthodox Muslims will just deny original sin and original guilt, in the same way that they deny that Surah 5:46-48 and 10:94 and 2:136, etc. affirm the Torah, Zobur, and Injeel.

    Will they or some Muslim scholars admit that there are results from the fall, as those verses from the Qur’an and Hadith that you bring forth seem to indicate; but not admit the guilt of sin in Adam?

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      Yep that is my argument. Let me quote to you some of the relevant sound hadiths, all of which is taken from the articles I sent you:

      Narrated Abu Huraira:

      Allah’s Apostle said, “Adam and Moses met, and Moses said to Adam “You are the one who made people MISERABLE and turned them out of Paradise.” Adam said to him, “You are the one whom Allah selected for His message and whom He selected for Himself and upon whom He revealed the Torah.” Moses said, ‘Yes.’ Adam said, “Did you find that written in my fate before my creation?’ Moses said, ‘Yes.’ So Adam overcame Moses with this argument.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 260)

      Narrated Abu Huraira:

      The Prophet said, “Moses argued with Adam and said to him (Adam), ‘You are the one who got the people out of Paradise by your sin, AND THUS MADE THEM MISERABLE.’ Adam replied, ‘O Moses! You are the one whom Allah selected for His Message and for His direct talk. Yet you blame me for a thing which Allah had ordained for me before He created me?’” Allah’s Apostle further said, “So Adam overcame Moses by this Argument.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 262)

      It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira and Hudhaifa that the Messenger of Allah said: Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, would gather people. The believers would stand till the Paradise would be brought near them. They would come to Adam and say: O our father, open for us the Paradise. He would say: What turned you out from the Paradise WAS THE SIN OF YOUR FATHER ADAM. I am not in a position to do that; … (Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0380)

      Abu Huraira reported that God’s messenger told of Adam and Moses holding a disputation in their Lord’s presence and of Adam getting the better of Moses in argument. Moses said, “You are Adam whom God created with His hand, into whom He breathed of His spirit, to whom He made the angels do obeisance, and whom He caused to dwell in his garden; then BECAUSE OF YOUR SIN caused MANKIND to come down to the earth.” Adam replied, “And you are Moses whom God chose to deliver His messages and to address, to whom He gave the tablets on which everything was explained, and whom He brought near as a confidant. How long before I was created did you find that God has written the Torah? Moses said, “Forty years.” Adam asked, “Did you find in it, ‘And Adam disobeyed his Lord and erred’?” On being told that he did, he said, “Do you then blame me for doing a deed WHICH GOD HAD DECREED THAT I SHOULD DO forty years before He created me?” God’s messenger said, “So Adam got the better of Moses n the argument.” Muslim transmitted it. (Mishkat Al-Masabih English Translation With Explanatory Notes by Dr. James Robson, Volume I [Sh. Muhammad Ahsraf Publishers, Booksellers & Exporters, Lahore-Pakistan, Reprint 1990], p. 23; bold and capital emphasis ours)

      Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu’z-Zinad from al-Araj from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah said, “Adam and Musa argued and Adam got the better of Musa. Musa rebuked Adam, ‘You are Adam WHO LED PEOPLE ASTRAY and brought them out of the Garden.’ Adam said to him, ‘You are Musa to whom Allah gave knowledge of everything and whom he chose above people with His message.’ He said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘Do you then censure me for a matter WHICH WAS DECREED FOR ME BEFORE I WAS CREATED?'” (Malik’s Muwatta, Book 46, Number 46.1.1)

      There is more:

      Commenting on this Ayah (7:172), At-Tirmidhi recorded that Abu Hurayrah said that the Messenger of Allah said, …

      ((… So Adam denied that and HIS OFFSPRING FOLLOWED SUIT (denying Allah’s covenant), Adam forgot and HIS OFFSPRING FORGOT, Adam made a mistake and HIS OFFSPRING MADE MISTAKES.))

      At-Tirmidhi said, “This Hadith is Hasan Sahih, and it was reported from various chains of narration through Abu Hurayrah from the Prophet. Al-Hakim also recorded it in his Mustadrak, and said; Sahih according to the criteria of Muslim, and they did not record it.”

      These and similar Hadiths testify that Allah, the Exalted and Most Honored, brought forth Adam’s offspring from his loins and separated between the inhabitants of Paradise and those of the Fire… (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged) (Surat Al-A‘raf to the end of Surah Yunus), First Edition: May 2000, Volume 4, pp. 201-203; bold and capital emphasis ours)

      Notice how Adam’s forgetfulness and denial caused his descendants to also forget and deny things.

      Muhammad even believed that Cain also shares part of the responsibility for every murder which occurs:

      Narrated ‘Abdullah:
      The Prophet said, “None is killed unjustly, but the first son of Adam will have a part of its burden.” Sufyan said, “… a part of its blood because he was the first to establish the tradition of murdering.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 423)

      It is apparent from these narrations that Muhammad believed that the sins which the first human beings committed created the same kind of sinful propensities within their descendants.

      I can send you more, but you have my articles.

  6. Sam Shamoun says:

    BTW Ken, why do you let Williams get away with his inconsistent arguments? He tries to pit Jesus against Paul concerning the Law, but fails to deal with the fact that this approach proves Muhammad is a false prophet. For instance, Muhammad set aside such commands as Sabbath observance, priesthood, sacrifices etc., all of which are prescribed in the Law. Muhammad also allowed his followers to eat certain meats which were forbidden in the Law, such as camel meat.

    Muhammad even taught that Jesus abrogated some of the things which God had made unlawful:

    “(I have come to you), to attest to the Law which was before me and to make lawful to you part of what was (before) forbidden to you …” S. 3:50

    The following quotations are taken from Mahmoud M Ayoub’s book, The Quran and Its Interpreters, Volume II, The House of Imran, State University of New York Press, Albany 1992. All bold and capital emphasis ours:

    “Tabari reports on the authority of Wahb bin Munabbih that ‘Jesus was a follower of the law of Moses. He observed the Sabbath and faced Jerusalem in prayer. He said to the Children of Israel, “I have not come to call you to disobey even one word of the Torah. I have come only to make lawful for you some of the things which were before unlawful and to relieve you of some of the hardships [which the Torah imposed on you].”’ Qatadah, according to Tabari, is said to have declared: ‘The [Law] with which Jesus came was much more lenient than that which Moses brought. The Law of Moses made unlawful for them to eat the flesh of camel, the fat covering the stomach of an animal, and some birds and fish’ …

    Ibn Kathir interprets the phrase ‘and will make lawful for you some of the things which were before unlawful’ as indicating that Jesus did indeed abrogate some of the precepts of the Torah. Nevertheless, he reports that some scholars have argued that Jesus did not abrogate anything, but only made lawful for the Children of Israel some of the things concerning which they had disagreed. Ibn Kathir, however, prefers the first view …

    Razi then raises the following question: ‘It may be argued that latter statement contradicts the one before it. This is because it clearly indicates that he came to make lawful some of the things which were unlawful in the Torah. This would mean that his legislation was contrary to that of the Torah, which would contradict his saying, “I shall confirm the Torah which was before me.”’ Razi, however, holds that ‘there is actually no contradiction between the two statements because confirming the Torah can only signify the belief that all that is in it is true and right. If, moreover, the second purpose [of Jesus’ apostleship] is not mentioned in the Torah, his making lawful some of the things which are unlawful in it would not contradict his having confirmed the Torah. Furthermore, since the Torah contains prophesies concerning the coming of Jesus, then neither his coming nor HIS LAW would be contrary to the Torah.’

    Razi then reports the different views concerning what Jesus made lawful for the Children of Israel. He mentions that Wahb b. Munabbih interpreted this statement as first referring to the rabbis ‘who had invented some false laws which they ascribed to Moses. But when Jesus came, he abolished these laws, and thus matters reverted to what they were during the time of Moses.’ Razi also attributed to Wahb the view that ‘God had made some things unlawful for the Jews as a punishment for the transgressions which they had committed, as God says, “because of the wrongdoing which the Jews committed, We made unlawful some of the good things which were before lawful for them” (Q. 4:160). This prohibition remained until Jesus came and lifted these restrictions from them.’ Razi gives by way of example what Jesus altered in the laws of the Torah, his substituting Sunday for the Sabbath as a day of rest …

    Qummi briefly comments that the things which Jesus made lawful for the Children of Israel included work on the Sabbath, and eating such fats and birds which were before unlawful …” (Ayoub, pp. 149-150)

    “… Qutb says: ‘The Torah was, like the Gospel, the scripture of Jesus, that is, the foundation of the religion which he came. The Gospel is intended to COMPLETE AND REVIVE THE SPIRIT OF THE TORAH and the spirit of faith which was obscured in the hearts of the Children of Israel. The Torah is the foundation of the religion of Christ and contains the law (shari’ah) on which the social order is based. The Gospel makes only slight modifications in the Torah, but it is a breath and renewal of the spirit of religion. It acts as a source of discipline for human conscience by bringing it into direct contact with God …’

    “… ‘By Saying, “I shall confirm the Torah that was sent before me” Jesus discloses the nature of true Christianity.’ Qutb argues that the Torah was essential to the message of Jesus, but his message introduced certain minor modifications to it. Jesus made lawful some of the things which God had made unlawful as punishment of the Children of Israel for their sins. ‘Then God wished to show mercy towards them through Christ.’” (pp. 152-153)

    “… He [Razi] then presents another possible reason: ‘The Jews knew that Jesus was the messiah who was announced in the Torah, and that he was to ABROGATE their religion …’” (p. 160)

    Commenting on the Jewish demand for a sacrifice and for fire from heaven to consume it in S. 3:183, Ayoub writes:

    “Qurtubi reports the account and adds: ‘It is reported that this [divine charge] was in the Torah but that it concluded with the words “until Christ and Muhammad shall come to you, but when they come, believe in them without a sacrifice.” It also reported, Qurtubi continues, that ‘offering sacrifices was mandatory UNTIL IT WAS ABROGATED BY JESUS SON OF MARY. Before that a prophet would slaughter the sacrificial animal and pray to God. Then a white smokeless fire with a hissing sound would descend and devour the sacrifice. Hence, this was a false claim by the Jews, for [the truth is that] either it was an exception which they concealed [from the Prophet] OR A CASE OF ABROGATION WHICH THEY STUBBORNLY DENIED …’” (p. 395)

    Here is what the English translation of the Tafsir of Ibn Abbas says regarding this text:

    (And (I come) confirming) and I have come confirming Allah’s divine Oneness in the Religion (that which was before me of the Torah) and all other Scriptures, (and to make lawful) to give you legal dispensation regarding (some of that which was forbidden unto you) such as the meat of camels, the fat of bovines and sheep, the Sabbath, and other things. (I come unto you with a sign) with a token (from your Lord, so keep your duty to Allah) so fear Allah in that which He has commanded you with and repent to Him (and obey me) and follow my command and Religion; (; bold and underline emphasis ours)

    The Tafsir al-Jalalayn states that:

    Likewise, I have come to you, confirming that which was before me of the Torah, and to make lawful for you some of that which was forbidden to you, in it. Thus he made lawful for them fish and birds which had no spikes; it is also said that he made it all lawful for them, so that ba’d, ‘some’, means, kull, ‘all’). I have come to you with a sign from your Lord, He has repeated it for emphasis and to expand upon it: so fear God, and obey me, in what I command you of affirming God’s Oneness and being obedient to Him. (; bold and underline emphasis ours)

    So if Williams is honest then he has no choice but to condemn Muhammad as a liar.

  7. I defended Jesus and Paul as unified from the Bible and consistent Christian theology; as I don’t know as much Hadith and other sources of quotes from Muslim theologians as you do. Good points you are making – Dr. White is right to call you “the Assyrian Encyclopedia”.
    I appreciate your material and education – that is a lot of material.

    When I started reaching out to Muslims in 1983, there was no internet and the Hadith collections in book form were just too expensive; and back then,it was too difficult to even know how to buy them. (seemed really remote and unavailable unless one knew who to ask maybe in NY or Los Angeles, – Islamic bookstores)

    I had to rely on the Qur’an alone, and basic books – some by Muslims and most of the classics by Evangelicals with experience in reaching Muslims (Samuel Zwemer, Carl Pfander, St. Clair Tisdall, Montgomery Watt, Phil Parshall, William Miller, Arthur Jefferies, Richard Bell, etc.) and courses taught by missionary organizations. (also by talking to many Muslims over the last 30 years)

    I still don’t have the money to buy the books like Dr. White does (Hadith and Tafsirs, etc.); but I am learning a lot from you and him and both the web site and the website.

    Another one: (although that is not a law to face Jerusalem in the Bible (I don’t think it is), but a tradition and practice – Daniel 6:10
    Muhammad changed the Qibla قبله also.

    • Sam Shamoun says:

      I just saw Williams deceptively use Acts 21 against you. Make sure to get Williams to read and comment on Acts 15:24-29 along with 21:25, since if Acts is good enough to prove Williams’ case then it is also good enough to expose his lies and distortions.

  8. Pingback: Paul Bilal Williams Refuted many times, bans those that answer him. | apologeticsandagape

  9. Pingback: The cultural tendency of the Muslim world to cover up their sins | apologeticsandagape

  10. Ken Temple says:

    Reblogged this on apologeticsandagape and commented:

    Luke 18:9-14 – Be Propitious toward me, the sinner! Time to re-post this important article, as it relates to both Muslim’s arguments and Roman Catholic arguments. Please also make sure to see the article on this at Beggar’s All.

  11. Shani says:

    This is my first time visit at here and i am genuinely
    pleassant to read all at one place.

Comments are closed.