In his debate with David Wood, Muslim apologist John Fontain argued that the Torah and Injeel can't be referring to the Scriptures that Jews and Christians had because the Quran says those Scriptures were Allah's direct speech. He's actually right, Christians and Jews don't hold a direct dictation theory of inspiration. So if the Quran says that, from an internal perspective, the Torah and Injeel can't be the Jewish and Christians Scriptures as we know them today. However, John has actually produced a new version of the Islamic Dilemma.
Horn 1 — Torah/Injeel = the Jewish & Christian Scriptures (not Allah’s “direct speech”) If this horn is true, Islam is false because the Jewish and Christians Scriptures contradict the Quran. This isn't John's view, so he doesn't need to worry about it. He needs to worry about Horn #2.
Horn 2 — Torah/Injeel = Allah’s Direct Speech (distinct from Jewish/Christian books) If this horn is true, Islam is false because in Surah 10:94, the Quran identifies the previous Scriptures as those that are being actually read by Jews and Christians. But the Jews and Christians weren't reading Allah's direct speech (we know what they were reading: they were reading what's in our current Bibles). Therefore, the Quran contradicts itself its identification of the Torah and Injeel, meaning Islam is false.
John of course has an escape hatch where he tries to say that verse 10:94 was only concerning Jews and Christians reading a different Torah and Injeel only available in Medina (and that we have no copies of). One of the problems with that move is that, according to Islamic scholars,10:94 is Meccan, not Medinan (it therefore refers to people outside of Medina). His move is also entirely ad hoc, needlessly complex, and completely unfalsifiable.
Capturing Christianity
In his debate with David Wood, Muslim apologist John Fontain argued that the Torah and Injeel can't be referring to the Scriptures that Jews and Christians had because the Quran says those Scriptures were Allah's direct speech. He's actually right, Christians and Jews don't hold a direct dictation theory of inspiration. So if the Quran says that, from an internal perspective, the Torah and Injeel can't be the Jewish and Christians Scriptures as we know them today. However, John has actually produced a new version of the Islamic Dilemma.
Horn 1 — Torah/Injeel = the Jewish & Christian Scriptures (not Allah’s “direct speech”)
If this horn is true, Islam is false because the Jewish and Christians Scriptures contradict the Quran. This isn't John's view, so he doesn't need to worry about it. He needs to worry about Horn #2.
Horn 2 — Torah/Injeel = Allah’s Direct Speech (distinct from Jewish/Christian books)
If this horn is true, Islam is false because in Surah 10:94, the Quran identifies the previous Scriptures as those that are being actually read by Jews and Christians. But the Jews and Christians weren't reading Allah's direct speech (we know what they were reading: they were reading what's in our current Bibles). Therefore, the Quran contradicts itself its identification of the Torah and Injeel, meaning Islam is false.
John of course has an escape hatch where he tries to say that verse 10:94 was only concerning Jews and Christians reading a different Torah and Injeel only available in Medina (and that we have no copies of). One of the problems with that move is that, according to Islamic scholars,10:94 is Meccan, not Medinan (it therefore refers to people outside of Medina). His move is also entirely ad hoc, needlessly complex, and completely unfalsifiable.
Will prolly put this in video form.
2 days ago | [YT] | 855