Epigraph:

“Is he, then, who knows that what has been revealed to thee (Muhammad) from thy Lord is the truth, like one who is blind? But only those gifted with understanding will reflect.” (Al Quran 13:20)

“When it is not in our power to determine what is true, we ought to follow what is most probable.” René Descartes

Prof. Richard Dawkins is facing Prof. Alister McGrath, who is in full view

Written and collected by Zia H Shah MD, Chief Editor of the Muslim Times

In this debate or interview, the parties did not invite a Muslim, as is often the case with the Western scholars, despite the fact that God of Islam was frequently hijacked by Prof. Alister McGrath and often point of criticism by Prof. Richard Dawkins.

Why do I say that Islam was frequently hijacked by McGrath?

Many of the current Christian concepts are borrowed from Islam, without due acknowledgement. I will give only two examples here.

Firstly, the pragmatic approach towards the offending party, punishing when the situation demands, rather than always turning the other cheek, has now become a hallmark of not only the Western civilization, but also Christianity, is an Islamic construct.

Secondly, when the Christian rationalists use the concept of Transcendent God, they are referring to the God of Islam, Judaism and Unitarian Christianity. The Triune God of Trinitarian Christianity is not Transcendent, as Jesus had two natures, he was perfect man and fully divine. His human nature was flesh and bones, born of virgin Mary and dwelled among us for more than thirty years. Nevertheless, the Trinitarian Christians employ, bait and switch unknowingly, as they talk about God. They mention God the Father and imply the Triune God of the Christian theology, a construction that took first 6 centuries of the Christian history to erect, through the different Ecumenical conferences and later coercion of Crusades and Inquisitions.

So, here I have taken the liberty to create a trilateral dialogue, between me and Dawkins and McGrath. They are welcome to participate and I promise that if any of them comments in this post, his comments will not be censored in any way. However, it is unlikely, at least for Dawkins that he will comment here, as I have exposed him before in the Muslim Times and have not heard from him.

In his refusal to debate Prof. William Lane Craig, he is on record saying that such a debate will look good on Craig’s CV but not on his. Dawkins is apparently more concerned about his CV than the search for the truth. He fails to realize that if salvation is at stake, CV does not matter. (Al Quran 3:92)

If they will not respond, it is likely that over time my dialogue will improve through different editions, but their will be frozen in time of the actual interview. It is not to rule out contributions from other apologists for atheism or Christianity.

In Youtube the debate is loaded in 15 parts and each part of the video will be followed by my commentary.

I will make my response as a weekly series of 15 parts.

I am calling it a David Versus Goliath story, as Dawkins and McGrath are well known and current or prior professors, in the prestigious Oxford University and I have no such bragging rights. But, I have been drinking from the fountain of the Holy Quran, as understood and taught by the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, the Messiah, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani and his followers. You be the judge if I play the role of David well or not!

Prof. Richard Dawkins will be spokesperson for atheism, Prof. Alister McGrath for Christianity and this humble one for Islam.

As a word of caution, let me say to the apologists of atheism and Christianity that I have saved the videos for the posterity, so it is no use taking them offline from Youtube.

Zia H Shah MD

First, something about the big picture, atheists are right in exposing the irrationality of the Christian dogma. However, the Christians are right in as far as their claim that there needs to be a Creator of this universe, Who employed natural means to do His work. However, both parties in their self-conceit are not listening to how Islam resolves their conflict; Islam as understood by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community.

Christian apologists want to make a case for Christianity based on laws of nature and science, by showing that there ought to be a Transcendent Creator, in one breath, and in the very next, deny all of science, by insisting on Eucharist, man-God of Jesus, who is not Transcendent, resurrection and miracles that violate laws of nature.

Alister Edgar McGrath (born 23 January 1953) is an Irish Anglican priest, theologian, and Christian apologist, currently Professor of Theology, Ministry, and Education at Kings College London and Head of the Centre for Theology, Religion and Culture. He was previously Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, and was principal of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford until 2005.

Zia H Shah MD is a practicing physician in New York state and is the Chief Editor of the Muslim Times and the Alislam-eGazette, a monthly electronic journal with a subscription of more than 40,000. He wants to show the West that there is a third theological option, other than Christianity and atheism, namely Islam as understood by Ahmadiyya Muslim Community.

Shah also aspires to establish separation of Church and State in all countries of the world and believes wars between ‘Science’ and ‘Religion’ can be avoided by defining a domain called ‘Metaphysics.’ He believes that Science and Metaphysics are a litmus test for the greater accuracy of the Holy Quran compared to the Bible. In these pursuits he has authored almost 400 articles, many have been published in peer reviewed journals and most are linked in the Muslim Times and Islam for the West.

I will now return to addressing myself in the first person. I have carefully read Dawkins’: The God Delusion and McGrath’s: The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine. I believe a careful reading of these books and our collection of materials in Islam for the West, should incline open minded and rational people towards Islam.

PART I

So, now without further ado here is the part one of fifteen of the interview or the debate or in the full debate below, the first seven minutes:

In the first part among other things Dawkins brings up the issue of evolution and according to a recent Gallup poll survey, still half of the Christians in USA are creationists. McGrath responds that Christianity is a very rational faith.

But, is it so?

The field of biology has struck a fatal blow to the concept of Trinity and other dogmas in Christianity on several counts. Firstly, there is the fundamental principle in biology “Like begets like,” which clearly refutes the concept of son ship of God. In the Holy Quran it is expressed in the words, “How can Allah have a son when He has no consort?” (Al Quran 6:102) Man’s genetic code is made of 46 chromosomes and God is transcendent and beyond time, space and matter. If we try to examine the nature of God the Father, Mother Mary and Jesus, alleged to be perfect man and fully divine at the same time, the idea of only begotten son is immediately pushed from the arena of rationality to the court of myth and dogma. Secondly, the concept of Original Sin is completely incompatible with the fundamental laws of biology including the principles of gene inheritance and the facts supporting the theory of evolution. Read further in Alislam-eGazette.

See our collection: Darwinian Evolution: Islam or Christianity?

In this part of the video Dawkins and McGrath also discuss their understanding of faith and McGrath tries to root faith in reason.

St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas may have been rationalists, but, this is no longer true for more recent apologists of Christianity.

Dawkins mentions that in his discussions with Christians, the trump card of ‘faith’ is produced every so often and that has certainly been my experience also that Christians, whenever faced with a difficult argument take refuge in ‘faith.’ The very idea of using the term ‘mystery’ for Trinity, Eucharist, vicarious atonement, two natures of Jesus etc., as Christians often do, implies that in every difficult moment they will take refuge in ‘faith,’ and shy away from rational and open discussion in one disguise or another. For this particular issue let me link two posts in here:

Faith and reason: an invitation to the Christians

Age of Reason by Thomas Paine in the Islamic light

Read on and in the words of Sir Francis Bacon, “Read not to contradict … but to weigh and consider.”

Prof. Richard Dawkins tries to define faith as blind without reason or foundation, but, that is not how the Muslims understand it to be.  There is a subtle relationship between faith and reason.  They are not divorced from each other, rather are intimately related but the relationship is not fully understood in legalistic pulling and pushing, rather in poetic inspiration and appreciation.

However, faith has to start with reason, otherwise a belief in any cult will be as reasonable as a belief in any established religion.  Dawkins atheistic ideas are echoed by some other philosophers, “Faith is believing what you know ain’t so.” says Mark Twain.  Bertrand Russell would say, “We may define ‘faith’ as the firm belief in something for which there is no evidence. Where there is evidence, no one speaks of ‘faith.’ We do not speak of faith that two and two are four or that the earth is round. We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence.” In a similar vein, Voltaire would say, “Faith consists in believing when it is beyond the power of reason to believe.” These philosophers capture only a part of reality and miss an important dimension.

There are other philosophers who present a more holistic view and delicately explain the relationship between faith and reason.  For example, William James says, “Faith means belief in something concerning which doubt is theoretically possible.” The Famous mathematician and statistician Blaise Pascal remarked, “Faith certainly tells us what the senses do not, but not the contrary of what they see; it is above, not against them.”  D. Elton Trueblood, was a noted 20th century American Quaker author and theologian, former chaplain both to Harvard and Stanford universities.  He has given us a good one liner on this subject, “Faith is not belief without proof, but trust without reservation.”

Now, I will quote from the Founder of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, the Messiah, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani and then link a collection of his excerpts, collected under the heading, Faith, Certainty and Insight:

Faith means acceptance at a stage when knowledge is not yet complete, and the struggle with doubts and suspicions is still in progress. He who believes, that is to say, has faith, on the basis of probability and likelihood and despite weakness and the lack of perfect means of certainty, is accounted righteous in the estimation of the Supreme One. Thereafter, perfect understanding is bestowed on him as a bounty, and he is given to drink of the cup of understanding after partaking of faith. When a pious one, on hearing the call of a Messenger, a Prophet or a commissioned one of God, does not just go about criticizing, but takes that portion which he can recognize and understand on the basis of clear proof the means of acceptance and faith, and considers that which he is unable to understand as metaphorical or allegorical, and thus removing all contradiction out of the way, believes simply and sincerely, then God Almighty, having pity on him and being pleased with his faith, and hearing his supplications, opens the gates of perfect understanding for him and leads him to perfect certainty through visions, revelation and other heavenly signs. [Ayyam-us-Sulh, Ruhani Khaza’in, vol. 14, p. 261]

The chapter 2 is titled Faith, Certainty and Insight, in the volume III of The Essence of Islam, which is a collection of excerpts from the writings of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani.

Part II