Sola Scriptura and response to Islamic polemics

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, Muslims, Roman Catholic false practices, Roman Catholicism, Sola Scriptura. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Sola Scriptura and response to Islamic polemics

  1. θ says:

    You Reformers can say “Scriptura” hundreds times yet in fact shamelessly you don’t have and can’t produce a single authorised Scripture, not even the KJV Bible that has been revised about ten times.

    • Ken Temple says:

      We are open and honest about textual variants in the manuscript copies.
      Inerrancy is about the original, not about human copies that we admit have mistakes.

      Uthman ordered all the older copies of the Qur’an burned, so most of the variants and differences were lost to history. He used the power of the state and sword to enforce one frozen man-made text on the Muslims.

      Christianity had no political or military power for over 300 years.

      So, our situation is more honest and more reliable historically, more truthful, and not political nor use of force.

      Islam is mostly about use of force and politics, and dead rituals, along with a few spiritual teachings, but mostly rituals that one has to perform as a duty and show to others.

      • θ says:

        “Ken Temple says: Uthman ordered all the older copies of the Qur’an burned, so most of the variants and differences were lost to history. He used the power of the state and sword to enforce one frozen man-made text on the Muslims.”

        Ken, I am sorry to say that similar accusation above is the most stupidest argument ever the Non-Moslem apologetics ever made. Can’t a scribe make another copy afterward?
        Do you know how easy for the writers to reproduce what they wrote again and again as long as they aren’t killed?

      • Ken Temple says:

        No; it is true. Do you deny Uthman burned all copies of the Qur’an except for one new text that he deemed to be right one? it is all there in the Sahih Hadith.

        http://sunnah.com/bukhari/66/8

        http://sunnah.com/bukhari/66/9

        And he had the Islamic Caliphate State government to enforce this.

        Totally different from the 300 + years of early Christianity. Our texts survived even in persecution and lack of government enforcement.

  2. θ says:

    The word “all” is too implausible. Uthman just burned the copies he can retrieve, moreover he didn’t kill the scribes who wrote them, so anytime they can reproduce the same exact writings again. The story of the codex’s burning by Uthman is simply a political show off for expressing a singular loyalty that Arabs now all are one Ummah, as one civilisation under one dialect of Arabic Quraysh, so that it stopped division due to an unnecessary competition among other variant Arabic dialects.

  3. Ken Temple says:

    The issue was much bigger than just “variant Arabic dialects”.

    “I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra’ on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur’an may be lost. “

  4. θ says:

    “Ken Temple says: The issue was much bigger than just “variant Arabic dialects”. “I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra’ on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur’an may be lost. “ ”

    Ironically, early Moslems who remember of the entire Qur’an by heart also know, teach and spread many Arabic dialects of Qur’an to new converts, so that the divisions among the Ummah spread so wildly. It didn’t stop until someday Uthman decides to end the divisions by unifying all Arabic dialects to Quraysic one and only. Prophet Muhammad is of Quraysh.

Comments are closed.